The Department of Justice has removed a National Institute of Justice study from its website that showed that white supremacist and far-right violence and terrorism “continues to outpace all other types of terrorism and domestic violent extremism” in the US. The study was available on the DOJ website last week, according to an archive of the page
The study has been replaced by a message that:
The Department of Justice’s Office of Justice Programs is currently reviewing its websites and materials in accordance with recent Executive Orders and related guidance. During this review, some pages and publications will be unavailable. We apologize for any inconvenience this may cause.
One of Trump’s avalanche of executive orders tells government agencies to scrub any mention of words like “diversity” and “gender” from their sites.
Far-right terrorism study: gone
The deletion of the white terrorism study comes immediately after the assassination of Charlie Kirk, with some saying he was a far-right ‘groyper‘. The study contradicts the Trump regime’s narrative that the left is responsible for most political violence in the country, in order to justify an escalated crackdown on the supposed “radical left.” After Kirk’s murder, Trump immediately blamed the left:
For years, those on the radical left have compared wonderful Americans like Charlie to Nazis and the world’s worst mass murderers and criminals. This kind of rhetoric is directly responsible for the terrorism that we’re seeing in our country today, and it must stop right now. My administration will find each and every one of those who contributed to this atrocity and to other political violence, including the organisations that fund it and support it.
The now-gone study tells a very different – and much more recognisable – story:
Since 1990, far-right extremists have committed far more ideologically motivated homicides than far-left or radical Islamist extremists, including 227 events that took more than 520 lives. In this same period, far-left extremists committed 42 ideologically motivated attacks that took 78 lives.
To mark International Day of Democracy, campaigners are calling on the prime minister to overhaul the relationship between government and people and to introduce a radical programme of democratisation.
International Day of Democracy: time to rewire the relationship of Whitehall with the country
In a letter to Keir Starmer, leading democracy and civil society advocates have cautioned the PM against the temptation to hoard power in Whitehall as he seeks to get his government back on track.
Instead, signatories urge Starmer to use ‘phase 2’ of his premiership to “lead a democratic revolution – rewiring the relationship between Whitehall and the rest of the country, and unleashing the full potential of people across the UK.”
Referencing a new report, Democracy SOS, the signatories call on the Prime Minister:
To go further and faster on devolution, permitting councils to raise much more of their own money, and embedding meaningful citizen engagement at every level of decision-making.
To crack down on disinformation, including sanctions for social media companies doing too little to combat deceptive material about matters of public interest.
To cap political donations and restore the independence of the Electoral Commission, ensuring politics serves citizens, not vested interests.
In Northern towns and cities, and in many other parts of the UK, people feel dispossessed, while in London a handful of people make all the key decisions. We have lost hope that the existing political system will address the extreme inequalities and many of us are turning to more extreme alternatives. We really need a different kind of democracy, one that is rooted in our neighbourhoods and town halls. One where ordinary people are allowed to be involved in debating and deciding things for ourselves.
Democracy SOS: an 8-point plan for action
The Democracy SOS 8-point action plan sets out how government can make this shift. But the report also warns of the consequences of inaction. Without serious reform, trust will continue to erode, disengagement will deepen, and those who exploit fear and division will gain ground.
Writer and former head of civil renewal for the UK government, and author of Democracy SOS, Dr Henry Tam said:
A weakened democracy is so much easier for charlatans to exploit and bring in arbitrary rule. If politicians don’t save democracy while they still can, they’ll be the ones to blame when the abuse of power becomes the norm under an unscrupulous regime. We’ve seen it happening elsewhere, and we don’t want the UK to end up the same way. Democracy SOS sums up what leading advocates say urgently needs to be done. The government should act on it.
The report stresses that Britain cannot hope to tackle poverty, climate disruption, housing shortages, or health crises without a functioning democracy that works with – not against – its citizens. Now must be a turning point, it argues, in restoring trust in politics and giving people real power to shape the decisions that affect their lives.
Democracy is not a luxury. Without it, the country cannot solve the problems people care about most. The Prime Minister now has a chance to show real leadership by giving citizens the tools, rights and opportunities to bring about the change they want to see. This is his moment to strengthen democracy – not only for today, but for the generations to come.
You know when you have one of those moments that sticks with you? It was the Majority Conference recently in Newcastle.
I’d just got back to the venue, the impressive Great Hall in the Discovery Museum. The hall was filling up. All the volunteers in their Majority T-shirts. The high-quality slides and audio-visuals. Just the buzz, that a great event was pulled together in just six weeks by a 100% volunteer organisation.
Majority Conference: no egos, no power grabs
A mix of inspirational speeches, interviews, table discussions, and lots of practical training on how to get things done. People volunteering to step up and take on roles. Putting themselves forward as candidates. The whole team was uplifted, all being part of creating a success. No egos, no huffs, no power grabs. A model of teamwork.
We’re gearing up to contest next May’s local elections. We covered how we’ll be running in Newcastle and the rest of the North East. We’re building around the country, too.
We got a lot of coverage, including the BBC and the Guardian. They have a habit of calling it Jamie Driscoll’s Majority Party. The coverage is good, but incorrect on both counts.
