Performative politics of many on the left is pushing people away
Take, for instance, a comment posted by Ruby Davies in response to your article 'Jimmy Carr shows 'should be cancelled' over secret pro-Israel party'. Here we had a comedian doing a paid gig, likely booked through an agent and probably unaware of the crowd dynamics that night. Ruby, in a fervour, likens him to individuals who entertained some of history's most heinous figures, such as Hitler or Pol Pot. This comparison isn't just excessive; it borders on delusional. It's not a quest for justice; it becomes a performative act devoid of real substance.
READ MORE: First aid trucks enter Gaza after Israeli blockade lifted
On the other side of the spectrum, we had politicians like Maria Eagle in the same venue boasting shamelessly about British military involvement in Israel's assault on Gaza. Did Ruby direct her outrage towards them? No, and that's telling. Confronting those in real positions of power takes courage, while chastising a comedian is a safer bet that garners attention and clicks.
Regrettably, this tendency to misplace focus is emblematic of a wider issue. Take Stonewall's recent response to the UK's drop in the European Rainbow Index, which evaluates the legal and policy conditions for LGBT+ people across Europe. In their announcement, they unequivocally lumped the UK in with countries like Hungary and Georgia. This comparison is fundamentally flawed. In those nations, LGBT+ individuals face violent mobs, bans on education, and systemic silence enforced by the government. Here in the UK, while challenges remain, we are not at that level of crisis – and when individuals exaggerate these situations, they do not come off as courageous; they appear disconnected from reality.
READ MORE: Israel 'will take control of all of Gaza', Benjamin Netanyahu says
A striking example is Deborah Frances-White's appearance on the show Triggernometry. She faced a direct and polite question, yet her demeanour shifted dramatically. Rather than engaging in a constructive dialogue, she appeared as though she was under attack. Watching That interaction was painfully awkward; it encapsulated a troubling trend within too much of the left today – a fragility, defensiveness, and an inclination to interpret even neutral inquiries as hostile. This 'Fragile Left' mentality, where every critique is treated as an assault, is pushing people away. It's no wonder many are growing frustrated and tuning out entirely.
The truth is that Most working-class individuals don't engage with this discourse. They are not active participants in the Twitter battlegrounds or immersed in endless online threads debating who is associated with whom. Instead, they live in the real world, juggling a myriad of responsibilities – bills to pay, children to raise, lengthy shifts, and the overarching stress of daily life. When everyday people observe those on the left melting down over a comedian's offhand joke at a dinner event, they don't interpret that as activism; they think, 'This crowd has completely lost the plot.'
READ MORE: Labour 'breaking promise to reset devolution', John Swinney says
If the working class feel marginalised, they are inclined to support anyone who doesn't talk down to them – even if that means rallying behind individuals like Farage. They don't see themselves reflected in the current leftist narrative, not out of love for right-wing populism, but rather because there is a desperate need for the left to reassess and recalibrate its approach.
While Ruby may believe she is championing a righteous cause, her actions, and those like hers, are not drawing people in – they're alienating them. It is essential that we initiate genuine conversations about these dynamics. If we fail to unite and understand the real challenges facing our communities, the individuals and groups opposing our values will continue to thrive by default, leaving us further estranged from the very people we seek to uplift.
James Murphy
Bute
SCOTLAND needs to concentrate on some canny voting next year. As much as we might disagree with the SNP government, inespecial where independence is concerned, we need to make sure it – or a combination of independence parties – gets the majority necessary to continue governing Scotland.
We cannot afford to let Farage and his business team get anywhere near to entering Holyrood, regardless of what we might think about his only concern where immigration is concerned.
READ MORE: Kenny MacAskill: Scotland can't survive Keir Starmer's migration crackdown
Immigration is a fact of life for Scotland, as the country needs and welcomes immigrants to contribute to our public and NHS services. This has always been the situation before Johnson and his ridiculous Brexit plan, which has almost ruined the the UK economy.
Voting for Reform UK on the single premise of immigration will not help a Scottish Government if it results in Farage becoming the leading opposition in Holyrood. Better it is/was with the Tories in that position.
In North East Fife we do not have an SNP candidate as yet, although I understand one is being considered by the SNP election people. However, it is a strong LibDem constituency, so I will have to give it a well-considered 1 and 2 selection. Certainly not a Farage vote if his party is on the list.
