Category: Politics

Preamble

Why I wrote this

What’s it got to do with me, a white man? I live in Leicester (hi!), but not where the riots were. And what right do I have to criticise the great Narendra Modi, Saviour of India?

I love living in Leicester and I was shocked by the riots. Until now, there’s been a history of peaceful coexistence between Hindus, Muslims, and Sikhs in Leicester.

To hear about hundreds of masked men chanting an extremist Hindu anti-Muslim slogan in Leicester was sickening.

The slogan was a Narendra Modi thing – part of his divisive and murderous Hindu-supremacy propaganda. In my city? No thanks, not if I can help it. Which I can’t, of course, apart from writing this post and criticising Modi – the Trump of the East.

There’s no secret about Modi’s cynical anti-Muslim rabble-rousing in India in support of his Hindu nationalist RSS ideology. The question addressed by this post is: how could it have happened here?

The riots: Hindutva in Leicester

Introduction

Hindutva chanting, Modi and the RSS

This post is about the anti-Muslim Hindutva march in Green Lane Road on 17 September 2022 and its origin in the fascist RSS ideology of Hindu supremacism.

Here in Leicester, a small city in the East Midlands of England with a majority South Asian population, Hindus, Muslims and Sikhs have co-existed peacefully for over 50 years since South Asian people first moved to Leicester in significant numbers in the 1960s.

But in September 2022 we had riots, which famously included a Hindutva march: a masked Hindu mob marching down Green Lane Road, a mainly Muslim shopping street, chanting an anti-Muslim slogan.

The slogan chanted by the masked men was that of the Hindu-supremacist movement known as Hindutva.

This post doesn’t cover the whole series of events during the weeks of civil unrest. It addresses only the Hindutva march on 17 September 2022, the specific circumstances surrounding it; and puts it in the context of the riots.

Things have since quietened down, but there’s reason for concern about continuing tension in Leicester fomented by India’s Hindu nationalist prime minister Narendra Modi, the BJP political party he heads and the pious but vicious RSS organisation that controls Modi and the BJP.

The BJP, the RSS and the powerful Hindu nationalist umbrella organisation Sangh Parivar actively promote their toxic Hindutva ideology to the Hindu diaspora in the UK and elsewhere.

Since Hindus became Leicester’s secondary South Asian population about 15 years ago, having been overtaken in numbers by the Muslim community, discontent has apparently simmered.

Leicester Hindus are said to have claimed unfair treatment, victimhood, and – a new word – Hinduphobia.

No doubt Gujarati Modi will have sought to exploit this unrest amongst Leicester’s mainly Gujarati Hindus.

According to my micro-poll – I spoke to a few representatives – Leicester’s Hindus seem to love Modi for (as they see it) restoring pride in India.

Postcolonial national pride is understandable, but some aggrieved Leicester Hindus have apparently gone further – and embraced Modi’s anti-Muslim Hindutva ideology.

Modi is there, you could say, because the British Empire was there. Hindu nationalism existed before the empire, but was suppressed by it. Now it’s surging as a populist wave of bigotry.

Hindu representatives in Leicester have denied the suggestion that Hindutva sympathy amongst Leicester’s Hindus played a part in the riots. But they’ve offered no convincing explanation for the 300 Hindutva chanters.

The riots: Hindutva in Leicester

The riots: causes suggested

Howzat!

The Hindutva march needs to be understood in the context of the 2022 Leicester riots. Two causes of the riots have been suggested – cricket and the Daman and Diu issue.

The two main causes
Daman and Diu Hindus: some history

Causes suggested🔺

The two main causes

It’s not just cricket

The September 17 Hindutva march took place during the 2022 Leicester riots. Two main causes of the riots have been suggested:

Over-enthusiastic cricket celebrations
Ongoing conflict between Muslims and recently arrived Hindus

The two causes seem to be connected in that celebrations of two cricket results, both involving India versus Pakistan, are said to have worsened existing conflict.

One cricket result incident was in the same area as existing conflict between recently arrived Daman and Diu Hindus and established Muslims. It happened in the Spinney Hills and North Evington area.

The existing conflict involves complaints by Muslims about their Hindu neighbours’ late-night (3 am) alcohol consumption and noise when celebrating Hindu festivals. Muslims are forbidden to drink alcohol, and generally don’t.

And Daman and Diu Hindus were upset about Muslim street ‘patrols’ set up in response to the late-night Hindu street celebrations.

Leicester’s established Gujarati Hindus were said to be concerned about their co-religionists’ alleged antisocial behaviour and the consequent conflict.

Also, the newcomers’ arrival is tainted by fraud. Some history is due.

Causes suggested🔺

Daman and Diu Hindus in Leicester

They’re here because Portugal was there

Many Daman and Diu Hindus settled legally in the UK. But a more recent influx in Leicester involved the use of fraudulent documents.

Daman and Diu – separate places named together, like Trinidad and Tobago – is a coastal territory in northwest India. It was part of Portugal’s Indian colony, surrendered to India in 1961.

Following a left-wing coup in Portugal in 1974, Portuguese citizenship was granted to Indians born before 1961 in former Portuguese India, and to their children and grandchildren.

In 1992 Portugal became a member of the European Union, which gave its citizens the right to free movement throughout Europe. An estimated 20,000 Daman and Diu Indians with Portuguese passports came through that legal loophole to the UK.

Then in the first half of the 2010s an estimated 3,000 Daman and Diu Indians entered the UK illegally using Portuguese passports acquired with false birth and marriage certificates bought for up to £22,000 each.

The criminal gang of illegal migration brokers operated in Lisbon (Portugal), London and Leicester. In December 2015, UK investigators raided properties in Leicester and London.

A suspect, described as a gang linchpin, was arrested in Leicester and extradited to Portugal. In 2017, four people were jailed in Lisbon for nationality fraud.

Portugal now requires birth and marriage certificates to be checked against Indian originals. Since Britain’s 2016 exit from the EU free movement of people from the EU to the UK has ended.

No action was taken against the Daman and Diu Hindus who entered illegally. They mostly settled in Leicester in rented accommodation in Spinney Hills and North Evington, and found low-paid work in the Muslim-owned garment factories in that area.

They were, in effect, competing with the mostly Muslim existing residents for the same resources. This, combined with the taint of fraudulent entry, may have contributed to the tension which led to the masked Hindutva march down Green Lane Road – in North Evington.

(Some Leicester Damanese Hindus had unrelated difficulties when notorious Leicester East MP Keith Vaz failed to stop Modi stealing their land in India. See below.)

Causes suggested🔺

The riots: Hindutva in Leicester

Anecdotal evidence

Vox pop shock

In August 2023, a year after the riots, I spoke to two shopkeepers in Green Lane Road, the site of the Hindutva march. Both were women; one was Muslim and one was Hindu.

Muslim shopkeeper
Hindu shopkeeper
Reflection

Anecdotal evidence🔺

Muslim shopkeeper

I spoke to the Muslim shopkeeper first. She was sorrowful but hopeful. She said she wasn’t there on the day of the the Hindutva march, but her friend’s son, a young Muslim man, was beaten up on that day near Green Lane Road.

The Muslim shopkeeper said the young man was outside his house having a smoke, when he was seized by a number of masked men, dragged to a nearby park, and badly beaten.

The Muslim shopkeeper said the young man had recovered from his physical injuries, but was now traumatised, and wouldn’t leave the house.

However, the Muslim shopkeeper expressed no anger. She said that on the whole, since the riots, things had returned to normal, and she hoped peace would now prevail.

Anecdotal evidence🔺

Hindu shopkeeper

In contrast, the Green Lane Road Hindu shopkeeper I spoke to next was defensive and angry. I asked if she was there when hundreds of men walked past, chanting. She said there were only about 40 men, and the chant was a prayer.

The Hindu shopkeeper must have known ‘Jai Shri Ram’, a prayer to the Hindu god Rama has been adopted by the anti-Muslim Hindutva movement as a rallying cry for Hindu supremacy. In the context of a large number of masked men shouting ‘Jai Shri Ram’ in the street, she must have known it wasn’t just a prayer.

But the Hindu shopkeeper unconvincingly insisted the chant was a prayer – and said she joined in the ‘prayer’ herself. I asked her why men chanting a prayer would be masked. She said she didn’t know.

I said to the Hindu shopkeeper the men were masked because they were chanting ‘Jai Shri Ram’ as an anti-Muslim Hindutva slogan. She got angry, saying, ‘Hindutva? That’s nonsense!’

The Hindu shopkeeper said in India, Hindus can’t go into Muslim areas for fear of attack. She said India’s a Hindu country, and Muslims have their own country, Pakistan.

I didn’t ask about Modi. I felt I’d heard enough. (Also, the shop makes my wife’s favourite bhel. I didn’t want to fall out with them.)

Anecdotal evidence🔺

Reflection

I chose the two shopkeepers in Green Lane Road more or less at random. If I’d chosen differently or spoken to more people, the result might have been different – perhaps more balanced.

But as it was, the difference in the two responses was striking – and significant.

The Muslim woman moved me. She had no anger but spoke with quiet concern about the injured boy; and spoke gently and sincerely about her hope for peace.

The Hindu woman’s angry attitude shocked me. She spoke deceptively about crowd numbers and about the chant; and readily voiced with rancour her anti-Muslim prejudice and her support for Hindu nationalism.

Such anecdotal evidence may be considered unreliable, and may be dismissed as biased disinformation – or Hinduphobia.

Alternatively, perhaps it reflects what’s happening in India – and raises alarm about what’s happening in Leicester.

Anecdotatal evidence🔺

The riots: Hindutva in Leicester

Top Hindu nationalist invited to the Midlands

Nationalism: a murderous abomination

An invitation to a prominent Hindu nationalist to speak at events in the UK Midlands alarmed Muslims.

Until the 2022 riots, whatever the differences between Leicester’s Hindus and Muslims, there was no open conflict. Differences wouldn’t previously have led to a masked Hindu mob chanting an anti-Muslim slogan.

But now things were taking a Hindu nationalist turn.

Shortly before the riots, top Hindu nationalist Sadhvi Rithambara was invited to the UK to speak at a series of events in the Midlands, including in Smethwick, Birmingham, Derby and Nottingham.

Rithambara heads Durga Vahini, meaning Battalion of Durga. (Durga is the name of a Hindu goddess). Durga Vahini is the women’s wing of Hindu nationalist group VHP.

The VHP is a member of the powerful Sangh Parivar group, the family of Hindu nationalist organisations led by the extremist RSS. The VHP is the religious wing of the RSS.

The programme of events was cancelled and Rithambara didn’t travel to the UK. But the provocative invitation made to a prominent Hindu nationalist further increased tension.

The riots: Hindutva in Leicester

Hindutva involvement dismissed as ‘misinformation’

Move along – nothing to see here

The suggestion of support for Hindutva in Leicester was dismissed by local Hindus and by the anti-Muslim Henry Jackson Society.

After the riots, the issue of Hindutva chanting was raised. The size of the chanting crowd suggested a significant level of Hindutva support amongst the Hindu community in Leicester.

But Hindu representatives quickly dismissed any suggestion of Hindutva in Leicester as ‘misinformation’.

[I’m sure this dismissal actually happened, but I didn’t keep the source, and now I can’t find anything! Any info, please email.]

The Hindu representatives’ denial of Hindutva involvement was backed by the Henry Jackson Society, a far-right anti-Muslim thinktank.

Immediately after the riots, the HJS produced a highly inaccurate and badly written ‘research brief’ claiming the suggestion of Hindutva involvement was ‘misinformation’. This was widely and uncritically reported in national media.

The mainstream media’s failure to do due diligence on the HJS showed carelessness – or worse. (The HJS has insidiously become part of the establishment furniture, so maybe editors overlook its far-right, anti-Muslim agenda.)

Googling ‘Leicester Hindutva’ produces the HJS publication as a – richly undeserved – top result. They got their SEO and PR right, at least.

The HJS got something else right: one accuser of the involvement of Hindutva was Majid Freeman, a self-appointed community activist who was later found to have posted misinformation. (See below.)

Before, during and after the riots, exaggerated, inaccurate and inflammatory accusations were made on social media by both sides.

But that doesn’t mean the suggestion of Hindutva involvement can be dismissed as ‘misinformation’. If that suggestion is wrong, where did the 300 Hindutva chanters come from?

Because of the many exaggerated accusations – in particular the self-serving intervention by Freeman – and because of the widely accepted but highly unreliable HJS response, that crucial question will be difficult, if not impossible, to answer.

The riots: Hindutva in Leicester

The role of social media

Dangerbots

The riots were deliberately inflamed by hundreds of thousands of anti-Muslim X posts from India.

It seems odd that in a city with 50 years of peaceful co-existence, cricket-result celebrations and alleged antisocial behaviour could result in several weeks of civil unrest, with bad behaviour by Hindus and Muslims including a mob of masked men marching down a Muslim shopping street chanting an anti-Muslim slogan.

It’s odd unless you consider the possibility that the conflict was inflamed and orchestrated by an external social-media cyber attack. Three monitoring organisations have found evidence of just such attacks made shortly after the initial cricket result incidents:

BBC Monitoring found that of 500,000 X posts with hashtags such as #HindusunderattackUK, half were geo-located to India; and that individuals were deliberately using multiple accounts to push a narrative.
A report by Logically, a British company specialising in analysing and challenging disinformation, found that a significant proportion of the X posts which drove engagement online came from India.
A report by the US Network Contagion Research Institute found that malicious online narratives, many since deleted, played an essential role in instigating attacks in Leicester, and blame for the events was placed on Muslims by a concentrated but highly reposted network coming from India.

It seems the purpose of this cyber attack was to inflame the riots by deliberately inciting inter-ethnic hatred in East Leicester, an area where widespread frustration born of relative poverty was ripe for some channelled dissension.

Although digital RSS fingerprints apparently haven’t been found on the malicious messages, the concerted claim of ‘Hindus under attack’ is typical of RSS strategy.

No actor in India other than the RSS – or one of the RSS-supporting media outlets – is known to have the means and motive to carry out such a sophisticated cyber attack.

The riots: Hindutva in Leicester

Conclusion

Hindutva’s in the air. It stinks

The identity of the 300 Hindutva marchers may never be known but they were clearly organised by UK agents of the fascist Indian RSS, exploiting underlying tensions. However, goodwill can overcome hatred.

From India with hate
Who were those masked men?
How it happened: a summary
Reflection

From India with hate

During the 2022 Leicester riots, whatever the initial provocation, there was clearly bad behaviour from both sides, Muslim and Hindu.

But how come that behaviour included a crowd of 300 masked men marching down Green Lane Road, a mainly Muslim area, chanting the anti-Muslim Hindutva slogan?

And where did those 300 masked marchers come from?

The Green Lane Road crowd size clearly implied some Hindutva support in Leicester. But Hindu representatives were quick to dismiss any suggestion of Hindutva involvement as ‘misinformation’.

The Hindu representatives’ knee-jerk denial of Hindutva involvement was unconvincing, but at least it implied awareness that Hindutva was something to be avoided or hidden.

The Hindu representatives’ dismissal was backed by an equally unconvincing ‘research brief’ – badly written and inaccurate, but widely reported – produced by the far-right anti-Muslim Henry Jackson Society.

Worryingly, the claim by Hindu representatives that such a suggestion was ‘misinformation’ is typical of the RSS strategy of cloaking anti-Muslim aggression by portraying Hindus as innocent victims.

That attitude was perfectly reflected in the angry and defensive views of the Green Lane Road Hindu shopkeeper I spoke to.

Suggestions of Hindutva involvement have been parried with accusations of Islamist involvement.

There is, regrettably, a small Islamist presence in Leicester, the source of some disinformation about the riots, but there’s no evidence that Islamism was a factor in the actual riots.

There’s also, apparently, no evidence of direct involvement in the riots by the Leicester-based HSS UK, the UK wing of the RSS.

There is, however, evidence of Hindutva being overtly promoted by the HSS UK office.

Some of the disinformation was local, but most of it was in the form of a masive Indian cyber attack consisting of anti-Muslim RSS slogans such as “Hindusunderattack”, thought by analysts to have deliberately inflamed the civil unrest.

I spoke to several local Hindu leaders and priests, and it became clear that Leicester’s Hindus generally love Narendra Modi. But they don’t hate Muslims. Yet.

However, Sangh Parivar, an RSS umbrella organisation with a not-so-hidden agenda of rabidly anti-Muslim, ultra-right Hindu nationalism, is covertly active in the UK, especially amongst Hindu students.

Sangh Parivar has been in the UK since the 1970s. It operates through the VHP (World Council of Hindus), formed by the RSS in the 1960s to expand its secular appeal to the worldwide religious Hindu temple network. (See article listed below.)

There may not be much Hindutva in Leicester at the moment, but thanks to Sangh Parivar and the VHP it’s on the rise amongst UK Hindus generally, thereby threatening Leicester’s long tradition of peaceful co-existence.

I couldn’t find any Leicester Hindus openly opposed to RSS Hindu nationalism. There must be some. As with Muslims and Islamism, they should organise to oppose the poisonous ideology that’s hijacking their religion.

After local electoral defeats for the BJP in India in 2023, there was speculation about Modi’s future. But if the RSS replace him, the same agenda will continue.

Hindu opposition to Hindu nationalism in India and elsewhere needs to counter the growing influence of Modi and the RSS before they get the Putin-style autocracy they’re after – and before more Indian Muslims die.

Who were those masked men?

Only they know – and they’ve not said

A crucial question remains about the anti-Muslim march down Green Lane Road on 17 September 2022. Where did the 300 masked Hindutva chanters come from?

It’s been suggested they were outsiders. There may have been some outsiders among the Green Lane Road marchers, but the crowd numbers suggest most were probably local.

The Green Lane Road march and the pre-existing conflict between Muslims and Daman and Diu Hindus were both in North Evington. Some Hindutva chanters may have come from the aggrieved Daman and Diu community.

But apparently many Green Lane Road marchers went there from Belgrave Road, in the established Hindu area.

Leicester’s Hindus are said to have felt generally disadvantaged since they became second in numbers – and therefore influence – to Leicester’s Muslims.

This, combined with the relative poverty in East Leicester, was fertile ground for extremism. No doubt Modi and the RSS were aware of Leicester’s simmering Hindu-Muslim tension, and would have been keen to heat it up and exploit it.

A massive Indian cyberswarm programme was launched shortly after the riots began. Hundreds of thousands of Indian X posts were sent with hashtags such as #HindusunderattackUK.

A significant number of Hindus from throughout East Leicester may have been persuaded by the Indian cyberattack to join the extremist Hindutva cause.