It’s not Jamie Driscoll’s. I don’t own it, not the way Reform was a company owned by Farage, or in any other way. Nor do I control it. We’re completely democratic. In fact, every year, the entire membership votes on whether they want to boot out the current leader and elect a new one. I’m not aware of any other political organisation that gives their members such power.
Members get to vote on all key decisions, and have freedom to self-organise. My job as elected leader is half general secretary, managing resources, and half a chief training officer, empowering members and sharing my experience.
A platform to build progressive alliances, not a political party in the conventional sense
Majority is not a party, either. At least not as people usually understand it. The organisation that people join is a social movement, not a registered political party. No one has to leave their current party to join us. So long as you agree with our political values statement, you’re welcome.
There is a separate legal entity that is Majority the political party. We set that up, after discussions with the Electoral Commission, so we can run candidates as Majority if we wish. Or we can back Greens, or independents, or, when it’s ready, Your Party.
Our constitution commits us to seeking progressive alliances. Independent Holly Waddell who previously took a seat of the Tories in Northumberland, and the Green Party’s Sarah Peters who took a seat from Labour, both spoke at the conference. Two young women who stepped up, and got Majority support.
That’s the key. How do you build an organisation that people want to give their time to? It’s not enough to have a party where people think, “Well, I suppose they’re not as bad as the rest”. Without passionate volunteers, you need rich donors to pay the staff. If you need rich donors, you can never truly represent the people who vote for you.
Majority conference members ready to help shape ‘Your Party’
As Your Party takes shape, many of our members will be shaping it. I know I will. I’ll be arguing that to stop a far-right government in this country, we need a progressive alliance. We need radical grassroots democracy. We’re showing it can work.
Some say progressives need to build a social movement. Some say the focus should be on electoral politics. Why can’t it be both? In fact, how can it not be both? Without a broad base in society, we only represent ourselves. We won’t win against big money unless we’re embedded in communities. And without electoral success, how will we change public policy to serve the interests of the many and not the few? Citizens’ assemblies are great place to start.
So many people joined Labour, and went to their first meeting thinking, “Will we be talking about the climate, I wonder, or perhaps the NHS?” Then got there, and someone sold them a raffle ticket. Then a long report from the officers. Then a long and repetitive debate about leaflets. Honestly, it’s less interesting than being at work. And no one got within a mile of making any meaningful decisions. People concluded, “If I am going to make no difference, I can do that much more efficiently at home”. If you want volunteers to step up, you must engage their emotions and their intellect.
Majority is fun. We have reading groups, where everyone gets to develop their ideas in a safe space. We have film clubs. We have very little admin. We’re out campaigning. Against austerity. Against racism. Against genocide. For a sustainable world for ourselves and our kids. And every member gets an equal say. One member, one vote.
Zarah Sultana’s standing ovation: a sign of what’s to come
Zarah Sultana was our keynote speaker at the Majority conference. The hall was so packed people were standing round the edges. Even the venue staff came to listen. She’s a charismatic speaker. She got a standing ovation.
But all she did was articulate what every person in that room, and millions across this country were already thinking. It’s about time Britain was run in the interests of its people, not billionaires.
If we can win in Newcastle in May’s all-out elections, the whole country will look to us and believe it can be done.
The Canaryspoke to Zarah Sultana and Jamie Driscoll after a packed event in Newcastle on 6 September where Sultana received a standing ovation for her powerful speech. And considering all the energy and enthusiasm around the Your Party project, we asked why it’s taking so long to set up the new party‘s founding conference.
Zarah Sultana: Conference must be democratic, with “one member, one vote”
This is a political party that people have been desperately wanting for ages… And I understand the desperation in our communities that people just wanna get on with it and start doing stuff.
But we need to just get structures and governance and conference right. And you can’t really jump the process and you can’t really fast track that.
She also emphasised that:
the project we are undertaking is huge. It’s historic. It’s got over 750,000 people already interested
And she asserted:
It’s really important that we have a conference arrangements committee that is gender-balanced – it’s not just led by MPs, it’s regionally and racially diverse.
We need to make sure that conference is democratic. That’s what we’re all desperately wanting. So it has to have one member, one vote.
Everyone’s voice has to matter, she stressed, and democracy has to be “at the heart of this”.
Jamie Driscoll: “everything has to be member-led, member-decided”
Zarah Sultana came up to speak at the conference of Majority, “a progressive coalition of activists and voters who powered Jamie Driscoll’s recent Independent North East Mayoral campaign”. Driscoll has been part of the efforts to build a new mass party on the left.
Responding to the early days of Your Party, he pointed out that “all births are messy”, and that:
The first third of any project is actually pulling together what it is and scoping it out. And we’ve gone from zero and it’s out there.
Then, the next third is pulling the resources together, the people, the governance…
And then actually the last third is the delivery – and people look at that bit and think that that’s the project.
One trade union general secretary, he added, told him “well, our conference takes a year. As soon as we’ve finished, we start the next one.”
He said:
I certainly will be pushing as strongly as I can that everything has to be member-led, member-decided, including the election of general secretary and these sorts of positions.
Ensuring that kind of democratic communication and decision-making, he highlighted, is “gonna involve electronic platforms”, and “anyone who’s dealt with software knows that takes time”.
