Latest news with #People'sFrontofJudea
The National
2 days ago
- Politics
- The National
Meltdown over Jeremy Corbyn's new party exposed their fear
Indeed, that word, 'meltdown' is becoming the common parlance with which to describe the attitudes and actions of an ailing political and media establishment to events they neither control nor understand. Such lashing out is rarely, if ever, rational. On the one hand, a party led by Jeremy Corbyn – or the 'Magic Grandpa' in the words of the once widely respected Andrew Neil – is surely pie in the sky adventurism. On the other, it poses a substantial threat to the Labour Party, and will float Nigel Farage into Number 10. You could feel the sense of entitlement and relief when Zarah Sultana's announcement of the founding of this new political force was followed by public revelations of some of the internal rifts about how to go about such a project – cue the clapped-out 'People's Front of Judea' jibes. READ MORE: How small Scottish parties are reacting to news of a new Corbyn project There is no point in denying that the backdrop to this development has been partially interrupted by various leaks to the press, before the thing has been formally launched. But all of that is secondary to the underlying fact that there can be no doubt a mass constituency for the kind of politics it represents exists. And it is this reality which adds to the mounting sense of unease, which goes beyond the electoral sphere, among an increasingly brittle ruling class. So much so, that the state has come to proscribe a non-violent protest group as a 'terrorist organisation'. Over the weekend, the Reverend Sue Parfitt (below), 83, was detained for holding a placard which read. 'I oppose genocide. I support Palestine Action,' as a consequence of this. She was, farcically, arrested by Met Police officers for offences under the Terrorism Act. Yes, the same legislation that is purportedly designed to tackle the likes of al-Qaeda. Is this really where Yvette Cooper believes the threat to the people of the United Kingdom comes from? Or, in fact, is it far closer to the truth to say, quite obviously, that this has nothing to do with security and everything to do with clamping down on Palestine solidarity activism? Consider for a moment, that had Sue been holding a sign saying 'I support genocide', she would be free to do so. Every part of the movement has encountered the sharp end of the state, not just those who have taken part in direct action. Leading figures in the Stop the War Coalition and the Palestine Solidarity Campaign have also been arrested and charged for organising huge demonstrations, no matter how peaceful they were and are. This, of course, is not the sign of a confidence, but of grave weakness. It could not be more serious. Whatever is said in public, the UK Government knows full well the scale of the atrocities in Gaza, and their participation in it. They can take losing an argument about sundry domestic affairs. But here we are talking about genocide, the worst of all crimes against humanity. It is quite simple: they cannot allow for there to be a popular, impactful and organised current of opposition which, crucially, is determined to hold those responsible to account. READ MORE: Freedom Flotilla Coalition to launch new aid ship to Gaza Don't for a second underestimate just how upending this is for our society. So much so that the government are willing, in a fit of reactionary panic, to shred civil liberties and rights in the process of defending their position on the matter, while demonising their opponents. Any student of history knows it never ends well for the powerful when they overplay their hand. When there is a need to resort to force and repression, it only underlines the fact that the ideological line has irrevocably collapsed. Some have a keener sense of this than others, such as The Times, whose editorial stance is to oppose applying terrorist status to Palestine Action. There is, then, a sense of desperation and hysteria about it all. Which is where we return to the potential of a left party. Because it is this issue which has generated the conditions for rupture with the Labour Party, and the politicisation of a whole new generation of campaigners. Meanwhile, the links between imperial foreign policy and declining living standards are being made in the process. In the same way as extra-parliamentary protest has been demonised, a party which could represent it in parliament will be smeared and shunned. READ MORE: Lisa Nandy aide 'drafted note saying BBC is institutionally antisemitic' That is one of many reasons why developments around party formation must be hand in glove with the mass movements which give rise to the political atmosphere required to launch such an initiative in the first place. Corbyn would never have become leader of the Labour Party had it not been for the anti-war and anti-austerity campaigns. And the same is true today for any emerging electoral vehicle. This means a break not just with the Labour Party, but also with the Labourism which elevates parliamentary politics above all else. Overcoming the notion that working-class organisation and social movements are subordinate to electoralism and elections is not an optional extra. It also means learning from experience, and in Scotland, treating the differences in the political terrain here seriously. I will offer some perspectives on these issues in the coming weeks and months. Politics today is fluid, and explosions in activity and insurgency can come into the scene quickly. We have seen this on the radical right with the rise of Reform. But these things can also go up like a rocket and down like a stick. Creating lasting organisation in not easy. It requires clarity of ideas; the ability to navigate a complex period; internal cohesion and much else. But the big picture is that the foundations of politics are changing. Boxed in, shrill and dogmatic, the status quo seem ill-equipped to deal with this and with the multi-dimensional crises they are wedded to. Perhaps that is the one constant in an otherwise volatile and unpredictable world. So expect more meltdowns, at the very least.