No doubt Sangh Parivar (known to be active in the UK) would have been ready – whether coming from outside Leicester or operating from the Leicester HSS UK office – to organise a Hindutva march by local Hindus with grievances against their Muslim neighbours – in which case, the Hindutva marchers were locals.

Regarding the suggestion that many marchers were outsiders, it’s possible that radicalised Hindu students were trained and bussed in by Sangh Parivar – but someone would surely have reported seeing the buses. However, that possibility can’t be entirely ruled out.

According to the police, earlier that day, on 17 September, disorder around Belgrave Road resulted in 46 arrests and 26 charges. That shows the angry mood of the Belgrave Road crowd, many of whom then went on to march down Green Lane Road.

The police were apparently surprised by the Green Lane Road march. They reacted by attending in small numbers, as seen in a video of the event. They were unable to intervene significantly, and apparently made no arrests.

So who were those masked marchers? There’s been much speculation – including mine – but no real evidence. So that crucial question remains unanswered and may never be conclusively answered – unless someone sees the light and blows the whistle.

How it happened: a summary

A perfect storm

Hindutva – all you need is hate
Over the last 100 years, hate-based Hindutva has been nurtured and propagated, resulting in the deaths of many thousands of Indian Muslims. It’s been lurking in the UK since the 1960s. Now it’s come out to play in Leicester.
See Hindutva: a brief history, below
Minority minority: chip on shoulder
Over the last decade, since Leicester’s Hindus became second in numbers to Leicester’s Muslims, they’re said to have developed a sense of victimisation.
Poverty fuels tension
East Leicester, where the riots happened, is a poverty-stricken area. 42 percent of children are below the poverty line. Many workers are paid below the minimum wage. The median annual pay is the lowest in the country. This fuels tension and a sense of injustice.
Information: Claudia Webbe, former MP for Leicester East
Newcomer Hindus vs established Muslims
Recently arrived Daman and Diu Hindus’ late-night celebrations upset established Muslims; Muslims’ militant response upset newcomer Hindus.
Modi would have sensed the disturbance
Gujarati Modi, at the centre of the RSS/Sangh Parivar web would have detected the disturbance in Leicester’s mainly-Gujarati Hindu diaspora.
Cricket results sparked it off
Celebrations of results of two India-Pakistan matches took a nasty, unsporting turn.
Fighting in the street
The time was right. (But also wrong, of course.)
India launched a massive cyber attack
Shortly after the unrest began, hundreds of thousands of provocative X posts, dubbed a cyberswarm, were sent from India, probably organised by RSS/Sangh Parivar, many tagged as #HindusunderattackUK.
Local misinformation on social media
False narratives abounded, cyberswarm X posts were reposted, and waters were chaotically muddied.
Hindutva in Leicester
Probably organised by HSS UK and/or Sangh Parivar, hundreds of angry young masked Hindus marched down Muslim Green Lane Road chanting anti-Muslim Hindutva slogans.
Moderate citizens sickened
The Green Lane Road march’s militant display of Hindutva – far-right, nationalist, Hindu-supremacist, anti-Muslim fascism – was sickening and disgusting.

Reflection

Evil thrives – but goodness can prevail

Where the Green Lane Road marchers came from may remain unknown. But their high-profile march on 17 September 2022 was a boost for Sangh Parivar and the VHP and their recruitment of UK Hindus to the hate-based Hindutva cause.

That Hindu-supremacist vessel will probably implode eventually, under pressure in the moral depths to which such brutal ideas must sink. Until then its poison is likely to spread.

In that context, how important is the display of Hindutva in Leicester? Was it a flash in the pan or the start of something big?

Things have quietened down in Leicester since the riots, but tension simmers. There’s no street fighting but feelings still run high.

A Muslim friend said her Hindu next-door neighbours, with whom she’d been very friendly for several years, haven’t spoken to her or even given her eye contact since the riots.

Leicester’s Hindus seem to love Modi. They might not realise he’s dedicated to the supremacist ideology of Hindutva and is at the centre of the powerful RSS organisation that propagates it.

The hate-based, anti-Muslim, Hindu nationalist ideology of Hindutva has been propagated for 100 years, and is currently being promoted to Hindus in the UK by RSS agencies HSS UK, Sangh Parivar, the VHP and Overseas Friends of BJP.

The masked mob marching down a Muslim shopping street shouting Hindutva slogans was a manifestation of that.

If UK Hindus are to reject the Hindutva ideology that’s poisoning their religion, they’ll have to reject Modi and the BJP.

Hindutva’s hollow promise of Hindu supremacy may beguile the aggrieved, but, like the Fascism emulated by the RSS, it’s a false ideology leading only to brutal ethnic cleansing.

In India, BJP Hindutva is on the rise as a cynical populist route to power – which benefits only the powerful.

Amongst the western Hindu diaspora in the US, the UK and mainland Europe, RSS networks spread the bad word of Hindutva, disguised as national pride.

There’s little public awareness of the spread of Hindutva in the UK and therefore little criticism of it. UK domestic security service MI5 should put a stop to this dangerous radicalisation, which propagates its extremism like a toxic fungal network.

Otherwise, the only barrier to the deadly virus of Hindutva taking hold in Leicester’s Hindu community is our city’s long tradition of peaceful co-existence.

With vigilance and goodwill, Leicester people can reject the discord exported by hate-monger Modi – and restore harmony.

UK Hindus who oppose the political movement that’s poisoning their religion need to organise. Suggested slogan:

HINDUS AGAINST HINDUTVA

The riots: Hindutva in Leicester

Additional information

Supplementary angles

Some background facts
Hindutva: a brief history
The three inquiries
What about Labour?
Some sources
The Henry Jackson Society: ‘far-right, deeply anti-Muslim and racist’
Majid Freeman: disrupter, Islamist sympathiser and fantasist

The riots: Hindutva in Leicester

Some background facts

Just the facts. OK, some added opinion, but mainly facts

The march

During Leicester’s street riots in September 2022, an anti-Muslim slogan was chanted by about 300 men, their faces hidden by hoods, balaclavas and Covid masks. They marched down Green Lane Road, a mainly Muslim shopping street, chanting – or, rather, shouting – slogans of the Hindu-supremacist Hindutva movement. The main slogan, ‘Jai Shri Ram’ was a harmless, commonly used Hindu prayer and informal greeting until it was appropriated by the pseudo-religious RSS. See the march and hear the chants in this video.

Hindutva outsiders?

It’s been suggested the Hindutva chanters were outsiders but there’s no evidence for that. During the riots, there was bad behaviour on both sides and the police made many arrests. Information about the religion of those arrested has been withheld. Of the men charged, 10 were said to be from outside Leicester. So there were some outsiders making trouble, but the Green Lane Road crowd numbers of 300 or more show that any Hindutva outsiders must have joined a large number of Hindutva followers from Leicester.

Hindutva

Hindutva ideology emerged in 1923 in India to promote anti-Muslim Hindu supremacy – India for Hindus only. Hindutva, like Islamism, is an extremist idea that’s led to the deaths of thousands of innocent people. Hindutva isn’t religious – it’s about ethnic and cultural superiority based on Hindu nationalism (which has long historical roots pre-dating the British Empire). Indian premier Narendra Modi and his RSS bosses use populist Hindutva propaganda to keep power in India. They also export it to the Indian Hindu diaspora. For instance, shortly after the 2022 Leicester riots began, an opportunistic Indian cyberswarm campaign was aimed at disaffected UK Hindus. The RSS, formed to promote Hindutva, is the only Indian organisation with the means and motive for a cyberattack that big. The X posts sent had hashtags such as #HindusunderattackUK, typical of the RSS strategy of provoking anti-Muslim aggression by portraying Hindus as victims. The campaign apparently succeeded. During the Leicester riots, a large masked crowd marched down Muslim Green Lane Road, chanting the anti-Muslim Hindutva slogan.
See Hindutva: a brief history, below

RSS

The RSS was founded in India in 1925 as an avowedly fascist organisation modelled on Mussolini’s Blackshirts. Its purpose was to implement Hindutva and to organise Hindus in the face of Hindu-Muslim conflict. Its name translates as the innocuous-sounding National Volunteer Organisation. Young people were encouraged to volunteer. The RSS co-planned the 1947 riots which resulted in the Jammu massacres, when an estimated 20,000-100,000 Muslims were killed by extremist Hindus and Sikhs. Currently, the RSS runs the BJP political party and the Sangh Parivar umbrella organisation for Hindu nationalist groups. Through its overseas agencies, the RSS covertly propagates its murderous anti-Muslim Hindutva extremism to the international Indian Hindu diaspora. In India, the RSS, with 5-6 million core followers and about 50 million supporters, provides quasi-official paramilitary enforcement for the BJP. A prominent RSS strategy is to cloak anti-Muslim aggression by portraying Hindus as victims of Hinduphobia.

**Whiteshirts at RSS rally in 2019** – still fascist after all these years | *Photo: STR/AFP via Getty Images*

HSS

HSS was founded in Kenya in the 1940s as the overseas wing of the Indian Hindu-nationalist RSS organisation to continue the RSS front of youth-volunteering, good works and Hindu cultural promotion and – its real purpose – to propagate Hindu-supremacist Hindutva ideology to the international Hindu diaspora.

HSS UK

HSS UK was established in Leicester in 1966 (by Hindus coming from East Africa) as the UK wing of the RSS. As with the HSS, its real purpose was to propagate Hindutva, in this case to the UK Hindu diaspora. HSS UK was registered as a charity in 1974 with this weaselly pious statement:

It is a part of the accepted doctrine of the Hindu religion that its practice develops in its adherents both a love for Bharat (India) as the Holy Land of the Hindus and the spirit of eternal Hinduism, which means love for the whole of humanity regardless of race, country, nationality, religion, sect, faith, caste or creed.

That last part, however, contradicts Hindutva ideology: Bharat is a country for Hindus only. Despite complaints, HSS UK is still a registered charity and presents itself as a good-works fund-raising operation – whilst still promoting Hindutva. HSS UK’s Leicester office currently fronts as a bookshop, HSK (listed by Yell as an HSS UK ‘service project’).

**Just a harmless-looking bookshop…** | *Photo: Google Maps*

Sangh Parivar

Sangh Parivar, an RSS umbrella organisation for Hindutva groups, was formed in India in the 1960s. It presents itself as beneficial, claiming reformist green, feminist and pro-Dalit campaigns. But Sangh Parivar has a hidden agenda of promoting undiluted Hindutva: ultra-right, rabidly anti-Muslim Hindu nationalism. Sangh Parivar is currently covertly active in the UK, working with HSS UK and VHP to recruit UK Hindu students to the Hindutva cause.

VHP

The VHP, the World Council of Hindus, was formed in India in close association with the RSS in the 1960s as a religious organisation to infiltrate worldwide Hindu temple networks. The RSS realised their Hindutva idea had a limited secular appeal. To expand, they needed religion. The VHP works covertly with Sangh Parivar in the UK to recruit young Hindus to the Hindutva cause.
See a local example, the VHP in a Hindutva history, and an excellent article.

Modi

Indian premier Narendra Modi is powerful, but he’s a creature of the extremist RSS organisation. Born in 1950 in Gujerat, he joined the Hindu nationalist RSS at the age of eight and was working for them full-time by the age of 21. In 1985 the RSS assigned him to the BJP, where he became general secretary in 1998. From 2001 to 2014, Modi was chief minister of Gujarat, where he brought ‘development’ but didn’t improve health, poverty or education. Modi was complicit in the 2002 Gujarat riots when more than 2,000 Muslims were killed. India’s supreme court described Modi’s administration as ‘modern-day Neros’ who allowed killings with impunity, but the court later found insufficient evidence to prosecute him. Modi became prime minister of India in 2014 and won again in 2019. After local election BJP defeats in 2023, there was some speculation about Modi’s future. RSS mouthpiece The Organiser said that without effective governance at the regional level, Modi’s charisma and Hindutva ideology would be ‘insufficient’. But Modi held on to power and was expected to win a third term in 2024.

**(Useless) UK premier Rishi Sunak meets his hero** | *Photo: Leon Neal/Pool via Getty Images*

BJP

The BJP political party, formed in India in 1980 with origins dating back to 1951, is the political wing of the Hindu nationalist RSS organisation. The BJP came to power in 2014 with 31 percent of the vote – the lowest vote-share by a party winning a majority of seats since independence. The BJP won again in 2019 and was expected to win a third term in 2024. The BJP has kept power thanks to the undoubted charisma of premier Narendra Modi and his popular populist mix of ethnic polarisation (known – awkwardly – as ‘communalism’), macro-economic development and strident nationalism. The RSS criticised Modi in 2023 but he survived. With or without Modi, the RSS/BJP juggernaut will aim to roll on.

Overseas Friends of BJP (UK)

Overseas Friends of BJP in the UK (OFBJP UK) was founded in 1992. It recruits UK Hindu private-sector professionals to promote the BJP in the UK political sphere. Members also help fund the BJP – unlawfully, until premier Narendra Modi legalised donations from foreign nationals under the dubious electoral bond scheme. In 2019, before the UK general election, OFBJP UK campaigned on behalf of the Tories and against 40-plus Labour candidates, raising concern about foreign interference in a UK election. OFBJP UK tried to get local Hindu temples to boost the campaign, thereby putting the temples’ charitable status at risk. (UK charities can’t take part in political campaigning.) OFBJP has also been successful in the US and is now gaining recruits in mainland Europe. Most OFBJP members are engineers and managers in high-profile corporate jobs.

Killings

20 percent of Indian citizens are Muslim. Since independence in 1947, this large minority has been under threat. The RSS co-planned the 1947 riots which resulted in the Jammu massacres, when an estimated 20,000-100,000 Muslims were killed by extremist Hindus and Sikhs. Since then, many thousands of Indian Muslims have died at the hands of Hindutva mobs or militias, including more than 2,000 Muslims killed in 2002 during rioting in Modi’s home region of Gujarat. Respected NGO Genocide Watch has said there are early signs of genocide of Muslims in the Indian state of Assam and in Indian-administered Kashmir.

Secondary status

Hindus used to be the majority South Asian population in Leicester but according to the census they slipped to second about 15 years ago. Between 2001 and 2010 the increasing number of Muslims in Leicester overtook the (also increasing) number of Hindus. By 2021 there were about 86,000 Muslims and 65,000 Hindus in Leicester. (Sikhs numbered about 16,000.) This secondary status is said to have led to Hindu feelings of disadvantage and victimhood – fertile ground for extremism.

Gujarat

RSS creature Narendra Modi was born in Gujarat, and first came to power there. Most Leicester Hindus are Gujarati. (Also, according to my micro-poll, most Leicester Hindus love Modi.) Leicester’s Gujarat Hindu Association (GHA) office is just yards away from the office of HSS UK, the UK wing of the RSS. I emailed the GHA president to ask if the GHA office’s geographical closeness to the HSS UK office meant closeness in any other sense. I’ve had no reply.

The GHA website highlights its president’s involvement with the Theosophical Society – a non-sectarian group which claims to espouse:

A universal brotherhood of humanity without distinction of race, creed, sex, caste or colour

In my unanswered email I also asked the GHA president if he still follows Theosophical Society principles, and if he consequently opposes the Hindu supremacism espoused by GHA’s neighbour HSS UK and displayed during the riots

The riots: Hindutva in Leicester

Hondutva: a brief history🔺

Hindutva: a brief history

Centuries of nationalist numptiness

16th-century: Since the Mughal invasion of India, proto-Hindutva anti-Muslim Hindu nationalism has seethed and simmered.
1923: With the end of British rule in sight, anti-Muslim Hindu nationalist Hindutva (Hindu-ness) ideology emerged in India, demanding Hindu supremacy: India for Hindus only.
1925: The avowedly fascist organisation RSS (National Volunteer Organisation) was founded to implement Hindutva; young Hindus were encouraged to volunteer.
1940s: HSS (Hindu Volunteer Organisation) was founded in East Africa as the RSS overseas wing to spread Hindutva to the world’s Indian Hindu diaspora.
1947: The RSS was mainly responsible for the Jammu massacres when an estimated 20,000-100,000 Muslims were killed by Sikh and Hindutva extremists.
1958: Narendra Modi, aged eight, joined the RSS as a young Hindutva convert.
1960s: Sangh Parivar (RSS Family*) was founded by the RSS as an umbrella organisation for Hindutva groups; and to propagate Hindutva in India and abroad.
1960s: The VHP (World Council of Hindus) was founded by the RSS as a religious Hindutva organisation to infiltrate the world temple network. (For example, see above.)
1966: HSS UK was established in Leicester to propagate Hindutva to the UK Indian Hindu diaspora.
1970s: Sangh Parivar and HSS stepped up activity in UK, recruiting young Hindus to the Hindutva cause.
1980: The Indian BJP party (Indian People’s Party) was founded by the RSS as the Hindutva political wing.
1992: Overseas Friends of BJP (OFBJP) was founded to promote the BJP and Hindutva by influencing US and UK politics.
2002: Gujarat chief minister Modi was complicit in the killing of more than 2,000 Muslims by Hindutva militants.
2014-2024: The Modi-led BJP held power in India with populist anti-Muslim Hindutva policies. The BJP was expected to win a third term.
2020s: HSS UK, OFBJP UK, Sangh Parivar and VHP continue to promote Hindutva in the UK and to recruit UK Hindus.
September 2022: 300 masked men marched down a Muslim shopping street in Leicester, UK, shouting Hindutva slogans

*Sangh Parivar (RSS Family) 🔺
The RSS, Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (National Volunteer Organisation) was presumably abbreviated to Sangh (the organisation). Hence Sangh Parivar (Organisation Family), meaning RSS family.

The riots: Hindutva in Leicester

The three inquiries

Count ’em

Since the riots in Leicester in September 2022, bizarrely, three separate inquiries have been launched.

The first inquiry sank without trace. The second one’s listing to starboard and faces a blockade. The third one – I’ve run out of nautical metaphors – has questionable origins and a controversial backer.

And what if the two remaining inquiries come to different conclusions?

The three inquiries:

City council / University of Leicester
The government / ‘Lord’ Austin
SOAS / Soros

The riots: Hindutva in Leicester

Inquiry 1 – City council/University of Leicester🔺

Inquiry 1

City council / University of Leicester

Mentioned Hindutva – had to go

The first inquiry into the Leicester riots by the University of Leicester was immediately abandoned after Hindu opposition.

The first inquiry was launched on behalf of Leicester city council in October 2022 by elected city mayor Peter Soulsby.

Soulsby appointed Chris Allen, associate professor of hate crimes at the University of Leicester to lead a team of researchers and an advisory panel.

