Tory MPs have a lot to say about racism at present. According to them, no one in their party is racist. But then, they also deny that there is any such thing as Islamophobia.
They accept that there might be anti-Muslim hate. But simultaneously they imply that this is a response to what they describe as a Muslim takeover of cities like London or Birmingham, for which there is not the slightest shred of evidence.
And through all this diversionary narrative they will quietly suggest whilst anti-Semitisn is real because there is a state of Israel, Islamophobia cannot be because there is no equivalent state. So, whilst they will imply it is anti-Semitic to oppose the policies of the Israeli government, or to be opposed to Zionism, which cannot be true because many Jews are opposed to both in their existing forms and to be anti-Semitic is to be prejudiced against Jews precisely because of their Jewishness and not their politics, they say it is not possible to be Islamophobic because they seem to think that there is no single state to which this term might be applied.
This is a fundamental category error. Not only is anti-Semitisn not capable of being confused with attitudes towards the state of Israel, unless the attitude in question involves the denial of the rights of Jews as Jews when Israel was always expected to be and actually is a multicultural state, but it is to also confuse ethnicity with which beliefs are associated with statehood and citizenship when they are clearly not the same thing.
As example, Sadiq Khan is British. As British as I am. Maybe more so, as I have two passports. Anyone suggesting otherwise misrepresents what it is to be British. Doing so they commit a hate crime, which the government has defined as:
Hate crimes and incidents are taken to mean any crime or incident where the perpetrator's hostility or prejudice against an identifiable group of people is a factor in determining who is victimised.
That is what I think Lee Anderson is guilty of. Others may disagree. I think that.
I also think some people are very clearly guilty of such crimes against Jews. I do not for a moment deny that. Anti-Semitiam is real, and is a hate crime against an identifiable group of people. The term is used to identify a particular form of hate-crime that is necessarily racist in nature. I condemn it.
So too is Islamophobia a hate crime against a particular and identifiable group of people that is necessrily racist in nature. The words describe the sane crime perpetrated against different groups. I also condemn Islamophobia.
But, some Tories, from the prime inister downwards appear refuse to recognise one of these crimes. Why is that?
Rehman Chisti MP, a Tory MP of Pakistani heritage, suggested on Sky in an interview with Sophie Ridge last night that Sunak has written off the Muslim community. The implication was that they do not matter to him. He was clearly angry, whilst managing it well given he has every reason to be very angry indeed.
Baroness Warsi, another Tory, for whom I have much time on this and some other issues, does not try to hide her anger, and why should she? She is the subject of prejudice by many in her own party, which seeks to deny that the description of that prejudice exists, as well as to claim it is not racist.
There are hate crimes happening right now and some Tories are facilitating them by even denying that the language to describe them exists. The prime minister would seem to be in that number.
How did we reach this point where the existence of blatant racism is denied?
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Very bravely said and I agree.
In this country it is OK to bash Muslims apparently. Sorry, but that’s what I see and I’m an English as English could be.
Muslims seem to be treated as disposable by British politics.
It also reminds me of how cynical this all is.
It goes on to remind me how anti-semitism was weaponised by the Labour Right to bring down Corbyn in my view. There was no real concern for Jews – only a convenient flag to attack one of their own and fight amongst themselves whilst the Tories ripped up the country to form a convenient political consensus between New New Labour and the Tories.
The Tories might be in the electoral dog house but they know how and when to stick together when the moment counts.
Does anyone want to vote for a Labour party that deliberately undermined and sacrificed a genuine attempt at a more progressive programme under Corbyn and played games with Palestinian lives in Parliament recently?
I won’t.
The result?
The ‘unprincipled society’ as described by David Marquand, where neo liberalism and cod socialism does not work but fascism does. The book he wrote needs an update but I think he’d be horrified by what he’d see now.
Good post PSR. I was re-reading the Starmer amendment to the SNP motion of last Wednesday. Without not a lot of word changing it could have been a Corbyn motion!