The Guardian
23-04-2025
- Entertainment
- The Guardian
Andor season two review – the excellent Star Wars for grownups is as thrilling as ever (and funnier too)
Comrades! Welcome back to the revolution. Andor is the Star Wars TV show with the sharpest political acumen: yes, like everything in the franchise, it's about an underdog rebel movement fighting against a totalitarian empire in space, and it has plenty of thrilling battle sequences, but here there are no Jedi mind powers or cute green backwards-talking psychics. Under the hard-nosed stewardship of writer Tony Gilroy, Andor bins the magic and myth and replaces it with the reality of anti-fascist struggle, where the good guys are ready to risk their lives for freedom. It's the Star Wars spin-off with the strongest claim to being a proper drama – but, in season two's opening triple bill, it shows it can do sly, wry comedy too. We're a year on from where we left off, which is four years before the Death Star blows up at the end of the original movie – the point at which all the work done by our hero, Cassian Andor (Diego Luna), pays off. We pick him up in an imperial military facility, where he's posing as a test pilot for a spacecraft he intends to nick. There's a classic Andor moment where Cassian meets the rebellion's woman on the inside, a junior technician who has gathered her courage to make her contribution, and knows the rage of her superiors will be directed at her once Cassian has flown off. 'If I die tonight, was it worth it?' she asks him, and gets a rousing speech in response, urgently whispered. But once it's revealed that the ship is more advanced than Cassian is used to and he doesn't know how to fly it properly – forward and reverse are not where he expects – it's clear that Andor has returned in an unusually playful mood. Soon Cassian is captured by a gang of inexperienced young mercenaries who are no danger to him, because being lost in a forest together without being able to agree who their leader is has turned them into a cross between the People's Front of Judea and the cast of Yellowjackets. We wait, amused and expectant, for Cassian to outwit them and escape. Meanwhile, in a meeting room atop a snowy Bond-villain mountain, Galactic Empire politicians are discussing the planet Ghorman and how best to extract its priceless deposits of 'deep substrate foliated calcite', the mining of which could cause the whole rock to break apart. Basically, they're going to frack Ghorman to death. The rising star at the summit is Dedra Meero (Denise Gough), who has to decide whether owning the Ghorman project, with its likely death toll of 800,000, will serve her career ambitions. Before she has a chance to nail that down, however, she is part of the sort of domestic scene that Andor isn't afraid to include, even if it means putting the fight for intergalactic supremacy on hold. In the season one finale it was hinted that focused, calculating Dedra might enter into a symbiotic romantic relationship with callow, conniving failure Syril (Kyle Soller). And now here the two Empire loyalists are, cohabiting in a high-rise apartment with an extremely unwelcoming light-grey interior palette. This is excellent news because Syril is perhaps Andor's best character, representing the male emotional inadequates who tend to be a fascist movement's foot soldiers. Syril is the sort of man who, on Earth, would be posting aggressive, grandstanding political opinions from a computer in his mother's basement. Season one recognised this by having him actually move back in with his mother after a professional setback, and revealing her to be a textbook overprotective, vicariously ambitious mom played with fearsome comic smarts by the fabulous Kathryn Hunter. Now she is Dedra's new in-law, and she's on her way round for a lunch where the passive-aggression threatens to curdle the fondue. We visit two other locations that seem unconnected but won't stay that way for long. On the lush planet of Chandrila, comfortably wealthy senator Mon Mothma (Genevieve O'Reilly) is hosting a lavish wedding for her daughter, but the marriage is a grubby arranged affair that is about to tip Mon into betraying her upper-class lifestyle and leading the resistance instead. Meanwhile, far away in the wheat fields of Mina-Rau, Cassian's activist pals are trying to lay low while they await his return, but are subjected to an imperial inspection led by a smarmy officer who singles out Bix (Adria Arjona) for special attention. The power imbalance between them, with Bix recognising immediately that this man's apparent friendliness is loaded with a threat of sexual violence, reminds us that even when it's in a lighter mode, Andor is Star Wars for grownups. This rebellion is a serious business. Andor is on Disney+ now
