I would like to reflect on something other than the failure of British (and maybe broader politics) to reflect the views of moderate people this morning, but that is hard to do.
I have already commented on George Galloway's win in Rochdale. I won't repeat the comments I made there. But there is more to say.
This is most especially true because of the implicit message in this vote. Muslim people were saying that they do not want to be oppressed.
There should get nothing surprising about this message. Who would want to be oppressed? If there has been a persistent theme in politics over the last 200 or so years it has been the desire to end oppression. It was reflected in the campaign for universal suffrage. Since then it has been reflected in the rightful demand for equality and respect for differences.
Now we are backsliding on both fronts. The Tories are openly gerrymandering, restricting the rights of younger and poorer people to vote in particular using totally trumped up arguments. Labour can't even field candidates and will not stand up for democratic reforms. No wonder we are in a mess.
And then there is backsliding on equality. Women are not being protected, as recent reports on policing make clear. There is no desire in the police to be rid of misogyny.
The whole LGBTQ+ community feels under threat, and with good reason.
Debate on anti-Semitism now has an apparent entry requirement that those partaking be Zionist and support a fascist government in Israel.
The government is fuelling racist sentiment via its immigration policy.
Anti-Islamic feeling is rife amongst Tories.
And meanwhile, Labour and Tories alike appear all too happy to crack down on demonstrations and the right to free speech when the measures available (excepting, perhaps, in the immediate vicinity of MP's homes where their families, friends and neighbours do need protection) are more than adequate to deal with any risks, and are already draconian in far too many cases.
All this is about the fostering of extremism, not least by our mainstream political parties, who seem to be far too willing to adopt intolerant positions.
Most moderate people welcome people, whoever they are.
They understand differences and the need to respect them.
They abhor discrimination because there has been the most incredible change in mindsets in my lifetime.
They hate fascism and those who promote it, because they know the harm it causes.
They also loathe corruption.
And they will not stand aside and tolerate genocide.
They want action on climate change, nit denial.
They want politicians who stand up for ethical positions, and very rarely are they ever extreme ones. Aristotle understood that long ago. Innately we all do. But it seems that too many of our politicians do not as they move increasingly rapidly towards extreme positions that alienate the moderate majority of the UK, whose tolerance is being abused.
What do we do about this?
First, and foremost, we talk about it.
And we tell all our politicians that take these positions that they are wrong.
That, is where we start.
And then we need the new vision to replace that of all the extremists. And talking about it is the only way to do that.
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:
Thank you and well said, Richard.
Not entirely off topic as it regards the detachment of Labour and Tories from the public: Yesterday, I received an e-mail from the head of the main City trade body, a body I used to work for and am still involved with. Last week, said head met Starmer, who told him, “Labour will unashamedly champion the City, Britain’s greatest asset.” Said head said he has been pleasantly and profoundly surprised of how Labour has engaged the City and can’t recall a level of engagement, agreement and coordination with any party in his (four decades) in the City.
It remains to be seen whether Starmer can be trusted though. On the face of what evidence we have, I’d say not at all.
I read this recently:
Where is a similar message of hope from any of today’s politicians? and, as you say, Richard, based on conversation and a new vision….
**
Barack Obama’s first presidential campaign in 2008 is widely regarded as one of the most successful and innovative political campaigns in modern history. Here are some key lessons that can be learned from Obama’s campaign:
Emphasis on grassroots organizing: Obama’s campaign prioritized grassroots organizing and community engagement, mobilizing millions of volunteers and supporters across the country. This groundswell of grassroots support helped build momentum and energize voters, particularly young people and minorities, who traditionally had low turnout rates.
Utilization of technology and social media: The Obama campaign leveraged technology and social media platforms, such as Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube, to connect with voters, raise funds, and organize events. This approach allowed the campaign to reach a wide audience, engage supporters directly, and generate enthusiasm and excitement for Obama’s candidacy.
Inclusive and aspirational messaging: Obama’s campaign focused on inclusive and aspirational messaging that emphasized hope, change, and unity. By inspiring voters with a vision for a better future and emphasizing the importance of collective action, the campaign was able to transcend traditional partisan divides and appeal to a broad coalition of supporters.
Effective fundraising strategy: Obama’s campaign implemented a groundbreaking online fundraising strategy that empowered small donors to contribute to the campaign. By democratizing the fundraising process and tapping into the power of grassroots support, the campaign was able to raise record-breaking sums of money and compete effectively against well-funded opponents.
