As The Guardian has noted:
Shabana Mahmood told “white liberal” hecklers to “fuck right off” after being accused at an on-stage event of copying the policies of Nigel Farage's Reform UK.
The home secretary was barracked by a man who said he wanted to “personally thank you for out-Reforming Reform” during a live interview in central London on Monday. Two other audience members shouted “refugees welcome” as the man was removed by security.
Speaking to the comedian Matt Forde, Mahmood said she would not be put “in her box” and accused the protesters of trying to “delegitimise” the “perfectly valid” concerns many people have with high levels of immigration.
The clash took place as Mahmood faces pressure from Labour MPs and cabinet colleagues to water down hardline plans for asylum and immigration.
There is so much to unpack here. First, note that Mahmood chose her interviewer with care. As Google noted when I asked about him:
Matt Forde is a British comedian, broadcaster, and author known for his "pro-politics" comedy and insightful political commentary, defining himself as being on the centre-left of the political spectrum. He has a deep background in the Labour Party, having worked as a party advisor before becoming a comedian, but has described himself as "politically homeless" due to his disillusionment with the party under Jeremy Corbyn.
I think we can safely conclude he is not on the left, then. Like many now calling themselves centre left when associated with Labour, he is almost certainly on the neoliberal right at best.
Second, Mahmood's policies are racist. They seek to increase the scale of discrimination within the UK against those not born in this country, with a particular prejudice, indicated by worsening treatment, for those who come here as refugees, who inevitably have low social status, low incomes and come from ethnic minorities. This is racist discrimination. Those calling this out are right to do so. Our government is not respecting human rights as it is required to do by the conventions it has signed.
Third, note that Mahmood used the "whiteness" of those attacking her as a basis for her counterattack. That is a sign of a racist mindset, in itself. So, too, is the comment about being put in her box. She obviously thinks there are lines in that case. Her accusers did not draw them.
Fourth, there can only be two reasons for what Mahmood is doing. She either believes in discrimination, or she is trying to "out-Reform, Reform". Her accusers look to be making a reasonable claim in that case.
Fifth, Mahmood has never addressed valid concerns about migration, on which this country has always been, and now is, critically dependent, for reasons I have often explained here. She has, as she was accused of doing, always played to the Reform agenda, and it is both far-right and racist.
Sixth, she had her critics thrown out.
How far has Labour fallen? Very far indeed, I think we can safely say, based on this incident and Mahmood's reaction. No wonder the country has had enough of them.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
There are links to this blog's glossary in the above post that explain technical terms used in it. Follow them for more explanations.
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Buy me a coffee!
It’s a clever policy, putting people (usually women) of colour into posts where they announce and force through clearly racist policies. Patel. Braverman. Mahmoud.
It’s clever because no matter the level of vile racism which pours out of their mouths, ordinary people think “It can’t be racist. She’s Asian/Black”
Read any speech by any of them out loud, as I did a few years ago on LBC, but replace only one word. Replace the words “illegal immigrants” with the word “Jew”
Then see how it sounds. If it fills you with revulsion, then so it should with “illegal immigrant”
Well said Hannah and RobertJ.
We need people to wise up and see that it is austerity that is hurting them – not immigration. Labour’s pivot to the Reform agenda when they openly acknowledge austerity and previous Tory and Lib Dem mismanagement is simply unforgivable. They could have built a narrative on and against austerity but chose – consciously – to ‘take things as they have found them’. A bloke in the Labour party called Darren was the first person I saw enunciate that bollocks to the country – apparently he grew up in poverty. Hmmm, yes, a poverty of ideas, principle and imagination I think………………
….”the “perfectly valid” concerns many people have with high levels of immigration.”….is Mahmood lazily reinforcing the MSM’s warped narrative.
If she objectively examined the immigration issue and embraced some of the creative thinking available on everything from housing to employment she might be able to come up with some policies worth considering.
That’s leaving aside the monumental issue of why families wrench themselves away from their home countries in the first place.
I live in an area (near Lichfield) where there are relatively few non-white people, and the ‘immigrants’ tend to be either Ukraine or long-settled restaurant owners. The area is substantially Reform now (as is Staffordshire Council), despite the dismal performance of those voted in. Why? It is simply the mass media and the constant barrage of racism, overt or covert. Labour is massively complicit.