Within 24 hours, the decision met with widespread criticism from Hindu councillors and groups. They refused to cooperate with the inquiry.

Allen was accused of having a Muslim bias. He was criticised for having mentioned Hindutva as a factor, for having previously written about Islamophobia, and for being seen in a video apparently entertaining ‘false flag’ 9/11 conspiracy theories.

It’s highly unlikely Allen was entertaining conspiracy theories. Rather, as an expert on hate crimes, he was probably amused by one of the bizarre delusions found down the conspiracy rabbit hole.

Nevertheless, in the face of concerted Hindu hostility, Allen had no choice but to stand down. He said:

current climate

unprecedented levels of hate

spurious allegations

outright lies

distorting and misrepresenting the truth

ideological gain

[My bolding]

Soulsby said:

I am sorry that Dr Allen will not be able to lead the research but understand the decision that he and the university have taken. I do think it’s important to proceed with a review, and will be taking soundings locally and nationally as to whether any individual or organisation could take it forward in a way that has the confidence of all parties concerned.”

Good luck with that, Sir Peter.

The riots: Hindutva in Leicester

Inquiry 2

The government / ‘Lord’ Austin

Right-wingers in bed with Henry Jackson Society

The second inquiry into the Leicester riots was commissioned by the Tory government and led by an ex-MP of dubious origin

Controversial appointment
Refusal to participate
Progress update, September 2023
Doubts and worries
Virtual meeting, December 2023

Controversial appointment

Lordy, Lordy

The second inquiry into the Leicester riots was launched in May 2023 on behalf of the UK government by secretary of state for communities Michael Gove.

The inquiry was to be led by former Labour MP Ian Austin, now a member of the House of Lords (parliament’s unelected second chamber).

After his appointment, ‘Lord’ Austin immediately came in for criticism. His history and character are therefore relevant.

Austin resigned from the Labour Party in 2019, saying it was antisemitic. The party, then led by anti-Zionist left-winger Jeremy Corbyn, was split. Most party members supported Corbyn; most MPs didn’t. Austin was on the anti-Corbyn, pro-Zionist Labour right.

Austin’s resignation followed a series of self-inflicted difficulties – minor rebellions, skirmishes, and expenses issues – but he said he left because the party had a culture of ‘extremism, anti-Semitism, and intolerance’.

Newly independent MP Austin also said he wouldn’t stand in the 2019 general election. In an emotional interview with the anti-Corbyn Jewish Chronicle, Austin said his action was inspired by his adoptive Czech Jewish father. The Jewish Chronicle said:

Britain’s Jewish community has lost one of its most outspoken and devoted supporters in Parliament.

Others have taken a less flattering view of Austin’s behaviour and resignation.

Before the general election in 2019, Austin urged Labour voters to support the Tories rather than Corbyn’s Labour. In 2020, victorious Tory premier and supertwit Boris Johnson made Austin a ‘Lord’, and he became a ‘non-affiliated’ member of the House of Lords.

Refusal to participate

Unpopular choice

Peter Soulsby, Leicester’s elected mayor, welcomed the announcement of the inquiry. But within a week, many city councillors and Muslim leaders in Leicester had refused to participate in the inquiry.

The objectors were concerned about Austin’s lack of legal expertise, a public accusation against him of racism, and his repeated calls for more stringent conditions for refugees.

Austin has also had a working relationship with the pro-Zionist anti-Muslim thinktank the Henry Jackson Society, which dismissed the suggestion of Hindutva involvement in the riots as misinformation.

Austin has hosted and spoken at HJS events in parliament, and has praised their ‘important and valuable work’.

However…

During a virtual meeting in December 2023 (of Austin, inquiry panellist Shaaz Mahboob and me Austin took umbrage at the criticism of him in this post. He said his association with the Henry Jackson Society was in relation to good causes, and he was unaware of HJS’s bad reputation. Regarding the accusation of racism, he said it arose from a flippant comment he made about Hamas, and he’s always been antiracist. He also said he’s not right-wing – he was a Labour moderate.

Anyhow…dissenting Leicester city councillors urged the government to reconsider Austin’s appointment.

Austin responded to the criticism, saying:

Hmm.

In response to questions from the MP for Leicester East, where the riots happened, a minister from Gove’s department (for levelling up, housing and communities) said an independent panel of experts would ‘hear from a wide range of people and voices from across the city and beyond’.

But it’s hard to see how the Austin inquiry can proceed if local representatives refuse to participate.

Progress update

September 2023

A Gov.uk announcement in September 2023 said Gove had appointed three expert panellists to join the Austin inquiry, now called the independent review into civil unrest in Leicester:

Dr Samir Shah CBE, former commissioner for the Commission on Race and Ethnic Disparities, former chair of the independent race equality thinktank The Runnymede Trust for 10 years and former member of the Holocaust Commission.
Professor Hilary Pilkington, professor of sociology at the University of Manchester and Fellow of the UK Academy of Social Sciences. She coordinated the 2020 DARE (Dialogue about Radicalisation and Equality) project, and her research includes the study of youth participation, activism, stigmatisation and extremism in the UK.
Dr Shaaz Mahboob, head of Digital Development NHS England and trustee of British Muslims for Secular Democracy for 10 years until 2018, including its vice chair for a number of years.

The Gov.uk announcement concluded:

The panel will establish the facts of what took place over the period of unrest, and a sequence of events; present an analysis of the causes of the unrest; make practical recommendations for how similar events that may arise in future could be prevented; and set out proposals and ideas for strengthening social cohesion locally. The panel is expected to publish the findings of the review next year.

Doubts and worries

We’re worried about Ian (and Michael)

The three expert panellists seemed squeaky clean, and would apparently write the inquiry report themselves. But the dissenting Leicester city councillors and Muslim leaders were still refusing to cooperate with the Austin-led inquiry.

The many serious doubts about Austin, including his lack of legal expertise, continued to cast doubt on his ability to head an impartial inquiry.

Mayor Soulsby, expressing concern about an inquiry run by a politician, said:

SOAS

Soulsby was referring to the widely held view that a judge should have been appointed to lead the inquiry.

A judge-led inquiry doesn’t guarantee impartiality. (For instance, see the section on the Hutton Inquiry in my post Gilligan, Blair and the Iraq war. Judge Hutton whitewashed the government.)

But a judge-led inquiry would have a better chance of impartiality than an inquiry led by a has-been politician with no legal expertise.

Then there’s the Hindutva-denying Henry Jackson Society. Inquiry commissioner Gove is closely associated with that influential right-wing, anti-Muslim thinktank. His appointee Austin also has an association with the HJS.

In a rubbish 2022 ‘research brief’, HJS dismissed as misinformation the suggestion that Hindutva was involved in the Leicester riots. The HJS dismissal was baseless, but was widely and uncritically reported.

Senior Tory minister Gove is an HJS former trustee, beneficiary and supporter. Inquiry head Austin has hosted HJS events at Parliament and has praised their ‘valuable work’.

A little due diligence shows that two HJS co-founders resigned in disgust, separately saying that in 2011 executive director Michael ‘mendacity’ Mendoza turned the HJS into a far-right, anti-Muslim, racist organisation.

HJS was first exposed as an anti-Muslim organisation in 2012. Gove became an HJS trustee in 2017. It’s hard to believe Gove and Austin could be unaware of the HJS stench of bigotry.

The anti-Muslim element shared by HJS head Mendoza, minister Gove, and inquiry head Austin seems to be Zionist opposition to the Palestinian cause.

Were anti-Muslim Zionists now consorting with anti-Muslim Hindu nationalists in the UK’s lobbyist corridors of power?

Talking of anti-Muslim Hindu nationalists, Indian premier Narendra Modi was ultimately responsible for the Hindutva march in Leicester. But the Tory government didn’t want to risk upsetting Modi – they wanted a trade deal with him.

In appointing Austin, was Gove hoping to please his Modi-admiring boss, super-rich Hindu and (useless) Tory premier Rishi Sunak?

**Love, actually: Sunak and Modi** | *Photo: Simon Walker/No. 10 Downing Street*

Hard-right neoliberal Sunak was sucking up to fascist Modi to make a trade deal that would favour his – Sunak’s – super-rich corporate friends. It was a nasty business – it stank.

Perhaps the inquiry’s ‘expert panelists’ would conduct a fair investigation. But would Austin, like his friends at the HJS, seek to disregard evidence of the involvement of power-hungry Modi and his extremist RSS organisation?

Virtual meeting

December 2023

Blathering and ranting – and that was just Austin

When the three inquiry panellists were named, I emailed them. Shaaz Mahboob responded, suggesting I ask to take part – which I did.

This resulted in a video conference on 11 December 2023 with Austin and Mahboob.

(The other two panellists weren’t available. One of them, Samir Shah, had recently been announced as the ‘preferred candidate’ to be the next BBC chair.)

I blathered about the background, and ranted about the RSS – and about Narendra Modi, the BJP, HSS UK, Sangh Parivar and the VHP. To what effect, time will tell.

They asked me what could be done. I urged them to check MI5 was monitoring the anti-Muslim Hindutva radicalising activity of Sangh Parivar and the VHP in the UK. They said that was outside their remit.

They were apparently thinking about things like giving talks at schools. Which is fine, but butters no parsnips if your temple’s being infiltrated.

When I mentioned the Henry Jackson Society, a peeved-looking Austin said he took exception to some of the things I’d written about him. I’ve noted what he said.

I apologised for writing ‘Yeah, right’ after his ‘I have spent my life working against racism‘ statement. My comment was gratuitously cynical. I’ve replaced it with a more thoughtful, linked ‘Hmm’.

Austin didn’t address my accusation of anti-Muslim Zionism. But perhaps that was also unfair. That’s the trouble with social media. It’s so easy to slag people off.

Austin clearly felt he’d been unfairly attacked – by me and others. But googling his online profile makes you wonder: what made Gove think Austin was the right person for this important job?

At the end of the meeting, I was told if I had anything else to say, I could email the inquiry. I did, saying:

I was asked what can be done to prevent it happening again. After the meeting, I had another idea about that: ask Rishi Sunak to stop sucking up to Narendra Modi. Leicester’s Hindus seem to love Modi. They might not realise he’s dedicated to a fascist ideology, Hindutva – nor that he’s at the centre of the powerful organisation that propagates it. That hate-based, anti-Muslim, Hindu nationalist ideology is being covertly promoted to young Muslims in the UK. The masked mob marching down a Muslim shopping street in Leicester shouting the Hindutva slogan (the subject of my blogpost) was a manifestation of that. If UK Hindus are to reject that poisonous idea, they’ll have to reject Modi. Seeing Sunak hugging Modi doesn’t help.

Mind you, by the time of the government inquiry report – due in late 2024 – there’ll have been a general election, and probably a Labour victory.

Would a Labour government follow the Tories in consorting with fascist Modi? See below.

The riots: Hindutva in Leicester

Inquiry 3

SOAS / Soros

George SOAS

The third inquiry into the Leicester riots by SOAS was likely to be impartial – but why was SOAS doing it?

Questionable origins
Majid Freeman strikes again
Controversial backer: Soros
Progress update, September 2023
My statement taken, March 2024

Questionable origins

How did the call for an independent inquiry lead to SOAS?

The third inquiry into the Leicester riots was launched in June 2023 by SOAS, the School of Oriental and African Studies based in the University of London.

Announcing the inquiry, SOAS director Adam ‘N-word’ Habib said it would be led by eminent human-rights lawyer Juan E. Méndez, with a panel of lawyers and academics – and a ‘community-engagement team’. Habib said:

community-engagement team

Suresh Grover

meets regularly

representatives in Leicester

call for an independent inquiry

[My bolding]

This raises some questions. What’s a community-engagement team when it’s at home? Who were those Leicester representatives?

And how did the ‘independent inquiry’ they called for become an inquiry by the London-based SOAS, when Leicester has two good universities with local knowledge and expertise?

I emailed Suresh Grover. He hasn’t replied.

I asked SOAS about this. Regarding the choice of SOAS rather than a Leicester university, they said:

The feeling was that it would be better for the process to be led by an institution that could not be construed as having any vested interest one way or the other. I am certainly not suggesting that the Leicester universities could not conduct impartial research, but that the findings and process can easily be treated with suspicion and politicised, even unfairly so, by others.

Hmm.

Majid Freeman strikes again

Beware the troll

In reply to my query about the Leicester ‘representatives’ who – according to the announcement – called for an ‘independent inquiry’ (which then mysteriously became a SOAS inquiry), SOAS said they were unable to identify them.

However, I’ve since found out that one of the ‘representatives’ at Grover’s meetings was probably Islamist stirrer and self-promoter Majid Freeman, who made several widely repeated inflammatory accusations on social media during the Leicester riots.

Grover and Freeman are apparently acquainted. They certainly seemed quite chummy in Freeman’s video of him ‘interviewing’ Grover after the riots, as posted on Muslim news website 5Pillars.

Grover had apparently failed to do due diligence on Freeman.

The SOAS announcement also said:

community activists

advisory group

[My bolding]

The SOAS inquiry should beware of Grover’s chum Freeman, the fake ‘community activist’, insinuating himself into that advisory group.

Controversial backer: Soros

Beware the anti-Jewish conspiracy nutters

The SOAS inquiry is funded by Open Society Foundations (OSF), the grant-making network founded by controversial hedge-fund billionaire and philanthropist George Soros.

The SOAS inquiry announcement made no mention of funding – apparently at OSF’s request.

Perhaps OSF wanted to avoid having the controversy surrounding Soros distract from the inquiry. The nutty anti-Jewish hard right and assorted conspiracy fantasists famously claim that Jewish Soros is at the heart of a global conspiracy.

Liberal polymath Michael Ignatieff (writer, broadcaster, historian, politician and academic) has said of the anti-Soros campaign:

It’s a faithful reprise of every single trope of anti-Semitic hatred from the 1930s… The whole thing is a complete fantasy. This is the politics of the 21st Century, if you haven’t got an enemy invent one as fast as you can, make him look as powerful as possible and bingo – you mobilise your base and win elections with it.

But there are two issues regarding Soros that might affect Hindu participation in the SOAS inquiry.

Soros’s well-known support for the Palestinian cause might make some Hindus suspect the inquiry of having a Muslim bias.

And in response to Soros criticising the Modi government at the 2020 World Economic Forum, Indian Hindu nationalists called Soros ‘opinionated and dangerous’ and said he wanted to ‘break Indian democracy’.

That typical nationalist response to external criticism was ridiculous nonsense, of course, but it might be taken seriously by some Leicester Modi supporters.

Progress update

September 2023

In response to my query about what was happening with the inquiry, launched three months ago, SOAS said a few initial journeys were made to Leicester, the necessary paperwork was completed in July, and the formal inquiry was due to begin in September.

The principle inquirer was to be SOAS academic Dr Subir Sinha, reader in the department of development studies and a member of the centre for migration and diaspora studies.

On September 18, a press conference was held in Leicester by Sinha and inquiry head Juan Méndez. The conference was held at the Peepul Centre in Belgrave, a mainly Hindu area (and the site of some of the rioting).

Sinha said they planned to hold briefings for the local community and community groups in the coming weeks.

Perhaps some of those meetings would be held in mainly Muslim areas.

My statement taken

March 2024

Anything you say will be taken down…

In March 2024, I attended a Leicester session of the SOAS inquiry team, and gave a statement.

In December 2023, I’d asked the inquiry organiser if this post could be entered as evidence. He said I’d have to submit it as a statement, which I did. He said it’d be considered.

Then, in March 2024, he emailed to say an inquiry team was in Leicester that day and would like to see me. Luckily, I was free to attend. The session was held at the African Caribbean centre in the Highfields area

(The Highfields borders Evington North, the location of the Daman/Diu-Muslim conflict and the Hindutva march.)

The centre’s reception desk said they had no booking for the SOAS inquiry. It turned out the room was booked for the Monitoring Group, the group run by leading SOAS inquiry participant Suresh Grover (who didn’t respond to my query about his role in the choice of SOAS for the inquiry).

However, Grover wasn’t there – the session was run by two astute inquiry coordinators. I was the only attendee. I gave a statement – of sorts.

I also asked for the URL for this rolling blogpost to be entered as evidence – so all the contents, including any new material, could be seen.

_ _ _ _ _ _

Apparently, after its evidence-gathering stage, the SOAS inquiry intended to hold a public meeting in Leicester. That might have been interesting – but I never heard any more about it.

The riots: Hindutva in Leicester

May 2024

What about Labour?

What indeed

The Tory inquiry into the Leicester riots was looking useless. Might Labour do any better?

Introduction
Principle and pragmatism: Modi and Kashmir
Pro-Modi Labour candidate for Leicester East
Leicester East’s troubled history
Labour in Leicester – a bad time
Leicester East and the general election
Conclusion: equally useless
Requests, complaints and queries made

The riots: Hindutva in Leicester

Introduction

Would a new Labour government do any better then the Tories? Or would they avoid any confrontation with Modi?

The Tory response to the 2022 Leicester riots was weak: an underpowered inquiry led by a dubious has-been politician. The inquiry was due to report in late 2024 – but the general election in July 2024 was expected to result in a Labour victory.

How might an incoming Labour government respond? It’d probably ignore the report. But would it follow the Tories in ignoring the spread of Hindutva in the UK and consorting with fascist Narendra Modi? Sadly, apparently, it would.

Labour’s current attempt to court Modi involves the tragic issue of Kashmir, and the Labour Party’s shoddy reponse to that issue.

In 2019, the Labour Party, then led by Jeremy Corbyn, challenged the Modi government’s brutal repression of Kashmiri Muslims.

There was an immediate backlash from UK Modi supporters. The backlash was supported by Labour opponents of Corbyn.

In response to the backlash, Labour cravenly renounced the challenge to the Modi government. In spite of that, Labour lost Hindu votes in the 2019 general election.

When Kier Starmer suceeded Corbyn in 2020, he abandoned Kashmir – and the consorting began.

As for Labour in Leicester and the prospect of Labour-mediated peace in Leicester East – it wasn’t looking good.

The riots: Hindutva in Leicester

Principle and pragmatism: Modi and Kashmir🔺

Principle and pragmatism: Modi and Kashmir

Labour is unlikely to challenge Modi. Under Corbyn, Labour challenged Modi – and lost votes. Under Starmer, Labour sucks up to Modi.

Introduction
Principled challenge to Modi on Kashmir
Pseudo-pragmatic appeasement of Modi

The riots: Hindutva in Leicester

Introduction

Under principled previous leader Jeremy Corbyn, the Labour Party challenged Modi’s brutal occupation of Kashmir. There was a damaging backlash and Hindu votes were lost – but it was the right thing to do.