We’ll be releasing the rest of our coverage of Majority’s Newcastle event over the coming days, including the rest of our interview with Sultana and Driscoll.
This means the UK can decide that Banksy’s latest piece is potentially criminal in hours but they can’t call a genocide a genocide nearly two years in.
It’s all so very predictable of this current Labour government.
Banksy: war on piece
Regardless of whether you think Banksy should be allowed to paint on public buildings, he has done for years now, and Britain celebrated him for it. As such, it’s suspicious the police are now finally springing into action. Reporting on the potential criminal proceedings, the Independent wrote:
Banksy could finally see his identity revealed after police launched an investigation into his latest artwork at the Royal Courts of Justice in London.
The Metropolitan Police is examining whether the recent work, which shows a judge in a wig and gown beating a protester holding a blood-splattered placard, is enough to put him in front of the court where his name would be revealed to the public.
Potentially Banksy could away with this by simply not coming forwards? Presumably there are financial avenues the police could pursue to uncover his identity, but if not, we may end up with a situation in which thousands of UK citizens come forwards to claim ‘I am Banksy‘.
Several videos and images have come out of the image being removed, which originally looked like this:
Banksy: *graffitis hundreds of political slogans all over the world for over 25 years*
Police: *silence*
Banksy: *criticises crackdown on anti-genocide activists*
The UK government, after almost two years of providing political cover for Israel’s genocide and more than a year directly assisting it, has announced its carefully considered conclusion that… you’ve guessed it: Israel is not committing genocide.
People had a strong reaction to this online:
The Labour Party is complicit in the extermination of an entire race. Anyone who remains politically associated with these filth is a collaborator in genocide. https://t.co/dGVzquh6db
The government explained that it doesn’t consider it to be genocide because:
As per the Genocide Convention, the crime of genocide occurs only where there is specific “intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial or religious group.” The Government has not concluded that Israel is acting with that intent.
"I have ordered a complete siege on the Gaza Strip. There will be no electricity, no food, no fuel, everything is closed. We are fighting human animals and we act accordingly."
In its analysis, the organization also considered alternative arguments such as ones that Israel was acting recklessly or that it simply wanted to destroy Hamas and did not care if it needed to destroy Palestinians in the process, demonstrating a callous disregard for their lives rather than genocidal intent.
However, regardless of whether Israel sees the destruction of Palestinians as instrumental to destroying Hamas or as an acceptable by-product of this goal, this view of Palestinians as disposable and not worthy of consideration is in itself evidence of genocidal intent.
Many of the unlawful acts documented by Amnesty International were preceded by officials urging their implementation. The organization reviewed 102 statements that were issued by Israeli government and military officials and others between 7 October 2023 and 30 June 2024 and dehumanized Palestinians, called for or justified genocidal acts or other crimes against them.
Of these, Amnesty International identified 22 statements made by senior officials in charge of managing the offensive that appeared to call for, or justify, genocidal acts, providing direct evidence of genocidal intent. This language was frequently replicated, including by Israeli soldiers on the ground, as evidenced by audiovisual content verified by Amnesty International showing soldiers making calls to “erase” Gaza or to make it uninhabitable, and celebrating the destruction of Palestinian homes, mosques, schools and universities.
Contrast
Maybe if Banksy paints the statements of senior Israelis on the walls of listed buildings, UK politicians will finally have to acknowledge them?
Or maybe not.
The moment when Labour could have held Israel accountable is long gone, as our government is just as implicated as the Tories they replaced at this point. And much like with Banksy’s latest piece, these politicians will struggle to wipe away the stain of what they’ve done.
What’s the best way to pass on what you learned from more than a half century of left-wing doing, reading, writing, talking and thinking?
Write a book. This was especially obvious to a retired union-activist-journalist-novelist grandfather. So, I did. Started writing a book tentatively titled Economic Democracy or No Democracy — An Anti Oligarchy Manifesto.
But then I actually listened to my grandchildren and learned they don’t read much. Instead, their pipeline to understanding the world is social media, mostly memes and videos, few of which exceed five minutes of attention span. At first, I argued with them. “You should read. Much more. Opens your mind to places, experiences, ideas …”
They try to be polite to grandpa but there’s no mistaking the disinterest as cellphone-induced zombie (perhaps Zen-like?) eyes stare at a screen on the table instead of me.
How to respond? What to do? Decades of union organizing has taught me the importance of listening. Meeting people where they are at. Following their lead rather than trying to impose an ‘organizing template’ on them. The most successful organizing drives are ones in which the ‘organizer’ is a resource, an assistant in a process where the unorganized transform themselves into the organized. “The union is U” — an old slogan expressing a fundamental truth.
So, how to meet my grandchildren and other young people where they are at? How to say something they might consider listening to?
Perhaps these are questions someone two generations removed can never really answer. Certainly, in the late 1960s and early ’70s, when I was the ages of my two oldest grandchildren there was no way most ‘old people’ were deemed worthy of even asking their opinion about war, politics and life in general, let alone the really important issues of the day like sex, relationships and feminism.