Just been reading about this incident. Mahmood is accusing those who heckled her of being racist towards her, and saying they probably think she shouldn’t be allowed to live here. Utter made up rubbish with no evidence or basis in fact. So her response is claiming victim status. Utterly disgusting.
Yes indeed how far has Labour fallen?
DARVO in action
If Labour had come to government with a plan (+budget) to give my neighbours genuinely affordable local social housing with agreed levels of priority for local people, a lot of the sting would have been taken away. We have such a scheme in Bristol, but underfunded due to neoliberal economics.
Secondly, the cynical way in which refugees end up being carted off to v poor areas with run-down housing stock, which is bought up cheap by racketeers who then let it to government or councils, for refugee housing, almost on a ghetto model, negligently, arrogantly, creates an avoidable social tension in already deprived neighbourhoods which politicians then exploit and cynically weaponise. Ken Loach made a film on this, “The Royal Oak”. As pre approval refugees aren’t allowed to work, then locals see them idle on street corners and usually are unaware of how little they have to live on, nor are they aware of the NRPF rules.
Thirdly, politicians should suffer criminal sanction for deliberately divisive rhetoric especially when it is deliberately racial in tone. I would include criticising hecklers for being white, in that category (it reminds me of the trouble Corbyn got into for saying some hecklers – 2 v committed Zionist activists – didn’t understand British irony. Many “hate speech” police investigations were launched on far less contentious grounds, against ordinary members of the protesting public, so why not against deliberately inflammatory divisive rhetoric? It does result in people getting killed.
Fourthly, Labour councils often have avoided discussing legitimate concerns, offering racist politicians an open goal. Now, Labour have realised this, but instead of initiating sensible two-way dialogue they do what Mahmood did, stir up division, employ racist rhetoric, attack straw men – in summary, they cynically out-Reform Reform. (the Margaret Hodge Barnet playbook)
Much to agree with
Would it be possible to stop referring to the current govt. as Labour?
Their principals and support to socialist ideas/ideals are lip-serve only.
Acta, non verba!
Will not be holding my breath.
I believe the decision was taken deliberately to house asylum seekers in town centre hotels to wind up people who thought they were living in real luxury rather than shared rooms with no cooking facilities, restricted in what they could do and expected to exist on a few pounds per week.
It was a perfect way to get even normally tolerant people to say ‘this is not right’ and it was accompanied by regular news items in the media about dark skinned people arriving on small boats.
It has been very cleverly orchestrated and is a worrying development in British politics.
I’ve had to deal with people like this in the health service (both clinical and non clinical ‘managers’).
I think they start out with some principles, maybe a bit of morality but then the lure of power is so great that they slowly lose that morality. Telling themselves they have to compromise and becoming more and more paranoid because every time someone points out that what they are doing is wrong, is actively harming the very people they should be protecting , they turn on that person/group and viciously suppress them. DARVO, as has been already stated here. And then they are trapped, some have lost all sense of ethics and morality at this point and are very happy to destroy lives, reveling in the joy of watching others suffer. having some warped version of reality in which they feel completely justified.
Others live a life of paranoia and misery, thinking every one is out to get them, striking first at totally innocent people they just don’t like the look of just to avoid this scenario, destroying more lives and careers as they go. And they bring that home and into all their relationships, so in the end it destroys them.
I wonder which type Mahmood is.
It’s obvious which one Steeting is, he never had any principles to start with.
I also know of people in the health industry like this. And councils, and other services.
It seems to me that there was a time, during the Thatcher years, (the years when privatisation started and our entire public services system began to be dismantled), when dynamic people with real principle and energy, were rejected in favour of ‘grey’ individuals who knew and spoke the new business/services jargon (read any public services agenda paper) and did not rock the boat.
We lost so many brilliant people.
And have you noticed how those who were obedient, learned the language and managed to kid people they were on top of ‘strategy’ which disguised loss of services, rationing, access and affordable care/education etc have gone up the greasy pole to the top? I could name several at the VERY top of government departments who started out as clerks with little talent.
Much to agree with