Under pseudo-pragmatic current Labour leader Kier Starmer, the party abandoned Kashmir and began appeasing fascist Modi, seeking to win back the lost Hindu votes. It was wrong.

(Real pragmatic solutions are progressive, redistributive and just, but dull pseudo-pragmatist Starmer just wants a Labour government. In a world of brutal populist autocracy and unremitting corporate neoliberalism, a little genuine international socialism would be nice, Kier.)

The riots: Hindutva in Leicester

Principle and pragmatism: Modi and Kashmir🔺

Principled challenge to Modi on Kashmir

The riots: Hindutva in Leicester

Introduction

In August 2019, fascist Modi’s anti-Muslim government clamped down on Muslim-majority Kashmir.

Opponents of the move were called ‘terrorists’. Thousands of Kashmiri Muslims, including politicians and journalists, were jailed. People were tortured and ‘disappeared’.

Respected NGO Genocide Watch issued a genocide alert for Muslims in Kashmir.

In September 2019, in a conference motion, the Corbyn-led Labour Party challenged the Modi government’s occupation of Kashmir.

The challenge didn’t end well for oppressed Kashmiris – or the UK Labour Party. It provoked a backlash from Modi supporters, and failed to get the support of the parliamentary Labour party – anti-Corbyn Labour plotters jumped on the backlash bandwagon.

(Left-wing Labour leader Corbyn was supported by most party members but was opposed by most Labour MPs and officials, who plotted against him.)

Corbyn’s Labour opponents, in joining the Kashmir backlash, deprived the oppressed Kashmiris of the UK support they should have had.

The riots: Hindutva in Leicester

The conference motion and Corbyn’s tweet

In September 2019, Labour’s annual conference approved a emergency motion* challenging the Modi government’s occupation of Kashmir.

*Find ‘Kashmir’

This followed Corbyn’s tweet saying ‘human rights abuses’ in Kashmir were ‘unacceptable’.

The riots: Hindutva in Leicester

The backlash

Neither the conference motion on Kashmir nor Corbyn’s tweet directly criticised Modi or the BJP, but the implied critique was enough to produce a massive backlash from:

UK Modi supporters
The Indian RSS
Corbyn’s opponents in the Labour Party.

The riots: Hindutva in Leicester

UK Modi supporters’ backlash

In 2019, after the Kashmir motion was passed, the UK Modi-loving Labour Friends of India (LFIN), (co-chaired by Rajesh Agrawal, recently Labour candidate for Leicester East!), fired off a knee-jerk complaint about what they said was ‘anti-Indian rhetoric’ in the motion.

There was no anti-Indian rhetoric in the motion – but there was implied criticism of the Modi government. That, apparently sparked the backlash.

Corbyn, who apparently hadn’t known about the motion before it was was presented, thoughtfully replied:

some of the language

misinterpreted

hostile to India

human rights of all citizens of Kashmir are respected and upheld

[My bolding]

Despite his nuanced reply to LFIN, Corbyn, lacking support from the parliamentary Labour party, couldn’t prevent the backlash. More than 100 UK pro-Modi Indian groups signed an open letter of protest to Corbyn.

Modi-praising Keith Vaz, the notorious then Labour MP for Hindu-majority Leicester East, stuck his self-serving oar in. Joining the backlash on behalf of his Modi-loving Hindu constituents, Vaz pronounced:

Issues of sovereignty are a matter for the Indian government.

Vaz’s motives were suspect – as usual – but his 2019 pronouncement was prescient. In 2020, new pseudo-pragmatic Labour leader Kier Starmer, wanting to get back the Hindu votes lost in 2019, echoed Vaz by announcing:

Any constitutional issues in India are a matter for the Indian Parliament.

Was nationalist ethnic cleansing in one country a matter for another country with historical links? Apparently not – especially if even a tentative intervention could lead to the loss of crucial diaspora votes, as in 2019.

It seemed there was a worryingly thin line between Vaz’s self-service and Karmer’s pseudo-pragmatism.

The riots: Hindutva in Leicester

Indian RSS backlash

Labour’s challenge to fascist Modi’s occupatiton of Kashmir resulted in an immediate Indian RSS backlash: a campaign of UK election interference which caused Labour to lose a significant number of Hindu votes.

The RSS campaign was fronted in the UK by the Overseas Friends of BJP UK (OFBJP UK). The aim of the RSS/OFBJP UK campaign was to persuade UK Indian Hindus to switch from Labour to Tory in the 2019 general election.

The campaign used the RSS trick of equating being anti-Modi with being anti-India and anti-Hindu.

(A similar trick was used by the anti-Corbyn Labour right to portray Corbyn’s anti-Zionism as anti-Israel and anti-Jew. To be fair, the Forde inquiry into Labour anti-Judaism found toxicity on both sides.)

The RSS/OFBJP UK campaign was effective. In the 2019 general election, support for Labour among British Indians was reduced by about 50% – from 61% in 2010 to 30% in 2019.

The riots: Hindutva in Leicester

Labour Party backlash

Labour chair Ian Lavery (who?) joined the Kashmir backlash, quickly backing Labour away from confronting Modi. (Corbyn, perhaps weakened by then, kept quiet.)

Other Labour opponents of Corbyn also jumped on the backlash bandwagon. Leaked messages and emails show that kamikaze Labour plotters enhanced the Hindu losses by deliberately seeking to lose the election in order to oust Corbyn.

Note 1: The Labour Party under Starmer spent over £4m in pursuing not the plotters but the alleged leakers. (The £4m included settlements paid to the plotters!) In June 2024 the party dropped the action. A leftwing member of the NEC (Labour’s governing body) said: ‘This pointless and vindictive failed lawsuit is another example of Starmer allowing his bully boys to get carried away with their war on the left‘. A pro-Starmer NEC member described the legal action as a ‘pointless political vendetta’.

Note 2: The 2019 plotters had form. The leaks showed Corbyn’s Labour opponents also plotted to lose the 2017 general election. Corbyn’s 2017 campaign was unexpectedly good but he was sabotaged by his own party.

The 2019 general election resulted in a Tory landslide. The main factor was Brexit, but RSS interference and Labour-right plotting no doubt made a significant contribution.

In early 2020, Corbyn resigned as leader of the Labour Party.

Principle and pragmatism: Modi and Kashmir🔺

The riots: Hindutva in Leicester

Pseudo-pragmatic appeasement of Modi

Under principled Corbyn, Labour lost Hindu votes after a challenge to Modi on Kashmir. Corbyn’s successor, pseudo-pragmatist Kier Starmer, wanted the lost votes back – and was willing to appease fascist Modi to get them.

Following his election as Labour leader in 2020, Starmer turned the party away from confronting Modi about Kashmir, saying, in an echo of the 2019 backlash:

Any constitutional issues in India are a matter for the Indian Parliament.

Starmer then began wooing the pro-Modi Hindu right. In 2024 Labour frontbenchers Angela Rayner (shadow deputy PM) and David Lammy (foreign affairs) were sent to India to court the near-fascist BJP/Modi government and its corporate partners.

Here in the UK, in 2023 Starmers’s Labour Party made no objection to the shortlisting and selection of a pro-Modi Hindu candidate as Labour’s general election candidate for Leicester East, the site of the 2022 anti-Muslim march.

Principle, pseudo-pragmatism and Modi🔺

The riots: Hindutva in Leicester

Pro-Modi Labour candidate for Leicester East

In 2024, Labour’s general election candidate for Leicester East, where the Modi-inspired anti-Muslim Hindtutva march happened, was a pro-Modi Hindu.

In August 2023, the Leicester East constituency Labour Party (CLP) was suspended because of suspected favouritism.

In November 2023, although the CLP was still suspended, local party members were somehow able to choose their candidate from a shortlist of two – both Hindus.

The chosen candidate, Rajesh Agrawal, an Indian-born super-rich entrepreneur and former deputy London mayor, was said to be a staunch RSS sympathiser.

Candidate Agrawal continued to co-chair the Modi-backing Labour Friends of India (LFIN), previously chaired by notorious Modi-worshipping Labour MP Barry Gardiner.

What a laugh! Labour rightwinger **Barry Gardiner** with his hero, fascist PM **Modi**, in 2020 | *Photo: unknown*

Agrawal was co-chair of LFIN in 2019 when it objected to a Labour conference motion challenging Modi’s brutal occupation of Kashmir. (See above.)

LFIN, in framing their complaint, used the clumsy RSS trick of equating being critical of Modi with being anti-India.

Agrawal has attended official Hindutva-promoting events of HSS UK (the UK RSS branch), and has associated with RSS activist Manoj Ladwa.

Pious Modi-lovers Rajesh **Agrawal** (left) and Manoj **Ladwa** at an **ISKCON** event in 2018. **ISKCON** – the **‘Hare Krishna’** group – is known to support **Modi** | *Photo: Agrawal’s X account*

Ladwa’s an active member of HSS UK. He is – or was – their communications director, hiding HSS extremism behind its pseudo-pious charity front.

Ladwa was also communications director for the 2014 ‘Narendra Modi for Prime Minister’ campaign. He co-founded National Hindu Students Forum (UK) and founded Indians for Labour, both pro-Modi groups.

Fascist **Modi** and acolyte **Ladwa** in 2014 | *photo: Ladwa’s website*

In the continuing aftermath of the 2022 Hindutva march in the Leicester East ward of North Evington, when hundreds of masked men shouted Modi’s anti-Muslim RSS slogans, the candidacy of Modi supporter Agrawal was likely to alarm Muslims in that constituency.

The riots: Hindutva in Leicester

Leicester East’s troubled history

Labour’s selection of a pro-Modi candidate (above) for Leicester East was troubling and controversial – but Leicester East has a history of trouble and controversy

Leicester East has had two controversial Labour MPs: Keith Vaz and Claudia Webbe.
In September 2022, Leicester East was the site of the Leicester riots.
In May 2023, mass Leicester deselections by Labour’s national executive committee led to huge local election losses in Leicester East.
In August 2023, Leicester East’s constituency Labour Party was indefinitely suspended.

The riots: Hindutva in Leicester

Keith Vaz

Leicester East was represented for 32 years by Labour MP Keith Vaz, a Goan-origin Roman Catholic.

After a long history of controversies, shortly before the 2019 general election, Vaz, due to be suspended from parliament after a sex and drugs scandal, stood down as an MP. (Vaz was replaced as Labour candidate and as Leicester East MP by Claudia Webbe.)

Shortly before the 2024 general election, Vaz, after standing for another party, was finally expelled from the Labour Party. (What took them so long?)

Vaz’s Wikipedia entry lists 17 controversies. Perhaps the worst one was Vaz’s casual failure to protect the interests of Leicester East Damanese Hindus against Modi’s Indigenous land clearance in Daman, north India.

In 2018, the Modi government announced that seafront land in Daman, owned by indigenous Adivasi fishing communities and by Damanese people in Leicester, would be confiscated and their homes demolished to make way for tourism.

Some of the 11,000 Damanese people in Leicester East appealed to Vaz, and he went to Daman.

Vaz reported back that he was impressed by the commitments made by Modi; that there would be no further demolitions until a court ruling was made; and that he welcomed the government’s ‘constructive and positive approach’.

Unsurprisingly, the bulldozing went ahead. Protests were banned and protesters jailed. A few of the evicted Adivasi fisherfolk were rehoused, but most languished, traumatised and homeless, on the streets near the rubble of their razed homes, until eventually being removed.

Thanks for nothing, Keith.

The bulldozed site was acquired by billionaire Binod Chaudhary of CG Corp Global. It’s now the Fern Seaside Luxurious Tent Resort, offering accommodation from about £80 a night.

**Fern Seaside Luxurious Tent Resort** in Daman – cheap holiday in other people’s misery

That’s been fascist Modi’s modus operandi since he was chief minister of Gujerat: enhance RSS power by bringing ‘development’ that benefits the super-rich.

The actions of the Modi government in Daman were a gross abuse in breach of Article 17 of the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

None of that seemed to bother Modi-loving Vaz. There’s plenty of evidence of Vaz’s love for fascist Modi:

Vaz enthusiastically joined the celebrations at a Leicester East Hindu temple for Modi’s 2019 election victory, dancing with the guests.
Also in 2019, Vaz pompously joined the backlash against Labour’s challenge to the Modi government’s brutal occupation of Kashmir, saying: ‘Issues of sovereignty are a matter for the Indian Government’.
As shown in his sickeningly pseudo-pious YouTube video, Vaz toadyingly visited the Hindu temple in Ayodhya, India, built on the site of a razed mosque and inaugurated in 2024 by Modi.
At a Leicester celebration of the Ayodhya temple inauguration, Vaz gave a speech paying tribute to Modi ‘for the work that he has done’.

Is Catholic Vaz’s sickly love for Hindu nationalist Modi genuine? Or is he currying favour (sorry – bad pun irresistible) with Leicester East’s Modi-loving Hindus?

Vaz, who lives in London, is said to still be popular with Leicester East’s Hindus (although perhaps not with Damanese Hindus). He remains influential: he’s ‘honorary president’ of the Leicester East constituency Labour Party (CLP).

(The Leicester East CLP is currently suspended and under investigation. See below.)

In 2023, Vaz was said to be considering standing as an independent in the 2024 general election.

In June 2024, Vaz said he’d stand – for the One Leicester party (launched in 2023 by a local Labour rebel).

After Vaz’s announcement of his candidacy for another party, he was finally expelled from the Labour Party. (Apparently, however, Vaz remained honorary president of the – suspended – Leicester East CLP!)

Pass the sick bag, Alice.

The riots: Hindutva in Leicester

Claudia Webbe

The MP for Leicester East from 2019 to 2024 was Claudia Webbe, a black woman born and brought up in Leicester. Until 2021 she was a Labour MP.

In 2021, Webbe was expelled from the Labour Party after being being convicted of the harassment of a love rival. From then on she represented Leicester East as an independent MP.

From 2010 to 2021, Webbe was a Labour councillor and cabinet member in Islington, London. She was a close ally of former Labour Party leader Jeremy Corbyn.

Before the 2019 general election, after former Labour MP for Leicester East Keith Vaz stood down, Webbe was chosen by the Corbyn-led national party as the Labour candidate for the constituency.

The imposition of a black, left-wing candidate on the mainly South Asian, centrist constituency of Leicester East was controversial. Webbe won the seat, but with a much reduced majority.

In the July 2024 general election, Webbe stood for Leicester East as an independent. She came a poor third.

(Leicester East had two other left candidates in 2024: Labour’s pro-Modi Rajesh Agrawal; and pro-Modi former Labour MP Keith Vaz, standing for a new local party. A pro-Modi Tory won.)

The riots: Hindutva in Leicester

The riots

The September 2022 Leicester riots happened in the Leicester East wards of Belgrave and North Evington.

Green Lane Road, the site of the he crucial Hindutva march on September 17 is in North Evington.

Former Leicester East MP Claudia Webbe, in her analysis of the Leicester riots, has detailed the poverty that fuelled tension and a sense of injustice in her constituency.

The riots: Hindutva in Leicester

Mass deselections, local election losses

Shortly before the May 2023 local elections, Labour’s national executive committee (NEC), intervened in the Leicester selection process.

The NEC deselected 19 Leicester Labour councillors and appointed an NEC board to choose candidates.

The disastrous consequence for Leicester East was that four wards, Belgrave, North Evington, Evington and Rushey Mead, all-Labour in 2019, lost every seat to the Tories.

(The 2022 Leicester riots happened in Belgrave and North Evington.)

The only explanation given by the central party for its Stalinesque NEC intervention was the bland Kafkaesque statement that there were ‘concerns about the process’.

The riots: Hindutva in Leicester

CLP suspended

In August 2023, the Leicester East constituency Labour Party (CLP) was indefinitely suspended by the national party and put under investigation.

Apparently, the CLP was suspended because of a concern that meetings had been unfairly organised to support a particular faction.

In spite of the indefinite suspension, in November 2023, Leicester East CLP members were somehow able to choose pro-Modi Rajesh Agrawal as their general election candidate from a shortlist of two.

(I asked the Labour Party how local members made that choice, given the CLP suspension. I’ve had no reply.)

The riots: Hindutva in Leicester

Labour in Leicester – a bad time

It’s been a bad time for Labour in Leicester. In addition to Leicester East’s trouble and controversy (above) there was a rebellion at City Hall.

In March 2023 the city council Labour group led by elected mayor Peter Soulsby suspended three councillors after they rebelled and voted to scrap the role of elected mayor.

Some of the councillors suspended and later deselected left the party and vowed to campaign against Soulsby.

The beleaguered and increasingly autocratic Soulsby, in his comments about the riots and the Hindutva march, seemed clueless and out of touch.

One ex-Labour rebel, Rita Patel, formed a new party, One Leicester. In June 2024, Keith Vaz, disgraced former Labour MP for Leicester East, stood as the One Leicester general election candidate for Leicester East, helping to split the left vote. A Tory won.

For many years, Leicester’s Labour-led city council has suffered from poor leadership, incompetence, infighting and dereliction of duty – especially in East Leicester. This may have contributed to the outbreak of rioting in 2022.

The riots: Hindutva in Leicester

Leicester East and the general election

Leicester’s Hindus seemed to love Modi – so pro-Modi Hindu Rajesh Agrawal (above) should have held Hindu-majority Leicester East for Labour in the 2024 general election.

Agrawal should have won – but two other Leicester East candidates, Claudia Webbe and Keith Vaz, were in danger of splitting the left vote and letting in the Tories. (Update: they did.)

The two splittists:

Claudia Webbe

Sitting Leicester East MP
Elected in 2019 for Labour
Expelled from the Labour Party in 2021 after being convicted of harrassment
Continued as independent MP
Standing as an independent

Keith Vaz

Former Leicester East Labour MP
Stood down in disgrace in 2019
Standing for the One Leicester party
Expelled from the Labour Party in 2024 after announcing his candidacy
Modi-praising, said to be popular with Leicester East’s Hindus.

Leicester’s mainly Gujerati Hindus seem to love fellow-Gujerati Modi not only because of regional loyalty but also because they think he’s making India great again. Perhaps they’re not fully aware of Modi’s lifelong commitment to the fascist RSS and its Hindutva ideology of murderous, anti-Muslim Hindu-supremacy.

That could be liberal wishful thinking, though. The Green Lane Road Hindu shopkeeper I spoke to about the Hindutva march readily and angrily expressed ill-informed but fervent anti-Muslim prejudice and support for Hindu nationalism. She expressed her views with a confidence that suggested she wasn’t alone in holding them.

