With Gaza genocide as the galvanising issue, in seats where Muslims are over 30% of the electorate, Labour’s vote share plunged from 65% in 2019 to 36% at the 2024 general election.
In Blackburn, where I stood, Labour’s vote share dived incredibly, from 65% to 27%. This in a general election where Labour won a huge majority.
The strategy to stand anti-Gaza genocide candidates and show Starmer that Labour cannot, as in the past, take the support of Muslim voters for granted, was therefore a success. Four anti-genocide Independent MPs were elected, taking seats from Labour.
However, if you look beneath this headline, the situation is less celebratory for a Left/Muslim anti-war alliance than it may appear on the surface.
To look into this requires a granular look at my own experience in Blackburn that I hope you will find interesting.
In the early 2000s, the Stop the War movement was a highly successful example of a broadly Left/Muslim alliance in which I was deeply involved. It went on to oppose not only the war in Iraq and Afghanistan but also the wave of officially inspired Islamophobia and the attacks on civil liberty in the “War on Terror”.
This video is of me addressing a Stop the War conference on Islamophobia in 2007.
Stop the War’s work goes on and is closely linked with the pro-Palestinian movement, of which I have been a member since the 1970s and which has also been broadly a successful Left/Muslim alliance.
So what is the problem?
Well one pointer is that, of the scores of specifically anti-Gaza genocide candidates, over 20 of whom were standing in constituencies with more than 30% Muslim voters, the only 4 elected were themselves Muslim.
None of the anti-genocide non-Muslim Left candidates, myself included, were able to be elected on the basis of Muslim support.
This is not a fluke statistic, as I hope to explain.
Firstly, there is a problem for many Left candidates in fitting in with the social conservatism of Muslim communities. In Blackburn I found previous writings of mine, for example on abortion, gay rights and on legalisation of cannabis, being widely circulated and used against me.
Muslim supporters urged me to say my views had changed, but naturally I could not lie in this way.
I was also contacted by panicked supporters the day before the election over a quote from the Koran being widely circulated against me, which states:
“O believers! Do not take disbelievers as allies instead of the believers. Would you like to give Allah solid proof against yourselves?”
Sometimes this kind of attack was quite crude. I was more than once called a “Kaffir”. This example is from comments on the Facebook page of popular Muslim media 5Pillars.
Maria Hussain, who joins in, is the sister of the successful candidate, now Independent MP, Adnan Hussain, and co-ordinated his extremely effective social media campaign.
My second point is that there is a real problem with sectarianism in the UK’s Islamic communities. What I came across in Blackburn – and I believe to be a general problem promoted by British security services – is a specifically Sunni extremist sectarianism. This was used to portray me as an “Assadist”.
By focusing on anti-Assad rebels and the Syrian civil war, this Sunni sectarianism explicitly supports the US/NATO/Saudi position. It was ruthlessly used within British Muslim communities against Workers Party candidates all over the UK, on the alleged basis that the Workers Party is pro-Assad. That assertion is itself based on some alleged comments praising Assad by George Galloway, which I have never seen adequately sourced.
This position was well expressed by Dilly Hussain of 5pillars in a dialogue with Sheikh Asrar Rashid held in Blackburn during the election campaign. This link takes you to a key moment.
The entire dialogue is well worth viewing as a fascinating discussion in which Dilly Hussain puts the prevalent view of the British Sunni community, and Sheikh Rashid responds with thoughtful points with which I very largely agree.
As brief background the Syrian rebel forces – DAESH, ISIS, Al-Nusra and to a large extent the Free Syrian Army – are mostly specifically Sunni, while the Assad regime has been broadly protective of Syria’s substantial Shia, Alaouite, Christian, Jewish and other minorities.
That is extreme shorthand: many Syrian Sunnis support Assad and the original Syrian democracy movement had broad cross-communal support.
The key point however is that the positions put forward by Dilly Hussain – supporting the overthrow of Gaddafi by NATO and supporting the alliance by Syrian rebel groups with the USA against Assad – are identical to those which were being advanced against me in Blackburn by the Adnan Hussain camp, where I was consistently and quite wrongly described as pro-Assad.
The first time I ever met Adnan Hussain, at a pro-Gaza demonstration in Blackburn in April, he included in his speech support for British policy in the Ukraine against Russia. I was bewildered by this. It was only during the election campaign that I understood where it came from.
This pro-NATO aspect of Sunni sectarianism, on the basis of the Syrian civil war, is hard for a liberal mind intellectually to reconcile with what is the genuine and heartfelt opposition of these same Sunni sectarians to Western policy in Palestine. It was a real problem for the Left/Muslim alliance in this general election.
Thirdly, the place of religion in politics is itself a problem for a Left/Muslim alliance.
In Blackburn, campaigning through the religious Establishment was the central plank of Adnan Hussain’s campaign, planned and organised from the outset.
Ulama means scholars of the Islamic religion, a specific and highly trained group. Imams are clerics. The Ulama and Imams together may be taken as forming the religious establishment.
Adnan Hussain very frequently claimed that he had the endorsement of the Scholars and Imams of Blackburn, and indeed that this was the very basis on which he was standing for election. He reinforced this by social media output, often filmed or photographed within mosques or madrassas, continually reinforcing the notion his campaign had the backing of the religious Establishment. Even at his few “political” meetings he always took care to have Imams and scholars behind him.