Empowerment of volunteers and supporters: The Obama campaign empowered volunteers and supporters to take ownership of the campaign and become active participants in the political process. By providing training, resources, and support to grassroots organizers, the campaign was able to harness the energy and enthusiasm of its supporters to drive voter outreach and mobilization efforts.
Focus on voter registration and turnout: Obama’s campaign invested heavily in voter registration and turnout efforts, particularly in key battleground states. By expanding the electorate and mobilizing traditionally underrepresented communities, the campaign was able to tip the balance in its favor in closely contested races.
Overall, Obama’s first presidential campaign demonstrated the power of grassroots organizing, innovative use of technology, inclusive messaging, and effective mobilization strategies in building a successful political movement. These lessons continue to be relevant for aspiring candidates and political campaigns seeking to engage and mobilize voters in today’s political landscape.
As Richard would say ‘much to agree with’. But Obama lost the mid-terms (a feature of their constitution designed for a different age) as the effects of the Global Economic Crisis kicked in and the Tea Party mobilised around the idea of the economy being like a family budget-demanding cuts to the ‘the beast’ -the state. All to reduce the national debt and lower taxes. They succeeded in neutralising much of Obama’s program.
That is the other lesson -IMHO
The national debt wasn’t lowered, it was increased – substantially.
I do so agree, the political landscape is profoundly depressing and out of kilter with what most people want, so on this gloomy morning I thought I’d share this video of a “dance your PhD competition winner” that someone from my dance group sent me this morning. Strangely relevant to your post:
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/watch-this-years-dance-your-phd-contest-winner-a-musical-celebration-of-kangaroo-behavior-180983865/
As you say Richard, people generally are reasonable , but their tolerance is being abused.
Despite people being largely OK – they can end up voting Trump, Orban, Le Pen, Modhi etc etc
Its almost as though Labour is, by offering no future, is intent on clearing more space for the ‘strong man’ to emerge.
Well said Richard. However such people cannot rise in politics without money and exposure, and neither are available in the amounts necessary for those who are ethical. You know Alan Simpson, and how this affected him.
“So, a few of them [politicians] might get killed or beaten up and get nasty comments on line?”
Killed, beaten up or nasty comments are not equivalent; however much you may disdain or deplore politicians, anywhere.
Frankly, I find that remark utterly repugnant. I am sorry to feel moved to say that; but I think it required, and it was incumbent on me to say this; because I comment regularly here and have to say this, because I cannot condone it, or even ignore something quite so extreme.
John
You just prove how hard it is to moderate
I try to read all comments but have to speed read those from regular commentators on most occassions, and usually it works
Here PSR did offer an unacceptable comment. I have deleted it.
My apologies.
I hope he will think harder.
And I do not in any way condone what he said and apologise for letting it threough moderation. My mistake.
Richard
We’re firmly back in ‘Paradox of Tolerance’ territory here.
Tolerating the intolerable is not acceptable, especially in a liberal society.
Personally I’d say the manifestation of fascism in the current Israeli government is one such.
Israel’s existential rights are presented as self determination whereas equivalent Palestinian rights are terrorism. Now we have a form of Zionism that justifies the extermination of the ‘human animals’, and that has to be resisted. Failure to do so, is passive endorsement of genocide – and that was the context for Popper’s thoughts post WW2.
We have resurgent Russian nationalism; fascistic Zionism; Southern USA using the Handmaid’s Tale as a how-to manual; and demagoguery masquerading as populism almost everywhere.
I’d support PSR on the political mindset of the political class being based on new managerialism – entirely neoliberal and echoing James Burnham’s managerial revolution and elite theory, (as influenced Orwell and echoed in 1984)
1. The primary object of every elite or ruling class is to preserve power and privilege.
2. The rule of the elite is based upon (not-necessarily explicit) force and fraud.
3. The social structure is sustained by a political formula that typically correlates with a generally accepted religion, ideology or myth.
UK government is firmly based on these principles.
I only wish I knew how we disempowered and replaced this self serving anti-democratic elite, both political and economic.
Unfortunately, we seem to have little or no protection of this form of unenlightened self interest.
Power does corrupt, but resisting a demagogue like Trump seems a lot easier than resisting an entire class, many pretending to be public servants but really acting as the praetorian guard of oligarchs and populists, with the unstated objective of establishing “Me First” and then protecting that self interest. These are the ‘new managers’.
As PSR points out, it is entirely amoral, but with the pretension of public service as cover.
Richard wrote a piece recently on events accentuating an Eeyore like cloud of depression over public life. The lack of agency and helplessness that feeds is pervasive, and dangerous.