Please consider the next five years of government in Scotland, how we vote for what we can and will achieve as a sovereign nation responsible for effecting our independence. There is a way forward already in motion, via Salvo, that will help us achieve that without any unnecessary contacts or input with the UK/English parliament.
Alan Magnus-Bennett
Fife
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Spectator
27 minutes ago
- Spectator
Northern Ireland is still paying a heavy price for Brexit
This week heralds the arrival in Northern Ireland of yet more overregulation, bureaucratic overreach, and political incompetence. No, Keir Starmer isn't making an unannounced visit to Belfast. From this month, many thousands of food products imported from Great Britain to Northern Ireland will have to display warnings on their packaging highlighting that these goods are not to be brought into the European Union. The reason why is essentially a bungled Brexit deal for which thousands of business – and millions of customers – will pay the price. It is yet another reason for British firms to stop doing business in Northern Ireland The Windsor Framework – the result of the UK's Northern Ireland-focused post-Brexit legal agreement with the EU – ensured that Northern Ireland remained within the EU single market for goods. This meant that products can flow freely throughout the island as no hard border exists between Northern Ireland and the Republic. At least that's what was promised in theory. In reality, this soft border has made trade between Great Britain and Northern Ireland increasingly difficult. Confusing and unworkable regulations have stymied the flow of goods to Northern Ireland as checks on arrival take an increasingly long time, packaging requirements are different, and costs are increased. From October 2023, meat products entering Northern Ireland had to be labelled as being 'Not for EU' in order to ensure they weren't being sold in the Republic of Ireland; these rules were expanded to include dairy products from October 2024. And now, from this month, the scope of these regulations will be drastically increased as the Windsor Framework's implementation reaches its final phase. Packaged fruit, vegetables, and herbs; fresh, frozen, and processed fish; honey; eggs; chilled, frozen, or shelf-stable composite products, such as ready meals and jars of sauce; all will be subject to new rules which change their packaging to ensure no Pot Noodle bound for Belfast is sold south of the border. This matters because it is yet another reason for British companies to stop doing business in Northern Ireland. As Stuart Machin, the CEO of Marks & Spencer, explained on Friday, this regulatory expansion just adds 'yet another layer of unnecessary costs and red tape for food retailers like M&S.' Machin went on to state that over a thousand more M&S products will require alternate packaging specifically tailored for Northern Ireland, while an additional four hundred products will have to undergo extra checks in what has become known as the 'Red Lane' – the customs channel for goods deemed at risk of entering the EU. In short, Machin said, it's 'bureaucratic madness'. All of these additional regulations in Northern Ireland undermine the idea of the Union, dissuading British businesses from offering goods and services in a constituent country of the United Kingdom. It has had a measurable impact, too, as the Office for National Statistics found recently. Between 2020 – the final year before the Northern Ireland Protocol on the Brexit withdrawal agreement came into effect – and the start of this year, the percentage of retail, wholesale, and car repair businesses in Great Britain which sold goods into Northern Ireland had decreased from 17.5 per cent to only 12.4 per cent; the percentage of manufacturing businesses which sold to Northern Ireland decreased from 20.1 per cent to 12.9 per cent. The issue of the effectual trade border in the Irish Sea is a politically contentious one in Northern Ireland. It highlights the difference in treatment of people in Northern Ireland compared with the rest of the United Kingdom – raising questions about whether the initial idea of Brexit as 'taking back control' ever materialised. Jim Allister, a Traditional Unionist Voice (TUV) MP, and one of the fiercest critics of the Windsor Framework, said that British businesses 'will have to play by EU rules to trade within their own country. That's a fundamental breach of sovereignty.' I spoke to another elected representative from the TUV about the new rules, who decried them as little more than 'ridiculous and unnecessary bureaucracy forced upon us', highlighting that 'Northern Ireland did not get the Brexit the United Kingdom voted for as a nation'. Many of these issues could quite easily be solved if a sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) deal were to be signed between the UK and the EU; this would align the regulations between the two bodies and make trade easier. Naturally, however, this also goes against the ideals of what Brexit was portrayed to be, as while it doesn't exactly hand over our sovereignty on the issue, it does ensure the UK and EU are treading the same line. Labour announced a deal on this back in May, however this has yet to materialise and negotiations are, allegedly, still ongoing. Given Starmer's record of negotiating, it is not difficult to imagine how little say we might have over our own internal trade regulations as a result; the Prime Minister is no stranger to dismantling British sovereignty, as Chagos and Gibraltar show. In the mean time, internal trade within the United Kingdom is likely to get harder before it gets easier. If the past decade of politicians were supposed to be acting in favour of British interests, they are doing a good job of hiding it.