“That this house believes that an Israeli ground offensive in Rafah risks catastrophic humanitarian consequences and therefore must not take place; notes the intolerable loss of Palestinian life, the majority being women and children; condemns the terrorism of Hamas who continue to hold hostages; supports Australia, Canada and New Zealand’s calls for Hamas to release and return all hostages and for an immediate humanitarian ceasefire, which means an immediate stop to the fighting and a ceasefire that lasts and is observed by all sides, noting that Israel cannot be expected to cease fighting if Hamas continues with violence and that Israelis have the right to the assurance that the horror of 7 October 2023 cannot happen again; therefore supports diplomatic mediation efforts to achieve a lasting ceasefire; demands that rapid and unimpeded humanitarian relief is provided in Gaza; further demands an end to settlement expansion and violence; urges Israel to comply with the International Court of Justice’s provisional measures; calls for the UN Security Council to meet urgently; and urges all international partners to work together to establish a diplomatic process to deliver the peace of a two-state solution, with a safe and secure Israel alongside a viable Palestinian state, including working with international partners to recognise a Palestinian state as a contribution to rather than outcome of that process, because statehood is the inalienable right of the Palestinian people and not in the gift of any neighbour.”
https://commonsbusiness.parliament.uk/Document/85314/Html?subType=Standard#_idTextAnchor005+3
Of course Starmer had to produce it under duress. Needed to pretend Labour MP’s were all behind him morally!
The International court of Justice has issued this -one month after their provisional ruling
https://www.icj.org/gaza-one-month-on-israel-fails-to-comply-with-the-order-of-the-international-court-of-justice/
It seems Israel failed to comply.
two lines from it
‘Third States’ actions and omissions in this context could be evidence of a failure to prevent and punish genocide, but could also give rise to complicity in genocide.’
We are a third country and by suspending finance for UNWRA we may be complicit.
What will Starmer say now?
Thanks
Words definitely matter, and if that car crash interview from Michael Tomlinson MP with Nick Ferrari is anything to go by, the word islamophobia itself probably had him sweating into his mug of tea. Baroness Warsi was spot on when she said if you can’t call Islamophobia Islamophobia, then how are we going to fix it?
Just to note in the post below that the ICJ – the international court – has not issued a statement on Israel’s compliance, this note is from the International Commission of Jurists, albeit a highly respected organisation
If the Conservative Party have written off the Muslim community who are also unhappy about Labour’s response to what is happening in Gaza isnt good to put it mildly.
The Tory leadership only care about winning (or, at least, not losing as terribly badly as seems likely). It seems obvious that most of the Muslims who live in our inner cities are unlikely to vote Tory (as are most of their non-Muslim neighbours), so the Conservatives are happy to ignore them.
The likes of 30p Lee are despicable grifters who care nothing for the country and are only in it for themselves (his next port of call, ‘politically’, will clearly be ‘Reform’ – inverted commas intentional), but the cynicism shown by the Tory leadership is quite breathtaking.
Their calculus is obviously that they stand to win more votes from the racist sections of society so, though they have been forced to criticise Anderson by pressure from the media, they won’t out and out call him Islamophobic or racist as an electoral gambit. We’re left with the ludicrous situation of senior Tories giving soft criticism to Anderson and saying he should apologise, without admitting what he should be apologising for!
My contempt for these people increases daily. If only we had a decent Labour Party leadership worth backing.
I’m really not looking forward to being forced to vote for the least shit option later this year. Miliband and Corbyn were much, much more worthy than Starmer and Co, in spite of their weaknesses. I’ve got a hopeless (but not corrupt) Tory MP in my constituency who has to go because he’s just another enabler of those at the top of his despicable party. Therefore, I have little choice but to vote Labour to get rid of him, even though I have absolutely no idea who the Labour candidate is. Not a single Labour Party flyer has been posted through my letterbox over the course of the last Parliament (that I can recall) whereas we seem to get one every few months from the Tories.
I have a dislike of all organised religion.