In this meeting publicised by his campaign and within a religious building, Adnan Hussain states:
With the duas [prayers] of (name of senior cleric present), with the duas of the scholars, I am taking this stance Inshallah [Allah willing], with your support I hope that we are successful Inshallah.
I am showing you here a small fraction of this kind of social media output by the Adnan Hussain campaign, featuring religious establishment endorsement:
There is much more of this. I confess I am uncomfortable with this religious basis of campaigning. On top of which it is very definitely illegal.
Using spiritual influence in an election campaign is against the law and grounds for disqualification. It was used against Luftur Rahman in his disqualification as Mayor of Tower Hamlets in 2015.
It is however a law which is extremely difficult to enforce. Neither the Returning Officer nor the Electoral Commission have any power to intervene against the use of spiritual influence. And while it is an offence, the Electoral Commission advise the police can only act where undue spiritual pressure is brought to bear on a named individual.
The wider electoral law against spiritual influence can, the Electoral Commission say, only be activated by an electoral petition brought against the result by a defeated candidate, to be heard by an electoral court.
For the avoidance of doubt, I am not going to do this.
For one thing there is a £5,000 fee to bring the petition, plus you need to have lawyers to take it through the process who are likely to cost many times that.
But rather more importantly, I am not sure it would be right to bring a petition. The voters of Blackburn decided they prefer Adnan Hussain to me. Who am I to query their motives?
While I stated that I am not comfortable with the use of religion as a campaign platform, that is not to say that I agree that it should be illegal to do so. I am in two minds on the subject. I have always felt the disqualification of Rahman was unfair.
The law against spiritual influence in elections was introduced in the 19th century specifically to stop the Catholic church hierarchy in Ireland from instructing people to vote for Irish nationalists.
While I do favour the separation of the state from religion, and worry about the ability of religious hierarchies to exercise control over their followers which in some instances may be unhealthy, I am not certain that I agree the state should be able to dictate to people the criteria by which they should vote.
In short, if Muslims wish to vote for somebody because they are Muslim, or even because their religious hierarchy tells them to do so, is it not their right to vote as they wish?
There is however one aspect of this whole experience which does concern me. Blackburn remains an extremely segregated town, to a degree it is hard to believe if you have not experienced it. There are whole wards which are well over 95% Muslim or over 95% non-Muslim. There are state schools which are 98% Muslim or 98% non-Muslim.
I held 5 public meetings during my election campaign, and attendance at every one was roughly 50% Muslim and non-Muslim.
Contrast that to attendance at Adnan Hussain’s meetings. He held two public meetings I know of, and this the second is identical in composition to the first, i.e. frighteningly ethnically homogeneous.
It is of course natural that a campaign which is heavily based on religion will not attract those not of that religion. Hussain’s campaign tried to state that they had significant support in non-Muslim areas, highlighting in particular his personal friendship with a popular mixed martial arts fighter, but I can tell you for certain this is empty.
At the count you can see the ballot boxes from different polling stations counted, and I have no doubt whatsoever that Hussain’s total of 10,518 votes contained an absolute maximum of 500 non-Muslim votes, and probably a great deal less than that.
In a community as tragically divided as Blackburn, the effects of an MP being elected by only one section, across a divide that to some individuals is sadly bitter, can only be unhelpful.
I realise this is probably more information than you wanted to know about Blackburn and its politics. But I believe that those insights can be more widely applied to the electoral fate of the Left/Muslim alliance on Gaza.
I also think an account of what happened was owing to the readers of this blog, who after all financed my campaign through crowdfunding. For which I am, as ever, extremely grateful.
————————————————
Forgive me for pointing out that my ability to provide this coverage is entirely dependent on your kind voluntary subscriptions which keep this blog going. This post is free for anybody to reproduce or republish, including in translation. You are still very welcome to read without subscribing.
Unlike our adversaries including the Integrity Initiative, the 77th Brigade, Bellingcat, the Atlantic Council and hundreds of other warmongering propaganda operations, this blog has no source of state, corporate or institutional finance whatsoever. It runs entirely on voluntary subscriptions from its readers – many of whom do not necessarily agree with every article, but welcome the alternative voice, insider information and debate.
Subscriptions to keep this blog going are gratefully received.
Choose subscription amount from dropdown box:
PayPal address for one-off donations: [email protected]
Alternatively by bank transfer or standing order:
Account name
MURRAY CJ
Account number 3 2 1 5 0 9 6 2
Sort code 6 0 – 4 0 – 0 5
IBAN GB98NWBK60400532150962
BIC NWBKGB2L
Bank address Natwest, PO Box 414, 38 Strand, London, WC2H 5JB
Bitcoin: bc1q3sdm60rshynxtvfnkhhqjn83vk3e3nyw78cjx9
Ethereum/ERC-20: 0x764a6054783e86C321Cb8208442477d24834861a
Craig, you seem to be very slowly edging towards the inevitable conclusion that Stop the War’s Lefty naifs have been used by Muslim activists from the start. But you won’t quite get there until you realise that what you refer to as the British Sunni community is actually the Sunni Community in Britain.
Very interesting. The “Assadist” attack line suggests their outrage about Gaza isn’t even because Palestinians are fellow Muslims but only because they are specifically Sunni. Would there be the same outrage in British Muslim quarters if it was the Shia in Lebanon that the West was genociding?
No, consider Syria, where (just like NATO/Israel) alas many would be perfectly content to see the Alawites, Christians, Druze, Shia, Yazidi and “not-Sunni-enough-Kurds” get wiped out.
