A new consensus has emerged in British politics — peaceful protesters are dangerous, hateful extremists, but apologists for the mass slaughter of tens of thousands of Palestinian civilians are mainstream, respectable moderates.
From his bully pulpit, British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak declares there is a “growing consensus” that “mob rule is replacing democratic rule.”
The world has been turned upside down, and you are entitled to ask why.
How this all unfolded is instructive. The Scottish National Party (SNP) on Feb. 21 used one of its three annual opposition days to table a motion demanding an immediate ceasefire in Gaza. The Labour Party was in a bind: under pressure from voters who are opposed to Israel’s brutal war, a huge parliamentary rebellion beckoned, with shadow ministers prepared to resign, but Labour leader Keir Starmer would not accept the SNP motion. Why? Because it referred to Israel’s “collective punishment” of people in Gaza in response to last year’s Oct. 7 Hamas atrocities.
That wording acknowledges the commission of a war crime — collective punishment — which would logically demand action from the British state, such as an arms embargo and sanctions on Israel. Such pressure is the only realistic means Israel’s allies have of shifting its behavior at this stage, but Labour is clearly not prepared to go that far. It can offer only provisional condemnations, which Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu knows are designed for domestic public consumption and can be safely ignored.
Labour has 17 annual opposition days, meaning it does not lack opportunities to present its own position in the House of Commons. It called for an “immediate humanitarian ceasefire,” as opposed to the SNP’s “immediate ceasefire for all combatants,” but, crucially, included no reference to collective punishment.
According to parliamentary protocol, Labour’s ruse should have been discarded, but Labour lawmakers — when they were not giving speeches and raising points of order in the direction of their whips to stall for time — gathered around House of Commons Speaker Lindsay Hoyle claiming, according to the Sunday Times, “Keir is going to fix the speaker.”
After a visit from Starmer, which itself defies normal parliamentary procedures, the speaker ignored the advice of his own clerk and accepted both Labour and Conservative amendments. Senior Labour sources briefed the BBC journalist Nicholas Watt that unless the speaker bent to their will, the inevitable Labour majority at the next election would remove him from the chair. In common parlance, this is known as blackmail, though the speaker’s office denied it.
His alternative explanation, that he wanted to widen the debate, was alas somewhat undermined by the SNP being deprived of any vote on its motion, but he promised to compensate the party by granting it a new debate last week. The punchline? He then reneged on that pledge. The speaker, by the way, is himself a former Labour lawmaker.
You might find this politicking morally abhorrent, given that it boils down to a refusal by Labour to pin the self-evident crime of collective punishment on Israel. After all, Gaza has been so comprehensively destroyed that it is a different color and texture even seen from space, and starving dogs have been reported eating decomposing human remains. So Hoyle offered an alternative explanation. He buckled to Labour pressure because he feared a terrorist attack on lawmakers.
Does this make sense? No. Is the question of lawmakers’ security important? Yes. Is it being conflated with legitimate scrutiny and the age-old right of citizens to place collective pressure on their lawmakers? Also, yes.
So Labour’s cynical maneuver became a moral panic about the right to protest. Protesting is a basic pillar of democracy, secured at great cost and sacrifice by our ancestors, and it is already crumbling owing to new Conservative laws — and now a new clampdown beckons.
The question then arose — which protesters are the menace? In a society riven by Islamophobia, the sizeable contingent of Muslim protesters became the inevitable targets, but if the protesters are so dangerous, why no mass arrests?
Enter former British home secretary Suella Braverman, who resolved this logical flaw by suggesting Islamists were actually running the UK. Former Conservative Party deputy chair Lee Anderson narrowed the conspiracy down to London, with the specific implication that the city’s mayor is some kind of Islamist sleeper agent.
The Conservatives must own their rampant racism, but all of this arose from a deliberate attempt to portray the real dangerous extremists as those opposed to the bombing, shooting and starving of tens of thousands of civilians. Why is this happening? Because most of our political and media establishments are increasingly exposed as complicit in one of the greatest crimes of our age.
A new detailed study suggests that between 4 and 5 percent of Gaza’s residents would be dead by August. Israeli soldiers are shooting parents in front of their children, blowing up paramedics sent to save terrified children who are themselves then killed, and repeatedly wiping entire bloodlines from the civil registry.
The UN’s special rapporteur on food has said they are deliberately starving Gaza, and children are already perishing of hunger, while families make bread from animal feed to survive. A UN panel has said there are “credible allegations” of sexual assault, including rape, against Israeli soldiers — two mothers are dying an hour and women make sanitary products from scraps of tent.
Israeli soldiers have been posting potential violations of international law, such as the destruction of civilian property, on TikTok for their comic amusement, and posing with stolen possessions — children’s bicycles, women’s underwear, children’s toys.
Our political and media establishments know that a proper reckoning would strip them of moral legitimacy. They cannot claim ignorance, because Israeli leaders and officials loudly told the world exactly what they would do — they would starve “human animals,” release “all the restraints” on troops, treat civilians as collectively responsible and as “Nazis,” and erase “the Gaza Strip from the face of the Earth.”
But do not forget — the real extremists are the people who opposed this.
To The Honorable Legislative Speaker Han Kuo-yu (韓國瑜): We would like to extend our sincerest regards to you for representing Taiwan at the inauguration of US President Donald Trump on Monday. The Taiwanese-American community was delighted to see that Taiwan’s Legislative Yuan speaker not only received an invitation to attend the event, but successfully made the trip to the US. We sincerely hope that you took this rare opportunity to share Taiwan’s achievements in freedom, democracy and economic development with delegations from other countries. In recent years, Taiwan’s economic growth and world-leading technology industry have been a source of pride for Taiwanese-Americans.
Next week, the nation is to celebrate the Lunar New Year break. Unfortunately, cold winds are a-blowing, literally and figuratively. The Central Weather Administration has warned of an approaching cold air mass, while obstinate winds of chaos eddy around the Legislative Yuan. English theologian Thomas Fuller optimistically pointed out in 1650 that “it’s always darkest before the dawn.” We could paraphrase by saying the coldest days are just before the renewed hope of spring. However, one must temper any optimism about the damage being done in the legislature by the opposition Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), under
To our readers: Due to the Lunar New Year holiday, from Sunday, Jan. 26, through Sunday, Feb. 2, the Taipei Times will have a reduced format without our regular editorials and opinion pieces. From Tuesday to Saturday the paper will not be delivered to subscribers, but will be available for purchase at convenience stores. Subscribers will receive the editions they missed once normal distribution resumes on Sunday, Feb. 2. The paper returns to its usual format on Monday, Feb. 3, when our regular editorials and opinion pieces will also be resumed.
Young Taiwanese are consuming an increasing amount of Chinese content on TikTok, causing them to have more favorable views of China, a Financial Times report cited Taiwanese social scientists and politicians as saying. Taiwanese are being exposed to disinformation of a political nature from China, even when using TikTok to view entertainment-related content, the article published on Friday last week said. Fewer young people identify as “Taiwanese” (as opposed to “Chinese”) compared with past years, it wrote, citing the results of a survey last year by the Taiwan Public Opinion Foundation. Nevertheless, the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) would be hard-pressed
RSS