Still, it is important for a socialist and union elder to try passing on at least a few things that might help young people today learn from our experiences — successes and, most of all, failures. According to a TV documentary about elephants, the oldest females are the ones able to lead the herd to faraway, lifesaving watering holes in times of drought.
Surely this era of climate-change-ignoring-billionaire-emperor CEOs, ‘free-world’-supported- live-streamed genocide, Donald Trump and all the other authoritarian, about-to-turn-fascistic ‘world leaders’ is at least the human political equivalent of a savannah drought.
We are in a crisis almost certainly about to get worse and the young ones need our working-class socialism, union-movement elderly-elephant-like accumulated knowledge to survive. It is up to us whose tusks are falling out to do what we can to save the herd.
So, I taught myself how to make videos, created the Your Socialist Grandfather YouTube channel and turned my book manuscript into 43 five-minute-or-so-long videos. I call it a video book and the first few episodes are already live on YouTube with a new one added every second day.
Mostly the free videos are about creating a new inclusive language of economic democracy to replace the old socialist/Marxist/anarchist jargon that divided us and to understand capitalism as another in a long line of tiny minorities attempting to rule over the vast majority.
As Your Socialist Grandfather sees it, ‘the left’ must get back to what was its original reason for existence — to fight for one-person, one vote democracy in the economic as well as political systems that govern our lives. To achieve our goals, we must get rid of capitalist dictatorship in our economy and workplaces as well as oligarchy/authoritarianism in our political systems. We must challenge capitalists’ claim to “own” our economies.
The imprisonment of Imran Khan is now a subject occupying the ground and shifting the mood of Pakistan in reaction. With his party symbol taken away and being surrounded by hundreds of other lawsuits, Khan continues to dominate conversations at the market stalls, tea stalls, and social media feeds. For many, he is an icon of resistance against a system long branded as one that silences popular leaders—a picture that awakens echoes of Zulfikar Ali Bhutto’s fate. His supporters see him as a victim of political engineering and these very political constraints. An outright ban on visits to his family, detention of his allies, and exile of sympathetic journalists have only strengthened the very allegiance among his supporters. Far beneath the floods, economic hardships, and day-to-day life lingering in their heads is the name of Imran Khan, both as a grievance against the ruling elite and a rallying cry for hope. Hence, his incarceration metamorphosed into a reflection of Pakistan’s truncated democracy, where public sympathy came into conflict with establishment revenge.
Stolen Verdict
The general elections exposed deep cracks in the democracy of Pakistan on February 8, 2024. Independent candidates joined Imran Khan’s PTI who won the most seats, leaving PML-N and PPP behind. However, not a single party managed to carry the clear majority, further escalating political uncertainty. Allegations regarding the vote rigging and other irregularities occupied the whole post-election scenario. PTI leaders accused the Election Commission of manipulating the result by delaying the announcement while reports of interference in vote counting identified the denial of PTI’s election symbol and thus painted in a picture of pre-election suppression.
This controversy deepened when a divisional commissioner came up and confessed to fraud under duress from superiors before walking it back. These forces have manipulated the results of the elections but the findings have largely shown that the public is up against rejection of Pakistan’s dynastic parties, coupled with the public’s resentment of military interference in politics.
Trials of Power
The demise of Imran Khan is linked to a series of prominent cases. The leaked “cipher” which was published by The Intercept, suggested that there was pressure from the U.S. for his ouster over his Russia-Ukraine policy, which subsequently landed him a 10-year sentence under the Official Secrets Act. Khan and his wife Bushra Bibi were also sentenced to seven years in the controversial Iddat case, which questioned the validity of their 2018 marriage, before they were acquitted on appeal in July 2024. He was also given a 14-year sentence on the Toshakhana wristwatch case involving gifts from foreign states. In a related inquiry, £190 million was allegedly diverted from property tycoon Malik Riaz to the Al-Qadir Trust linked to Khan and his wife, resulting in corruption charges. Such politically engineered cases, in the eyes of his supporters, have further exacerbated public grievances and reaffirmed his image as a persecuted leader.
Pakistan’s Hybrid Power Structure
Pakistan manifests a hybrid power system of political order where a military establishment converges with dynastic families, capitalist elites, and technocrats, who would all be working together to keep control. The ex-army officers occupy such lofty positions in civilian offices and institutions like NADRA, PTA, and WAPDA. This certainly indicates that there is a lot of military penetration in civilian governance and policy-making.
Major parties being politically dominated by families like the Sharifs and Bhuttos who together exert family connections to establish the political monopoly and hinder political competition in an ongoing rivalry. Meanwhile, bureaucrats and business elites align with military and political families, thus fortifying a resistant-to-change ecosystem. Such commodification of power produces civilian-military brackets, institutionalises elite capture, and perpetuates the fragile democratic order in Pakistan.
Exodus of Talent and Capital
Emigration from Pakistan continues at a very brisk rate till now after regime change involving Imran Khan. For instance, in 2023, 862,625 people migrated, a slight improvement over the figure of 832,339 in 2022; hence, a gradual outflow instead of a sudden spike (PIDEBEOE). The net migration figure is clearly negative, at -1.6 million for 2023 and -1.3 million for 2022; thus, it is more people going out than coming in Macrotrends.