The “Syrian rebels”, barely hid their intentions, whilst the ratbag “Ali G Hadis” from ISIS boasted about their vile motivations.
The fact that Assad was able to rally support, in a much more diverse/divided country, than the other “Arab spring revolts” is highly telling. Whole communities swiftly saw the conflict as a battle for survival, whatever their overall feelings for the Assad clan.
Why are you frightened by the makeup of the attendees of Adnan’s meeting?
Why are you unable to understand the phrase “frighteningly homogeneous”?
(unless Im misinterpreting how these comments are indented) I feel that people are reacting to me as if I picked a name of a regular poster – I’m not but of course I can’t prove that. I asked because I want to know where that choice of words comes from: they’re your words; I can only read what you’ve written. The homogeneity frightens you? What other thing did you mean if any? That’s my straight answer to your question.
It frightens me that in a very highly multicultural town like Blackburn, a candidate runs solely on the support of a single ethnic community – whichever community that be – because that implies a racist political dynamic.
I hope that is clear to you.
Thank you for the response.
I supported you, but I think it’s time for you to move on. And for the record Kate Hollern also got an endorsement from a religious Scholar in Blackburn. As did Jack Straw regularly and politicians of various parties have for decades campaigned in elections by attending, churches, Mosques, Synagogues, Gurdwaras, Temples, etc. This election was a rebellion against Labour, and the local community preferred a local candidate from Blackburn.
I suspect Adnan Hussain and the other independents will get a rough ride from Parliament as it is.
You supported him, but you’re annoyed that he’s got the temerity to analyse his experience! … Just move on without any thought or reflection!
I suspect Adnan is going to fit in just fine in a place full of NATO warmongers, especially when he tells them who his election agent was!
“It’s time for you to move on” – what does that even mean? It’s the kind of language that’s only ever used by shifty politicians.
This article was much needed – I knew there must be more to say about what happened in Blackburn. It’s depressing, but it’s reality.
““It’s time for you to move on” – what does that even mean? It’s the kind of language that’s only ever used by shifty politicians.”
or unfaithful spouses, now, why do I immediately think of Boris Johnson?
Yes, I noted in a previous comment that in your interview with the committee they complained that segregation had not been resolved yet that same segregation was being used by the Adnan Hussain campaign. However, is it at root any different from the other subgroups in society, like mining communities in the past, or the voters in the stockbroker areas?
Sunni’s backing Nato and the West, is akin to turkeys voting for Christmas: don’t they realise that once the Shias have been decimated that Nato/West will come after them, in a similar fashion to Nato asking China to help defeat its friend Russia only for Nato/West to then isolate and turn on China – ‘divide and rule’ is certainly a useful tool. Surely Shias and Sunnis have more in common with each other than they have with Nato and the West’s dividing powers.
Catholics, Protestants, Hindus, Sikhs, Muslims and many other denominations can live in peace, but there will always those who want to divide and put people against each other to push agendas.
“Richly comic”, as a neo-fascist once commented on HIGNFY when confronted with some of the details of his corrupt past.
There are many things that could be said of liberalism in general, and this site in particular, but I will confine myself to noting that, as an avowed non-socialist, you seem remarkably relaxed about both “socialising” your losses (legal fees et al) and carpetbagging on the back of a socialist party in Blackburn in a way that would bring nods of respect from any random Trot.
Thanks – interesting to read.
Personally (while neither Ukrainian, Russian or Muslim) I am proudly Assadist as I am proudly Putinist. The idea that one can hold serious-minded criticism of either given what we all know seems a little silly. Mind, I don’t stand in elections.
Anyone who declines to abide by UK laws should face re-education. Faith schools of all denominations must be inspected to ensure they do not teach oppression or hostility. Belief is not a rational motivation. People believe all sorts of things and sometimes this is called paranoid schizophrenia. Four centuries since the Age of Reason have made it possible to travel and perceive differences and similarities all over the world. You are right, Craig, that your views on human rights and women’s autonomy must prevail. We can follow any religion or none. We can leave a religious ideology or join one, and as long as it does not conflict with UK law then that freedom of worship is upheld.
I feel we should be looking for a global consensus on inviting Palestinians who wish to leave Gaza or the West Bank, to join diaspora communities around the world who wish to invite them. If this is capitulating to the fascism that is the current Israeli government then it would at least be a humanitarian response. Palestinians are not just Muslim. Many are Christian and Israel makes no distinction in its pursuit of genocide of the Palestinian people.
There is no place for the concept of blasphemy in the UK.
Most likely the security services have a network of informants and undercover assets in every major Muslim community the length and breadth of the country. We’ve also seen how certain MSM reporters have been enrolled into things like the Integrity Initiative – compromising their journalistic independence and integrity in the process – then pushing certain state narratives verbatim.
This is why we really need a written, codified constitution; that includes a US constitution style First Amendment to prevent interference with the press and a section dedicated to : Powers, functions and monitoring; to prevent any political interference using undercover assets.
It may be that they understand the delimitations / boundaries already, and are fully aware of going ‘beyond powers’ – the concept of ‘ultra vires’ to use the legal jargon. But here’s the thing: we simply don’t know. The state is too powerful and has too many resources at its disposal to simply assume they self-regulate to uphold the democratic values they claim they defend? Permanent security officials, with near ‘free rein’ and guaranteed unaccountability from democratic oversight or scrutiny, could be forgiven for having an ‘untouchable ‘mindset and thinking they’re more important than democracy.
