Latest news with #politicaldiscourse
Telegraph
31-07-2025
- Politics
- Telegraph
Labour deserves to be punished by voters for its disgraceful smear against Farage
This morning Labour MP Neil Coyle Tweeted a picture of Nigel Farage standing at the podium of his party's last annual conference. The legend on the lectern read: 'Reform will fix it'. 'This was Reform conference branding,' wrote Coyle, smugly confirming what his colleagues and fellow Labour MPs have been saying in the last 48 hours: that Farage, because of his opposition to the Online Safety Act, is 'on the side' of predators like the late Jimmy Savile. Allow me to take you back to the dark day in October 2021 when Conservative MP David Amess was murdered by a knife-wielding Islamist in his constituency surgery. David's former colleagues from across the House of Commons gathered to seek ways of avoiding the very real threat of Islamism, and so came up with the notion that if only everyone was kinder to each other on social media then everything would be alright in future. It was an illogical and cowardly turn for the debate to take, but let's go with it for now, for it suits our purposes in the current circumstances. In what way does the Jimmy Savile smear – and it is a smear, whatever its defenders may claim – against Farage and his party align with this Government's belief that there is a need for more courtesy and tolerance – dare I say, kindness – in modern political discourse? Let's face it: Peter Kyle, the Secretary of State for Technology, was suggesting Farage was on the side of paedos. There was no subtlety in the attack, there was no need to read between the lines. Labour might as well have emblazoned 'If you vote Reform, you need your hard drive checked' across its election literature. And before the usual suspects take to Twitter to accuse me of being a closet Reform supporter, nothing could be further from the truth: I would vote SNP before I voted Reform (and if you are aware of my views about the SNP, that should tell you something). I want to see Reform defeated, because I think Farage would be a disaster for this country were he ever to achieve office. If only Labour took the Reform threat as seriously as I do. Because this sort of smear isn't a serious political response by a mature political party. There are primary level kids in this country right now who are in their playground murmuring 'Come on mate, get a grip' to the Labour leadership. But worse than being childish and downright stupid – not to mention politically incompetent, and we'll come to that – this whole drama is downright dangerous. When kind and good MPs like David Amess – and Jo Cox before him – can so easily fall victim to extremists, painting Farage or any MP of any party as being sympathetic to child rapists is a grotesquely dangerous and hugely irresponsible thing to do. For a party that fought tooth and nail against holding a national public inquiry into Pakistani rape gangs, it is also a self-defeating tactic. The sad thing is that Kyle, Coyle and even Number 10 – where the attack was approved, if not where it was originated – know this. Yet still they persevere and double down on an attack that would, in any sensible world, have made them feel ashamed of themselves as soon as it was uttered. For those of you who aren't keeping up: in 2025, cabinet ministers label those who criticise Government policy as apologists for child rapists. God forbid that any MP suffers the same fate as either David Amess or Jo Cox, but if ever such an attack is ever repeated, calls for kindness and courtesy towards political opponents from senior Labour figures serving in cabinet today will be immediately dismissed as meaningless and insincere, for they will fail to include the caveat to such an injunction: 'Provided they don't threaten us electorally.' The real stupidity of this attack is in its gross insult to those millions of Britons who are considering giving their vote in future elections to Reform. The phrase 'Project Fear' was deployed against the campaigns in support of the status quo in both the Scottish independence and the EU referendum two years later. It perfectly captured the negative mindset of those campaigns and provided a boost to the anti-UK and anti-EU efforts. In the case of the former, it almost led to their victory. In the case of the latter, it helped them across the finishing line first. Yet the arguments used by both the Yes and the Leave campaigns never once plumbed the depths of sheer offensiveness, childishness and superficiality as what we have seen from Labour ministers and back benchers. Do they imagine that the voters are impressed? Can we expect to see more of this strategy deployed in the months ahead? Perhaps Number 10, fresh from its impressive victories on welfare reform, the winter fuel allowance and Palestine, will authorise leaflets pronouncing that 'Nigel Farage is a poopy-head'? If this is the best Labour has got, if these are the depths to which a once professional party has fallen, perhaps it should just concede now and retire from the game. Voters aren't stupid, and a strategy based on exactly that assumption will deserve to fail; they will deliver a damning judgement when the polls re-open.