Labour’s Pro-Modi Agrawal would get votes from Leicester East’s pro-Modi Hindus, but there was no way Agrawal, a supporter of the anti-Muslim RSS branch HSS UK, could have resolved the conflict between Hindus and Muslims. That, apparently, wasn’t Labour’s priority.

5 July 2024

General election update

As forewarned (above), three candidates split the left vote and let the Tory in:

Tory (a local Gujarati Hindu): 14,526 votes
Left candidates’ total votes: 19,313:
Agrawal: 10,100
Webbe: 5,532
Vaz: 3,681

Vaz’s result was rubbish. His popularity was wildly overestimated – probably by himself. And if Webbe really cared about Leicester East, she’d not have stood. That might have prevented the Tory victory. Albeit the Labour winner, Agrawal, would have been a super-rich Modi supporter. It was lose-lose.

The riots: Hindutva in Leicester

Conclusion: equally useless

The Tory response to the 2022 Leicester riots, in particular the 17 September Hindutva march, was useless. Sadly, Labour seemed equally useless.

Nationally, under ruthlessly pseudo-pragmatic Kier Starmer, the Labour Party has cravenly courted the near-fascist Modi government.

Consequently, Labour seemed likely to continue the Tory policy of turning a blind eye to RSS extremism in India – and to RSS Hindutva radicalisation in the UK.

In Leicester city council and Leicester East, Labour was a mess. And the party chose a pro-Modi candidate for divided Leicester East.

So… what about Labour? In their response to the alarming appearance of Hindutva in Leicester, would they be any better than the Tories? Sadly, not – it seemed they’d be equally useless.

The riots: Hindutva in Leicester

Requests, complaints and queries made

I asked Leicester East general election Labour candidate Rajesh Agrawal for his comments. He hasn’t replied.

I complained to the Labour Party about Agrawal’s candidacy, referring them to the 2020 open letter in Tribune written by the South Asia Solidarity Group and signed by over 600 Labour Party members and supporters.

The letter, about Kashmir, included a paragraph about Agrawal and Ladwa – and a link to a 2016 HSS UK press release headed ‘Deputy mayor of London attends breakfast meeting with HSS UK’.

The Labour Party replied, asking me for evidence of Agrawal’s involvement with HSS UK and his association with Manoj Ladwa. I referred them (again) to the Tribune letter.

I couldn’t provide any direct evidence of Agrawal’s support for the RSS, but HSS branches were explicitly set up as overseas RSS wings. A savvy politician like Agrawal attending HSS UK events must have been aware of the fascist RSS ideology lightly veiled by HSS UK’s fake charitable front.

I asked my MP, Jon Ashworth, Labour MP for Leicester South, shadow minister and – apparently – a core central party adviser, to urge reconsideration of Agrawal’s candidacy.

I asked the Labour Party how two general election candidates were shortlisted and how Agrawal was chosen in 2023, given the suspension of the Leicester East constituency Labour Party.

Apart from the useless response to my complaint about Agrawal’s candidacy, no one has replied.

The riots: Hindutva in Leicester

independent local inquiry

Some sources

Check it out for yourself

Some useful sources of informed analysis, in date order:

Telegraph | article | November 2014
Friend of murdered hostage Alan Henning defends Isil online
By Andrew Gilligan, award-winning investigative journalist and UK government special adviser

Majid Freeman

Islamist supporter

Iraq dossier

Gilligan

criticised

Hutton

resign

Muslim websites

Islamism

right

dodgy dossier

major

award

Freeman exposé

Aeon | article | October 2017
How ‘Hindutva’ recast multi-faith India as the Hindu homeland
By Ariel Sophia Bardi, American journalist and researcher

Guardian | article | February 2020
How Hindu supremacists are tearing India apart
By Samanth Subramanian, Indian journalist and author living in London

South Asia Solidarity Group (SASG) | press release | 22 September 2022
UK South Asian diaspora groups call for peace and unity and tell Narendra Modi – stop dividing our communities!
By Keval Bharadia

joint statement

Hindutva

Narendra Modi

RSS

bussed in

SASG

anti-Modi/BJP

The Conversation | article | 28 September 2022
Leicester’s unrest is a problem for the whole city, not just Hindu and Muslim communities
By Dr Chris Allen, associate professor, school of criminology, University of Leicester

pressure

Hindutva

Note:

Hindu opposition

stood down

abandoned

‘current climate’

academic scrutiny

‘unprecedented levels of hate’

‘spurious allegations’

Note:

Hindutva

Logically | report | September 2022
Double Check: What Do We Know About Events in Leicester?
By Sam Doak and three others

An excellent fact-checking exercise and social media analysis by a British company specialising in the analysis of disinformation.

BBC Monitoring | report | September 2022
Did misinformation fan the flames in Leicester?
By Reha Kansara, Abdirahim Saeed and others

Another excellent fact-checking exercise and social media analysis.

Rutgers University/Network Contagion Research Institute (NCRI) | report | October 2022
Cyber Social Swarming Precedes Real World Riots in Leicester: How Social Media Became a Weapon for Violence
By NCRI lead intelligence analyst Alex Goldenberg and 16 – yes, 16 – others.

question:

cyberswarming

mob mobilization

[My bolding]

Reservation 1:

Alex Goldenberg

Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs

Reservation 2: A recommendation in the NCRI report says: ‘NCRI assesses that conspiracies about “Hindutva” dominance are likely to increase…’ That chimes unpleasantly with the spurious finding of anti-Muslim UK thinktank the Henry Jackson Society, which claimed the suggestion of Hindutva involvement was misinformation. If Hindutva can be dismissed as a ‘conspiracy’ theory or ‘misinformation’, where did the masked mob shouting Hindutva slogans come from?

So although Goldenberg’s report identified the Hindutva cyberswarm, it sought to dismiss concern about it as a conspiracy theory – perhaps because of Goldenberg’s apparent sympathy with anti-Muslim Zionism. I put this to Goldenberg and asked for his comments. He didn’t reply.

Guardian | article | October 2022
In Britain and India, we must resist the tragic thinking that pits Hindus against Muslims
By Chetan Bhatt, professor of sociology at the London School of Economics, and participant in the SOAS inquiry into the Leicester riots. Professor Bhatt concluded:

The situation in India is likely to get even more deadly than it already is, whether or not the BJP win the general election in two years’ time. What will be the impact here after the next atrocity in India, Pakistan or Bangladesh? There are other possibilities, perhaps wildly utopian, but they can be glimpsed now and then in community meetings in Leicester, in the protests organised by south Asian women who refuse to let political religion divide them, and in the actions of many in the community who oppose ruthlessly the logic of communalism in their everyday interactions.

ISD (Institute for Strategic Dialogue) | article | October 2022
Violence in Leicester: Understanding Online Escalation and Offline Fallout

International Socialism | article | January 2023
Hindutva and the Sangh Parivar in Britain
By Barry Pavier, author and retired further education lecturer

class

The Sangh Parivar in Britain

Find in Page

BBC TV | two-part documentary | February 2023
India: The Modi Question
Series producer: Richard Cookson

A brilliant and damning programme, covering the violent career of Narendra Modi from Gujarat to Kashmir and more. Loudly criticised by Modi supporters as ‘Hinduphobia’.

BBC Radio 4 | programme | March 2023
Playing with Fire
By Professor Barnie Choudhury, award-winning journalist and lecturer in journalism at the University of East Anglia

An excellent analysis of the influence of Indian politics in the UK.

Morning Star | article | June 2023
Leicester disorder 2022: any review must be impartial
By Claudia Webbe, the controversial MP for Leicester East (2019-2024), the location of the 2022 unrest

government inquiry

Abacus | book | 2024
The New India: The Unmaking of the World’s Largest Democracy
By Rahul Bhatia, independent Indian journalist, former fellow at the Radcliffe Institute for Advanced Study at Harvard and co-founder of journalism platform Peepli.org.

Bhatia investigates the slow destruction of democracy in India; and the religious, societal, and technological changes leading to a nationalist mindset that despises democracy and human rights.

Some sources 🔺

The riots: Hindutva in Leicester

The Henry Jackson Society🔺

The Henry Jackson Society: ‘far-right, deeply anti-Muslim, and racist’

It stinks

Immediately after the anti-Muslim Hindutva march in Leicester, the anti-Muslim Henry Jackson Society said there was no Hindutva involvement. The government inquiry into the Leicester riots was commissioned and led by two HJS supporters.

How the Henry Jackson Society morphed into something nasty
The Henry Jackson Society’s infiltration of the political establishment

How the Henry Jackson Society morphed into something nasty

In 2022, UK thinktank the Henry Jackson Society (HJS) claimed, in a badly written and inaccurate ‘research brief’, that the suggestion of Hindutva involvement in the Leicester riots was misinformation.

The HJS claim was widely and uncritically reported in the UK media. The reports didn’t mention that the HJS is now a far-right, anti-Muslim organisation. The media’s failure to do due diligence on the organisation was perhaps due to them being taken in by establishment support for the HJS.

The Henry Jackson Society (named after a US anti-Communist Democrat senator) was founded in 2005 at Cambridge University as a centrist, bipartisan thinktank meant to promote democratic geopolitics by providing informed analysis to policymakers.

Then in 2011 The Henry Jackson Society morphed into something quite different – something quite nasty.

Marko Hoare, HJS co-founder and former director, wrote in 2012 that he’d resigned because HJS had degenerated into a right-wing anti-Muslim organisation.

Hoare said HJS co-founder and self-appointed executive director Alan Mendoza had removed the original, mainly centre-left, founders in a putsch.

The only founder spared was Mendoza’s mentor, unelected HJS president and Cambridge professor Brendan Simms.

Replacements installed by Mendoza included right-wing extremist Douglas Murray.

Another HJS co-founder and former director, Matthew Jamison, also resigned in disgust. In 2017 Jamison wrote that Murray is:

…a white supremacist, racist anti-Muslim bigot… full of venom and hatred for Muslims

Update, April 2025: Murray was an associate director of HJS from 2011-2018. He’s currently an associate editor of the formerly liberal, now right-wing Spectator magazine. Disgustingly, on 16 April 2025 Murray was platformed by BBC TV’s flagship news programme Newsnight. This shows the extent of the infilitration of the political establishment by the HJS and its slimy diaspora.

Jamison wrote:

Jamison said HJS president Brendan Simms, in backing Mendoza, was to blame for the degeneration of the HJS. Jamison said Simms must have known about what was going on and about Mendoza’s mendacity, and was therefore to blame:

Brendan Simms…is ultimately responsible for the monstrous animal that the Henry Jackson Society has become…It is well known to many in the London foreign policy community and Cambridge academic circles that Alan Mendoza is a deeply untrustworthy, compulsive pathological liar, who revels in lying and creating mischief.

The Henry Jackson Society🔺

The Henry Jackson Society’s infiltration of the political establishment

A 2021 SOAS report, The Henry Jackson Society: The Threat to British Democracy caused by Security Think Tanks, concluded:

HJS has proven links to several far or extreme-right organisations
HJS reports have used highly problematic research approaches and methodologies
HJS continues to have close links to the UK government, helping to shape governmental and Conservative Party policy discussions
It is critical that the government distance itself from such problematic think tanks

But instead of distancing itself, the UK Tory government was busy cosying up to that ‘problematic think tank’. The chief culprits were two senior right-wing Tories:

Michael Gove, co-founder of the big-oil-funded Policy Exchange lobby group
Priti Patel, former tobacco lobbyist

HJS has influential supporters who apparently ignore HJS’s history and reputation – but who inevitably implicate themselves in its bigotry.

For instance, in May 2023 senior government minister Michael Gove – an HJS supporter and beneficiary, and a former HJS trustee from 2017 – appointed Ian ‘Lord’ Austin – who’s hosted and spoken at several HJS events in parliament and has praised their ‘important and valuable work’ – to head the official inquiry into the Leicester riots.

Many Leicester Muslim groups and city councillors have refused to participate in the Austin inquiry, partly because of Austin’s association with the Hindutva-denying anti-Muslim HJS.

In response, during an inquiry video meeting, former Labour MP Austin said his association with the Henry Jackson Society was in relation to good causes, and he was unaware of HJS’s bad reputation.

But it’s hard to believe Austin could have been unaware of the HJS stench of bigotry.

In 2013, backbencher Priti Patel, then vice-chair of the Zionist Conservative Friends of Israel, was paid £2,500 by HJS to attend a US Congress ‘security’ programme in Washington DC, hosted by the Zionist American Israel Public Affairs Committee. On her return, Patel hosted an HJS event in parliament.

Patel has sat on an HJS advisory council and – like Gove – has been an HJS trustee. in 2017, Patel, then secretary of state for international development, made another US visit on behalf of HJS, who paid her £492 hotel costs. Her main expenses were paid by the American Israel Public Affairs Committee. The purpose of her visit was meetings with officials in her role as an HJS Trustee.

Between 2015 and 2017, £83,452.32 was paid to HJS by the UK home office for a report on UK connections to Islamist terrorism.

In 2018, a reply to a freedom of information request confirmed that an HJS employee was working in the office of then home secretary Sajid Javid. (The home office spent nearly a year blocking the release of that information because of ‘safeguarding national security’.)

In 2021, then home secretary Priti ‘Rwanda’ Patel appointed Robin Simcox as UK commissioner for countering extremism. Simcox was formerly an HJS ‘research fellow and terrorism analyst’ and has contributed to other rightwing thinktanks and media outlets.

Gov.uk said:

impartial

[My bolding]

An impartial CCE would be assessing the threat of Hindutva extremism to UK Muslims. But Simcox’s close association with the Hindutva-denying, anti-Muslim HJS made that unlikely.

Simcox was clearly not impartial. His appointment smelt of HJS infiltration of UK government – as warned about by the SOAS report (above).

Such infiltration was typical of the widespread covert influence within the Tory UK government of shadowy far-right thinktanks.

HJS is a registered charity under British law but has always refused to disclose its funders. It has close links to the CIA (the US intelligence agency) and has hosted several meetings with CIA officials in parliament.

Like a symbiotic parasite, the far-right anti-Muslim pro-Zionist Henry Jackson Society has infiltrated the UK political establishment. People and organisations of goodwill should beware of that ‘monstrous animal’.

The Henry Jackson Society🔺

The riots: Hindutva in Leicester

Majid Freeman: disrupter, Islamist sympathiser and fantasist

Cut-price Zelig

During the riots, Majid Freeman featured in posts, videos and news articles. He presents himself as a concerned campaigner but seems more concerned with self-promotion than truth.

Update: In July 2024 Freeman was charged with online terror offences. Also, in September 2024 he was jailed for six months for a minor offence committed during the riots. See below.

The riots: Hindutva in Leicester

The boy who cried ‘Wolf’

Freeman made several widely repeated inflammatory accusations on social media about the Leicester riots, some of which he later withdrew.

One of Freeman’s’s accusations was that Hindutva activists were involved.

The presence of hundreds of masked men shouting Hindutva slogans in Green Lane Road showed Hindutva activists were involved. But Freeman’s self-promoting interference and his ‘boy who cried wolf’ reputation helped suggestions of Hindutva involvement to be dismissed as ‘misinformation’.

The riots: Hindutva in Leicester

Islamist

Disrupter Freeman has been accused of being a supporter of Islamism.

Accusations of Freeman being an Islamist made by Hindu nationalist propaganda outlets and by the anti-Muslim Henry Jackson Society can perhaps be discounted.

But the detailed exposé of Freeman’s support for murderous Islamist terror groups by Andrew Gilligan, the award-winning investigative journalist who exposed Tony Blair’s ‘sexed-up’ Iraq dossier, can’t be so easily discounted.

The riots: Hindutva in Leicester

Charity or scam?

As well as calling himself a community activist, Freeman calls himself a charity worker. His website consists entirely of numerous charity appeals, all on the dodgy LaunchGood platform.

LaunchGood has been exposed as a ‘misleading’ charity platform by a Muslim Working Towards Ehsan newsletter, How Launchgood keeps up to half of your charity for itself without telling you. The newsletter says:

at worst

all your money could go to a scam

[My bolding]

The riots: Hindutva in Leicester

Zelig

Like a cut-price Zelig, Freeman, posing as a concerned community activist, insinuates himself into association with influential people such as elected Leicester mayor Peter Soulsby and respected rights activist Suresh Grover – and videos the event.

On his X page, Freeman claimed to have had a ‘productive meeting’ with Soulsby about the riots. Freeman attached a video showing a rather awkward but cordial conversation. Soulsby mentions the need to address ‘the ideology’.

In an equally awkward video of his meeting with Grover, shown on the 5Pillars Facebook page, Freeman ‘interviews’ Grover about the riots. They seem well acquainted. Hindu Grover expresses concern about RSS activity.

Both Soulsby and Grover seem to have been prompted by Freeman about Hindutva.

Freeman was right to raise the issue of Hindutva, but wrong to make himself the story.

The riots: Hindutva in Leicester

SOAS

Apparently, Freeman was involved with Suresh Grover in calling for the inquiry by SOAS (the London-based School of Oriental and African Studies) into the riots. (See below.)

The SOAS announcement said the inquiry would include:

…a community-engagement team, overseen by Suresh Grover of The Monitoring Group, a respected London-based human rights and anti-racist organisation that meets regularly with civil society representatives in Leicester. The call for an independent inquiry came directly from those meetings.

Freeman was apparently one of those ‘civil society representatives’.

The SOAS announcement also said:

To facilitate engagement with the people of Leicester, prominent community activists…have agreed to serve as part of an advisory group to the inquiry. The inquiry will seek the widest participation from those affected.

SOAS should beware of Freeman inserting himself into that advisory group.

The riots: Hindutva in Leicester

Diligence

Mayor Soulsby and Suresh Grover, by lack of due diligence or by turning a blind eye, have associated with a self-serving, disruptive Islamist supporter.

They and other actors in good faith – including SOAS – should be more circumspect.

Freeman, apparently more fantasist than Islamist threat, seems to be acting mainly alone. He should be left to plough his lonely furrow of deluded self-importance.

The riots: Hindutva in Leicester

Freeman jailed for separate 2022 offence

The Trial: Ashworth vs Freeman (and Adam)

Update: September 2024

This section is also a separate post: Annoying Gaza butterfly broken

In July 2024, annoying riots stirrer Majid Freeman was charged with online terror offences. It’s a torrid tale of muddled ideology, self-promotion, (possible) abuse of power and a new MP with links to extremism.