“This is why we really need a written, codified constitution; that includes a US constitution style First Amendment to prevent interference with the press and a section dedicated to : Powers, functions and monitoring; to prevent any political interference using undercover assets.”
And who, pray, would be enforcing that?
Bayard
The Supreme Court.
But I’d change the way judges are appointed – selections are still far too narrowly drawn and elitist. Conservatism seems to be baked-in to UK judicial selections. How many judges could truly be called ‘socially liberal’ in the UK? And no, I don’t mean liberal like the Sun or Mail’s bogus accusations that some judge is ‘too liberal’ because of some unusual sentencing decision.
It was once even worse; before New Labour’s judicial reforms they were appointed via the mysterious arcane ‘tap on the shoulder’ method – truly outrageously elitist. I’d also tighten the law on judicial interference.
“The Supreme Court.”
and whose army? Quis custodiet custodies ipses?
«Most likely the security services have a network of informants and undercover assets in every major Muslim community the length and breadth of the country.»
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=ZvnZCgAAQBAJ>
Ben Judah, “This is London”, 2016. page 58
“The boys tell me there are informers wherever there are Muslims. But they say no informers do it for free: there are some who do it for the passports, some who do it for English lessons, but that anyone will do it for a council flat — all you have to do is call MI5 and answer their questions. Who went to Syria? We raised what money? They come in themselves sometimes, the watchers, into the basement mosques, and the shisha bars, with little leaflets explaining what the law is and what they have a right to request. They wink at the owners. We know who has right to remain and who doesn’t in the family. We know who is here illegally. So, if anyone we are looking for comes in we are going to hear from you. OK?”
«The state is too powerful and has too many resources at its disposal»
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=jJj0NgA08SUC&pg=PA244&lpg=PA244
George Orwell “Review of The Civilization of France by Ernst Robert Curtius” (1932)
“In England, a century of strong government has developed what O. Henry called the stern and rugged fear of the police to a point where any public protest seems an indecency. But in France everyone can remember a certain amount of civil disturbance, and even the workmen in the bistros talk of la revolution – meaning the next revolution, not the last one.
The highly socialised modern mind, which makes a kind of composite god out of the rich, the government, the police and the larger newspapers, has not been developed – at least not yet.”
That “composite god” is worshiped by the increasingly large percentage of affluent oldies who just want more safety at any cost to someone else, and demand more authoritarianism, more conformism, more repression.
“a US constitution style First Amendment to prevent interference with the press”
Has that worked in the US?
Johnny Conspiranoid
‘Has that worked in the US?’
Broadly, yes, I think it has. US media and opinion piece discourse, certainly in serious newspapers, is a lot more honest and open than here in the UK. The debate about Ukraine is far more open in the US. Here, our media – TV, radio and newspapers – tend to all sing from the same hymn sheet, as if under direct govt instruction. It’s as if we’re under war-time reporting censorship rules. During the Snowden-leaked material reporting, the material was safe in the US, but not in the UK.
Adnan Hussain had gatekeepers on all his media posts: all questioning of his position and/or attack on our campaign was filtered out, and only those heaping praise on his campaign/post were allowed. Only those who favoured his campaign, who did not question his lies and outright racial discrimination, were allowed to comment, mostly from his own camp of 200 helpers and followers.
I, for one, cannot understand why Shias and Sunnis still grate against each other, keep to their sectarian places of worship and listen to armchair scholars (whose overall knowledge on international affairs is poor and guided by their own bias), when they could be a united strong force to be reckoned with, should they ever destroy the borders they have been erecting and hiding behind for hundreds of years.
I do not agree that politics should be determined by religion. It is a personal issue that does not concern one’s understanding of multicultural representation, imho.
Human rights on the other hand should punch through this narrative of religious pampering, human rights for all should not be diluted with factional infighting and racial segregation. In my view it is a pure understanding of humanity that should guide us all: hence genocide, wherever it occurs, has no place in the world. It should not demand attention at the UN or be interpreted as a right to defend oneself.
I am very surprised that so many fellow Germans do not understand this. I feel lost and empty after this Blackburn experience. I also feel tired of courts who cannot persuade political Governments that their judgements are meant to be adhered to. Imran Khan should be free, but the same kind of politicians that jailed him, are now hastily looking for reasons to keep him in prison, making out that his party and presence is against the national interest. Poppycock!
His party was elected to Parliament by the people and those who are denying this representation are fueling civil war and more suffering of innocent civilians.
Palestine is a country and should represent all that live within, but Zionists have usurped power and are ruling with genocide and a cabal of international countries that are actively supporting this crime against humanity. The Zionist entity without declared borders should be expelled from the UN and their state be renounced as invalid, against the principles of Balfour and the Geneva Conventions. It is time to adhere to UN human rights guidance or be shown the door.
Excellent article Craig, though none of it surprises me. Years ago when Respect was George Galloway’s current vehicle, the SWP criticised him for introducing “communalism” into British politics, ie the system common in developing countries, in Northern Ireland, and to some extent in the USA, where people vote according to their ethnic group, religion, caste or tribe rather than on social class or preference for one party’s policies or leadership. (This was about the only time I’ve ever agreed with the SWP).