Irish Daily Mirror
22-04-2025
- Politics
- Irish Daily Mirror
Eamon Dunphy column: I won't miss Marc Canham ... I never even knew he was here
It MAY have come as a great shock to people to learn that Marc Canham, the chief football officer of the FAI, is about to leave. But to be honest, I am still trying to figure out when he even arrived because to my mind, he made no impact in his three years in the job. And, by the way, what exactly was his job? Initially appointed as director of football, he leaves as chief football officer, which reminds me of the sketch in Monty Python's Life of Brian when there is an argument between the People's Front of Judea and the Judean People's Front. That's the level of farce you get with the FAI, which has forever left me feeling underwhelmed, angry, disappointed and bemused. They may have reached peak inadequacy during the John Delaney years but they were unimpressive before he arrived and are still uninspiring now. This chap Canham sums the new FAI up. He didn't leave his mark. In fact be barely even leaves his Marc. Let's reexamine the highlights package of his time in Ireland. The Irish women's team reached their first ever World Cup under Vera Pauw. Her reward was to be shown the exit door. Stephen Kenny brought about much-needed reform and got no luck. He too was ushered towards the exit. Next came the longest and most futile search since Lord Lucan disappeared. Eventually, after eight months, the FAI found their man — a dentist from Iceland. So that's Marc Canham's legacy. He, like his Dutch predecessors Wim Koevermans and Ruud Dokter, arrived here without a detailed knowledge of Irish culture, Irish schoolboy soccer or the League of Ireland. And it showed in their work. What's needed now is a commission to be set up, whereby Irish football's three wise men, John Giles, Niall Quinn and Liam Brady, head a panel that investigates what has gone wrong in the game here and what needs to go right. The answer is Government investment. But if this Government were to hand over millions to the FAI it would be nothing short of a disgrace. You can't trust those guys to make smart decisions. Where the money has to go is into schoolboy clubs, in terms of their facilities and their coaches, because these are the clubs who have made things happen for Irish football over decades, not just years. They have the expertise but not necessarily the facilities. And that's where the Government can come in. They can bypass the FAI and go directly to these clubs with their grant aid. Certainly we need something to happen because we are no longer producing players. There is no Irish player at Manchester United, Manchester City, Arsenal or Chelsea. We have Caoimhin Kelleher at Liverpool but for how much longer will he stay at Anfield? In England and in France, plenty of players are being developed, but they have exceptional academy systems in place. Ireland doesn't. The old way, where kids honed their skills playing on the street and in schoolboy clubs, has been affected. Modern life dictates that street football no longer exists. The FAI in their wisdom introduced underage League of Ireland football, which immediately diluted the quality of schoolboy soccer. And standards have decreased. That's why we need Irish people holding the important jobs in Irish football. And it's why we need people like Brady, Quinn and Giles to front up the commission which will steer the game in the right direction. We cannot keep going to people who impress grey-haired board members with a powerpoint presentation. We need someone who is more comfortable in a tracksuit than in a suit, who knows the game. The next person in has to have a status and a plan, not just the ability to click a mouse on a keyboard and move seamlessly from one powerpoint slide to the next. The fan on the street has a right to have someone they rate in charge. If you asked the ordinary fan who Marc Canham is, they wouldn't have a clue. Mention Jonathan Hill's name and again you'd get a blank face looking back at you. Mention Hill's successor, David Courell, and once more you would have stony faces staring at you. I have no idea what Hill or Courell sound like, look like, or stand for. You might as well have had Benny Hill in there instead of Jonathan. And as for Canham, well off with you, young man. Your legacy is leaving us with an Icelandic dentist in charge of our national team, a man who may well be able to make your teeth shine, but who has certainly been unable to put a smile back on the face of Irish football. We won't miss you Marc Canham. To be honest, I barely even knew you were here.