While remittances have continued to show resilience, even during the pandemic period, future growth remains uncertain because of a possible slowdown in migration or diversion away from conventional labour destinations GIDS Report. This consistent outflow of professionals, labour, and capital represents one of the most grievous long-term losses for Pakistan and represents a debilitating drain on both talent and economic potential.
Deep State: Old Patterns, New Confrontations
Imran Khan’s four-year tenure indeed signified a drastic shift away from decades-old deep state patterns in Pakistan, especially when it came to an absolute rejection of U.S. drone strikes. For two reasons: One, in Khan’s government, there was no use of a drone on Pakistani soil, the first time since 2004. Unprecedented in its overt rejection of sovereignty, this act was Khan’s attempt to often evidently show that he rejected any imposition on sovereignty. For years, Khan had been mobilising protests against drones, condemning civilian deaths and secret pacts by past governments.
Khan condemned Pakistan’s military as having aided U.S. operations in Afghanistan, calling it a “slave war” that cost Pakistan 70,000 lives and billions of dollars in damages, openly shunning military establishment strategy to pursue Washington’s objectives.
In the past, however, accusations on Pakistan’s deep state have been persistent, accusing it of using non-state actors as instruments of proxy warfare in Afghanistan and Kashmir IDSA. It also facilitated the proliferation of Saudi-funded madrassas, from the 1970s onward, embedding puritanical ideologies which have altered Pakistan’s educational system and sectarian landscape.
Another dark shadow hung over the drug trade. The heroin trafficking routes during the Afghan jihad in the 1980s were reportedly protected by intelligence networks to finance their covert wars, as claimed by GISF. Reportedly, these networks then became modern-day militancy financed by narcotics connected to groups like the Taliban and the Haqqani’s Global Initiative.
Perhaps this level of opacity still exists today. During $364 million worth of defence contracts between the U.S. firms and Pakistan, it was suggested that arms be redirected to Ukraine alone. At the same time, claims by President Zelensky in 2025 that mercenaries from Pakistan had fought in favour of Russia were firmly rejected by Islamabad as false and politically motivated.
For Khan supporters, this entire proxy warfare, ideological manipulation, illicit trades, and foreign appeasement went soberly against Khan’s policy that placed sovereignty first. His open defiance of deep state’s traditional alliances, coupled with his own zero-drone-strike record, is understood as an immediate trigger for his downfall, that is, being punished in prison for going against deep-rooted interests.
Conclusion
The jailing of Imran Khan is all about much more than one man; it is the ultimate proof that the politics of Pakistan are hostages to a hybrid deep state—military overlords, dynastic families, capitalist cronies, and generals turned bureaucrats. For this reason, Khan was punished for refusing to bow down to the system: ending military drone strikes, opposing proxy wars, and exposing elite corruption. An insatiable addiction to foreign dictates, drug money, and Saudi influence has sustained a system whose output is a broken democracy, mass exodus of youth and captivity of the nation between sovereignty and servitude. Until this nexus is broken, every elected leader will remain disposable, and every citizen will remain expendable.
In cooperation with gangs and with massive popular support, Nayib Bukele is cracking down on dissidents and massively expanding the state’s carceral apparatus.
Flesh and blood alone cannot halt the advance of iron and steel. To stop the tanks, we need people to place blocks on the road and throw sand into the gears.
The Brazilian president once argued that democracy will founder where inequality reigns. Today, he sees fighting inequality as democracy’s animating mission.
If Keir Starmer has had one success, it’s killing democracy in the Labour Party. Following the latest reshuffle, it’s clear that Starmer has no intention of tolerating dissent, even though his MPs clearly have a better read of the public mood than him – and his head honcho Morgan McSweeney:
Labour source points out that the government whips office now contains the wife of Morgan McSweeney, the No10 chief of staff, and the husband and brother of Amy Richards, No10's new political director.
"I'm sure that will reassure the PLP," the source says.
Whips are MPs and peers affiliated to a political party appointed to ensure their party colleagues vote according to the leader’s agenda
Reading that, you might think a bit of Morgan McSweeney-style nepotism is actually the most sensible means of whipping the party into shape. After all, it’s going to feel pretty awkward slagging off the abysmal operation in Number 10 when you’re talking to one of the abysmal operators’ wives.
The first problem for Starmer is that Britain is superficially dedicated to democracy and meritocracy. Can Starmer pretend to be in favour of either of those things when he’s employing the spouses of his meritless lackeys to enforce his ill-thought out bidding?
The second problem for Starmer is that everyone knows he’s becoming increasingly authoritarian because his rank incompetence and public unpopularity demand it. A key example of this was Starmer’s recent attempt to gut benefits for sick and disabled people. Because the plan was blatantly cruel and demonstrably at odds with why people voted Labour, it was wildly unpopular with the public. Many Labour MPs picked up how unpopular the cuts would be, and whether or not they actually cared about their constituents, they did take a stand against the government.
The climb down
As a result of the rebellion, Starmer was forced to climb down. This was embarrassing for Labour, but ultimately it was less of a clusterfuck than it would have been if they’d actually succeeded in forcing the cuts through.