I liked most of the Worker’s Party manifesto and would certainly have considered voting for them if they’d stood in my area. But then I noticed that 58% of their candidates had identifiably Muslim names, and I realised that they were a sectarian one-issue party which hopefully has no future in this country.
I’d be interested to know the exact wording of the electoral law forbidding “spiritual influence.” George Galloway always used to use certain phrases which are commonly used among Muslims, and has made sure to tell everyone that he doesn’t drink, while maintaining that religion is a personal matter, thus having his cake and eating it. I remember a few years ago a discussion on an Islamic forum about whether GG was a Muslim, the consensus was that he was, and about the same time he did a podcast to emphasise that he was not a Shia. This time around he’s stated clearly that he’s a Roman Catholic, though like many religious people he picks and chooses which bits of his religion to conform to.
Personally I thought it was a sign of progress a few years ago that nobody really cared when it was pointed out that all three main party leaders in the UK were Roman Catholics (including Blair who was attending a Catholic church but hadn’t yet formally converted). An Islamic party would be a huge step backwards.
Incidentally, as regards Syria, for the reasons we’re discussing I doubt that a normal democratic system could work there, because there would be a Sunni party who would always win, and they would then govern for the benefit of Sunnis. Lebanon gets over this with a complex system where specific government posts are reserved for specific religions, but that doesn’t seem to work either given the amount of conflict in that country.
«criticised him for introducing “communalism” into British politics, ie the system common in developing countries, in Northern Ireland, and to some extent in the USA, where people vote according to their ethnic group, religion, caste or tribe rather than on social class or preference for one party’s policies or leadership.»
https://www.spiegel.de/international/spiegel/spiegel-interview-with-singapore-s-lee-kuan-yew-it-s-stupid-to-be-afraid-a-369128.html
Lee Kuan Yew “It’s Stupid to be Afraid”, 2005-08-08
“In multiracial societies, you don’t vote in accordance with your economic interests and social interests, you vote in accordance with race and religion. Supposing I’d run their system here, Malays would vote for Muslims, Indians would vote for Indians, Chinese would vote for Chinese. I would have a constant clash in my Parliament which cannot be resolved because the Chinese majority would always overrule them.”
Part of the reason for that is that “communalism” almost inevitably turns into “clientelism”, because patronage/preferment is usually based on an extended form of “self-dealing”, that is “nepotism”, giving “special deals” to related people “our own”.
Which is nothing new in the UK, as for example the “2,000 families” of “The Establishment” have been doing that for a thousand years too, sometimes mediated by Eton/Harrow/Oxford/Cambridge.
https://conservativehome.com/2016/03/22/nick-timothy-what-does-the-conservative-party-offer-a-working-class-kid-from-brixton-birmingham-bolton-or-bradford/
Nick Timothy “What does the Conservative Party offer a working-class kid from Brixton, Birmingham, Bolton or Bradford?” (2016-03-22)
“We all know the kind. They reveal themselves through minor acts of snobbery, strange comments that betray a lack of understanding about the lives of ordinary people, or when they are councillors or Members of Parliament by the policy positions they take. I remember one MP who, as a member of the Shadow Cabinet, once said: “school reform is all very well but we must protect the great public schools, because we need to look after our own people.” Quite how many of the millions of core Tory voters he thought had attended public schools was never explained.”
As for the Workers Party, they will only ever be a sectarian group, possibly winning local councils but never the General Election, because their social conservatism is alien to younger people. Galloway’s social conservatism, based on his Roman Catholicism, was abundantly clear in his long interview with Aaron Bastani on Novara Media, including repeating the intellectually dishonest slogan that we shouldn’t allow assisted dying “because it gives too much power to doctors.” Novara Media was much criticised for this video but all they did was allow George Galloway to express himself at length rather than in soundbites. Mr Galloway also made some snide comments about Jeremy Corbyn and John McDonnell, which put me right off him.
When it really mattered, George Galloway did not cynically represent you and other Corbyn supporters as antisemites. Aaron Bastani and his Novara gang did, and would not hesitate to do so again if they thought it would strengthen their credentials with the British establishment.
I am not supporting Mr Bastani or Novara Media, which I rarely looked at even when I was an active member of the Labour Party, I actually find their whole sophisticated tone quite off-putting. But I don’t think they should be blamed for allowing GG to say things which put a lot of people off him. The more we know about politicians’ opinions, the better we can assess whether they are worth supporting.
While I have sympathy for Craig and all the constituents of Blackburn, what difference would it have made if he’d won?
Whoever gets ‘elected’, the establishment remains in power. Foreign policy (ie ‘war’) does not change.
The only things that change are advances in technology – which always enable yet more state power.
Consider as an example – decades ago if you were pulled over by the police, you could give a false name and address (obviously, that’s a bad idea – it’s just to illustrate the point). Now though, the police just put your details (reg no. etc.) in their little computer and know immediately who you are, if your car’s ‘legal’ etc.
ANPR cameras can find any person and their vehicle. Isn’t that good? Well…
In the event of the state going into full dictator mode (not at all impossible), any dissidents could be easily located and jailed/disappeared.
That’s just one example. As computers, tracking, digital IDs etc. are rolled out further, the state’s grip gets tighter.
However! As energy constraints squeeze discretionary spending, and the financial economy becomes increasingly divorced from the real economy (of goods and services), the current mode of existence – central government, 9 to 5 jobs, office jobs etc. will become more and more irrelevant and unsustainable.
A paradigm shift in thinking about how society is organised is needed.