New European
19-03-2025
- Politics
- New European
Populism's Monty Python problem
The mutual animosity of the People's Front of Judea and the Judean People's Front in The Life of Brian satirised the liberation movements and left factionalism of the 1970s. A contemporary update would have as its target the endless splinters and splits that are now occurring across the populist right. Just as the Popular Front of Judea turns out to consist of a single elderly man, the whipless Rupert Lowe now forms a one-man band who is touted as leading a rival counter-insurgency party. What is the Rupert Lowe versus Nigel Farage clash really about? Personalities, partly. Control, certainly. But this is also a clash over political strategy, especially how far populist disruption should go when it comes to the boundaries of democracy, decency and extremism. The key moment in their relationship breakdown was a cocktail of these three elements, and it came about when Elon Musk called for Farage to be ditched as leader of Reform for his refusal to work alongside Tommy Robinson, the former leader of the extremist English Defence League. This was swiftly followed by Musk's praise for Rupert Lowe, who is now attacking Farage over immigration, mass deportations and grooming gangs. 'Nigel Farage should hope he is the only Reform MP elected. Because if there are two or more of them, the Reform parliamentary party will split at some point during the next parliament,' the Conservative peer Daniel Finkelstein predicted in the Times back in June. He was reflecting on the long history of Farage's previous clashes, including with Robert Kilroy-Silk, Douglas Carswell, former Ukip deputy Suzanne Evans and others. Yet this is about much more than political egotism. This kind of internal conflict may well be inherent in the populist project itself. Populist parties pitch themselves as the political outsiders: prepared to say the things that need saying that the mainstream parties won't. But there are at least two different target audiences for that populist message, who hear two different versions of it. For the authoritarian hardcore, the point is to reject and reverse the social changes of the last half century, particularly with regard to immigration, ethnic diversity and other social changes. But a reactionary project with serious ambitions cannot succeed merely by appealing to the hardcore – an overtly racist party like the British National Party would not secure 5% of the national vote. But the idea that the political classes seem too comfortable with the status quo does have a broader resonance, and Reform's post-election rise in the polls demonstrates the breadth of public frustration about whether politics can deliver. This shows that populism can begin to take root across the mainstream right in Britain, where there is a broad socially conservative scepticism about the actual and perceived 'woke' excesses of identity politics on the left – but not if it seems in thrall to the extreme right. This is Farage's greatest challenge: the core online activist group wants Reform to say things about immigration and race that would repel their target voters. Farage has dealt with this divide for his entire political career. He has always taken the view that explicit association with the far right would be toxic to a party with mainstream credentials. His departure from Ukip came about due to his successor's embrace of Tommy Robinson, a decision that Farage said would make Ukip 'the new BNP'. Today, the remnants of Ukip campaign for the release of those convicted over racist violence last summer, referring to them as political prisoners. The party also challenges Reform for not embracing Tommy Robinson. There is an important difference between Farage's clash with Lowe and his clash with then Ukip MP Douglas Carswell, who challenged Farage for being too 'nativist' in his approach to immigration. The reason was that the winning post for the EU referendum was 50%. At the time, the 'Farage paradox' was that Farage was good for Ukip getting 13% in a general election, but bad for Leave's chances of winning the referendum. Vote Leave therefore sought to exclude Farage, relying