New York Times
29-07-2025
- Politics
- New York Times
Trump Is Discovering the Downside of a Justice Department With No Credibility
Readers will surely have varying views about whether the Jeffrey Epstein matter should be dominating political discourse. But the Trump administration's attempt to tamp down the controversy by reviewing its files, interviewing Ghislaine Maxwell and otherwise attempting to show it has nothing to hide brings into sharp relief the damage it has done to the Justice Department and its credibility. From the start, President Trump appears to have put personal loyalty above all in the leaders he chose for the Justice Department and the Federal Bureau of Investigation. And he seems to have succeeded in that regard. Attorney General Pam Bondi, Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche, Principal Associate Deputy Attorney General Emil Bove, the F.B.I. director, Kash Patel — all have shown a North Korean level of fealty to their leader. Ignoring norms of Justice Department independence from the White House, they have jumped to follow his orders. They've announced investigations he demanded, seemingly regardless of whether there was support for doing so. They have moved to dismiss the cases that suited his political or personal purposes, regardless of the public interest. What is truly extraordinary, at least in recent times, has been their readiness to fire or otherwise push out agents and prosecutors, apparently for sins as minor as associating with Mr. Trump's critics and taking assignments to prosecute Jan. 6 defendants. Numerous federal judges have raised concerns, to put it mildly, about the Trump administration's readiness to put political expediency and presidential will above professionalism and adherence to the rule of law. Justice Department lawyers in every administration often find themselves fighting uphill battles in court to advance the president's political agenda. But even when they don't have the law squarely on their side, they generally start with a personal and institutional credibility without which their work would be much harder. If a Trump Justice Department lawyer appears before a court and either doesn't know an answer because the political bosses have withheld it, or, worse, is not fully candid or even lies, she becomes just another lawyer, and a sleazy one at that. The government's case suffers accordingly, as it should. The credibility crisis is not just inside the courtroom. Having supposedly scoured its files on Jeffrey Epstein, the F.B.I. and the Justice Department have told the public that 'no further disclosure would be appropriate or warranted' for good and sufficient reasons. No one is fooled by the lack of any official's name on the written statement. It comes from Ms. Bondi's Justice Department and Mr. Patel's F.B.I. — organizations whose lawyers and agents have seen colleagues pushed out for the mere suspicion of insufficient loyalty. How can these institutions show that they are not simply protecting the president? Want all of The Times? Subscribe.
Mail & Guardian
08-07-2025
- Politics
- Mail & Guardian
Pope Leo a breath of fresh air in Trump's belligerent world
Pope Leo XIV. (X) Pope Leo XIV, in the strict sense of the word, is no politician. But, as the foremost world church leader — head of the Catholic Church — his voice holds sway, and carries weight, in shaping the world's political discourse. He speaks to the universal church and, by extension, to the people who populate the world. His voice reverberates; it reaches billions of the faithful — and those with no faith. He speaks with the authority conferred on him by his office, and when he does, the world takes notice; the political principalities of the world pay attention. This is because his views are couched in language that, although gentle, speaks with great force to all citizens of the world — especially to political leaders who abuse their authority, causing great pain to 'the children of God', to use the biblical lexicon. Of course, for a variety of reasons, this seems a tall order. Implied in what is given to us by historical facts is that society, since time immemorial, has been driven by different understandings of the workings of the world. The people of the world have been at each other's throats, even as they seek to achieve happiness. Billions of dollars, or whatever denomination one might prefer to choose, have been used to try to settle political and ideological scores, while billions of people throughout the world continue to starve to death because of a plethora of unfavourable human conditions that militate against good living. It does bother the pope when political ideologies are used to cause conflict that threatens peace in the world — and he does raise his concerns sharply, offering advice through the church and its bishops and archbishops, who in turn become transmitters of his concerns and words to the world. We know Donald Trump, president of the