I no longer care about microaggressions: Ash Sarkar
The Independent
Ash Sarkar is the face of woke. Up against the Goliaths of the right wing, the 32-year-old journalist from north London counts tech billionaires like Elon Musk and US president Donald Trump among her adversaries — of which she has many. Another to cross her path was Piers Morgan before his unceremonious exit from Good Morning Britain in 2021, when during a heated TV debate about Trump and Obama, she quipped: 'I'm literally a communist, you idiot.' A video of the moment has since clocked up nearly eight million views on YouTube. In 2023, Sarkar was ranked No 45 on the New Statesman's Left Power List, and through appearances on shows like Question Time and in her role as senior editor of Novara Media, she has become one of the left's most ubiquitous commentators. Thus it will come as a surprise to many that Sarkar is now sounding the death knell for the culture wars on which she made her name, declaring: 'Woke is dead.'
By that, she means all this uproar about unisex bathrooms and the debate over whether there should be a Black James Bond or a gay James Bond is simply not the priority. Such a statement might seem counterintuitive to everything Sarkar stands for, but 'diversity, equity, and inclusion', she says, is a distraction from the real issues. And so goes Sarkar's argument in her debut book Minority Rule: Adventures in the Culture War. 'Identity has become the dominant preoccupation for both the left and the right,' she tells me in The Independent offices. 'I no longer care about microaggressions — pronounce my name however you want.'
Sarkar knows that this view is controversial, and as ever, she's prepared for the backlash. 'People are gonna be like, she's moved to the right,' she jokes, drily. She's correct. A quick scan of recent comments on Novara Media, the platform she helped get off the ground over the last decade, reveals a rift in the left-wing ranks over her apparent conversion. 'Pathetic,' writes one person. 'A fundamentalist identity politician slating an ideology she built an entire career around as the Western public massively rejected it.' One headline in The Daily Telegraph reads: 'The Queen of Woke just exposed the hypocrisy of the virtue-signalling Left.' Still, online jibes are nothing compared to the death threats she's received in the past. 'I'm not worried about anyone from the left killing me,' she laughs. 'They've all got iron deficiencies anyway.'
Sarkar is self-assured when it comes to politics, offering analysis with the certainty of scientific fact. And for someone who is about as famous as a journalist can get, she doesn't find talking about herself all that interesting. Unlike other media personas who make a meal of just about any X post — ahem, Piers Morgan — she shrugs off any insults, attacks, and controversies, often with a smirk or a funny remark. Sometimes a literal shrug. She has not once thought about quitting her job ('I made my bed') and tells me she doesn't feel any sense of pressure despite her still-rising profile. Sarkar doesn't get upset or angry about the vitriol she faces and credits a lack of media training for her ability to speak with wit and candour compared to the fusty politicians she often shares mics with. A testament to that candour, she calls such MPs 'degraded, atrophied figures'. Sarkar attributes her penchant for insults to her time at an all-girls school. 'It was an Olympic sport,' she says of the name-calling. 'And everyone else was much better (at it than me).'
Perhaps most surprising of all, Sarkar doesn't enjoy fighting. 'I hate conflict in my personal life,' she says. 'I'm a scared little dog. If my husband is like, 'Look, let's have this difficult conversation, tell me what you really think.' I cannot do it. Whereas, if you put me in a news studio and say, 'Talk to this pro-privatisation lobbyist, they're going to take your head off and you've got to stop him from doing that,' I'm like, 'Great. Fine, light work.''
She's since come to the realisation that compartmentalising like this isn't exactly healthy. The death of her stepfather last year heralded the end of what Sarkar calls her 'avoidance and 'inshallah' strategy'. At the age of 31, she entered therapy for the first time where she learnt that being unmoved and removed is a survival technique. 'But you can't just freeze things out,' she says. 'Being frozen is not the same thing as being resilient.' Sarkar has been trying to tap more into her emotions. 'You have to accept that your brain is the dumbest part of you,' she says. 'You have to drop down into this intuition and work out what it is that it's telling you.' So far, it's a technique that has served her well, guiding her through some of the biggest decisions in her life, like getting married in 2023. For Vogue, she wrote a piece on how marriage and Marxism can, in fact, co-exist.
