May’s chalice the ‘least poisoned’, promises Downing Street

Three chalices - the Mythical Chalice, May's Chalice, and 'No Deal' Chalice - arranged by severity of poison
John Shafthauer

In 2016, people like Boris Johnson and Nigel Farage sold us a mythical chalice. They told us this shiny goblet was filled with a honey-like ambrosia that would nourish us like we’d never been nourished before. And then, when we voted to drink from this blessed receptacle, they ran off.

Since then, we’ve learnt that the promised chalice doesn’t actually exist. Several others do; they’re just a bit poisoned, that’s all. This puts Theresa May in the position of having to hold our noses while we swallow what she insists is the least poisoned option.

Bottoms up

The choice is between May’s chalice and the ‘no-deal chalice’ – the one we’ll receive if we back out of our chalice negotiations. Although this second chalice is 99% poison, Jacob Rees-Mogg has repeatedly claimed:

It’s better for people to drink lots and lots of poison than just a little bit.

It’s since come to light that Rees-Mogg runs a poison business called Jacob Rees-Mogg’s Incredibly Toxic Poisons. He’s subsequently denied that his involvement in the poison business influences his promotion of poison drinking.

Democracy

There’s an outside chance we just won’t drink any poison. The middle classes seem to think so – largely as they don’t realise that most elections present a poisoned chalice. The difference this time is they’re swilling it back with the rest of us.

Still, if not drinking poison becomes an option, make mine a double.

Featured image via pixabay

Get involved

We need your help ...

The coronavirus pandemic is changing our world, fast. And we will do all we can to keep bringing you news and analysis throughout. But we are worried about maintaining enough income to pay our staff and minimal overheads.

Now, more than ever, we need a vibrant, independent media that holds the government to account and calls it out when it puts vested economic interests above human lives. We need a media that shows solidarity with the people most affected by the crisis – and one that can help to build a world based on collaboration and compassion.

We have been fighting against an establishment that is trying to shut us down. And like most independent media, we don’t have the deep pockets of investors to call on to bail us out.

Can you help by chipping in a few pounds each month?

The Canary Support us
John Shafthauer