Talking about it is one thing, but we do need to realise that nobody with authority or power willingly relinquishes that. I’m no revolutionary, as replacing one elite with another seems a pointless exercise, but reversible incrementalism has failed too.
Despite that institutional and managerial change is possibly the only route open to us..
I am seriously alarmed by Sunak’s attempts to curtail our right to Peaceful Protest, labeling all the march participants ‘extreamists’, and demanding action to prevent what he is now referring to as the danger of ‘mob rule’. Obviously the Tories thought that the public would tire of the Palestinian protests and the desired level of apathy would prevail. After the sabotage of the SNP motion I started writing yet another letter to my MP, but the sentiments are growing more important by the day. This is what I wrote:
Anneliese Dodds MP; as Kim Sanders-Fisher, you have my solemn pledge of ‘Non-Aggression’ concerning your complete and utter disregard for the opinions of the overwhelming majority of your Oxford East constituents. Despite my solid commitment to active and very vocal Peaceful Protest, you need never fear for your personal safety on my account. I will never threaten you, any member of your family, your staff or your supporters in any way either in person, via the internet or by mail. I will never attempt to harm you, confront you in front of your children or outside your home. I will encourage others to commit to this same pledge. While our shouts of “Ceasefire Now” and “Stop Bombing Gaza” might have disturbed your recent Labour Party dinner gathering, there was no need to exit via the back door and bolt for safety to avoid our justifiable verbal confrontation: that was cowardly. I feel sure you knew perfectly well that not a single person among our Peaceful Protest group had any intention of harming you, and besides, the police were there to protect you.
The sinister erroneous label of ‘Radical Islamist’ is a specious attempt to gag Peaceful Protest in the UK, but this warped conflation with terrorism cannot be endorsed by members of any Political Party to subvert legitimate, Peaceful verbal confrontation. Please do not assume or assert that I am a rabid ‘Islamic Extreamist’, to justify tuning-out my strong opinion over Gaza. I lose sleep over Gaza, but my genuine anguish is harmless when I participate in regular Oxford silent Thursday evening vigils for Gaza at Carfax. Despite the undoubted compromise of my wheelchair, I am prominent in many of the Peaceful Protest Marches here in Oxford as well as down in London. I am proud to say that, as a passionate humanitarian, seriously distressed over the extreme loss of life in Gaza, I was one of the two Oxford women in wheelchairs to lead the Peaceful London Protest March from BBC Portland Place a few weeks ago.
Protesters want you to summon the courage to meet with, and finely listen to, your constituents demands for an Immediate Ceasefire in Gaza with a total ban on all arms shipments to Israel. We are deeply concerned that this Tory Government, and the increasingly impotent Labour Party ‘Opposition’ in the UK, have decided to remain complicit in the Gaza Genocide by abstaining on UN Ceasefire Motions while still supplying Israel with weapons being used by the IDF to slaughter innocent Palestinian civilians. When an election is called MPs who couldn’t bring themselves to vote for a permanent sustainable Ceasefire should crawl out of parliament in shame on all four humanitarian ‘paws’! Once again the UK is on the wrong side of history, in lock-step with the US. If Tony Blair was George Bush’s poodle, then Rishi Sunak and Keir Starmer are President Biden’s Chihuahuas! Imagine that humiliating caricature…
Rishi Sunak has made wildly exaggerated and contrived claims that our Peaceful Protests represent “a subversion of the democratic process” and that the UK is “descending into mob rule”! That is really rich Rishi, a crude and very dangerous attempt to inculcate intolerance, at a time when the PM is desperately trying to eviscerate our democratic right to free speech. Demanding support for an Immediate Ceasefire in Gaza is not an unreasonable ask, in consideration of the fact that Israel is right now fighting the highly credible South African allegation of Genocide at the International Court of Justice in the Hague concerning the relentless Israeli bombardment of civilians in the Gaza strip. The Interim Ruling of the ICJ has been comprehensively Ignored by the extreme right-wing Zionists Government, with an increase in lethal bombing raids. The risk of continued ‘Ethnic Clensing’ in Gaza is now exacerbated even further by Benjamin Netanyahu’s steadfast commitment to a devastating IDF assault on Rafah. The UK supply of weapons to Israel makes us complicit in the Gaza Genocide.