Breaking news

Addendum

Labour Together

Introduction

During the 2024 general election Freeman confronted Leicester South MP Jon Ashworth on video. Two weeks later Ashworth lost his seat. Five days after that Freeman was charged with terror offences. Coincidence?

On 21 June during the election Majid Freeman posted a video of his public confrontation with MP Jon Ashworth about his voting record on Gaza. The video went viral.

On 22 June independent candidate Shockat Adam, standing mainly on the issue of Gaza, reposted Freeman’s video with added anti-Ashworth comments.

Then…

On 4 July, Ashworth’s seat was unexpectedly lost to Adam.
On 9 July, Freeman was charged with terror offences.
On 10 July, Ashworth challenged Adam about his apparent association with Freeman.

So… two weeks after Freeman’s video went viral Ashworth lost his supposedly safe seat to Adam. Five days after that Freeman was charged. The next day Ashworth angrily challenged Adam.

Q: Did an angry Ashworth abuse his power to get Freeman charged?

A: It looks like a strong possibility.

The Trial: Freeman vs Ashworth vs Freeman (and Adam) 🔺

The charges against Freeman

**Freeman goes to court in August 2024** | *Aaron Chown/PA Media*

In July 2024 Majid Freeman was arrested and charged with terror offences. His trial was due to be held in Birmingham in September 2025.

(See Freeman’s September 2024 imprisonment for a separate public order offence below.)

On 9 July 2024 Majid Freeman, aka Majid Novsarka, was arrested by Leicestershire Police and charged with two terrorism offences: encouragement of terrorism (re Hebdo) and supporting a proscribed organisation (Hamas).

At his first pre-trial hearing Freeman was given bail. His trial, due in 2025, was going to be in Leicester but has been moved to Birmingham.

Prosecutor Lee Ingham said the move was needed because of ‘strong feelings’ in Leicester and because Freeman was ‘fairly well-known’ in the area as a ‘political activist’. However, the trial could safely be held in Leicester – Ingham’s concerns are largely misplaced.

There are certainly ‘strong feelings’ in Leicester – about Gaza. Hence Labour’s shock loss in Leicester South. Freeman clearly shares those strong feelings – and seeks to exploit them to enhance his public image. But his status as a ‘political activist’ with local support is exaggerated – by him.

Is Freeman, the self-styled political activist, ‘fairly well known’? As a self-appointed spokesperson for local Muslims, Freeman does get some local recognition. And Freeman’s posts and activities attract some media attention – which he apparently craves.

The mainstream media, too lazy for due diligence, sometimes gullibly report Freeman’s comments. The more partisan media feature Freeman occasionally and portray him according to their bias. Pro-Modi and Zionist media portray Freeman as an Islamist devil; and Muslim media portray him as an altruistic angel. (Take your pick – or split the difference.)

So prosecutor Ingham’s assessment of Freeman as ‘fairly well known’ is accurate. But if his trial was in Leicester, there’d probably be no crowds of protesters with ‘strong feelings’.

However, Hindu-Muslim tension has simmered in Leicester since the 2022 unrest. During the unrest one of Freeman’s posts was notoriously inaccurate and inflammatory. So perhaps Ingham was right to err on the safe side.

As for the charges, Freeman’s alleged crimes are perhaps the product of muddled thinking rather than cohesive ideology. Freeman’s passion for Muslim causes, local or international, seems confused with his obsessive self-promotion.

Freeman’s alleged support for Hamas perhaps shows the problem with acting mainly alone. Unchecked, righteous support for the Palestinian cause can too easily shade into indefensible support for Hamas.

Supporters of Hamas say it’s a legitimate response to Israeli occupation. But such support became illegal in the UK when the political and military wings of Hamas were proscribed as a single terrorist organisation in 2021; and indefensible when Hamas’s military wing committed the October 2023 atrocities.

(A September 2024 poll showed 39 percent of Gazans still supported Hamas. See my post, Amazingly, Gazans still support Hamas.)

The Hamas atrocities inevitably sparked a savage Israeli response, resulting, by August 2024, in an estimated 40-50,000 deaths and over 20,000 life-changing injuries. Many casualties were women and children.

That ‘collateral damage’ is the result of Israel’s de facto genocidal strategy (and the international community’s craven complicity). But it’s also the direct consequence of the brutal October 2023 attack by Hamas – the organisation Freeman allegedly supported.

The court was told Freeman‘s allegedly offending posts were mainly on Instagram and X. Freeman was given conditional bail: he was ordered not to use or access social media to post or transmit anything (with the exception of WhatsApp).

That must be frustrating for the dedicated self-publicist.

Freeman vs Ashworth vs Freeman

During the 2024 general election, Freeman posted a video of his Gaza-related confrontation with MP Jon Ashworth. Five days after Ashworth lost his seat, Freeman was charged with two terror offences, one Gaza-related. Was Ashworth responsible?

In June 2024 during the run-up to the general election, Majid Freeman campaigned against Leicester South sitting MP Jon Ashworth because of his voting record on Gaza.

On 21 June Freeman posted a video (his favourite means of self-promotion) of him haranguing Ashworth in the street about his Gaza voting record. The video went viral with over 1m views.

Freeman’s 100-second video shows Ashworth videoing Freeman videoing him whilst aggressively questioning him. Ashworth, clearly upset, doesn’t repond to Freeman’s questions but complains about Freeman’s ‘bullying’ and ‘intimidation’.

The next day, 22 June, independent Leicester South candidate Shockat Adam, who was standing mainly on the Gaza issue, reposted Freeman’s video with added anti-Ashworth comments.

Two weeks later on 4 July Ashworth unexpectedly lost his seat to Adam. Five days after that on 9 July Freeman was charged with terror offences. Was Ashworth responsible for that?

Ashworth had faced other street confrontations about his Gaza voting record. Was Freeman’s viral video and its reposting by Adam the last straw?

As a Leicester South constituent, I met and briefly spoke with Ashworth towards the end of his campaign. He seemed badly rattled.

Did the pugnacious and well-connected Labour insider – upset, angry and massively piqued after losing his seat and his expected cabinet post – pull strings to get Freeman charged?

What strings might an angry Ashworth have pulled? He was a close ally of Kier Starmer, the new prime minister and the former head of the UK prosecution service. That would have been a useful string.

Anger is said to be the second stage of grief, after denial. Perhaps Ashworth skipped denial and went straight to anger. The Wikipedia entry on the five stages of grief says of the anger stage:

Who is to blame?

[My bolding]

(The ‘five stages’ model was developed by psychiatrist Elizabeth Kübler-Ross to help understand and improve the mental health of patients with a terminal illness. It was later extended to grieving friends and family; and then to anyone suffering serious loss.)

Freeman has history. He’s got form for foolish flirtation with extremism. But if he deserved prosecuting for it, it should have happened ten years ago.

In 2014 the Torygraph published a thorough and detailed exposé of Freeman as an online supporter of proscribed Islamist terror groups including Isis and al-Qaeda.

The article, by award-winning investigative journalist and – at that time – obsessive Islamist hunter Andrew Gilligan (of dodgy dossier fame), uncovered damning evidence and made serious accusations. Freeman was questioned by the police but not charged.

If Freeman wasn’t worth charging then, why make these flimsier charges now? Is it because Ashworth pulled strings? The timing makes that look likely:

21 June – Freeman posted his video of his aggressive confrontation with Ashworth about Gaza.
22 June – Freeman’s viral video was reposted by Gaza-focussed candidate Shockat Adam.
4 July – Adam unexpectedly won Leicester South, narrowly overturning Ashworth’s large majority.
9 July – Freeman was charged with terror offences, one Gaza-related.
10 July – Ashworth challenged Adam about his association with Freeman.

Ashworth vs Adam

A week after losing his seat, Jon Ashworth publicly challenged new MP Shockat Adam to explain his apparent association with terror suspect Majid Freeman. Adam’s team dismissed the challenge as sour grapes.

On 10 July, the day after Majid Freeman was charged, Jon Ashworth (newly head of powerful centre-right Labour thinktank Labour Together) publicly challenged new Leicester South MP Shockat Adam to explain his apparent association with Freeman.

An angry Ashworth was implying Adam shared Freeman’s alleged support for Hamas. Ashworth’s challenge failed to get a direct answer from Adam – but it posed a fair question.

Was Adam associated with Freeman?

Freeman campaigned against Ashworth on the Gaza issue central to Adam’s campaign – but that didn’t necessarily show a connection between Adam and Freeman. Adam has denied any association. Asked about Freeman in an interview in September. Adam said:

He wasn’t even a supporter. He did not canvas for me. He did not campaign for me.

And in reply to my request for comments an assistant to Adam said:

But a reposted tweet suggests an association. On 22 June Adam reposted Freeman’s 21 June viral video of his Gaza-based confrontation with Ashworth.

According to a (paywalled) Financial Times report, the reposted video – since removed from Adam’s X account- had comments supporting Freeman’s aggressive line of questioning added by Adam. The FT report said:

Adam wrote above the video, in a reference to the ceasefire vote, that Ashworth was “ashamed” of Labour’s “pro-genocide position”. “If you don’t want to be asked questions by the public when you are canvassing on our streets then maybe you should just stay at home,” he wrote.

That immediate reposting of Freeman’s video complete with its colluding message suggests a possible connection between Adam and Freeman.

Adam’s team dismissed Ashworth’s challenge about Freeman as mere ‘sour grapes’, but Ashworth’s implied criticism of Adam had some substance.

Adam – like Freeman – has history. He has personal, fraternal and campaign links to extremism.

Adam’s links to extremism

As implied by Jon Ashworth, Shockat Adam has links to extremism. The links are weak but now he’s an MP he should cut them.

Introduction

In challenging Shockat Adam about his apparent association with Majid Freeman immmediately after Freeman was charged with terror offences, Jon Ashworth implied Adam had links to extremism.

Adam may not be associated with Freeman but he does have links to extremism. He was Leicester chair of Muslim Engagement and Development (MEND) and his brother founded and runs Friends of Al-Aqsa (FOA). Both groups have been listed by the government as ‘extremist’.

Also, his campaign was backed by The Muslim Vote, a group with extremist links.

Adam helped run ‘extremist’ group MEND

Until March 2024, Adam, then known as Shockat Adam Patel – regarding his change of name, see below – was the Leicester chair of Muslim Engagement and Development (MEND), an organisation labelled by the previous UK government as extremist.

MEND’s stated aim is:

To empower and encourage British Muslims within local communities to be more actively involved in British media and politics.

However, MEND has been accused of promoting Islamist, anti-Jewish and anti-gay views.

Adam’s brother runs ‘extremist’ group FOA

Adam’s brother Ismail Patel – regarding their different surnames, see below – founded and runs Friends of Al-Aqsa (FOA), established in 1979 in Leicester. Like MEND, FOA was labelled extremist by the previous government.

FOA, prominent at Palestine demonstrations, says it demands political change for Palestine. But it’s connected (as is Hamas) to the political-Islamist Muslim Brotherhood.

Patel’s speeches at demonstrations show his support for political Islamism – that is, sharia government and law based on an extreme interpretation of Islam, as seen in Iran, Afghanistan and, under Hamas, Gaza. Patel has praised Hamas for standing up to Israel.

May 2024: **Ismail Patel speaks at a Whitehall rally to mark the 1948 appropriation of Palestine** | *Mark Kerrison/In Pictures via Getty Images*

Mend and FOA both contribute to separatism by misrepresenting all UK Muslims as victims of Islamophobia. (This oddly matches the Modi/RSS strategy of promoting Hindu nationalism by misrepresenting Hindus as victims of Hinduphobia.)

Adam backed by leaflets from The Muslim Vote

During Adam’s campaign, leaflets from The Muslim Vote were circulated in Leicester South.

The Muslim Vote has the declared aim of supporting candidates opposed to Conservative and Labour stances on the Israel–Hamas war. But the group is linked to extremists.

The Muslim Vote is linked to Hizb ut-Tahrir Britain, a proscribed terrorist organisation; and to the Cordoba Foundation, which has links to the political Islamist Muslim Brotherhood. and whose leader has publicly supported Hamas.

Leicestershire Police were investigating a possible breach of electoral law: the leaflets from The Muslim Vote didn’t say who funded them or which candidate was supported.

But that was a technicality – the main issue was that Adam’s campaign was boosted by leaflets from a group with extremist links.

Update: November 2024

‘Extremist’ listings under review

Mend and FOA were listed as extremist organisations by the previous Tory government. I asked the new Labour government about the current status of such listings. In reply, they said:

This government takes the threat of extremism very seriously and will continue to work with partners to tackle extremism in all its forms. The rapid review ordered by the Home Secretary earlier this year is considering the current understanding of extremism, including Islamist and far-right extremism. Following its conclusion, the government will be setting out its strategic approach.

Adam/Patel surname

Shortly before the 2024 general election, Adam, then known as Shockat Adam Patel dropped the Patel surname he shares with his brother, Ismail, the founder of FOA. Adam’s full name is Shockat Hussain Adam Patel.

Patel’s usually a Hindu name, but it’s also the name of some Gujarati Memon Muslims whose ancestors converted from Hinduism. Adam’s a Memon Muslim.

Adam, campaigning mainly against the ethnic cleansing of Muslims in Gaza, may have dropped his Patel surname to prevent Muslim voters thinking he was Hindu.

But he may also have dropped it to mask his association with his brother’s extreme views – and with MEND.

Unsolicited advice for Adam: cut these links

Adam’s Palestinian cause is just, but his links to extremism might damage that cause. If, as it seems, he himself is not extremist, he should renounce these links.

He might lose some support, but with his history he can’t make the omelette of democratic integrity without breaking those eggs.

Conclusion

Jon Ashworth was wrong if he pulled strings to get Majid Freeman charged. Freeman might be guilty as charged, but he’s no terrorist.

No doubt the charges against Majid Freeman are accurate. But the prosecution – however brought about – is excessive. Even if Freeman did urge terrorism and support a proscribed group, he’s clearly not a terrorist.

Nor is he likely to influence anyone. He has some followers, but basically he’s a delusional loner. However, he’s not a dangerous lone wolf, more a sick puppy.

If Freeman’s convicted, a custodial sentence would be inappropriate. He should be (metaphorically) de-wormed, and sent home with a tag and a banning order. Deprived of social media, he might get a life.

To paraphrase Pope: Who breaks this butterfly upon a wheel? If it was angry Jon Ashworth, he should come clean to the court.

The bigger threat: Hindutva

The security services are right to prosecute home-grown Islamism – but they’re apparently ignoring the insidious threat of imported Hindu supremacism.

Despite my criticism of Majid Freeman, we share concern about a major issue: the anti-Muslim Hindutva extremism being spread amongst UK Hindus by the Indian fascist RSS organisation.

It’s a shame the UK security services that have crushed annoying butterfly Freeman aren’t equally diligent in response to that much bigger threat.

Hindutva extremism is being actively propagated to the UK Hindu diaspora by these well-organised RSS agencies:

HSS UK
Sangh Parivar
VHP
Overseas Friends of BJP (UK)

No charges have been brought against those responsible – perhaps because successive UK governments have sought a trade deal with the Indian government of RSS fascist and premier Narendra Modi.

Comments requested

I approached Jon Ashworth and Shockat Adam for comment. (There’s no way to contact Majid Freeman as far as I know.)

An assistant to Shockat Adam replied to say:

Although Freeman opposed Ashworth he never specifically supported Adam. He even said Adam should stand down in favour of the Green candidate.
That’s apparently true. This post’s been changed accordingly.
Adam ‘strongly refutes’ this post’s assertion of his links to extremism.
Presumably that should be ‘strongly denies’. Refutation would need proof this post’s wrong – the reply offers none.
During the riots Adam worked tirelessly to build community cohesion.

Jon Ashworth hasn’t replied.

Update to the update: still September 2024

Freeman jailed for 2022 offence

Just to complicate things, on 9 September 2024 the bothersome Majid Freeman was jailed – harshly – for a separate minor offence dating from the 2022 riots.

On 17 September 2022 on the day of the Leicester anti-Muslim Hindutva march Muslim activist Majid Freeman was arrested under the Public Order Act 1986 and charged with:

Using abusive words with the intention that violence would be provoked

Almost two years later at Northampton magistrates court on 19 June 2024 (two days before his video confrontation with Jon Ashworth) Freeman was convicted of the offence under Section 4 of the act.

On 9 September, Freeman was sentenced in Northampton to 22 weeks in prison – close to the maximum of six months for a Section 4 offence.

None of the mainstream media reported Freeman being jailed – not even local rag the Leicester Mercury or the borderline-racist Daily Mail.

It was only reported in partisan media: anti-Freeman Hindu and Jewish media, and pro-Freeman Muslim media (for instance, 5pillars, which at least had some useful factual content).

How Freeman’s prison sentence will affect the progress of his separate prosecution for terror offences remains to be seen.

There’s also, apparently, the question of whether reporting this case breaches the Contempt of Court Act 1981 by prejudicing Freeman’s terror trial. Having checked out the act, I don’t think it does – but watch this space.

(Is that Plod I hear approaching? Shall I be joining Freeman in deluded messianic martyrdom? As almost no one is reading this, probably not.)

Regardless of that, Freeman’s near-maximum prison sentence is ridiculous. Any prison sentence for ‘abusive words’ would be harshly excessive. Free Freeman!

Addendum

Labour Together

UK thinktank Labour Together, newly headed in July 2024 by defeated former Leicester South MP Jon Ashworth, began as a ‘unity’ project but has morphed into a powerful centre-right lobby group.

Originally named Common Good Labour, the group was set up in 2015 as a ‘unity’ project after the resignation of Labour Leader Ed Miliband following the party’s general election defeat.

After leftist Jeremy Corbyn won the Labour leadership election, the renamed centrist Labour Together plotted against him (as did Jon Ashworth).

Labour Together’s fundamentally pompous deceitfulness was perfectly illustrated by its self-important but deeply flawed June 2020 review of Labour’s 2019 general election disaster.

The Labour Together review ignored the elephant in the room: free movement from Eastern Europe.

Many Labour voters voted to leave the EU in the 2016 Brexit referendum. According to polls, the main reason was the high level of unrestricted immigration from poor east European countries under the EU’s free movement of people rule.

Having been loftily dismissed by metrocentric Labour as ignorant provincial racists, many of those ‘red wall’ Labour voters voted Tory in 2019. But the 153-page Labour Together review made no mention whatsoever of ‘free movement’ or ‘Eastern Europe’.

The Labour Together review discussed lost voters and immigration as an issue, but the free movement issue was ignored. EU free movement of people was still supported by Labour metrocentrics, including, as recently as January 2020, by then leadership front-runner Kier Starmer.