South Wales Guardian
28 minutes ago
- South Wales Guardian
Scheme to register foreign agents comes into force but China avoids top tier
The new Foreign Influence Registration Scheme (Firs) comes into effect from Tuesday, requiring anyone carrying out 'political influence activities' on behalf of a foreign power to register with the Government or face prosecution. The rules, which cover activities such as political communications or lobbying, were introduced in 2023 as part of efforts to strengthen national security amid concerns about covert action by foreign governments. Security minister Dan Jarvis said: 'We welcome legitimate engagement with all countries, but we will not tolerate covert attempts to manipulate our political system or society. 'The Foreign Influence Registration Scheme gives us the tools to confront growing threats to our national security, one of the foundations of our plan for change, without compromising the openness that defines our democracy.' The new rules also include an 'enhanced tier', which requires anyone working for certain states to declare any activity, not just political work. Mr Jarvis said: 'This is about creating accountability and visibility so that covert influence operations have nowhere to hide, and ensuring we have the tools to detect and disrupt them.' Failing to register with Firs carries a maximum sentence of two years, or five years for agents of states in the enhanced tier. So far, only Iran and Russia have been placed in the enhanced tier, with both nations accused of operating covertly in the UK to shape public opinion and intimidate opponents. But despite calls from some MPs to include China in the enhanced tier, Russia and Iran remain the only nations on the list. Beijing has been repeatedly accused of seeking to covertly influence British politics and academia. A 2023 report by Parliament's Intelligence and Security Committee found China had engaged in 'aggressive' interference, including seeking to 'penetrate or buy academia to ensure that its international narrative is advanced and criticism of China suppressed.' Following the announcement in April that Russia would be included in the enhanced tier, Conservative shadow home secretary Chris Philp said it was 'astonishing' that China had not received similar treatment and accused the Government of 'prioritising economic links over national security'. At the time, Mr Jarvis replied that the Government had a 'consistent long-term and strategic approach' to the UK's relationship with China. He added: 'The Government's policy is clear – we will co-operate where we can, compete where we need to and challenge where we must, including on issues of national security.'
Glasgow Times
34 minutes ago
- Glasgow Times
Scheme to register foreign agents comes into force but China avoids top tier
The new Foreign Influence Registration Scheme (Firs) comes into effect from Tuesday, requiring anyone carrying out 'political influence activities' on behalf of a foreign power to register with the Government or face prosecution. The rules, which cover activities such as political communications or lobbying, were introduced in 2023 as part of efforts to strengthen national security amid concerns about covert action by foreign governments. Security minister Dan Jarvis said: 'We welcome legitimate engagement with all countries, but we will not tolerate covert attempts to manipulate our political system or society. 'The Foreign Influence Registration Scheme gives us the tools to confront growing threats to our national security, one of the foundations of our plan for change, without compromising the openness that defines our democracy.' The new rules also include an 'enhanced tier', which requires anyone working for certain states to declare any activity, not just political work. Mr Jarvis said: 'This is about creating accountability and visibility so that covert influence operations have nowhere to hide, and ensuring we have the tools to detect and disrupt them.' Failing to register with Firs carries a maximum sentence of two years, or five years for agents of states in the enhanced tier. So far, only Iran and Russia have been placed in the enhanced tier, with both nations accused of operating covertly in the UK to shape public opinion and intimidate opponents. Shadow home secretary Chris Philp said in April it was 'astonishing' that China had not received similar treatment to Russia (PA) But despite calls from some MPs to include China in the enhanced tier, Russia and Iran remain the only nations on the list. Beijing has been repeatedly accused of seeking to covertly influence British politics and academia. A 2023 report by Parliament's Intelligence and Security Committee found China had engaged in 'aggressive' interference, including seeking to 'penetrate or buy academia to ensure that its international narrative is advanced and criticism of China suppressed.' Following the announcement in April that Russia would be included in the enhanced tier, Conservative shadow home secretary Chris Philp said it was 'astonishing' that China had not received similar treatment and accused the Government of 'prioritising economic links over national security'. At the time, Mr Jarvis replied that the Government had a 'consistent long-term and strategic approach' to the UK's relationship with China. He added: 'The Government's policy is clear – we will co-operate where we can, compete where we need to and challenge where we must, including on issues of national security.'