instead on the more moderate leadership voices of Boris Johnson, Michael Gove and Gisela Stuart, while cynically running its own messages about Turkish immigration online. Despite its success in opinion polls, the public is divided on whether Reform should be regarded as mainstream. In research by Focaldata, carried out for British Future in the aftermath of the general election, just over four in 10 voters accepted that Reform was a mainstream party, while a similar proportion saw it as dangerous and divisive. Two-thirds of the public, including 60% of those who had voted Reform, thought the party needed tougher action to exclude extreme candidates. The Reform leadership, after the election, accepted this criticism – yet it was more ambivalent during the campaign itself. Nigel Farage rejected pressure from conservative media outlets, including the Daily Mail , Times and GB News, to drop overtly racist candidates. Farage U-turned during his BBC Question Time special – removing three racist candidates live on air when read their indefensible quotes. Reform is now placing much more emphasis on vetting candidates. Four out of 10 Reform members who have put themselves forward to become local election candidates have been blocked. It shows the scale of the challenge. So in 2025, Farage is the 'moderate' in his clash with Rupert Lowe on immigration and race. Lowe has complained that the leader sought to control how he could talk about grooming gangs and immigration. Lowe wanted to go beyond the party's call for deporting dual nationals convicted of grooming and to extend that to deporting family members too. The ostracised MP is talking about complicity, but he has something much more sweeping in mind when he declares that 'if whole communities need to be deported, so be it'. He also wants to adopt a Trump-like approach to mass deportations. Lowe is openly flirting with the supporters of Tommy Robinson. He has said that he does not know why Robinson is in prison (he was jailed for contempt of court after making a film in which he repeated libellous claims). Lowe has written to the prison governor over Robinson's conditions. Despite Farage's rejection of Robinson, Reform voters are evenly split over his merits, with a third in favour, a third against and a third on the fence. This is dangerous terrain. There is an ethno-nationalist core on the hard right that is not so much worried by the rate of net migration but by the fact of ethnic diversity, and that wants to legitimise the language of remigration and mass deportations. That would cover not only asylum seekers and those without legal status, but legal migrants and British-born minorities too. These views are only held by 3% of voters, but have more visibility than ever before, particularly due to Elon Musk's ownership of Twitter. Steve Bannon's argument that populists should not accept mainstream anti-racism norms but wear the charge of racism as a badge of pride now dominates the US MAGA right, putting Farage's position under more pressure. Farage's former Ukip allies and supporters can already be found spread across half a dozen parties: from Reform, to Laurence Fox's Reclaim, the remnants of continuity Ukip, the Heritage Party and even the ethno-nationalist Homeland Party that split away from Patriotic Alternative. There may be more of these new hard right factions to come. The former Reform deputy Ben Habib suggests he might team up with Lowe and seek Elon Musk's money. Academic-turned-Substacker Matthew Goodwin was exploring a new party, though may well throw his lot in with Reform. Dominic Cummings often blogs about how a new start-up party could sweep all before it without ever quite managing to start it up. The political appeal of populism is supposed to be that it is obvious what the people want that the elites refuse to deliver. Yet the point of democratic politics is that we do not all agree on what we want. Perhaps the 'splitters' problem of populism has a wider significance after all – it is a lesson on what democratic politics is really about. Sunder Katwala is a writer, director of thinktank British Future and former general secretary of the Fabian Society