The Labour Together review nerdily resorted to statistics, claiming voters associated with the leave side had deserted in 2015 and again in 2017, so the 2019 result only needed a small shift. But the reason for that desertion was duplicitously ignored.

Since then, Labour Together has gone on to bigger and worse things.

Now funded by super-rich donors, parasitically implanted in the Labour government, and promoting neoliberal private-funding policies, Labour Together makes the Tories’ hated Tufton Street ‘shady’ lobbyists look like amateurs.

Majid Freeman: disrupter, Islamist sympathiser and fantasist🔺

Additional information🔺

The riots: Hindutva in Leicester

The end 🔺 | Contents 🔺

February 2024

The end

This is the end…

This rolling post now rolls to a halt – apart from the occasional essential update, like this and this. And this. Even this. Also, this.

I knew nothing about Hindutva until eight months ago, when I started writing this. Outraged by what I found out, I’ve probably said too much. Or maybe not enough*.

What next? Thus spake Soothfairy:

In India, Narendra Modi and the RSS/BJP will get back in, with their near-fascist Hindutva populism.
Update: Wrong! Ish. Indians’ Modi-love has waned – the BJP won but lost its majority so has to rely on fickle alliances. It’s said to face local election losses. Hoo-fucking-ray! (But… if Modi’s charisma ‘n’ populism schtick is fading, the RSS might replace him with a more electable front-thug.)
In Leicester, Rajesh Agrawal, Labour’s pro-Modi general election candidate for Leicester East will win the seat. Tension will continue to simmer.
Update: Wrong! The left vote was split and the Tory, a local Gujarati Hindu, no doubt equally pro-Modi, won. Tension will continue to simmer anyway.
In the UK, poisonous Hindutva will continue to be spread by RSS agencies. (See below.)
The government inquiry report will downplay Hindutva and will make ineffective recommendations which will be ignored by Labour (after they win the general election).
Update, October 2025: The report was due in 2024. I asked MHCLG (the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government) what was happening. They said they were ‘reviewing’ the panel’s findings and would ‘share’ them as soon as possible. (A cynic might wonder if they were planning to bury it.)
The SOAS inquiry report will be better but also ignored.
Update, October 2025: Originally due in 2024, the SOAS report was now apparently due ‘soon’.

So it goes. Until it goes the other way – fate and organised Hindu opposition to Hindutva permitting. Suggested slogan:

HINDUS AGAINST HINDUTVA

The riots: Hindutva in Leicester

Hindutva warning by government extremism report 🔺

Update | 2025

Hindutva warning by government extremism report

Careful – it might upset Modi

In January 2025 a leaked government report said Hindutva extremism, as seen in Leicester, needed to be tackled.

After the rioting that followed the July 2024 stabbings in Southport (in the North West of England), the Home Office produced an urgent review of extremism, the (tautologically named) ‘Rapid Analytical Sprint’.

The review’s account of current threats included the Hindutva extremism seen during the Leicester riots.

An inquiry into tackling extremism had begun before the Southport rioting, but was now being sped up. In August 2024 home secretary Yvette Cooper, promising a new approach, said:

rapid analytical sprint

[My bolding]

The Sprint (as it became known) made the news in January 2025 after it was leaked to rightwing thinktank Policy Exchange.

(At the time of writing – November 2025 – the Sprint remained unpublished. A February 2025 FOI (Freedom of Information) request for its publication was refused by the Home Office because it concerned ‘the formulation of government policy’. Policy Exchange didn’t publish the document leaked to them.)

Policy Exchange’s report on the leaked document said the review included ‘Hindu extremism’ as:

…a distinct phenomenon that counter-extremist policy should tackle

Policy Exchange criticised some aspects of the Sprint review but said it was right to spotlight Hindutva, given the events in Leicester:

Hindutva

Leicester

[My bolding]

The Guardian apparently also had the leaked document. The January 2025 Guardian article which reported the leak quoted extensively from the Sprint.

According to the Guardian, this is the Sprint’s explanation of Hindutva in the context of unrest in Leicester:

Hindutva

Leicester

[My bolding]

In March 2025 a Home Office minister answered a parliamentary question about the Sprint. He said the government was considering its response:

Ministry of Housing, Community and Local Government

(Perhaps that ‘work’ involved the MHCLG ‘review’ – see above – of the government report into the Leicester riots, also unpublished at the time of writing.)

The parliamentary reply said the Sprint findings hadn’t been agreed. That was probably because of well-aired concern that the definition of extremism was being widened too far by including, for instance, toxic masculinity.

The Guardian article explained the wider approach to extremism suggested by the Sprint report:

The government’s approach to extremism should no longer be based on “specific ideologies of concern, but on behaviours and activity”, the report said.

It’d be a shame if the possibility of tackling UK Hindutva extremism was lost as collateral damage in a Sprint culture war. If ministers continued to disagree, they might decide to bury the unpublished Sprint report – along with its Hindutva warning.

(That would have the added benefit for a government cosying up to India of avoiding offending Hindutva figurehead and Indian premier Narendra Modi.)

But now the Sprint has said Hindutva extremism should be tackled, UK domestic security service MI5 – being operatively independent – might start investigating RSS UK agents. Better late than never.

The riots: Hindutva in Leicester

Hindutva strikes again 🔺 | Contents 🔺

Update | August 2025

Hindutva strikes again

They’re back

In August 2025, Hindutva was back in Green Lane Road, Leicester. An unauthorised procession of cars sounded their horns and displayed Hanuman flags. Hanuman’s image is used by the Hindu-nationalist VHP youth wing, Bajrang Dal.

*25 August 2025: Hindutva returns to Green Lane Road*

On 17 September 2022 hundreds of masked men marched down Green Lane Road in Leicester shouting anti-Muslim Hindutva slogans. Two years later on 25 August 2025, they were back again. Safely esconced in cars this time, they were waving Hindutva flags and sounding their horns. See this video of the event.

A September 2025 National Secular Society article reported:

Leicestershire Police are investigating an “unauthorised procession” which has been described by a Hindu human rights campaigner as a display of “Hindutva” …

Rajiv Sinha*, director of Hindus for Human Rights UK (HFHR) which advocates for pluralism, civil and human rights, said the procession down Green Lane Road in Leicester last week was an act of “blatant intimidation and provocation”…

Videos of the procession show cars waving saffron flags featuring the Hindu deity Hanuman, a flag Sinha said is associated with the Bajrang Dal. Sinha described Bajrang Dal as a “militant group” and part of the “family of organisations headed by the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS)”.

[My bolding]

* See Hindu Sinha’s impassioned protest against Hindutva perversion of Hinduism.

Bajrang Dal, the youth wing of the VHP (the religious wing of the fascist RSS), use the image of popular Hindu deity Hanuman as their logo. ‘Bajrang Dal’ means Hanuman Brigade. Sadly, there’s a tradition of associating Hanuman with Hindu nationalism. Since its early years, the militant RSS has fetishised Hanuman as a strong warrior figure.

**Monkey-man misused – the Hanuman logo of Bajrang Dal** | *Screenshot from Wikipedia entry for Bajrang Dal*

The National Secular Society article went on:

Posts on social media have claimed the procession was intended to mark a festival celebrating the Hindu deity Ganesha’s birthday, and was not motivated by Hindutva. Police also described the procession as marking the “beginning of the Ganesh Festival”.

Sinha described this claim as “ridiculous” due to the display of Hanuman flags , the absence of Ganesha iconography, and the choice of Green Lane Road as a location.

A group of Hindu organisations in Leicester has reportedly filed a police complaint against the Muslim Council of Britain (MCB) for describing the flags at the procession as “Hindutva-associated” and “tied to an extremist movement”.

Those Hindu groups, in making their ridiculous denial of Hindutva involvement (again), are at least implicitly acknowledging that Hindutva isn’t a Good Thing.

The riots: Hindutva in Leicester

Top 🔺

They say…

Quotes about this post

I found it really interesting. I agree with much of what you’ve written and your question about where the 300 or so chanters came from was one that I asked very early on in the process of being appointed to lead the independent review. It’s never been answered and I suspect never will.

Dr Chris Allen, University of Leicester

Associate professor, School of Criminology
Appointed to lead independent local inquiry into the riots.
(Dr Allen stood down and the inquiry was abandoned after the climate created by a malicious Hindu smear campaign against him made the academic process of objectivity and impartiality impossible.)

Very insightful and informative

Dr Shaaz Mahboob, NHS England

Head of Digital Development and lead for Digital Mental Health at NHS England
Panellist on government inquiry into the riots

Superb post – a remarkable resource for anyone trying to make sense of what happened

Rahul Bhatia, author and independent Indian journalist

Author of The New India: The Unmaking of the World’s Largest Democracy
Former journalism & nonfiction Lisa Goldberg fellow at the Radcliffe Institute for Advanced Study at Harvard University
Co-founder of journalism platform Peepli.org.

The Actual End

The riots: Hindutva in Leicester

Comments

Dear Reader (or skimmer), feel free to comment. I answer all comments.

Sorry – you have to scroll to the end of the comments to leave one. Blame WordPress.com for that bad design.

The slave trade and slavery in the Americas

Started August 2016 | last updated May 2025 | 1,000 words | Contents

European colonialism fucked up the whole world in many ways. But by far the worst thing was the Atlantic slave trade and slavery in the Americas. That terrible crime remains unresolved. Its aftermath blights the lives of millions of black people living in the US, the UK and elsewhere.

This is a standalone version of a section in my post Racism explained – as a redundant instinct.

The slave trade and slavery in the Americas
Top 🔼

Introduction
What white people did
After slavery
No compensation

The slave trade and slavery in the Americas

Introduction

The misery of slavery has, of course, existed in nearly every culture, nationality, and religion from ancient times to the present day – with or without any ‘justification’.

Estimates of the number of modern slaves range from 21 to 46 million. Perhaps this shows humans have an innate capacity to see certain ‘categories’ of our fellow humans as ‘other‘.

Slavery is thought to have been rare amongst hunter-gatherer populations. It really took off after the invention of agriculture about 11,000 years ago.

Perhaps hunting and gathering was an interesting and sociable activity, whereas farming was boring and tedious. Perhaps thoughts turned to how to get someone else to do it for you, preferably for free.

Farming led to city states, which led to warfare and captive slaves (and which later led to capitalism and wage slavery). Bingo!

The Bible condones slavery. Its purported moral superiority was wielded by cynical colonialists and deluded missionaries to replace indigenous culture, but the ‘Good Book’ wasn’t so good. It blithely accepted the fundamentally immoral practice of slavery.

In the Old Testament, check the terms and conditions that follow the Ten Commandments. In Exodus 21:26, slavery is clearly accepted as perfectly normal.

The New Testament continues to accept slavery. For instance, in Ephesians 6:5, the letter writer, possibly Paul, urges slaves to obey their masters.

Jesus’s powerful message of meekness triumphant was cynically exploited by colonialist Christian missionaries to encourage African acceptance of the European occupation – and of slavery in the Americas.

What would Jesus – apparently a real person and a radical teacher – think of such wickedness done in his name? (He said, Give to Caesar what belongs to Caesar, but that was coming from an occupied Jew, not from an imperialist Roman.)

The much-romanticised Anglo-Saxon age in Britain (I’m British – Hi) featured slavery, known as chattel slavery. Norman invader William the Conqueror is rightly hated for his legacy of land-grabbing aristocracy – see my post, The super-rich – law and order – but he did at least one good thing: he ended chattel slavery.

The slave trade and slavery in the Americas

What white people did

Four hundred years after the end of Saxon chattel slavery, European colonialists reinvented slavery. Bolstered by ideological racism, they latched onto existing African slavery systems and created the massive Atlantic slave trade, thereby instituting a whole new level of organised vicious inhumanity.

An estimated 12 million slaves were forced into the Atlantic trade between the 16th and 19th centuries. About four million died in Africa after capture, 1.5 million died on board ships, and 10.5 million reached the Americas to work on plantations.

The death rate on plantations was high, a result of overwork, poor nutrition and work conditions, brutality and disease. Many plantation owners preferred to import new slaves rather than provide the means and conditions for the survival of their existing slaves.

Kindness and conscience eventually prevailed. Opposition to slavery and to the slave trade began in the 1770s. The abolition of slavery was completed in the Caribbean by 1850; and in the US by 1865.

The slave trade and slavery in the Americas

After slavery

The US didn’t compensate the ‘owners’ of enslaved people, but the British did. Disgustingly, the 1833 Slavery Abolition Act required British ‘owners’ to be compensated.

The UK government borrowed £20m, equivalent today to £17bn. (It took until 2015 to complete the loan repayment.) 47,000 ‘owners’ got compensation.

No money and no apology has ever been given by the UK or the US to the enslaved people or their descendants.

As well as compensating ‘owners’, Britain managed to continue the racist brutality. Instead of being freed, enslaved people under British rule were forced to continue their slavery for four more years in the name of ‘apprenticeship‘.

Under the ‘apprenticeship’ regime, the brutal punishment for working too slowly or taking time off included being hung by the hands from a plank and forced to ‘dance’ a treadmill.

America the Beautiful is scarred by its ugly legacy of slavery. Sixty years after the achievements of the civil rights movement, the African American minority continues to face systemic and personal discrimination and prejudice.

The legacy of slavery wasn’t quite so bad in the Caribbean. After abolition, former slaves were in the majority in the islands, and, after independence – achieved between 1962 (Jamaica, Trinidad and Tobago) and 1983 (St Kitts and Nevis) – their descendants went on to assume power.

However, the UK African Caribbean minority – those who migrated to the UK in the 1950s and 60s and their descendants living in the UK – have faced, like the African American minority, prejudice and disadvantage due in part to the legacy of slavery.

The slave trade and slavery in the Americas

No compensation

The profits from slavery created vast wealth for white UK and US ‘owners’ of enslaved people. None of the perpetrators of that vile crime were held to account – and none of the proceeds were confiscated.

On the contrary, the UK government compensated the perpetrators and profiteers. 47.000 (47. Thousand) UK ‘owners’ of enslaved people were compensated for their ‘loss’. The government took out a massive loan and gave each ‘owner’, on average, about £400,000 by today’s values.

The African enslaved people were given nothing by the UK or the US – except, in the case of US freed people, the famous broken promise of forty acres and a mule.

The German government has rightly paid over $90bn in compensation to the Holocaust survivors and the victims’ heirs.

But there’s a shameful lack of any equivalent compensation paid to the heirs of the victims of the Atlantic slave trade and slavery in the Americas by the governments that permitted, colluded with, perpetrated and profited from those terrible crimes.

The descendants of enslaved people have been given nothing except the after-effect of slavery: devastating personal and institutional postcolonial racism.

Black descendants of of the victims of slavery understandably resist being seen wholly as victims themselves because it undermines their fight against racism. Nevertheless, they are victims – of post-slavery racism. As such, they’re entitled by natural justice to compensation.

But that same racism, disguised as fiscal caution, means that, sadly, it’s not going to happen.

The End

The Holocaust

The murder of six million Jews by Nazi Germany, known as the Holocaust, is hard to contemplate. But it resonates – as it should – in our collective memory.

Started August 2016 | last updated May 2025 | 1,700 words | Contents

Note: This post is also a section in my post Racism explained – as a redundant instinct. It uses the words ‘anti-Jewish’ and ‘anti-Judaism’ instead of the inaccurate words ‘antisemitic’ and ‘antisemitism’.

The Holocaust
Top 🔼

Introduction
The Holocaust
How could they do that?
After the Holocaust

The Holocaust

Introduction

There’s been anti-Jewish racism since the Jews’ most recent exile from Israel by the Roman empire, and their consequent dispersion throughout Europe.

Exile and diaspora is the conventional narrative – but apparently it’s more complicated than that. Apparently, historically, there was no expulsion two thousand years ago.

But however it came about, Jewish diaspora communities lived in Europe. They lived mainly in productive harmony with host communities, but cynical anti-Jewish rabble-rousing led to outbreaks of racist violence, or ‘pogroms‘; and Christian and Muslim extremism led to persecution and expulsion.

The Granada massacre of 1066, a Muslim pogrom in which approximately 4,000 Jews were killed, marked the end of centuries of peaceful coexistence with a liberal Muslim regime in Spain.

The final Christian reconquest of Spain in the late 1400s led to approximately 2,000 Jews being murdered by the Spanish Inquisition and to the eventual expulsion from Spain of over 50,000 Jews.

Savage pogroms continued all over Europe until as recently as the 1940s.

16th-century Christianity reformer Martin Luther publicly recommended the burning of synagogues. Protestant Luther’s beef with Judaism was supposedly theological – but his bitter hatred betrays something less ethereal.

**Reformer and anti-Jewish racist Martin Luther** | *Painting: Lucas Cranach the Elder*

(Ironically, Luther’s modern namesake, Protestant minister and black civil rights leader Martin Luther King, publicly spoke out against black anti-Judaism. He acknowledged Jewish participation in the civil rights movement and he actively – controversially – supported the state of Israel.)

Encouraged by the original Luther’s widely disseminated anti-Jewish rhetoric, 19th-century German ‘race’ theorists and philosophers ramped up the anti-Judaism.

The 19th-century German ‘race’ theorists invented the pseudoscientific word ‘antisemitic’. (See my post about that ridiculous word for a tragic phenomenon, Antisemitism – anti-what??)

German philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche is often accused of anti-Judaism. However, that reputation was created by his sister Elizabeth Förster-Nietzsche, who edited his works after his mental breakdown in 1889 and his death in 1900.

Nietzsche’s sister systematically falsified his writings to match her own virulent anti-Jewish racism. Nietzsche was arguably a protofascist, but he was deeply contemptuous of anti-Judaism and nationalism.

Förster-Nietzsche’s falsifications have since been corrected, but they were current in the 1920s and 30s. The main fakery was in Förster-Nietzsche’s collection of her late brother’s notes, published in 1906 as a book, The Will to Power.

Luther and Förster-Nietzsche were perpetuating derogatory stereotypes of Jews common in Europe for centuries, as exemplified in literature by Shakespeare’s Shylock and Dickens’s Fagin.

For instance, the ‘blood libel’ was a widespread anti-Jewish slur which – ridiculously – accused Jews of murdering Christian children to use their blood in the baking of Passover bread.

Such stereotypes found ultimate expression in the fake but influential 1903 document, The Protocols of The Elders of Zion, which purported to reveal – in great detail – a Jewish plot for world domination.

The Protocols of The Elders of Zion was exposed as totally fraudulent in the early 1920s, but it was taught as factual to schoolchildren in 1930s Nazi Germany. It’s still touted around amongst modern conspiracy theory enthusiasts. (David Icke thinks the ‘Elders of Zion’ are extradimensional beings.)