The Undeath Of Democracy
Don’t Vote
“What difference would it have made if he’d won?”
Those best placed to answer that question are the ones who exerted themselves to ensure that he lost.
An eloquent voice in Parliament does make a difference, if only by disturbing consciences that might otherwise slumber complacently on.
Surely at least that much idealism is also realistic? It may not be much, but it’s something. (And we were denied even that – what a world!)
“An eloquent voice in Parliament does make a difference, if only by disturbing consciences that might otherwise slumber complacently on.”
IOW, no actual difference.
I think an answer is that being an MP can bring with it far more influence than just the voice in parliament. For many MP’s the formal parliamentary activity is simply the decorative cherry on top. I suspect that Craig with his experience of the establishment would have been able to use the role very effectively to further the interests of both the constituents in Blackburn and the many other causes for which he speaks and agitates.
It is a great shame for Blackburn that there was more than 1 candidate for the left/Gaza. Likely that candidate would have got all 17000 + votes and been a big statement by the whole community. As you were invited by the councillors to stand and were a recognised supporter for human rights and Palestine, Adnan Hussain, if he had any moral decency, would not have contemplated standing.
This is quite interesting up to a point, Craig, but I think you’re severely over-analysing it. It’s much simpler than you seem to think. Islam doesn’t mix with anything, and there’s no accommodation possible with it. The Quran verse quoted against you is a simple and clear statement of what that religion teaches, and there’s really no need to complicate it further. I know this doesn’t gel with the liberal, Whiggish view of humanity or history, but sometimes a cigar really is just a cigar. Many people find it surprising, for instance, that Islam is not as deeply entrenched in the psyches and culture of the Iranian people as their militant government would seem to make it appear. This is for various racial, cultural and historical reasons which need not concern us here. The point is that the Shah was brought down by a left/Muslim alliance in the 1970s in which the left just assumed they could ride Islam like a pony into power. Never occurred to the “left” part of the alliance that Islam had it’s own plans, and here we are in the fourth decade of the “revolution.”
1. I didn’t know about the law concerning spiritual influence, so thanks for the historical education.
2. If one of your motives in standing in Blackburn was to get even with Jack Straw (remotely this time, via his successor) then you succeeded – you were a successful spoiler candidate against Labour. True, you didn’t take the prize, but you retained your deposit this time. Is all that not a glass half-full?
The campaign was very valuable. We broadcast about Gaza to millions around the world, with speakers including Chris Hedges, Richard Medhurst, David Miller and Roger Waters, and interviews on numerous foreign TV channels, major alternative media worldwide and even Sky News. So I am not unhappy.
The law against spiritual influence seems to have been slightly changed since the disqualification of Rahman after the 2015 election. According to this very useful post of the Law and Religion UK Blog, the definition was changed by the Elections Act 2022 (further links in the post) and is now:
(e) causing spiritual injury to, or placing undue spiritual pressure on, a person
with ‘undue’ perhaps making proof a bit harder. I also think you have to be a registered elector in the constituency to bring a case, so that’s two more reasons for Craig not to do what he doesn’t want to do anyway.
Of course if Hussain’s campaign was really designed to help Labour and split the anti-genocide vote that threatened to elect Craig in its place, it succeeded far too well. In reality I suspect it was driven more by those in charge of local politics being afraid to lose their control and seeing separation from Labour as the only way to keep it. In which case reconciliation may be some way off, if only because the control freaks now in charge of Labour are determined to centralise everything for their own gain.
I do wonder, however, if even in Blackburn the Muslim vote is quite as homogenous as he feels and in particular if younger and British-born voters are quite as willing to always follow the direction of the local religious hierarchy.
This woman Maria, I wish some honest media interviewd her on her views 🙂
Does she realise that Prime Minister is kaffir? Most probably, also police officers and tax agents dealing with her safety and her property. The King, again, must be pretty a kaffir! He is the head of the Church, christian church it was last time I checked.
Really, I supposed UK is a secular state.
Evidence, if needed, that integration and multiculteralism is just a white political fantasy.
In my experience, Muslims are not naturally left-wing. Their economic and social views tend to be more conservative, if it weren’t for the immigrant/outsider need to seek help from the left. Jews used to be like that too, but now to a very large degree coalesce with the Tories, with only relics left in the Labour party. So there’s always going to be a problem for an overtly left-wing position succeeding with Muslims.
That’s apart from sectarian issues within Islam, where you note a pro-Sunni position and criticisms of you. I find that a little surprising, as the previous sectarian splits have largely been effaced over Gaza since October 7th, and been replaced by pan-Islamic solidarity with the Gazans, Houthis and Hizbullah being examples. Perhaps there is a particularly extreme Sunni mosque in Blackburn, and consequently pro-Sunni calls would find an audience.
The elephant in the room for me is that so far as I know there was little attention paid to the white uk population of Blackburn in Craig’s campaign. There may well have been many white attenders in his public meetings but thats not quite the same as a concerted campaign presence in the white community.
There’s just as much cynicism within Muslim society towards political activism as in the western world. Despite the apparent Ulamaa/imam influence over muslim society on large-scale questions, there will still be a pushback against that pressure on a self-interested personal level.
So its no surprise to me that when it comes to the crunch a local candidate will almost always be preferred to an outsider, however well qualified s/he may be. The reason is simple; its that leverage on a person from within an ethnic minority depends on their local/family connections. That would be true of any minority culture.