Outside of TV and radio, you can find Sarkar hungover on the sofa with her husband (also an activist) and their cat Mousa Dembélé (named after the PSG footballer) watching Sharpe, the Nineties series about the Napoleonic Wars, starring Sean Bean. She falls asleep to woodworking videos. Her social media algorithm is wholesome, made up of 'cats, comedy, and recipes'. She's also an Aries. All this to say, she does, in fact, lead a very normal life.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Gulf Today
2 days ago
- Gulf Today
This is how Trump has become America's bully-in-chief
Eric Lewis, The Independent The Trump administration makes clear nearly every day that the rule of law is for chumps. It has been nearly three months since they deported 137 Venezuelans without hearings to a maximum-security prison in El Salvador, where they are being held indefinitely in horrific conditions. Others have been deported to third countries with which they have no connection. Many have been deported in clear violation of federal court orders enjoining the administration from doing so. Judges have repeatedly held that deportation without notice and a hearing is illegal. The administration has claimed to have no power to obtain the return of people sent, even in defiance of court order, because they are no longer in the United States. Eight detainees were being sent to South Sudan, one of the world's worst conflict zones. A Boston judge said it was "unquestionably in violation of this court's order". Rather than returning them, the Trump administration diverted the plane to another African country wracked by conflict, Djibouti, where they are held in a shipping container. Kilmar Abrego Garcia, a Venezuelan that the administration admitted had been deported by mistake, and had been cleared to remain in the United States because of a legitimate fear of gang violence, was accused by Kristi Noem, the homeland security secretary, of being an MS-13 gang member himself. Secretary Noem declared that he would never return to the United States. On Friday, the Trump administration were somehow able to obtain the consent of El Salvador's President to send him back, but only after a quick indictment was obtained accusing him of being a human trafficker, based on a 2022 traffic stop where other migrants were in his van. For more than three years Garcia checked in monthly with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), who knew of the traffic stop and saw no wrongdoing. This is the backdrop of the protest and violence that has erupted in California in recent days. It appears to foreshadow the next stage of lawlessness and a movement toward governing by emergency decree. Unlike the January 6 riots at the Capitol, the protests in Los Angeles were largely peaceful. To be sure, there were incidents of violence, a classic situation calling for police intervention. Five LAPD officers suffered minor injuries, none life-threatening. No ICE injuries were reported. That was not good enough for the Trump administration, which nationalized the California National Guard over the objections of the governor and mayor of Los Angeles and now Trump has called in the Marines. It is unclear how they will deployed and under what authority. The Trump administration is simultaneously seeking to suppress dissent with massive force, escalate and provoke confrontation and argue that blue state officials are too incompetent or too "woke" to enforce the law. As Trump wrote on Truth Social, "Looking really bad in L.A. BRING IN THE TROOPS!!!" He tried to mobilize the military during the George Floyd protests, but the Secretary of Defense declined. Not so today. For Trump, the military is being transformed into an extension of domestic political power, not a force to defend the country against outside enemies. The consistent thread is hostility to any alternative center of power. The administration has already arrested a judge, a mayor and a member of Congress — and Trump stated that he would support arresting California Governor Newsom. Trump's "big, beautiful bill" contains a provision depriving courts of jurisdiction to hold executive branch officials in contempt of court orders, so the judiciary can be ignored with impunity. Trump and his spokespeople have attacked judges who have decided cases against him as "USA-Hating" "monsters" who want the country to "go to hell." He cannot conceive that the 185-plus rulings against him so far were based on the law rather than inherently treasonous conduct by judges, including judges he appointed, requiring impeachment or worse. It is all an elaborate dance to intimidate the judiciary into avoiding a full-our war with the administration. Last week, the head