US, wants to make, in his own words, 'America great again', whatever that might mean. This he does through belligerent language, and at the risk of creating worldwide tensions, keeping everyone on tenterhooks, with no knowledge of what might happen next. Some political analysts and thinkers have, in the recent past, responding to Trump's belligerence, expressed trepidation about what might happen if the stand-off between the warring parties does not stop. Some are already predicting the onset of an armageddon or a third world war. In the past few months and weeks, dangerous missiles have flown, causing mayhem and panic, with Israeli soldiers and American bombers being, in the main, the aggressors and seemingly stoking fires and showing their countries' military muscle. World War II was caused by belligerence and racial animosity. Adolf Hitler's madness contributed to the madness. This was because of a lack of foresight, with the mind of a sadist and racial bigot at work, obsessed with power and putrid thoughts of racial hatred, driven by anti-Semitism that knew no bounds. And the desire to corrupt the world order. Trump, driven by his own destructive and divisive evangelical zeal, and given to a great deal of abusing biblical texts, consistent with what American religious zealotry stands for, is hellbent on resurrecting America and 'rescuing' it from the imagined jaws of communism and socialism which, in his small mind, are a threat to the well-being of society. The world Trump inhabits is marked by America spoiling for a fight, flaunting the military might of the US army. His language is militaristic. But we have to wonder, at a philosophical level, could it be that humans have not been completely cleansed of their original state of nature, as seen by philosopher Thomas Hobbes, when the world is beset by leaders of Trump's calibre? In that old society, disruption was the order of the day, with no rules, and a society marked with unmitigated violence, with no government to speak of. But the recent election of Pope Leo XIV as the head of the worldwide Catholic Church seemed to bring about a much-needed breath of fresh air — and indirectly critiqued the chaos unleashed by Trump and his warring allies and adversaries. First, it is axiomatic that political leaders ought to set the tone for sound world politics and for good governance. When World War II ended, the UN committed itself to securing international peace, preventing conflicts and promoting cooperation, among other things, underpinned by a culture of human rights. This is exactly where Leo comes in. As the head of the Catholic Church his comments about society, morality, politics and social justice carry weight. Recently, when the pope addressed his archbishops in Rome, he talked about the value of good ethical leadership and the need for the archbishops to cascade this value down to communities. He spoke about 'the human virtues of fairness, sincerity, magnanimity, openness of mind and heart … great openness to listening and engaging in dialogue and willingness to serve'. A few points can be teased out of what the pope is telling, not only the faithful, but the world at large. First, he explores the idea of human virtue which is made up of fairness, sincerity, magnanimity and openness. Without these qualities, or virtues, society is bound to produce self-serving world leaders who are incapable of thinking about the people they lead. To make 'America great' is to play a dominant role in world affairs — and possibly shorthand for expressing racial barbs directed at Barack Obama's two-term tenure in the White House — the first black US president. Trump, in his wildest dreams, could never countenance the idea of a black man elected to the high office of president of the US. These sentiments are contrary to what the UN demands and desires. It encourages cooperation; gestures of support for others, particularly under-resourced nations; dialoguing about the well-being of all countries and being magnanimous in all things, of human rights and social justice and the willingness to embrace others for the common good of all nations. Also, significantly, it is for the powerful nations 'to rejoice with those who rejoice and suffer with those who suffer' — in a spirit of human solidarity, of caring about others and ensuring, if you are a wealthy nation, you owe it to yourself to help less well-endowed countries. Speaking pertinently about things that matter, albeit theological, the pope said: 'Our patron saints followed different paths, had different ideas and at times argued with one another with evangelical frankness. Yet this did not prevent them from a fruitful harmony in diversity.' We all need each other. Our separateness, continent by continent, is artificial and has often resulted in seeing each other as different. In biblical language, humans are children of God, belonging to one common ancestry, sharing the same life-giving planet and the wisdom