I am determined we will change this country for the better for millions of working people – and I’m not going to be deflected from that.
Therefore, we have to deal with people who repeatedly break the whip.
Everyone was elected as a Labour on a Labour manifesto of change and everybody needs to deliver as a Labour government.
The word ‘change’ is doing a lot of heavy lifting here.
Yes, it’s unarguable that the British public wanted change; it’s equally clear that Starmer’s election campaign revolved around monotonously repeating the word ‘change’ like a busted chatbot.
It’s equally clear, however, that the people implicitly understood ‘change’ to mean ‘change for the better’; not ‘change for the worse’.
What goes around
You could make the case that the previous Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn was too soft on MPs. He sought to strengthen democracy wherever he could, and his MPs repaid him by stabbing him the back at best and stabbing him in the front more often.
Now, the same MPs who shat and pissed at the thought of re-nationalising the NHS are upset because they’re being bullied into torching their careers by a political idiot.
What a shame.
The problem Corbyn faced wasn’t that democracy doesn’t work; it was that it’s too late to reintroduce it to the Labour Party. At this point, Labour is really just three lobbyists in a trench coat.
These people were never going to disembark the gravy train of their own free will, but it’s good that Corbyn attempted it, because now we can all see that the concept of ‘Labour democracy’ is an oxymoron.
Once again, real democracy must be built from the ground up.
This time, let’s try not to let the sell outs take it over.
While many once wondered what Keir Starmer stood for, it’s become increasingly clear that the three pillars of Starmerism are:
Empty Slogans.
Kowtowing to the Far Right.
Incompetence and/or Corruption.
Starmerism
The problem with Starmerism is that it’s politically illiterate; it’s doomed to failure, and it’s comprehensively unpopular with the wider electorate, and as such the Labour Party went into the summer recess facing some of the worst polling it’s ever experienced:
With parliament taking a break, some wondered if Starmer would rethink his political project and point the party in a direction other than ‘straight down the shitter’. Instead, Labour have started week 1 of the new term by tripling down on everything that the country hates about them.
Starmer infamously became Labour leader on the back of 10 pledges; pledges he slowly abandoned at best and did-the-exact-opposite-of at worst. He’s continued to make promises since then, but the problem is we have this story in the UK called ‘the boy who cried wolf’, and as a result you can only lie to a British person 5 to 10 times before they become suspicious.
As a result of his flagrant wolf crying, the public trust Starmerism about as much as they trust gone-off milk:
You know what might win back people’s trust, though?
His internal No 10 reshuffle, which also covered the communications team and the policy unit, comes alongside a new economic pledge to deliver growth that “people can feel in their pockets”, a nod to the millions who are still struggling with the cost of living.
Growth.
That people can feel.
In their pockets.
I’m sorry, but unless this was written by Action Men dolls, there’s no way they can’t have thought: “wow, this sounds an awful lot like we’re talking about pocket wanking“.
Ignoring the should-have-been-obvious innuendo, what does ‘growth you can feel in your pockets’ actually mean?
As you’d expect, Labour haven’t fleshed out what we’ll get in practice, but seemingly they’re saying they’ll achieve GDP growth at the same time that people’s personal spending power increases. The reason why they’d need to point this out is because GDP – our primary indicator of how well the economy is doing – often tells us fuck all about how the economy is doing.
It starts with a strange paradox: You read the headlines: “GDP is up.” You look around: wages stagnant, housing unaffordable, services crumbling, your groceries cost 30% more than two years ago. Something doesn’t add up.
For decades, GDP has been the scoreboard of economic success. A rising GDP was supposed to mean progress, prosperity, and security. But more and more, it feels like GDP is running victory laps while the rest of us are stuck in traffic. Why? According to economist Diane Coyle, it’s because we’re still measuring the 2025 economy with tools built for 1945.
People have been getting wise to this for some time, and now Labour are getting wise to us getting wise. The problem is they’re not getting wise to actually fixing the problem, as their solution is to do more of what brought us here. This is why the above reshuffle saw Starmer employing Minouche Shafik, who economist Richard J Murphy described as a ‘neoliberal technocrat’. It’s also why Starmer’s second reshuffle on Friday 5 September mostly just swapped loyalists from one ministerial position to another, like the church moving a bad priest to the next town over.
Pillar 2: Kowtowing to the Far Right
Ever since Starmer took power and the country erupted in race riots, he’s been bending over backwards to appease the far-right. Guess how that pillar of Starmerism turned out:
The number of Reform UK, Conservative and Green voters saying they would never vote Labour has risen notably since last July
% of 2024 voters saying they would never consider voting Labour Reform UK: 79% (+29 from 20-29 July 2024) Conservative: 60% (+21) Green: 27% (+17) Lib… pic.twitter.com/YFsNQMSsjQ
The obvious answer to this is that it depends on the context. Consider the following two examples:
An England supporter in an England shirt holds aloft an England flag in the stands of an England football match.
A racism supporter (who was twice convicted of racially aggravated assault) holds aloft an England flag in the middle of a race riot.
Example 1 is usually going to be non-problematic because football has largely cleaned itself up since the 1970s.