of the FBI ordered a major diversion of investigative resources because his predecessor posted a photo of rocks on social media that formed the numbers 8647 (86 being a restaurant term meaning removed from the menu and 47 being President Trump's Presidential number). FBI Director Patel said: "Do you know how many agents I've had to take offline from chasing down predators, fentanyl traffickers, terrorists because everywhere across this country, people are popping up on social media and think that a threat to the life of the president of the United States is a joke and they can do it because he did it?" He seemed unaware that his job was to investigate serious crimes, not to suppress the political opinions of his adversaries by suggesting that their anti-Trump posts were homicidal threats. All of these actions are of a piece to undermine the rule of law, a principle that should not be controversial. It is an age-old, essentially conservative principle not tied to specific ideology. Judges are to apply the facts to clear and accessible laws and to apply them without bias for or against any litigant. It only requires a judicial and legal function that are independent from executive power or interference. But even the most minimal check on executive power is anathema to the Trump agenda. Since the early days of America, the judiciary has had the critical role to "say what the law is," and it has often taken very conservative, indeed at times reactionary views, upholding slavery, segregation and internment of citizens. Conservatives have poured billions of dollars into vetting and ensuring a conservative judiciary. But that is not good enough; this administration needs complete control and to win every case. Leonard Leo, the arch-conservative who has done more than anyone to pack the courts with conservative judges, was called out by Trump as a "sleazebag" who "hates America" because many of his touted appointees actually felt compelled to follow the law. The rule of law — a set of guardrails for neutrality, honesty and judicial independence — is the precondition for avoiding tyranny. As Benjamin Nathans wrote in his Pulitzer Prize-winning 'To The Success of Our Hopeless Cause,' there were 753 trials of Soviet political dissidents during the Brezhnev years that resulted in 753 convictions (and no acquittals). For Trump, a 753-0 record in political trials raises no questions; it is how the system should work. This destruction of rule of law infrastructure is a feature, not a bug, of ambitious authoritarians. Go after the judges; go after the lawyers; and use the power of investigation and criminal indictment as yet another chainsaw, not just to put your political enemies in jail if you can, but to intimidate your opponents into silence. And bring out the big guns, to show everyone who controls the most massive fire power the world has ever known. This is where we are today. The rule of law is the last impediment to absolute power. And it is now under siege. It will be difficult to put this bedrock structural principle of justice back in place when he is done.
Gulf Today
4 days ago
- Gulf Today
Kajol introduces her unconventional besties this National Bestfriend Day
Actress Kajol decided to introduce the netizens to her unconventional best friends this National Bestfriend Day on Sunday. Kajol revealed that her friends — her coffee, her crochet, and her books have a hard time understanding social media, and hence she could not upload a photo with them. 'I couldn't get any pictures coz I was spending time with my best friends, and they really don't get social coffee, my crochet, and my books! #NationalBestfriendDay.' Kajol penned on social media. On more than one occasion, Kajol has been seen kitting and reading books whenever she gets a chance. Kajol, who will next be seen in the upcoming film 'Maa', corrected actor R. Madhavan that she is not a 'big prankster' and it's her actor-filmmaker husband Ajay Devgn. On Wednesday, the makers of the film took to YouTube and dropped a video, where Kajol and Madhavan were seen having a conversation about the film, which is scheduled to release on June 27. In the video, Madhavan was seen telling Kajol: 'Everyone knows that you're a big prankster.' Denying the hilarious claim, Kajol said: 'No, you're mistaking me for Ajay Devgn. Not at all.' Madhavan asked Kajol if she is the serious kind on the set, to which Kajol responded that she is ' very serious on set' and then added with a laugh that she is 'kind and humble on set.' Madhavan then asked Kajol if she has 'ever scared a director out of your kindness and humility by completely memorising all your lines and all the other characters' lines, going completely prepared and sitting