“So too is Islamophobia a hate crime against a particular and identifiable group of people that is necessrily racist in nature. ”
I still don’t get the link to racism.
Is criticism of Christian fundamentalism racist then?
Is criticism of a white Christian fundamentalism racist?
Is criticism of an African Christian fundamentalism racist?
I also don’t understand why those who support women’s rights are also so keen to support the tenets of Islam or any religion that subjugates women.
You probably won’t publish this but it is worth thinking about.
First, understand racism. It is quite a wide definition. https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/section/9
Second, undertsand that ethnic origina can be (need not be, but can be) identified with a set of religious beliefs.
Then undertsand that hate is not the same as criticism.
Then come back when you have worked that out, and in particualr that disagreeing with someone not the same as hating them.
Why is that so hard to udnerstand?
And why is it so hard to understand that it is posible to respect the right of someone to disagree with you if that is done respectfully?
Thanks for the link and other comments.
Maybe I have bumped into too many fundamental Christians over the decades and been prejudiced by their response to polite discourse with others.
Being female I am a strong supporter of women’s rights, because why would I not be? I am disappointed with the ways some women choose to exercise their rights, wearing a burka being one of them and playing rugby another, but there you go, it’s their choice. At least they say it is, with regard to burkas in countries where burkas are not compulsory, I guess time will tell.
Listening to the newspaper headlines on the radio I’m ashamed to be British. It appears that a significant % of this country is more than happy to be islamaphobic, or is being whipped up to be so. And alongside that is more and more pressure to prevent demonstrations. We truly are being moved into a fascist authoritarian state.
I was surprised over the weekend when watching Sayeeda Warsi speak out eloquently on the media, that she is still a Conservative (that passed me by).
Steve Richards has the adage of the Tories that: ‘they can win elections, but when they govern they squabble and tear themselves apart eventually’.
As a depressing segway, another thing I noticed over the weekend, was that many former Labour MPs (naturally from the right wing) have been re-selected to stand. Especially depressing and (not surprising) is Pamela Nash (former Labour MP for Airdrie) who is standing in John Reid’s old seat Motherwell and Wishaw. Pamela Nash couldn’t be more right wing Labour and was the head of Scotland in Union the unionist campaign group.
Hopefully the SNP will keep most of their seats in the Glasgow area. Yousaf is right – Labour doesn’t really need Scotland to get over the line.
Thank you.
Orange Order official Henry Dunbar is also with Starmer’s Labour.
Further to my reply to Duncan, I should have added that it was not lost on many of us Catholic socialists that, soon after Starmer met Paul Mason, Mason began to harass Starmer’s leadership rivals and Catholics Rebecca Long-Bailey and Richard Burgon at hustings, asking if they planned to sub-contract social policy to the Vatican. It was the sort of trope that JFK faced in 1960, so the pair are in good company. Mason is a zionist, so that aggravated matters.
Thanks. This and the fact that Mason is a Zionist explains Starmer going against the tenets of the Good Friday (Belfast) Agreement in public by saying he will be continuing support of British Unionists and the Union in the event his N.I. SOS calls a vote on Ireland’s reunification. Of course there is also the fact that the post Balfour Declaration political state of Israel was, in part, a quid pro quo for financial aid to Britain for the expenses of the First World War. I do wonder just why Starmer & others in the UK ruling elite are holding both Ireland and Scotland politically hostage within an economically failing British Union. It must be to do with some form of City based financial exploitation and gain.
Words shape minds.
Politicians (and advertisers) know the power of words. Rhetoric has always been used to sway mass opinion. However many political language structures are now designed force a stance on the identity and the values you hold – identify politics. When you know how it’s done it becomes more obvious how things are being said.
Interviews who should know better give full licence by not interrupting and questioning at critical points.
https://daily.jstor.org/the-linguistics-of-mass-persuasion-how-politicians-make-fetch-happen/
Again R4 BBC Today programme interviewer trying to push the ‘London streets occupied’ – repeating a quote several times , ‘people’ (I think it was a Jewish organisation) who say they daren’t go into central London because they are scared by the demonstrations. .