Example 2 is quite clearly racist, though, and it’s not because the flag is woven from racism particles or because all flags are inherently xenophobic; it’s because the dipshit waving it is crudely making the argument that England is solely for people like him.
While the people engaging in this current ‘Raise the Colours‘ movement have maintained some degree of anonymity, we’ve seen enough to know who’s behind all this:
It’s clear then that the issue isn’t the flags themselves; it’s that legions of goons are once again conducting a wave of racially-motivated goonery.
UKIP’s Nick Tenconi bravely re-enacts history’s worst moments outside a hotel housing asylum seekers. Nothing says “patriot” like a Nazi salute on the streets of a country that fought and defeated fascism. pic.twitter.com/qmxFaB0RM4
Turns my stomach that @NickTenconi feels able to throw a Nazi salute on an English street without consequences.
The one suit wonder then shows the world who he really is by posting the video on Twitter with the title 'We are sending them home' pic.twitter.com/QN2t0LpFJz
So how did Labour react to this latest wave of flag shagging?
Umm:
Starmer has said he hangs the English flag in his home and 'always sits in front of a Union Jack'
He told the BBC: 'I'm very encouraging of flags. I think they're patriotic and a great symbol of our nation pic.twitter.com/oAkrbydQTx
— Peter #Socialist #COYS @woolhead on bsky.social (@CoysPeter) September 1, 2025
Asked if she's got a flag on display in her home, the Home Secretary says she has Union Jack bunting, St Georges flags, St Georges bunting, and Union Jack flags and tablecloths. pic.twitter.com/gvYsfMqOrf
The people he’s trying to appeal to think he’s a treacherous paedophile who should get the guillotine; does he really think he can undo all that by pretending to enjoy a good flag?
A charitable reading of all this would be that Starmer is trying to put people off the flag by associating himself with it. A less than charitable view would be that things are only going to get more desperate from here on out.
Remember that episode of Black Mirror in which the prime minister was blackmailed into fucking a pig? Imagine that, but instead of a pig it’s a flag, and instead of being forced into it Starmer is voluntarily broadcasting the scenario to a queasy nation of regretful voters.
It’s an unpleasant scene to imagine, but is it any worse than what we’re getting from him already?
Pillar 3: Incompetence and/or Corruption
On the fifth day of Labour Phase 2, Angela Rayner – the deputy prime minister and housing minister – resigned from her positions. She’d embroiled herself in a housing scandal after paying a lower rate of tax on a property. While her housing situation was admittedly very confusing (involving a trust; a disabled child, and a co-sharing arrangement with a former partner), the situation reflected poorly on her because she was the housing minister, and she allegedly took bad advice on matters relating to housing. This made people think one of two things:
She’s a very incompetent housing minister who doesn’t understand housing.
She’s a very corrupt politician who thought she could fiddle the system.
As such, it seems like ironic scandals are a load-bearing pillar of Starmerism, and that they will continue to happen no matter how many phases the party advances through.
Things can only get Starmer
At this point, there really is no question as to what ‘Starmerism’ is in practice. There are many questions around how long we can tolerate such politics, however, as they’re clearly not doing the country any favours.
Donald Trump’s war on diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) is not only an attack on the importance of education as a space for cultivating critical thought — it is also a direct attack on Black people. Trump’s attacks are buttressed by his commitment to an authoritarian playbook that wallows in weaponizing differences against the backdrop of creating historical myths — in this case about…
The Trump administration is facing growing criticism for suspending visas for Palestinian passport holders, including for Palestinian officials set to attend the annual U.N. General Assembly this month. When the U.S. denied a visa to Yasser Arafat to address the U.N. in 1988, the General Assembly was moved to Geneva — the U.N. faces similar calls now. The move by the U.S. is “an indication of the unprecedented degree to which the U.S. government has handed the levers of its foreign policy over to the Israeli regime,” says Craig Mokhiber, an international human rights lawyer who formerly served as the director of the New York Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights. He resigned in October 2023 over the U.N.’s failure to adequately address large-scale atrocities in Palestine and Israel.
Mokhiber also says there is more the U.N. could do to stop the genocide in Gaza. The General Assembly has the ability to circumvent the Security Council with a “United for Peace” resolution that could force “concrete action” in Gaza.
This content originally appeared on Democracy Now! and was authored by Democracy Now!.
As Congress returned to Washington Tuesday, the controversy over files related to convicted serial sex offender Jeffrey Epstein has picked back up, with bipartisan pressure to make files related to the federal investigation into Epstein public. Democratic Congressmember Ro Khanna of California has co-authored a bipartisan measure that could compel the Justice Department to release the files. The measure was filed by Congressmember Thomas Massie, a conservative who has clashed with President Trump, and lawmakers will begin collecting signatures for their Epstein resolution starting Tuesday. “We need 218 signatures,” says Khanna. “We have 216. We have to get two more Republicans on the bill, and we’re in talks with at least 10 who are strongly considering it.”
Khanna also discusses attempts by congressmembers to recognize a Palestinian state and enact an arms embargo on Israel. Military support for Israel is “a moral stain on the United States because of our complicity,” says Khanna.
This content originally appeared on Democracy Now! and was authored by Democracy Now!.
