And now Labour is paying the price. Last week's by-election victories show the party is well on its way to winning and that the fall out of genocide-gate had little to no effect on the overall result. But neither Tamworth nor Mid-Beds had large Labour-loyal Muslim communities in play. Many seats across London, the Midlands and the North do. And by his carelessness and bullishness, Starmer is risking this core component of Labour's coalition.
Let's be honest. Labour's Muslim supporters have been long suffering. Despite eight-out-of-ten Muslims voting Labour, they are taken for granted and occasionally traduced by their party. And you could be forgiven for thinking these last 20 years have tested their patience to breaking point. Subject to intense media and government surveillance after the September 11th attacks and in the lead up to the invasion of Iraq, Labour was only too happy to reward decades of majority support with disrespect, insult, and cleaving to Islamophobic press campaigns. Yet the electoral rebellion against this was largely confined to some good election results for Respect, including George Galloway's twice getting elected to the Commons, and the rise of Aspire in Tower Hamlets. This suggests industrial levels of forbearance on the part of Muslim voters. But you can't go against the interests of your base forever and always.
I hear that as soon as Hamas launched its attack on Israel and it was understood that Netanyahu would commemorate the victims by massacring thousands of Palestinians, consultative meetings between the Labour leadership, its trusted lieutenants, council leaders - particularly in areas with large Muslim populations - and Muslim "notables" went into the grid to try and ensure Labour got its messaging right. We can see that process has been a complete failure, and it was always going to be the case. For one, loyalty to Britain's geopolitical interests are as Labourist as Sure Start centres. And that means Israel is to the Labour leadership what the Soviet Union was to the old Communist Party of Great Britain. Its works are never to be criticised, let alone condemned. And its doings are to be alibied if they cannot be passed over in silence. "Defending" Israel, which means defending its right to murder Palestinians and grab their land, cannot be reconciled with assuaging the disgust, anger, and fear British Muslims are feeling.
What makes this even worse is the shoddiness of Labour's efforts to try and square the circle. Quite a few Labour MPs have now come out and demanded Rishi Sunak pushes for a ceasefire (fat chance), but Starmer and friends have also avoided making this demand. We get platitudes about letting the aid into Gaza without reference to the hundreds being killed every night. It's incoherent and is damning the party among Muslims. Then over the weekend, we learned of the deception behind Starmer's photo opp at a South Wales mosque. The image it wanted to convey was of the Labour leader listening to worshippers' concerns while everyone were smiling away. Meanwhile, as Labour are half-arsing their spinning of an impossible position, you have the likes of Luke Akehurst - one of Starmer's key fixers - amplifying suggestions last weekend's solidarity marches were motivated by antisemitism, and helpful "anonymous" sources from Starmer's office saying that they don't care about Palestinian deaths.
It's difficult to overstate the seriousness of the crisis of Labour support among Muslims. Shredding the party's credibility among its most solid constituency is not only incredible stupidity, it is a foretaste of what we can expect from Starmer in government. I often talk about the long-term decline of the Tories, and - just like his adoption of Conservative policies and framing - Starmer seems determined to follow them in this as well.
Image Credit
18 comments:
Is it possible the majority of British Muslims are not as sympathetic to Islamist causes as British hard left? Afterall, Hamas chucked Gaza under the bus to derail normalisation with other regional Muslim majority states, which perhaps gives truer reflection of sympathies (revealed preferences in economics). Is it also possible many British Muslims have a better understanding of actually existing Iranian Imperialism than British 'Anti-Imperialist' grifters (yes, I know, there's a whole cod theology around when 'Imperialism' does and doesn't count as 'Imperialism')? Even if British Muslims don't understand it in terms of leftist cant they probably have a better understanding of the truth on the ground.
Starmer's antics should knock a few tens of thousands off the Labour membership figures, making the membership base smaller. Probably means the party will also become even more Tory-lite (if thet's possible) in the run-up up to the election.
British Muslims are not very sympathetic to Islamist causes (note complete lack of mass support for HbT or Isis for example). What mobilises them is ongoing oppression of Muslims in general. Iraq wasn't Islamist but mass demonstrations vs war there, big protest votes etc happened anyway.
Kamo may have apoint but there is still the panic arsing among right wing Labour MPs in constituencies with large Muslim populations like the charming Jess Phillips, the talented Wes,etc.. They seem to be concerned.
It may be that it starts out with Hamas terrorisits being killed but it soon becomes women and children because the 'precision' bombs sometimes/always miss their targets. And when it is thousands of Muslim women and children British Muslims can note the rhetoric Starmer uses about russians blowing up infrastructure and killin innocents compared to Israel more ruthlessly blowing it up and killing.