there stoically and waiting for the shot?' Kajol said: 'Never would I do that to myself. I never do it to myself. If you want to scare the director, there are many other things to scare him. But, no.' The actress turned the same question to Madhavan and said: 'You are also a very, very prepared actor, as we know. I mean, you've brought a box of ladoos early in the morning to scare the director on set.' Madhavan said: 'Nobody has touched it, I know. I want to tell you that. I've to change my strategy right now, right? I'll have to change the ladoos. I'll bring barfi next time. are necessary sometimes.' Asked if he is one of those people who does not believe in a script, Madhavan said: 'The lines are written, but we'll do whatever needs to be done......' Kajol asked: 'And you don't interfere?' 'I mean, I fight a lot before reaching the set... With the director and everything. Whatever arguments, whatever takes place.' Kajol then asked: 'So, you've decided that you're going to fight with everybody before...' To which, he said: 'Yes, before and for the sake of the film. But, on the set, I've learned from Ajay sir and everybody... ...that you have to have only one director. So, put your argument vehemently. Then, I'll do whatever he says.' Indo-Asian News Service
Middle East Eye
5 days ago
- Middle East Eye
Israel's war on Palestinians will not end until the apartheid system is dismantled
More than 600 days into what many now call a "genocide war" in Gaza, even staunch supporters of Israel are beginning to question its motives. Some have started using the term "genocide" to describe Israel's actions. Yet focusing solely on Gaza obscures a broader, long-standing strategy - one targeting the Occupied West Bank, East Jerusalem, and Palestinians inside Israel's pre-1967 borders. To oppose genocide effectively, it is not enough to condemn what is happening in Gaza. We must also reject the systematic dehumanisation, dispossession and legal discrimination that Israel enforces against Palestinians everywhere. Western commentators such as Piers Morgan and former White House spokesperson Matthew Miller were slow to criticise Israel's conduct in Gaza, even as their platforms helped justify it for months. Their delayed condemnation reveals a deeply entrenched presumption: Israel is "right until proven wrong", while Palestinians are "wrong until proven otherwise". This imbalance stems from colonial privilege and Israel's near-total control over Palestinian life - from the river to the sea. By controlling every aspect of life, including electricity, water, movement and economic access, Israel reshapes Palestinian communities to serve its own interests and directly manipulates Palestinian politics. New MEE newsletter: Jerusalem Dispatch Sign up to get the latest insights and analysis on Israel-Palestine, alongside Turkey Unpacked and other MEE newsletters And in this regard, it is crucial to return to the beginning. Blueprint for control The term "Gaza Strip" only emerged after the Nakba of 1948. Before that, there was the Gaza District, which covered approximately 1,196 sq km. After the Nakba, it was reduced to just 365 sq km - less than one-quarter of its original size. The model of siege, deprivation and periodic warfare has been viewed as a blueprint for civilian control, and it drew virtually no meaningful international sanctions Before 1948, the Gaza District was home to 150,000 Palestinians. Following the Nakba, the population of the newly formed Gaza Strip swelled to 280,000 - 80,000 of them original residents, and another 200,000 refugees who had fled from elsewhere. For Israel, Gaza came to represent the logic of "minimum land with maximum Arabs", in order to secure "maximum land for minimum Jews". In the decades that followed - especially after the Oslo Accords - Gaza was transformed into a closed system. Calorie rations were kept at subsistence levels, electricity and water were tightly controlled, and movement was heavily restricted. From 2008 through to September 2023, Israel launched four major military assaults on Gaza, killing around 6,300 Palestinians. Despite the scale of destruction, no senior Israeli political or military official has ever been held accountable. This model of siege, deprivation and periodic warfare has been viewed as a blueprint for civilian control, and it drew virtually no meaningful international sanctions. Follow Middle East Eye's live coverage of the Israel-Palestine war The architect of this strategy was then-Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon. His 2005 Disengagement Plan was rooted in demographic calculations. With more than one million Palestinians and just 9,000 settlers in Gaza, the economic and political cost