it offers — which is that we ought to belong to each other and desist from mounting hegemonic battles against each other. And so, we all belong to Mother Earth — we are all her products. We need to disabuse ourselves of the notion that some belong and others do not belong. Colonisation was driven by the idea that others, weaker folk, could easily be dispensed of or displaced by stronger folk — all in the name of hegemony. Stephen Bantu Biko, using his liberating black consciousness philosophy, urged black people to recognise their inherent worth and unite to challenge the psychological effects apartheid and racial oppression imposed on them and, with pride and conviction, he urged them to focus on black solidarity and strive to create an egalitarian society where all races coexist. Robert Mangaliso Sobukwe, the president of the Pan Africanist Congress of Azania — and in some circles regarded as the 'president Azania (South Africa) never had' — rejected the notion of multiracialism. However, he strongly averred that 'there is only one race, the human race', emphatic throughout his short life — he died at 53 in 1978 — about the shared humanity of all people, holding that, in the 'new Azania', racial classification would be rendered irrelevant, arguing that it is an artificial construct 'used to divide the oppressed', which must have no place in a nonracial society. Today, Leo is saying the same things — he is telling us to be complete as humanity. We need each other, even though we might not always agree on everything. The world is lucky to have a thoughtful leader such as Pope Leo XIV — a wise prophet emerging from the crucible of human struggle in Peru — described in an editorial in that country in these terms: 'We have a pope who understands the true meaning of living in solidarity with the poor.' Contrast him with Trump, his countryman. They are poles apart, with the pope filled with the spirit of love and humanity and compassion and kindness, and Trump given to bullying and with no time to entertain other people's viewpoints. Jo-Mangaliso Mdhlela is an independent journalist, a social justice activist, a former trade unionist and an Anglican priest.
ABC News
01-07-2025
- Politics
- ABC News
Court finds 'vile' posts by Council Watch head not political commentary
The head of a ratepayer advocacy group has been hit with a two-year intervention order after a magistrate ruled he stalked and harassed an inner-city Melbourne mayor under the guise of political discourse, and was likely to do so again. Stonnington mayor Melina Sehr was on Tuesday granted a Personal Safety Intervention Order (PSIO) against Council Watch president Dean Hurlston over allegations Mr Hurlston had harassed her for six years. Magistrate Michelle Hodgson ruled that while some of the content put before the court did constitute legitimate political commentary, the nature, frequency and persistence of Mr Hurlston's communication had caused it to "lose its political character". Ms Hodgson told the court Mr Hurlston's content showed "ample evidence of ill-will, spite and animosity" towards Cr Sehr, and that Mr Hurlston's "reckless disregard for the truth", denial of intent and justification of harm in court meant she did not find him a credible witness. The magistrate also said personal malice could not be concealed "under the superficial veneer of political discourse or public-interest journalism". She said Mr Hurlston knew his conduct would cause harm or fear of harm. Throughout the four-day hearing in the Melbourne Magistrates Court, Ms Hodgson noted some of Mr Hurlston's social media posts, texts, emails and videos were fair comment and some were "pretty vile comments". Ms Hodgson said the concern was ultimately how they were communicated. She pointed to multiple examples of Mr Hurlston pairing genuine criticism with personal attacks, including one instance in which he accused Cr Sehr of financial impropriety alongside a "pretty personal attack" that alleged the councillor had weaponised the death of her mother for political gains. Cr Sehr told the court she had been subject to an "unrelenting stream of mockery, belittlement and abuse" from Mr Hurlston since 2019, when Stonnington council decided to build a series of netball courts near his home. Giving evidence, Cr Sehr referred to a 486-page document containing commentary and correspondence from Mr Hurlston, Council Watch and other online users that included posts likening Cr Sehr's conduct to the Holocaust solution, a pinned map showing where she lived, comments that Cr Sehr "might need a spare pair of undies", doctored images that allegedly fat-shamed her, and allegations she inappropriately touched staff. Cr Sehr also told the court Mr Hurlston had emailed her questions under an alias and claimed he worked for a non-existent media organisation. She said Mr Hurlston also contacted her employer and her contract was subsequently terminated. Mr Hurlston admitted in court he was