An issue is what the unwavering, uncritical and unconditional support of Israel brings Starmer. I suppose it proves he is not anti Semitic, that he is a grown up politician willing to destroy the world to save it from Russia/China/Iran/PDRK, and that the owners of the right wing press don't thin him a complete c##t and muzzle their attack dogs.
Squaring woke Corbynites with the Muslim vote was always going to be a challenge (although perhaps not as much as it may seem - woke issues are principally the realm of middle-class whites, try being Trans in Telford) but Starmer has his eye on the Red Wall and South East.
As Medhi Hasan observed: "anti-Semitism isn't just tolerated in some sections of the British Muslim community; it's routine and commonplace." More Muslims in Britain have a negative view of Jews than not (according to polls) and the recent shockingly anti-semitic coverage in the MSM (reporting Hamas claims without any scrutiny while in the name of "balance" moving swiftly on from the most shocking terrorist attack since 9/11) must certainly have whipped up opinion.
I never believed in institutional anti-semitism before I witnessed the MSM's coverage of this conflict, it's so blatant it's laughable. The BBC used to be the mouthpiece of the Tory Party, today it's like watching a Guardian editorial dinner party, or Oxford University's top table.
Muslim opinion is entitled to be aggrieved, but given the utter intractability of the conflict (unless Pro-Palestinians would like to see "Israel wiped off the face of the earth") they might do better asking why the nations they left for a better life don't do more to actually support the Palestinian people by promoting prosperity and peace, rather than, like Hamas, seeing them as little more than fresh meat for Israeli shrapnel. But then precisely the same could apply to Hamas's white middle-class supporters on the left.
«It's difficult to overstate the seriousness of the crisis of Labour support among Muslims. Shredding the party's credibility among its most solid constituency is not only incredible stupidity, it is a foretaste of what we can expect from Starmer in government.»
Again, I am astonished here as our blogger seems to argue that New New Labour/Change UK leaders care about that. Didn't Peter Mandelson say long ago "they have nowhere else to go"? Whom can the muslims vote for if they don't vote for New, New Labour? The Conservatives are not very friendly. So they can go only to a protest vote, either abstentions or the LibDems or other no-hope party. Those who abstain disenfranchise themselves, any Conservative or New, New Labour politicians will only think "good riddance" of them.
With FPTP it does not matter how many abstain, and it matters only a bit but not much who is the third, fourth, etc. party in nearly all constituencies.
«I often talk about the long-term decline of the Tories, and - just like his adoption of Conservative policies and framing - Starmer seems determined to follow them in this as well.»
My continuing impression is that the Conservatives and New, New Labour/Change UK will be dividing among themselves the conservative-but-whig and the liberal-but-tory voters and the others won't matter because there is no other party with a chance to win a number of seats under FPTP willing to represent other interests.
The only long term challenge to "There Is No Alternative" is to patiently work to build, despite likely brutal pushback from the government and employers, a mass movement that then can support a party or take back Labour, but my guess is that even the lower middle class are too complacent about their only slowly declining position to be motivated to do that.
Your all over the place. I've watched and read plenty of the mainstream coverage, and it's been equally, if not more, accepting of the Israeli governments narrative. What's laughable, is that you think there's "institutional antisemitism" because the corporate media have dared challenge the Israeli establishments version. That's reaching.
Sir Keirs the continuity candidate. Labour are awful without needing to be "tory-lite".
Anon @20.57
I would say unquestioningly reporting as news the Israelis have killed 500 at a hospital, while throwing shade on any Israeli attempt to challenge this 'news' (ie, C4) was anti-Semitism in action, as obvious as Hamas 'Big Lie' strategy. They still haven't corrected it, and still accept obviously doctored numbers as fact. It's 'blood libel' in action, only the chattering classes are so knee-deep in it they don't notice.
It is also anti-semitism to judge terrorists as equal to a legitimate government, unless you believe Hamas - with their explicitly genocidal charter - also has a seat at the UN?
Now that's what I would call 'reaching'.
It's not really a war, is it. It's more like a ridiculous over-reaction to a prison riot.
"I would say unquestioningly reporting as news the Israelis have killed 500 at a hospital, while throwing shade on any Israeli attempt to challenge this 'news' (ie, C4) was anti-Semitism in action, as obvious as Hamas 'Big Lie' strategy"
It might be wrong headed, but taking into account some of the equally misleading stories Western leaders, like Biden, were accepting as fact, such as "40 beheaded babies" and "mass rape", its understandable people would push back, and labelling anyone who questions the idf version as an antisemite, as if challenging the Israeli governments narrative is an affront to all Jewish people.
Bidens actions of uncritically echoing Netanyahu talking points about the above atrocities formented enough racial hatred that a crazed old man murdered a child.
"It is also anti-semitism to judge terrorists as equal to a legitimate government, unless you believe Hamas - with their explicitly genocidal charter - also has a seat at the UN?"