of direct military rule had become untenable. During meetings with US officials in 2004, Sharon made clear that he expected American backing for expanding settlements in the West Bank in exchange for withdrawal from Gaza. And that is precisely what happened. The number of settlers in the West Bank increased from 250,000 to 500,000, not including those in East Jerusalem. Legislated supremacy At the same time, under successive Likud governments, a raft of legislation was passed to erode the civil rights of Palestinian citizens of Israel. The 2011 Nakba Law authorised the finance minister to withhold public funds from institutions that commemorate the Nakba. The 2017 Kaminitz Law gave the state sweeping powers to demolish "unauthorised" structures - disproportionately impacting Palestinian towns. The 2018 Nation-State Law made Hebrew Israel's sole official language, downgraded Arabic to a "special status", and affirmed that only Jewish settlements merit state support. More recent laws have empowered Israeli authorities to deport the family members of alleged "terrorists" without due process, and to criminalise any public expression deemed sympathetic to Palestinian resistance. Cumulatively, these laws entrench a racialised hierarchy of citizenship that privileges Jewish lives over Palestinian ones. Expanding conquest In late 2024 and early 2025, the Knesset approved a wave of building permits that enabled the seizure of both state-owned and privately held Palestinian land around Hebron - a scale of expansion not seen since 2007. In Hebron alone, around 5,000 olive trees were uprooted. Jenin and Nur Shams refugee camps were razed. Between October 2023 and mid-2025, Israeli forces killed roughly 900 Palestinians and arrested nearly 14,000 in the West Bank - many held without charge under sweeping administrative detention orders. Why Israel is accelerating its expansionist plan in the Naqab Read More » Israeli authorities also demolished at least 227 Palestinian homes in East Jerusalem and other Palestinian towns inside Israel during that same period, citing minor zoning violations to justify large-scale demolitions. Meanwhile, under the pretext of "developing the Negev (Naqab)", Israel revived the 2011 Mokedim ("Focal Points") plan in 2024. Tens of thousands of dunams have since been slated for confiscation, threatening the homes of around 85,000 Bedouin citizens. The plan seeks to forcibly concentrate Bedouin communities into state-recognised townships while bulldozing so-called "unrecognised villages". Israel's current posture is not merely a reaction to the events of 7 October 2023. It is the latest expression of a century-long campaign to dehumanise and criminalise Palestinians. This narrative has been widely accepted in western media and politics, conditioning global audiences to side with Israel regardless of its actions. It took almost two years of daily images documenting Gaza's devastation for the world to finally shift its stance. But Gaza is not a "bug" in Israel's system - it is a feature. It is a demonstration of the extreme measures Israel is willing to deploy against any Palestinian population. Designed brutality The genocide in Gaza is not an aberration - it is the logic of the system laid bare. One cannot condemn what is happening in Gaza while ignoring everything else Israel has done to the Palestinian people. Some Israeli political factions, and their international allies, now realise the scale of the disaster can no longer go unnoticed - that accountability may be inevitable. And so they have moved to the damage-control phase. This is not about fits of rage but a system built to distort reality and preserve Israeli and Jewish supremacy Precisely for this reason, it is more urgent than ever to remind the world that this system will continue unless it is dismantled. Anyone who truly opposes genocide must also oppose the structures of Israeli control over Palestinians everywhere. This is not about "fits of rage" or temporary moments of excess. It is about a system designed to distort and forcibly reshape reality in order to preserve Israeli and Jewish supremacy over Palestinians. Now, as during the Second Intifada, with elections on the horizon, more Israeli voices will speak out against Netanyahu - not out of opposition to the war itself, but because the international backlash has grown too costly. Fearing sanctions and international boycotts, they will try to engineer an "Oslo 2.0" - a "peace process" filled with promises, yet like its predecessor, ultimately designed to entrench control after the genocide in Gaza. And so, the next Palestinian disaster becomes only a matter of time. The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Eye.