responsible for the email sent under a false identity, telling the court he believed Cr Sehr would not respond to correspondence from him. The court heard from three other current and former female Stonnington councillors who alleged Mr Hurlston also targeted them and continued to do so despite repeated requests to stop. During cross-examination of Cr Sehr, Ms Hodgson repeatedly warned Mr Hurlston's lawyer, Gordon Chisholm, to stop trying to prove the alleged misconduct was true and to stop introducing fresh allegations. "It's not an opportunity to raise other allegations in relation to Ms Sehr." Mr Hurlston told the court Council Watch was a "very complex multifaceted organisation" that balanced consulting work, lobbying and media coverage. He acknowledged it published material that was "salacious" and "intentionally click baiting" to "to hook people in". "But in amongst that there are some very real stories." Mr Hurlston told the court his tactics against Cr Sehr were not unique to her. He said he had suffered "unrelenting attacks" from Stonnington councillors and their associates and that explained why he had made comments about those councillors' vaginas. "I would say it's rude, deeply offensive, but you're not looking at the context when asking if it's decent," Mr Hurlston told the court. Mr Hurlston is not facing criminal charges but could be jailed if found in breach of the two-year intervention order. The order does not prevent Mr Hurlston from engaging in legitimate political commentary of Cr Sehr, but all content must be factual and relate exclusively to her public political position. Ms Hodgson prohibited Mr Hurlston from posting anything "degrading or demeaning" and personal, and he was not permitted to create, administer or author any forum for that purpose.
Yahoo
28-06-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Trump's second term is giving a green light to blatant racism
If there is a defining characteristic of President Donald Trump's second term — aside from shameless self-enrichment out of the executive branch — I'd argue it's the proliferation of unabashed and outspoken racism espoused by the president and many of his most loyal followers. The online attacks launched by Rep. Andy Ogles, R-Tenn., against New York City mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani demonstrated this in stark relief, such as here: As did many of the other GOP responses to Mamdani's Democratic primary victory this week, which my MSNBC colleague Steve Benen highlighted for MaddowBlog. This reactionary post from Charlie Kirk, which reads like Ku Klux Klan propaganda, is a prime example: During a recent conversation with MSNBC's Chris Hayes, author Ta-Nehisi Coates said that one of the Civil Rights Movement's greatest successes has fallen apart in the Trump era: People no longer feel ashamed to express 'open bigotry.' Coates added that one of Trump's most successful political instincts has been his bet that conservative voters are broadly more comfortable with the racist rhetoric that previous Republicans have flirted with a bit more obliquely. Indeed, this administration has spent its opening months seemingly grooming the MAGA movement to be OK with blatant racism — or, at minimum, accept it as a natural part of political discourse. Even when compared with Trump's first administration, which promoted diversity programs and parted ways with a speechwriter after it was revealed he spoke at a conference attended by white nationalists, Trump 2.0 has been far more permissive of unabashed bigotry. Trump welcomed the aforementioned speechwriter, Darren Beattie, into his second administration despite the fact that he wrote last year that 'competent white men must be in charge if you want things to work.' Trump's administration rehired after initially firing a Department of Government Efficiency staffer who had called for the normalization of Indian hate. And a host of other figures in the administration have a history of promoting various other blatantly bigoted ideas. Trump himself has peddled false claims, spread broadly by white nationalists, that white people are facing systemic oppression in South Africa, and he has targeted an exhibit at the Smithsonian American Art Museum that discredits racist pseudoscience. Trump's Department of Homeland Security itself has spread propaganda promoted by overtly racist social media accounts, and his White House has frequently relied on cruel memes meant to dehumanize and mock nonwhite immigrants. To be clear, MAGA racism is not a new phenomenon. But the president certainly seems to have given his followers a green light to embrace and express any racist hate they may be feeling. And all of this has the feel of a far-right psyop — as if the administration is attempting to train Americans' gag reflexes in such a way that grotesque exhibitions of bigotry that may have made them squeamish in the past no longer do so. This article was originally published on