It remains true that single-issue campaigns don’t have much success in the long-term. Galloway never retained a seat for more than one term. Even Martin Bell (the well-respected journalist) who won a Cheshire seat in 1997 as an indy against tory sleaze chose not to fight for a second term.
Re. “there was little attention paid to the white uk population of Blackburn in Craig’s campaign.” And, as I previously commented there appeared to be little attention given to the non-white population in Blackburn.
It’s all very well bussing in a load of famous white guys to talk about Gaza but where were the local leaders or big name Muslims. The population of Blackburn probably had no connection with Mr Murray’s mates and they were the ones who had the vote. Sorry but this is a self inflicted failure IMO. However, I never thought from the start that this was a good move for Mr Murray who can, I believe, do better outside of the Westminster sewer.
Re: ‘The wider electoral law against spiritual influence can, the Electoral Commission say, only be activated by an electoral petition brought against the result by a defeated candidate, to be heard by an electoral court.’
Whatever the Electoral Commission says, electoral petitions can also be brought by four electors, which is what happened in Tower Hamlets in 2014. However, I wouldn’t recommend any voters in Blackburn do this. Lutfur Rahman was found guilty beyond reasonable doubt of multiple charges, including bribery and postal vote fraud, and had to pay the petitioners’ legal fees of around half a million. He ultimately declared himself bankrupt and only around £200,000 was recovered from his assets, leaving the petitioners with outstanding legal fees of about £300,000, plus recovery fees of £80,000 (reduced from £240,000 after a series of court cases). Don’t I pay taxes* so that the CPS can deal with this sort of thing?
Re: ‘For the avoidance of doubt, I am not going to do this [bring a petition before an electoral court].’
I see our host is finally learning how these things work.
* There’s tax on Embassy No. 1’s / Signature Gold & creme de framboise, ain’t there?
Hmm, you could’ve saved a lot of time by saying some people you’re describing are f*ckwits, bigots or pied pipers.
The fact that the people supporting the Israeli genocide in Gaza, the Iraq war etc. unironically support the “Syrian” rebels & “democratic” Ukraine, doesn’t seem to shake the manipulated & gaslit perceptions. Proves you can’t always cure stupid.
Furthermore, I really have to wonder: why-oh-why, do the feelings of people whose ancestors predominantly hail from Bangladesh or Pakistan, get taken more seriously than say the Hong Kong Chinese on events pertaining to the Middle East simply because they’re “Muslim”?
They’re not Leventine Arabs or Arabs in general nor even the same religious denomination, “Sunni” being a very broad term.
Lastly to the notion that sectarian voting, ethno-sectarian enclaves and frankly growing mutual inter-communal antipathy isn’t a (literally) growing problem, I’d point out the experiences of Lebanon, Yugoslavia or (closer to home) Northern Ireland.
These things can tip-over, in really bad ways fast…
Mr. Murray, I respectfully refer you to what posters Athanasius and Laguerre said. Some of us Americans could have told you that, in general, Moslem communities constitute a pro rich people voting block, even if the community is willing to make temporary alliances to get their own people into office, as is the case with Representatives Omar and Talib. Furthermore, this community is notoriously work averse. Hispanic friends, unaffected by need for political correctness say, as I have heard, “Those guys are lazy!”. Part of the back story of the Floyd murder and subsequent protests (which were peaceful until someone brought in their paid for Antifa goons) was anger at Moslem businesspersons extracting wealth from inner city communities.
Hi Craig, you bring up some intriguing points regarding the political dynamics in Blackburn, including potential Muslim influence and segregation within the voting system. However, I have a question: if your campaign was focused on pro-Palestinian support (as evidenced by the multiple Palestinian flags in your leaflets and your repeated emphasis on this issue), why would you publish such a negative and bitter blog against the candidate who defeated Labour and is advocating for Palestine? This seems to contradict the very purpose of your campaign. I’m genuinely surprised by the inconsistency.
I must have explained myself rather badly.
I don’t think that support for Palestine within the context of general support for NATO and US Middle Eastern foreign policy is sustainable – or even trustworthy.
It means Craig Murray is a gem, and I think he will still bring immense benefit whether he is in Parliament or not. Any recriminations back and forth will probably be interpreted as sour grapes. It was a dirty campaign fought with accusations and counter accusations. Plenty of these type of campaigns around the country. Craig Murray, in my opinion, was the better candidate, not only in this election but back in 2005 as well, when he fought Jack Straw. As for this election, what also seemed to resonate locally was that Craig Murray had come down from Edinburgh to fight the election. And was not well versed in local community issues.
This blog post lists “left” candidates and their vote share:
https://averypublicsociologist.blogspot.com/2024/07/left-of-labour-general-election-results.html
It is remarkable for me that:
* A large number of the names of candidates do not look legacy-british, out of all proportion to the their proportion among the population.
* The nonlegacy-british names seems to me to be almost entirely names common in Pakistan (or in a much smaller number of cases common in Bangladesh), and there are almost no nigerian/polish/brazilian/romanian/… looking names.
* As in the case of Blackburn, in many other constituencies the larger vote shares for nonlegacy-parties seem associated with those nonlegacy-british names.