But he didn’t point out that there have been Jewish blocks taking part in these demonstations – which belies the ‘ they are all muslims’, and ‘hate marches’, picture they want to portray.
And yet again this headline-hogging story about MP’s can’t do their job because of Islamist takover – conveniently drowns out the Gava massacre and ceasefire story , and our part in in it etc.
Culture wars stories are so good for political leaders who dont want to address the main issues – health, the economy , poverty, inequality and all the rest.
BBC is happy to amplify.
Sadly the BBC are providing a massively expanded platform for Lee Anderson to spout his personal warped prejudice for those who missed his performance on the bigot station. By continiously playing the clip of him spouting his views they will help him drum up support from those looking for a Muslim scapegoat for all that is wrong in this country. Yes it is dog-whistle politics and, with so many Tory MPs trying to justify what he said, the Tories must be thrilled at the publicity Anderson is giving to the voters they are afraid of losing to Reform UK. This same strategy didn’t promote Anti-Semitism by bashing Jeremy Corbyn, because he was never Anti-Semetic. Anderson, a former Labour Party MP with a long history of toxic misogynistic and racist views, was considered a perfect fit for the Tories to gain support from the bigoted fringe.
Presenting a unique contrast to super rich Rishi, he was appointed Deputy Chairman of the Conservatives to help rescue the party from decline. A really good headline grabber with his distinctly off-colour remarks being repeated over and over again to reinforce his special value to the hard-right of the Party. The message he is putting across plays into the Tory plans to gag all protesters. The huge peaceful protests in London voicing concern over the devastating Israeli assault on Gaza can be successfully reframed as a mob of ‘Islamist Extremists’. The reality is that many of those marching, including myself, are not Muslim and some are Jewish, but we are all passionate humanitarians. This endless replay of what the Tories hope many bigoted people believe, will help the Conservatives with their mission to restrict or ban all manner of protests and it certainly looks like the BBC is onboard with that.
According to Editors who have worked for Rupert Murdoch the secret of his success is his view that at all levels of society a significant section of the population are to some degree Racist and Misogynistic and that you can sell newspapers, become a significant political force and most importantly make money by exploiting those prejudices.
Murdoch did not invent this method and he currently has many imitators but the evidence from Australia, the UK and the USA over the last fifty years demonstrates that he is arguably its most successful practitioner in History.
In these circumstances and with the Tories facing electoral wipe out this will be the most hate filled election this country has faced in modern times.
The relatively recent review of Islamophobia in the Conservative Party found it riddled with it – which they went on to deny
Thank you, Paul.
That was part of the USP when Murdoch expanded his business from South Australia to other states and then overseas.
He also backed and used Paul Staines (Guido Fawkes) and Farage, means of exerting pressure on the Tories from the right and protecting his business empire.
This includes using Guido Fawkes to dig for and report dirt, so that Murdoch’s mainstream units can then run with the stories. Staines likes, but is also encouraged, to keep his distance from the Tories.
Farage and Murdoch are close. Murdoch saw the opportunity and encouraged the Farage faction to unseat Alan Sked as party leader in the mid 1990s.
I often have to suppress a laugh when centrists tell me the Sunday Times is a left wing news paper and the Murdochs back Biden against Trump.
You make an interesting point about the closeness between Farage and Murdoch.
In the late nineties I came across the view that in the late 1980s Murdoch had spent a lot of time and money with European politicians trying to get them to change the European rules and regulations to allow him to monopolise Satellite TV in Europe in the way he went on to monopolise it in the UK.
Unfortunately for Murdoch, by then the Europeans could see the grip that he had on the UK government and rewrote the laws specifically to exclude offshore operators like him.
From that day onward, so the article went, Murdoch and his accomplices in the Tory party, once very pro-EU, suddenly became fanatically anti-European, ushering in the era of Farage, Johnson, Brexit and various other self-harms.