Israel is also currently under ICJ investigation for major war crimes and the imposition of apartheid, targeting Palestinians, both in Israel and the West Bank. Thousands of Palestinians from the West Bank were being rounded-up in nightly IDF raids and thrown in Israeli jails, imprisoned indefinitely without charge. This heavy-handed authoritarian suppression preceded the 7th of October Hamas attack; leading UN General Secretary Antonio Guterres to remak that the incursion “did not happen in a vacuum”. Devoid of any concern for accountability, Israel pursues a relentless policy of stealing land for illegal Jewish settlements, with increasingly destructive nightly IDF raids that have escalated since the Hamas attack. With unconditional diplomatic cover, logistical and financial support from the US and UK we are complicit in the Ethnic Cleansing of Palestinians from the West Bank, indiscriminate killing, displacement or imprisonment without charge. In reality, these Palestinian ‘prisoners’ are being held hostage by Israel.
As Chair of the Labour Party, you, Anneliese Dodds MP, are in a strategic position to influence the abarent decisions of current Labour Leader, Keir Starmer, but you continue to remain silent over the Gaza Genocide: this is unforgivable. We are told that Keir Starmer is ‘moderating’ his obvious unwavering support for Israel’s war on Gaza, over concerns that he risks “losing the ‘Muslim vote”! Like many of the other committed Gaza protesters, I am not a Muslim. There is also a growing Jewish contingent joining our protests against this unholy war targeting innocent Palestinian civilians, mostly women and children, in Gaza. Starmer’s appalling pressure on the Speaker of the House of Commons, to deviously hide Labour disloyalty with a cowardly hijack of the ‘Ceasfire Vote’, will only solidify our strong commitment to “No Ceasefire – No Vote”. I’ve got news for Sir Keir, Labour has already ‘Lost the Humanitarian Vote’!
Thankfully, Oxford City Council has listened to the people of Oxford, who are thoroughly disgusted and horrified by this war on Gaza. Oxford is paired with the West Bank city of Ramallah. Early on, Oxford City Council unanimously supported calls for an ‘Immediate Ceasefire’ to relieve the suffering of Palestinians. Oxford City Council has also rejected calls for the banning of BDS, ‘Boycot, Divest and Sanction’, as it was this tactic that put pressure on South Africa to end apartheid. A dozen Labour Councilors have abandoned their party in protest to stand as Independants after Keir Starmer, in a televised broadcast, readily approved the total blockade of Gaza. Now the Labour leader’s belligerent unconditional support of Israel has led him to deliberately sabotage the SNP motion calling for an Immediate Ceasefire in Gaza. We are told this was due to his objection over certain wording regarding the well-founded accusation that Israel is inflicting ‘Collective Punishment’ on Palestinian civilians.
The unconscionable amendment put forward by the Labour Leader totally gutted the fundamental objective of the SNP Motion, thus making a Gaza Ceasefire contingent on the impossible demands of Israel, despite their vocal commitment to Ethnic Cleansing. There was no legitimate justification for altering parliamentary procedure by pressuring the Speaker with unfounded rumours that Labour MPs were at significant risk from angry protesters, hence my pledge. We cannot allow the so-called ‘Mother of all Parliaments’ to descend into factional infighting or buckle to mob-rule. We fully expect all parliamentarians to vote their conscience on this highly emotive issue. We also hope that all Labour Party MPs will have the courage to call out the warped agenda of Keir Starmer. Local constituents here in Oxford are genuinely alarmed by the way our elected representative, Oxford East MP Anneleise Dodds, has neglected to vote for an Immediate Ceasefire in Gaza in accordance with increasingly demonstrative public demands that represent the will of the vast majority of her constituents.
Please remember Ms Dodds: “No Ceasefire – No Vote”!
I doubt my MP will read or reply to my email. However, I honestly believe that the most effective way to sabotage the disgraceful efforts of the government, trying to seed intolerance and division for political gain, is by taking proactive measures to accomplish the exact opposite. This is what I am trying to do where I live. I am proud to say that Oxford City has always supported the rights of Palestinians and welcomed migrants from all over the world. I sincerely hope that my request to plant an olive tree as a symbolic ‘Peace Tree’ in Manzil Way Gardens, will be approved by Oxford City Council. So far I have confronted the frustrating bureaucratic equivalent of ‘Computer Says No’, without anyone having bothered to ask relevant questions. This olive tree is a cold hardy variety that will arrive in late March with a full DEFRA health-check ‘Passport’. The dedication around the base of the Peace Tree must be universal: “Peace on Earth; To all People Globally; In all Places; At all Times”. I have already secured a verbal commitment from Jeremy Corbyn, representing the Peace and Justice Initiative, to attend an April planting. I am trying to get people to contact their Oxford City Counselor to signal strong local approval for this Project.