Another thing that seems remarkable to me is that many of those candidates with nonlegacy-british looking names campaign on the issue of the massacres in Gaza, but strangely the massacres in Sudan, Yemen, Ethiopia, Myanmar do not seem a big issue for the same candidates, as if massacres do not matter that much if committed by “people of global majority”.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/corbyn-rohingya-muslims-aung-san-suu-kyi-burma-labour-leader-call-end-violence-a7968916.html
“Jeremy Corbyn calls on Aung San Suu Kyi to end Burma’s violence against Rohingya Muslims”
https://jeremycorbyn.org.uk/ethiopia-sudan-and-tigray-humanitarian-situation-westminster-hall-debate-3-november-2021/
“Jeremy Corbyn (Islington North) (Ind): I beg to move, That this House has considered the humanitarian situation in Ethiopia, Sudan and Tigray.”
https://jeremycorbyn.org.uk/the-ongoing-crisis-in-yemen-8-april-2021/
“I remain deeply concerned about the widely acknowledged humanitarian crisis in Yemen. Britain’s continued role in providing weapons and military support to Saudi Arabia while they are conducting military action against Yemen, including inflicting massive civilian casualties, is totally unacceptable.”
British voters and journalists might want to look into how and by whom those non-British legacy named candidates are being funded.
[ Mod: ‘Charlie Ben’ has been banned for sockpuppetry ]
—
How much do you need for next month’s rent Craig? I’ll see if I can help?
I thought you were pro-Palestine yet firstly you split the vote, secondly you’re doing everything in your power to discredit the successful pro Palestine candidate? Did I miss something?
What is your real agenda if you don’t mind me asking?
You based your whole campaign on trying to make out Adnan was a Labour plant, turns out there was more chance of you being the plant….
Adnan successfully ousted Labour… you were the vote splitter.
This is just spammy nonsense.
– Craig was nominated first, by Adnan no less.
– This article is about mobilisation of interest groups in the context of the election; I’m sure everyone hopes Adnan will do everything in his power to help Palestine.
– Craig’s real agenda is human rights.
– Adnan’s campaign manager was jack straw’s campaign manager.
«– Adnan’s campaign manager was jack straw’s campaign manager.»
William Rees-Mogg, “The Times” (2006-08-07)
“When Jack Straw was replaced by Margaret Beckett as Foreign Secretary, it seemed an almost inexplicable event. Mr Straw had been very competent — experienced, serious, moderate and always well briefed. Margaret Beckett is embarrassingly inexperienced. […] The alternative explanation was more recently given by Irwin Stelzer in The Spectator; he has remarkably good Washington contacts and is probably right. His account is that Mr Straw was indeed dismissed because of American anxieties, but that Dr Rice herself had become worried, on her visit to Blackburn, by Mr Straw’s dependence on Muslim votes. About 20 per cent of the voters in Blackburn are Islamic; Mr Straw was dismissed only four weeks after Dr Rice’s visit to his constituency.”
“Craig was nominated first, by Adnan no less.”
Confusingly, it was a different Adnan Hussain. The duplication of names was no coincidence, but an insider prank, explained here:
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2024/06/the-leaving-of-blackburn/comment-page-1/#comment-1062334
Thank you for your very thoughtful anaysis of your experience in Blackburn during the 2024 General Election. I was following your campaign as closely as I could, but still did not understand many of the subtleties you have laid bare here.
I was aware, though, of the manipulative nature of the group who “interviewed” you as a candidate, where the fact that they had already made up their minds to support Adnan Hussain before you walked into the room, and were just making you jump through the hoops, was abundantly clear.
TRANSCRIPT:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1KCX4mUPjQwGGiGSHGZSgzsOaFBUPDNSSpCYDBJ5phx8/edit?usp=sharing
However, as you say, Blackburn has spoken and will now have to live with the results of that choice. Let;s hope they, but especially the suffering Palestinians, don’t live (or die) to regret it. Hussain has a lot riding on his shoulders.
I grew up in a small Western country where (1) it was generally expected that most people would tell the truth, and (2) It was generally believed that most other people would treat your person and your possessions with respect, and do you no harm. Obviously there were those who acted outside the accepted boundaries, but in general these assumptions made for reasonably happy and safe communities.
Then, several decades ago, I moved to a country where most people have the opposite assumptions: (1) Most people will lie to you, so it is okay to lie to them first, and (2) if others can see a way to cheat you, they will, so it is ok to cheat them first. Only within blood families are these assumptions suspended – to some extent. This was a great shock to me, and it took me years to l learn to function adequately while still holding on to my own values.
If whole communities share basic assumptions (whatever they might be), it seems to work for them. But when the groups get mixed, serious problems begin. Only with trust (usually achieved by intermarriage, but also by mixed workplaces, schools &/or sports) will a new, shared set of values arise to which both groups subscribe.
It is clear that Blackburn isn’t there yet.
Sadly this article reinforces that water and oil do not mix.
Communities with 98% Muslim and communities with 98% non Muslim are an utter disgrace.
Polarisation like this fuels racial division. In fact it promotes worse than that.
Communities that want to live apart, marry within only their cast, reject others with different beliefs are enemies of a contented consensual society.
Moreover, religion has, as it has always done over the millenia, been a cause of intolerance and conflict.
There is no other way to put it Craig.
Willie, ” communities with 98% non Muslim are an utter disgrace”, explain yourself please.
In case you haven’t noticed the UK is still a predominantly white, Christian country. Where’s the disgrace in that ?
Craig stating the bleeding obvious – they weren’t going to elect someone who wasn’t one of their kind. I could have told you that, but you would have just deleted my comment. 😉