However, as with much of all the other political and business machinations of Rupert Murdoch the UK media has enforced its usual omerta, so until some hard working historian with a genuine interest in the truth comes along it just remains a story.
There are not many Muslims in Sunak’s North Yorkshire constituency or the leafy Tory constituencies in the South of England. Ssunk does not have to worry about the ‘Muslim vote’ and welcomes any controversy about racism as a useful distraction from the NHS, climate, poverty etc. The more culture wars can be stirred up the better to deflect voters away from supporting the Reform party
Thank you and well said, Bill.
Sunak was not the choice of local activists when the seat became available. A local candidate was preferred. Sunak was on London HQ’s A list*, so was imposed. In addition, some of the seed capital for the investment firms co-owned by Sunak and Rees-Mogg was provided by disgraced financier Crispin Odey. Rees-Mogg’s in laws own much of the land in the constituency, the Fitzwilliam estates. As this is Britain, connections were called upon.
*Truss and Hancock also failed to impress locals and were far down the field, but were imposed. In Hancock’s case, the racing fraternity led by John Gosden got their man in, much to the disgust of other activists. Local activists were also disgusted by Truss, so she called them the “turnip Taliban”.
One wonders if leaders not deracinated would stir these ugly emotions.
There’s a lot more I could say about Sunak, Patel and Braverman, whose mother hails from the same former colony as my parents. The ugly emotions that they stir come as no surprise if one digs into their family histories.
I lived in Truss’ constituency when she was adopted. No one wanted her, even if I accept that the reasons were misogynistic.
Having taught second, third and fourth generation descendants of UK immigrants I have often found many of them to have the kind of highly socially conservative views that would tend to make them natural far-right Conservatives.
That until the advent of people like Sunak, Patel and Braverman this had not happened I had always put down to the innate racist hostility to immigrants of so many in the Conservative party.
It reminds me of the election of Margaret Thatcher when many foolishly thought that a Female Prime Minister running the country had to be an improvement on all those dreadful squabbling, childish, men. We now know how wrong that was.
If Sunak, Patel and Braverman have done nothing else it is to remind us that the distribution of virtue and vice is much the same across all genders, demographics, ethnicities and religions.
Last night on TV I watched a C4 news report on Jewish settler violence against Palestinian land owners post 7th October 2023.
What I saw was simply unacceptable behaviour whether you are Jewish, Palestinian or whatever.
Even though the guilty looked like Jews, they were behaving no differently to the Nazis and locals who’d oppressed and killed Jews in Europe in the 30s and 40s. The Palestinians were treated like non-persons.
I was left stunned by it all frankly, stunned into a grim silence where there was no solace at all.
PSR, I watched that C4 News Report too and was frankly stunned.
What chilled me most was the sense of utter utter hopelessness of their situation. Every avenue of hope or solace has been stripped away or denied by the settlers, the judiciary or the army.
The perpetrators of this barbarism seemed, from the report, to just accept that it was their right to act in this manner. Words fail I’m afraid.
I believe the Quran forbids interest on loans, an idea which won’t be popular with the UK’s finance sector. I’d say that’s the reason for this cultivated Islamophobia, that right there. Can’t have ideas like that catching on, can we?
Christianity and Judaism also banned usury. This is Abrahamic.
Thank you, Bill.
I used to work on Islamic finance, murabaha, akin to a loan, and sukuk, akin to a bond issue. The ban on interest is overcome by means of an admin fee for the use of the money and admin that equates to interest on conventional / western loans.
Murabaha is more common. The lender buys the asset, holds it for a day or two and then transfers the asset to the purchaser (borrower) in return for principal and an admin fee that may be amortised. A religious expert, usually an imam, issues an opinion, similar to a legal opinion, saying the transaction is, er, kosher.