It is also high-time Oxford City Council recognized the blindingly obvious, that our ethnically diverse, vibrant, multi-cultural community in St Clements and Cowley Road already distinctly represents a ‘Global Village’, in all but name. Ignoring facts on the ground, after stores were forced to close due to the critical damage of Covid and when so many businesses are struggling, will predestin this exceptionally welcoming community to suffer unnecessary decline. Due to the existing strong multi-cultural demographic, in reality this doesn’t require the approval of Oxford City Council. The residents and business owners in this ward can freely exercise their right to promote the ‘St Clements – Cowley Road Global Village’ as a destination, with the active participation of talented local street artists. To combat divisive Tory Government policies, and the increasingly dangerous rhetoric of right-wing extremists, we have this unique opportunity to set a positive example that other cities might wish to emulate.
Oxford is renowned for its highly ranked iconic university so of course its citizens reject racism: the hallmark of ignorance. I am reassured knowing that Oxford comprehensively rejects the divisive language of certain disgraceful politicians who despicably rely on ramping up racial hatred to score votes. We must refute the conflation of our peaceful calls for an Immediate Ceasefire in Gaza as ‘anti-Semitic hate speech’. This is part of a deliberate agenda to gag free speech against the Government’s blind support for continued conflict. Allies do not let allies commit genocide! Instead we should be teaching and instilling tolerance by encouraging our school children to collaborate on the creation of a new set of really inclusive ‘Universal Values’ to counteract the othering and weaponization of nationality with hostile assertions of so-called ‘British Values’. Our ‘Universal Values’ might include: The courage to say “I’m sorry” and a strong commitment to telling the truth, both sadly absent from the values of many politicians.
The Peace Tree and the Global Village Project offer a proactive approach to demonstrating a positive example of community cohesion as a welcoming city of diverse culture, with the majority of citizens dedicated to promoting peace. Beyond the monetary value to local businesses provided by a Global Village destination, this project will enhance the unique learning opportunity available to children raised in our multicultural city. It is within the power of the citizens in Oxford to choose if they want to make these projects a reality, If and when that happens I think Oxford City Council will feel compelled to approve. When ordinary citizens collaboratively produce initiatives like this there is no place for rabid extremists or the politicians who bait them into recruiting the disenfranchised into taking violent action. I want to live in a city where no one is left behind and I hope others will want to follow this example.
Thank you for sharing
Thank you Richard for the post and Kim for sharing her letter.
Anthony Blinken, Secretary of State under Biden, has just stated to the Munich Security Conference that ‘if you’re not at the table in the international system, you’re going to be on the menu.’
The so-called ‘rules-based’ international order pursued by the U.S. is grounded in the ‘the logic of power’.
As Sony Thang @nxt888 points out “As recognised by the public at home and abroad, it is the U.S. that cannot survive without preying on the weak, in view of its origination and existence mode.
Built on the sea of blood of Indians, the U.S. staged over 114 big and small wars of aggression and more than 8,900 military interference actions for over 130 years until World War I, and expanded its territory by over ten times by annexing and subordinating other countries and nations.
After World War II, the U.S. has grown corpulent through many wars and military interference actions in the DPRK, Vietnam, Iraq, Syria, Libya and other parts of the world and maintained its privileged position.”
In The New York Times on Feb 2 Thomas L Friedman, in an article titled ‘Understanding the Middle East through the Animal Kingdom’ likened the U.S. becoming the ‘king of the Middle East jungle’ to a lion and the Middle East countries to a ‘parasitoid wasp’ or ‘caterpillars’, and stressed the need for the U.S. to burn the whole jungle to kill the parasitoid wasp.
In a nutshell, the U.S. is devouring others at the table, some countries and nations in the Middle East including Palestine are on the menu and Israel is ‘skillfully cooking’ to suit the taste of the U.S.
The outlook on the world based on the US so-called ‘rules-based order’ and hegemonic foreign policy justifying aggression and war to promote its own existence is horrific.
This is the US under Biden, under the so-called Democrats, aided and abetted by the mainstream media across the entire so-called ‘West.’
What Galloway has shown is that the main Parties can be beaten in elections. We need to get away from two Party politics, especially as we’ve all been badly let down by the Tories, and Starmer’s Labour seem to agree with their policies. People need to vote for candidates who want to improve our lives, not self interested careerists.
I wonder what would have happened if Labour had tried?