Jeffrey Epstein survivors rallied in front of Congress on Wednesday, detailing their experiences of abuse and calling for the release of all Epstein files. “We cannot heal without justice,” says one Epstein survivor, Chauntae Davies. “We cannot protect the future if we refuse to confront the past.” Survivors also announced that some victims would work to confidentially compile their own list of individuals implicated in Epstein’s crimes. This comes as lawmakers seek to force a House floor vote compelling the Justice Department to release all the files from the Jeffrey Epstein case.
Lauren Hersh, the national director of the anti-trafficking organization World Without Exploitation, is a former sex-trafficking prosecutor in New York who joined survivors for their press conference just steps from the Capitol on Wednesday. “Courage is contagious,” says Hersh, adding that “we were approached by several other Epstein survivors who we didn’t even know.”
This content originally appeared on Democracy Now! and was authored by Democracy Now!.
If you vandalise innocent mini-roundabouts with red paint, politicians don’t care. But if you do the same with machinery that helps wanted war criminals commit genocide, politicians will call you terrorists and put you in jail.
That’s Britain today. It’s absurd. But at least it makes it clearer for anyone in doubt that most of our politicians don’t serve ordinary people – they serve the rich and powerful.
No interest in red-paint vandalism…
My area is currently full of mini-roundabouts which suddenly have the cross of St George on them. Local people aren’t all ultra-nationalists, though. I’ve probably seen just two houses – out of hundreds – that have put an English flag in their window in recent weeks. But it only takes a small number to have an impact. Because there’s no sign the council has any interest in un-vandalising the road markings.
I’ve seen a “standard response” on behalf of the local council. And while it points out that it’s “an offence to paint or make any unauthorised markings on the highway”, it says it will base any assessment on whether to act or not depending on “risk to the asset and risk to road users”. So if there’s “an immediate risk to assets or road safety they will be removed”. But in reality, of course, there’s no such risk. As a result, the response clarifies, the council will only un-vandalise the road markings “as part of our routine highways maintenance subject to funding”. In other words, it’s unlikely to happen any time soon.
I’ll be honest. It’s not exactly high on my list of priorities either. (I’d prefer for Britain’s participation in and support for the Gaza genocide to end first, and then for the government to fund the NHS, education system, and public housing properly.) But because Keir Starmer’s Labour government has decided to prioritise cracking down on vandalism of machinery with links to genocide, it’s hard to ignore the hypocrisy.
… unless it hurts the lucrative industry of death and destruction
The pro-Israel lobby is not the only lobby group in Britain. But it probably is the most prominent and aggressive lobby group that acts on behalf of a foreign state. (Ask the artificial intelligence bots of the corporations complicit in Israel’s genocide, and they’ll say the same thing.) As Declassified UK reported in 2024, a quarter of all MPs had received funding from the Israel lobby. And Starmer’s top team in particular is positively rolling in money from Israel supporters. In other words, it pays to support settler-colonial crimes.
So it’s clear that proscribing activists who dared to paint genocide-complicit machinery wasn’t about the vandalism. It was about what they were vandalising and who that annoyed. If it just annoyed local residents, there would be no real action. But because it annoyed influential lobbyists with the ear of our corrupt ruling class, politicians mobilised the full power of the state to try and harass non-violent opponents of genocide into silence.
The UK’s elites may cosplay democracy for appearances’ sake. But when a small number of people’s voices matter more than the majority’s, that’s not democracy. And the simple story of where you can – and can’t – put red paint sums that up perfectly.
A West Papuan activist says the transfer of four political prisoners by Indonesian authorities is a breach of human rights.
In April, the men were arrested on charges of treason after requesting peace talks in the city of Sorong in southwest Papua. They were then transferred to Makassar city in Eastern Indonesia and are awaiting trial.
Police had reportedly used “heavy-handed” attempts to disrupt the protest but was met with riotous responses, with tyres set on fire and government buildings being attacked.
A 28-year-old man was seriously injured when police shot him in the abdomen.
Seventeen people were arrested for property damage, while police are still search for former political prisoner Sayan Mandabayan accused of being the “organiser” of the protest.
West Papuan activist Ronny Kareni told RNZ Pacific Waves the protest was initially meant to be peaceful.
He said the four political prisoners being far from their home city had raised concerns.
‘Raises many concerns’
“What the transfer really transpired, is it raises many concerns from human rights defenders and many of us arguing that the transfer violates the principles of the Article 85 of the Indonesian Procedure Code which requires trials to be held where the alleged offence occured.”
Kareni said the transfer isolated prisoners from their families, community support and legal counsel.
Indonesian authorities say the group were transferred due to security concerns for the trial.
Kareni said the movement to liberate West Papua from Indonesia would continue to be seen as “treason”, even if there was peaceful dialogue.
“There is no space for exercising your right to determine your future or determine what you feel that matters to you,” he said.
“Just talking peace, just to kind of like come to the table to offer peace talks, is seen as treason.”
This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.
(@LeftieStats) 
Labour approval hits all-time low
Approve – 12% (-1)
Disapprove – 66% (-1)
F
(@MittensOff) 
(@SalfordMe2023) 