You'll have to take that up with the people you claim do that. It's a hefty accusation to make.
@kamo "chucked under the bus" is an interesting way of putting it. I have seen similar comments which seem to be saying that the Israeli response of all out slaughter was entirely predictable, so its all Hamas' fault that 2,900 children have so far been killed by Israeli bombs. No. Every death is the direct responsibility of whoever launched the missile, dropped the bomb or fired the gun. This applies equally to both sides. It's also the responsibility of those in power who make the decisions to give the orders, those who issue or relay the orders, and, of course, those who obey them.
Atrocities are crimes, whoever commits them. While keeping tally seems repugnant, it is necessary to give some sense of proportion to the level of atrocities being perpetrated. 1,400 Israelis killed, 220 captured. 7,000 Palestinians (including 2,900 children & 1,700 women) killed, something over 5,000 imprisoned. And several million exiled and stateless.
Whether a killer has a uniform that is recognised by the UN seems to make little difference to the victim, they are still dead. So, perhaps we can say that the side that kills the most non-combatants is the most deserving of condemnation. And there is a massive disparity here.
I can't speak for most British Muslims but those Muslims I know are almost all united in disgust at the slaughter being inflicted on the people of Gaza. Unlike some of the commentators here, they don't equate all those living there with a small minority of extremist "islamists". But, while we shouldn't judge people until we have walked a mile in their shoes, equally we should hold governments to standards set by international law. What is happening in Gaza is undoubtedly a war crime, and those who are not blinkered, biased, or pursuing some individual agenda that short-circuits their moral compass, can see it.
If your going to talk about genocide, why dont you also include things like Roy Sharon, a "respectable" radio and TV commentator on the main Israeli broadcasting corporation, speaking very explicitly of his desire to see “a million dead bodies in Gaza" or how the streets of Tel Aviv are flooded with red stickers reading "Exterminate Gaza!". Not "Destroy!", not "Flatten!" – but clearly and explicitly "Exterminate Gaza!". "Le-Ha-Sh-Mid!" - "Exterminate!".
Anon 1826
I presume Biden was briefed by US intelligence, although I think the evidence of Israeli coroners is sufficient. Personally, I feel it was a mistake not to film everything and post it, as clearly not doing so is a gift to pogrom deniers, but the state apparently wishes to preserve the dignity of the corpses and their families. Also, possibly recording was not the priority of the IDF at the time, although Hamas did quite a lot.
Historically this denial coupled with the mute acceptance of the Hamas claims will represent an indelible stain on leftism. Of course, like any outlandish cult, this will only draw believers tighter, but its appeal will become ever more obscure.
@Anon 21:15
The only denial going on is yours. Pretending that the mass slaughter of the people of Gaza is not happening, and failing to mention the many years of occupation, and the Apartheid system openly in place across Israel and the occupied territories. History will look back at this as the crime against humanity, and in the former case, genocide that it is. If any cult exists, it is that of the apologists for this injustice and the continuing war crimes of the State of Israel, which trumpets its own right to exist while simultaneously denying the rights of Palestinians to have any sort of state, or even an existence - since many extremist Israelis deny the existence of Palestinians as a people.
It's interesting to see just how crude and degenerate the apologists for mass murder committed by Zionist extremists are, how they ultimately must fall back on claims that the CIA tells nothing but the truth, that Israel is the only perfectly moral state in the universe, that anyone who denies these things is a Nazi, and that anyone who doesn't approve of the mass murder of civilians (when committed by the Israeli government with the full support of the United STates) is limitlessly evil.
This affair has really ripped the mask off everything. I won't say that it has changed my mind, but it makes me much, much less liable to listen to people who support the Western narrative, for if they can be so depraved on this issue, how can they be trusted to tell the truth, or take an honest stance, on anything else?
"I presume Biden was briefed by US intelligence, although I think the evidence of Israeli coroners is sufficient. Personally, I feel it was a mistake not to film everything and post it, as clearly not doing so is a gift to pogrom deniers, but the state apparently wishes to preserve the dignity of the corpses and their families. Also, possibly recording was not the priority of the IDF at the time, although Hamas did quite a lot."
Biden, and others who were pushing the idf version of events, have since had to backtrack, which isn't in line with said events being true. People acknowledge that the Hamas attacks were bad enough enough, without the need to add potentially dubious aspects, and pushing back against the Israeli state narrative isn't "pogrom denial".
Anonymous,
"It's blood libel"
Except it's not though, is it? We hear this over and over again and then it turns out that, yes, the IDF did exactly what they were accused of. That's the difference: the blood libel wasn't true, whereas the IDF does in fact kill civilians all the time. Certainly, they're not alone in that. It's a thing that occupying armies tend to do. Being Jewish doesn't make it any better, or make the denial any more plausible.
Post a Comment