Here is what all news channels should now do with all politicians. Michael Tomlinson MP, Minister of State for Countering Illegal Migration was interviewed by Nick Ferrari on LBC. He was asked six times; to explain what precisely it was that Lee Anderson MP had done wrong to be suspended. Tomlinson would only say he had done wrong. Ferrari finally said Tomlinson had refused to answer the question, and cut the interview short: refused him the sound-bite platform for refusing to answer a straight question. At last! An interviewer who delivers the answer to the spin confectioners; the coup de grâce.
That is the way to do it. Here is my protocol for all real news interviewers.
1) Ask the straight question you know the politician wants to avoid at the very beginning of the interview.
2) Ask the question in plain English in a form that requires a direct reply.
3) If the question is not directly answered, ask a second time.
4) If the question is avoided a second time, ask for a third time, prefaced by a warning that the interview will be terminated if the question is not answered.
5) If the question is evaded for a third time; terminate the interview immediately.
Many critics will say; not all questions can be answered in short-form. This is sophistry. In broadcast news politicians speak (or are edited) only in sound-bites; the interviews are not seminars, or an academic lecture. The short form Q&A is the order of procedure. Length is invariably waffle; used to eat time by a floundering interviewee. They want a headline, or to promote a simple message. The vast complexity of Brexit was reduced to ‘Get Brexit Done’. Plain speaking to plain questions is the lubricant of politics. Themedium defines the nature of the message.
I tweeted Ferrari.
He was very good.
I enjoy being interviewed by him.
I remember going on a media handling course once.
I was not taught how to answer a question, I was taught how to deliver my message despite the question.
It’s as simple as that.
‘Proud to say that I did not do very well on the course.
🙂
The broadcasters can stop all this by implementing a protocol based on the Ferrari rebut. The PR industry will then need a new course.
Jonathan Lis
@jonlis reposted on Twitter:
George Parker
@GeorgeWParker
·
Feb 25
“This idea from senior Conservatives that someone else is really running the country (the Deep State, Islamists, people with podcasts etc) is a reminder of how Brexit created a vacancy for governing parties looking for someone else to blame.”
The idea that politicians are at risk from Gaza genocide protesters is belied by the notorious Corbyn hate image and article published a few days after the Brexit referendum by the Daily Mail:
“Labour must KILL Vampire Jezza” over an image of Corbyn in a coffin.
https://www.leftfutures.org/2016/07/the-paranoid-style-of-corbyns-critics/
So much of what is going on in the media at the moment is designed to distract, disarm, confuse, and whip up all sorts of hatred and loathing – otherwise known as divide and rule.
Jonathan Lis is very good
Brilliant piece Richard, what abhors me about zionists and the creation of Israel is that the English and French claimed Palestine to be Terra Nullius or land without people, which the zionists adopted “land without people, for a people without land”.
This thread and right across the media seems obsessed with whether Anderson’s words were Islamaphobic. No one asks if they were true. That’s odd since truth matters and we ought to expect that our leaders will not lie. (I’m an optimist I suppose.)
It’s odd too because its obvious that Anderson is not telling the truth. Khan has NOT given London to his mates. London is NOT run by Islamists. So interviewers should hold Anderson and Sunak to account on this.
But it is only Islamophobic if it is not true, so I think the untruthfulness is being taken as read.
Might I gently suggest Islamophobia is no greater now than it has been, rather it is being amplified for propaganda purposes to counter the failing ‘anti-semitism’ pitch ?
Both main political parties and media took a view on what was happening in Gaza totally contrary to majority public opinion – Not only did it fail to shift public opinion, it backfired every time Eylon Levy dragged out the ‘holocaust’ ghost as argument.
The propaganda machine now seizes on ‘islamaphobia’ and arranges for such as ’30p Lee’ etc. to set the ball rolling on diversion… Just my 2c…
99%+ Muslims are not terrorists. However , which religious group murders non muslims and which religious factions murder each other? Nobody in Europe has been murdered by Christian, Jewish, Hindu, Taoist terrorist groups
What a totally bizarre comment.
Are you completely unaware of what happened in Northern Ireland over decades?
What about the Klan?
Have you heard of the Inquisition?
Or witch burning?
You reveal your ignorance and prejudices.