The word “genocide” is often deemed to be provocative and misleading by its perpetrators and enablers.
Raphael Lemkin, a Polish-Jewish lawyer who coined the term “genocide” in 1944, tirelessly advocated for the recognition of genocide as an international crime, influencing the drafting of the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide.
This was created under the auspices of the United Nations General Assembly by a committee of experts, with hugely significant contributions from Mr Lemkin and other legal scholars.
But it goes without saying, the intolerable parasite Starmer knows better.
Why the mini history lesson?
Why not?
When we wilfully fail to learn from the horrors of historical genocides, we doom ourselves to repeat the tragedies of the past, turning a blind eye to the desperate cries of humanity.
Israel is committing a genocide – yet where is Starmer (again)?
Just this past week, a United Nations commission of inquiry has claimed that Israel has committed genocide against the Palestinian people in Gaza.
The commission’s report concludes that the war criminal, President Isaac Herzog of Israel — welcomed into Downing Street by the unashamedly complicit Keir Starmer — “incited the commission of genocide” in his speeches and statements.
Once again, Keir Starmer’s appalling lack of judgement has proven to be fatally flawed and blinded by the blood-soaked flag of the state of Israel.
Cast your minds back over the last fourteen months. How many hugely critical decisions has Keir Starmer managed to get right?
Winter fuel allowance?
Disability benefits?
Ukraine?
Freebies?
Peter fucking Mandelson?
Now you can add Gaza genocide denial to list of eternal shame.
Trump, meanwhile…
Much of the news coverage over the last few days has been taken up by the arrival of the tangerine tantrum and his meeting with Keir Starmer.
If you were expecting to read about a capitulation to right-wing authoritarianism and neoliberal imperialism, reinforcing the serpent Starmer’s drift away from Labour’s socialist roots toward a centre-right establishment-friendly agenda, I’m afraid that ship set sail some time ago.
Starmer’s willingness to court a hateful piece of shit like Trump is hardly a shock, but the lavish hosting of the detestable President — complete with some stomach-churning butt kissing for the hope of economic ties — exposes the utter hollowness of his “change” mantra, once and for all.
Starmer and Trump aren’t really all that different. Neither of them serve any purpose to poor and working-class people.
Trump fronts an administration that thrives on xenophobia, climate denial, and corporate greed, all while the UK grapples with austerity’s lingering scars and rising inequality under Labour’s own appalling reforms.
It’s hardly the time to roll out the red carpet for a bankrupt neofascist, is it?
Britain needs a leader that will challenge Trump’s dangerous reactionary policies, not align with him on key issues.
Trump told Starmer to halt the “migrant invasion” by any means, including deploying the military, echoing the far-right rhetoric that demonises refugees and asylum seekers as threats to national security.
The borders that have been fortified by the failures of capitalism — displacement driven by wars, climate change and human exploitation — need breaking down, not reinforcing.
We want Keir Starmer, a Labour prime minister, to advocate humane immigration policies and international solidarity.
Weak and isolated Starmer’s failure to publicly push back risks normalising such draconian approaches in the UK, where anti-refugee sentiment has already fueled riots, division and painted fucking roundabouts.
Pick a side, you say
It wasn’t that long ago that Labour’s historical commitment to anti-racism and workers unity across borders actually meant something.
It also wasn’t that long ago that the British left thought they finally had something to be optimistic about with the creation of Your Party.
I must admit, I kept my optimism firmly on the back burner and I didn’t promote the fledgling party beyond a few paragraphs in my weekly Canary slot.
Why?
To be brutally honest, there are only so many egos you can put in one room before everything spills over into a big public mess.
I have been asked several times whose “side” I am on. Why would anyone care
Am I diehard Corbynite that thinks St Jezza can do no wrong? Or am I jumping on the Sultana bandwagon in the hope of rejuvenating my online activism?
Based on what I have seen and heard over the last few days, I will remain on the side of children from Gaza to Gateshead and beyond, and if that means putting my support behind Polanski’s Greens, however insignificant it may be, so be it.
A battle of whataboutery is an unbelievably selfish thing to do, and there are very few people that can walk away from the Your Party debacle with an ounce of credit and dignity.
Watching bloody good people chip away at one another doesn’t make me want to pick a side.
A genocide needs stopping – yet Your Party are navel gazing?
Maybe it can be saved? Sometimes it seems like a few people need to sit down, put self-ambition to one side, and thrash out a way forward that brings people together and puts the future of the party firmly in the hands of its members, but a decade of online activism tells me this may just be wishful thinking.
Remember folks. Divided we fall, and if we allow ourselves to tumble to the ground, there might not be a chance to pick ourselves up for at least a generation.
We have — or at least had — an historic opportunity to create a left alliance to challenge the far-right, Reform UK, and Keir Starmer’s Labour.
Today’s Labour government is polling lower than any Labour Party that was ever led by Jeremy Corbyn over those five tumultuous years. In fact, it is the lowest ever polling for the Labour Party in eighty years of polls existing.
Now isn’t the time for anyone with an agenda to engage in navel-gazing.
DIVIDED. WE. FALL.
That’s not for me. I want change. We need change. We need a serious opposition to the numerous crises that we are facing today, not an internal power struggle that has only served to embolden the enemies of change.
Am I asking too much?
Featured image via the Canary