Anti-Jewish prejudice, unlike most other forms of racism, isn’t colour prejudice. It’s not a reaction to people’s skin colour – it’s white-on-white prejudice.

As with Islam, Judaism is a religion, not a ‘race’. But, although Judaism contains different ethnic strands, the European Jewish diaspora can be said to be a ‘population’, like African or South Asian people. In the social construct sense, they’re a ‘race’. But they’re not a population easily identifiable by appearance. So how does the prejudice arise?

Anti-Jewish prejudice must be a form of culturist racism: specifically – historically – prejudice against the Jewish diaspora, where people of a different culture came to live in or near a settled neighbourhood, not as individuals but as a self-contained community.

Such Jewish diaspora groups arrived at established communities throughout Europe as fringe communities. Romani travellers, also known as Gypsies, who kept moving rather than settling, were similarly outsiders – and were similarly wiped out in the Holocaust.

Jews – like Gypsies – are voluntarily outsiders, not wanting to integrate but keeping to themselves and to their own culture. This marks them out for prejudice – in that being different means being seen as a threat.

The cultural differences are actually harmless – Jews aren’t actually plotting to rule the world – it’s the difference itself that causes fear, probably mainly unconsciously, which manifests as racism.

Culturism, of course, works one way. Racism is power plus prejudice, so the power is with the European majority and the prejudice is against the outsider minority.

(Culturism, as well as underlying white-on-white anti-Judaism, probably also boosts white-on-black colour prejudice, in that a different skin colour indicates a different culture.)

The Holocaust

The Holocaust

European anti-Judaism climaxed in the 1940s in Nazi Germany with the Holocaust, Adolf Hitler’s insane, genocidal ‘final solution to the Jewish question’.

Hitler’s anti-Jewish fascism was boosted by:

Widespread, centuries-old European anti-Jewish stereotypes and culturist racism
The anti-Jewish writings of German uber-Protestant Martin Luther
Racist 19th-century German pseudoscientific ‘race’ theory
The protofascist ‘übermensch‘ writings of German philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche
The anti-Jewish falsifications by Nietzsche’s fascist sister, Elizabeth Förster-Nietzsche in his posthumous book, The Will to Power.
The 1903 document The Protocols of The Elders of Zion, exposed as fake in the 1920s but taught as factual in German schools in the 1930s
Racist, pseudoscientific US eugenics programmes funded by the Carnegie Institution, the Rockefeller Foundation and John Kellogg.

Nazi Germany’s increasingly brutal 1930s anti-Jewish campaign ended in genocide when Jews were sent to extermination camps. In the death camps, the German state systematically murdered six million Jews.

Between 150,000 and 1.5 million Romani people were also murdered by the state.

The Holocaust

How could they do that?

For those of us who oppose racist anti-Judaism, the Holocaust’s meticulously organised murder of six million Jews haunts our imagination. It’s difficult to understand how people could have done that.

In 1961 the trial of high-ranking Nazi Adolph Eichmann took place in Israel. Eichmann, who’d been instrumental in organising the Holocaust, famously said he’d merely obeyed orders.

Yale professor Stanley Milgram, a Jewish social psychologist, heard about Eichmann’s defence and posed this question:

human nature

My bolding

Milgram then conducted a famous and controversial series of ingenious experiments – with shocking results.

Milgram showed that ordinary people in thrall to white-coated authority figures were willing to inflict what they believed to be severe pain and even death on strangers. (The strangers were played by actors.)

Questions have understandably been raised about the ethics and methodology of Milgram’s experiments. Their relevance to the Holocaust has been questioned. But Milgram’s basic findings still hold true.

The Holocaust authority figures themselves must have had some form of empathy-deficient mental disorder such as psychopathy. But more disturbingly, ordinary people in that situation were able to set aside their empathy.

Perhaps, however, the Holocaust executioners were not only acting in innate obedience to authority figures, as suggested by Milgram’s experiments, but were also indulging an instinctive racist urge.

The Holocaust

After the Holocaust

Ironically, extreme nationalism – a main factor in the Holocaust – is now a charge made against the powerful US-backed state of Israel in its ongoing conflict with Palestinian people, many of whom were expelled from their homes and homeland during the controversial establishment of Israel which began in 1948.

Equally ironically, the number of Palestinian people registered as refugees (in 2025) is six million. (There are about seven million Jewish people living in Israel.)

Following an attack on Israel in October 2023 by Hamas, the militant group running the Palestinian Gaza Strip, Israel launched the one-sided Gaza ‘war’ against Hamas during which many tens of thousands of Palestinian civilians, including children, have been killed or seriously injured by the IDF – the Israeli ‘defence’ forces.

**Mahmoud Ajjour, nine, lost both arms during an Israeli attack on Gaza City** | *Photo: Samar Abu Elouf / New York Times*

The International Criminal Court (ICC) accused the Israeli premier of war crimes and crimes against humanity, and – in the final irony – Israel was accused of genocide.

Supporters of the Palestinian cause who criticise Israeli Zionism are accused (perhaps correctly in some cases) of anti-Jewish racism. And so it goes.

Also, showing no one’s immune, there’s Jew-on-Jew racism in Israel, in particular against Ethiopian Jews.

A Sephardi (Jews of North African origin) chief rabbi reportedly said there could be no explanation other than ‘pure racism’.

Outside Israel, despite the terrible lesson of the Holocaust, anti-Judaism continues to thrive.

A 2008 report by the US department of state found there was an increase in anti-Judaism across the world, and both old and new expressions of anti-Judaism persisted.

A 2012 report by the US bureau of democracy, human rights and labor noted a continued global increase in anti-Judaism, and found Holocaust denial and opposition to Israeli policy were used to promote or justify anti-Judaism.

The German government has paid over $90bn in compensation to the victims and survivors of the Holocaust and their heirs.

Introduction
What do Gazans think of Hamas?
Hamas hoped to spark regional war
Donald Chump’s Nazi plan for Gaza
The future for Gaza and Hamas
Addendum:
Western support for Hamas

The End

Has Israel got collective Holocaust PTSD psychosis?

May 2025

In 2024 rightwing Israeli premier Benjamin Netanyahu was accused by the International Criminal Court of war crimes and crimes against humanity, and he’s been on trial in Israel since 2020 on multiple charges of corruption and bribery.

In the last (proportional representation) election in 2022, Netanyahu got 23% of the vote and was able to form a governing coalition with far-right groups.

To keep the support of his far-right coalition partners and so stay in power, Netanyahu waged all-out war on Hamas, killing and maiming tens of thousands of Gazan civilians, including children.

Israel has been accused of genocide. Is Israel suffering from collective post-Holocaust PTSD psychosis?

(The next Israeli election is due in October 2026.)

Cosmic architect: Earth crisis – fuck it

Cosmic architect Yin was in bad mood. Something had gone wrong. Yin had picked a universe, found a suitable planet, added a moon, seeded life, guided evolution by wiping out the dinosaurs (with, Yin smugly recalled, a well-aimed asteroid), and now, after four billion planet years (no time at all, really) the sodding superconscious beings were about to destroy their environment!

Reason had replaced religion, so further intervention was out – free will was essential. It was tempting to smite that ‘drill, Baby, drill’ fool, but it was a free and fair election, so… The short life span didn’t help. Yin felt bad about that, but it was what happened with evolution. Apparently.

The angels would try to help, but it wasn’t looking good. Another singularity project down the drain, thought Yin. The same thing, or similar, was happening in innumerable universes. Oh well, fuck it, thought Yin. Plenty more fish in the sea.

Thanks a lot, Trump voters

**Utter nutter** | *Patrick Semansky / AP*

Anti-Trump protests increase – state of emergency – prison camps – executions – President-for-life. Or Trump-induced past-the-tipping-point environmental destruction and end of civilisation. Or both. Or whichever comes first. Nice. Thanks a lot.

Amazingly, some Gazans still support Hamas

Begun January 2025 | 1,600 words | Contents

Seeing defiant Hamas fighters on TV during the January 2025 hostage releases, I wondered if, given the havoc Hamas has provoked, Gazan people still supported them. Amazingly, some did.

**Hamas fighters pictured during a hostage release** | *Photo: Reuters*

Top 🔼

Amazingly, some Gazans still support Hamas
Contents 🔼

Introduction

The horror

We western liberals looked on in horror as the news broke of the brutal October 2023 attack by Hamas. We continued looking on in horror and frustration as news of the even more brutal Israeli war on Gaza rolled on.

Our frustration was due to the powerlessness of the international community. The so-called United Nations (with its veto-hampered Security Council) was more toothless than usual as its US paymaster continued to give unconditional support to Israel and the lawless IDF – the Israel ‘Defense’ Forces.

Some western support for the Palestinian cause shaded into misplaced support for Hamas. (See below.) That didn’t help.

In November 2024 the International Criminal Court (ICC) issued an arrest warrant against Israeli premier Benjamin Netanyahu. The court accused Netanyahu of war crimes and crimes against humanity:

ICC charges against Netanyahu

War crimes

Starvation as a method of warfare
Intentionally directing an attack against the civilian population

Crimes against humanity

Murder
Persecution
Other inhumane acts

The Israeli military used those criminal tactics to destroy Gaza whilst trying to destroy Hamas. But, as shown in the January 2025 hostage release videos, Hamas wasn’t destroyed – they were still there.

Hamas was still there – and making a point of looking in charge. But given their deliberate provocation of Israel’s destructive response, I wondered: what did battered Gazan civilians really think of Hamas?

Amazingly, some Gazans still support Hamas
Contents 🔼

What do Gazans think of Hamas?

Open criticism

Video of hostages being released by Hamas fighters
19 January 2025 | Forbes

In videos of hostages being released during the ceasefire that began in January 2025, the Hamas fighters in charge displayed a defiant and confident ebullience.

That display suggested buoyant support for Hamas in Gaza – or a cowed population. Gazan civilians were reportedly cowed – as might be expected under the rule of Hamas’s ultra-sharia political-Islamist government.

In the 2006 election in Gaza, Hamas won against the more moderate Fatah by 37 to 32 percent. International observers said the election was ‘open and fairly contested’.

However, an electoral system described as ‘skewed’ meant Fatah got no seats. A unity government was formed but in 2007 it collapsed when Hamas ousted Fatah by force and imposed authoritarian rule.

(The US and the EU, considering Hamas to be a terrorist organisation, didn’t accept the 2006 election result. A 2021 election due in Gaza and the West Bank was postponed indefinitely by Palestinian president Mahmoud Abbas.)

A June 2024 US Foreign Affairs article by security expert Audrey Cronin said:

Hamas rules Gaza through oppression, using arrests and torture to suppress dissent. Gazans widely loathe its internal General Security Service, which surveils and keeps files on people, stamps out protests, intimidates journalists, and tracks people accused of “immoral acts”.

As for popular support for Hamas in Gaza, it was sinking rather than buoyant. A September 2024 poll found that although 39 percent of Gazans still supported Hamas, that had fallen in three months from 64 percent.

A July 2024 UK BBC News article said:

Open criticism of Hamas has been growing in Gaza, both on the streets and online. Some have publicly criticised Hamas for hiding the hostages in apartments near a busy marketplace, or for firing rockets from civilian areas.

The BBC article quoted an educated Gazan man speaking angrily on video about the Hamas leadership:

I am an academic doctor. I had a good life, but we have a filthy leadership. They got used to our bloodshed, may God curse them. They are scum! We could have avoided this attack.

Quote from a video (apparently no longer available) of a man, his face and clothes covered with blood, speaking outside a hospital filled with hundreds of casualties after an Israeli operation to free hostages from central Gaza.

**Distressed Gazan civilian criticising Hamas** | Screenshot of **viral video**, June 2024 | *Photo: UGC*

A senior Hamas government employee, who asked to remain anonymous, told the BBC the Hamas attack was a ‘crazy, uncalculated leap’. He said:

The Hamas government prepared well for the attack militarily, but it neglected the home front. They did not build any safe shelters for people; they did not reserve enough food, fuel and medical supplies.

The BBC article concluded:

Criticism of Hamas is growing sharper, and long-buried divisions over Hamas rule in Gaza are becoming clear. Out of the destruction left by Israel’s battle with Hamas, a new war is emerging: a battle for control of public opinion within Gaza itself.

Amazingly, some Gazans still support Hamas
Contents 🔼

Hamas hoped to spark regional war

Daft as a brush

What did Hamas think would happen when they launched their October 2023 attack?

The attack – a brutal assault on a lightly defended peacenik kibbutz – wasn’t, as might be thought, an unplanned outburst. Despite the assault’s shambolic execution, training and planning had been going on for weeks. So what was the purpose?

The attack by Hamas was apparently intended to spark regional war. A Hamas spokesman said the attack was intended to provoke a strong Israeli response and a consequent regional war against Israel.

The regional war didn’t happen – and had no chance of happening. Middle Eastern Muslim countries may support Palestinian resistance groups with money, weapons and training, but they have no interest in waging war against Israel, the US-backed regional superpower.

In fact some regional Muslim countries, including well-armed Saudi Arabia, had been busy establishing diplomatic links with Israel.

Was the Hamas leadership – perhaps made gullible by ideology – misled by callous regional partners into believing the attack would result in war? Did Hamas expect Palestinian victory, with Gazan deaths being glorious martyrdom?

Did Hamas think embeding themselves amonst Gazan civilians would deter Israeli aggression?

Whatever their thinking, Hamas’s childish strategy – poking the angry Zionist bear and then hiding amongst civilians – inevitably caused Gazans to suffer mass death, injury, destruction and displacement for – as Hamas should have realised – an unachievable end.

In spite of that, a December 2023 poll found only 19 percent of Gazans blamed Hamas for their post-attack suffering. That showed a stubborn loyalty – but Gazans deserved better.

Amazingly, some Gazans still support Hamas
Contents 🔼

Donald Chump’s Nazi plan for Gaza

Insane in the brain

It could be said the Hamas attack succeeded in raising the profile of Gaza and the wider Palestinian cause – but raised it to what end? There was still no prospect of Israel being persuaded to accept a two-state solution or to end its aggressive settler expansion.

Also, unfortunately for Gaza, its raised profile caught the eye of rampaging newly re-elected US president Donald Chump.

Within weeks of his January 2025 inauguration, Chump announced an insane Nazi plan for Gaza. The US would take control and ownership of Gaza, deport the people and turn it into a Middle Eastern Mar-a-Lago.

Chump embroidered the plan, but his team got the original idea from a July 2024 paper given them by rightwing economist Joseph Pelzman. (Apparently Pelzman offered it to team Biden first, but – understandably – they didn’t want it.)

Prof Pelzman’s highly detailed but quite bonkers paper said – in summary – that reconstructing Gaza would be too costly and the only solution was to remove the people, level the ground and start from scratch. He specified a tourist seafront. Chump the real estate moron must have loved that.

Pelzman said the country carrying out his plan should be granted a 50-year lease. Typically, Chump took that to mean the US should assume ownership of Gaza.

Anyone hoping Chump has a tiny spark of sanity or conscience should watch his gobsmacking Nazi-propaganda-style AI-generated Chump Gaza video. He clearly hasn’t got a spark of anything worthwhile.

To be fair to Chump (even a narcissistic sociopath deserves that), his bullying style apparently brought about the Gazan ceasefire and hostage releases that began in January 2025.

But that ceasefire was an incidental silver lining to Chump’s deliberate cloud of confusion and crisis. Chump talks cheesily about wanting peace, but his real concern is to ensure he and his felllow-billionaires can continue profiteering from crisis.

(Candidate Chump promised to ‘drain the Washington swamp’, but he and his parasitical class – served, ironically, by ‘swamp’ lobbyists – are actually draining the economy, hollowing it out to enhance their obscene wealth.)

Ceasefire update | March 2025
To keep power, Benjamin Netenyahu, Israeli premier and wanted war criminal, reneged on the second part of the ceasefire agreement, in which all hostages were to be be freed and all Israeli forces were to leave. Instead, the mass death and destruction resumed. Idiot Chump colluded with Netenyahu’s return to war. Reuters reported that after a White House meeting with released Israeli hostages on 5 March Chump posted:

I am sending Israel everything it needs to finish the job, not a single Hamas member will be safe if you don’t do as I say. Also, to the People of Gaza: A beautiful Future awaits, but not if you hold Hostages. If you do, you are DEAD! Make a SMART decision. RELEASE THE HOSTAGES NOW, OR THERE WILL BE HELL TO PAY LATER!

My bolding (Chump’s caps!)

Most of the ‘people of Gaza’ – distiguished by Chump’s ‘also’ from Hamas – had nothing to do with the holding of hostages. Threatening civilians with death is a war crime.

Amazingly, some Gazans still support Hamas
Contents 🔼

The future for Gaza and Hamas

Better leadership

**Best friends: the war criminal and the psychopath** | *Photo: Reuters*

Donald Chump and his new pal, rightwing Israeli premier and wanted war criminal Benjamin Netanyahu, would presumably have to drop their fantasy Nazi ethnic-clearance ‘Riviera’ plan for Gaza.

In which case, if and when the Israeli military left Gaza, a caretaker government could supervise reconstruction – and would need to implement elections.

Hamas’s stupid strategy inevitably brought nothing but death and destruction to the people of Gaza. Gazans deserve better leadership – one that pursues the Palestinian cause but also protects civilians.

Despite its show of defiance in the hostage videos, Hamas seemed a spent force. Whether at the hands of the avenging Israeli military or a dissatisfied Gazan electorate, Hamas’s days in power were surely numbered.

**Seaside genocide** | *Photo: AP/Getty*

Amazingly, some Gazans still support Hamas
Contents 🔼

Addendum

Western support for Hamas

Terror error

As well as still having some support in Gaza, Hamas had some support in the liberal west, where righteous support for the Palestinian cause sometimes shaded into misplaced support for the Islamist group.

Here in the UK, for instance:

In a 2009 speech, Jeremy Corbyn, leader of the Labour Party from 2015 to 2020, gullibly described Hamas as:
Ismail Patel, zealous Muslim founder of UK political-Islamist campaign group Friends of Al-Aqsa (listed as an extremist group by the UK government in March 2024) has made speeches at UK Palestine demonstrations unconditionally praising Hamas for standing up to Israel.
In 2024, foolish Leicester Muslim campaigner Majid Freeman was charged with the terrorism offence of supporting Hamas online. (In 2021, the political and military wings of Hamas were proscribed as a single terrorist organisation by the UK.)

Hamas’s extremism and recklessness harmed the Palestinian cause. However, some international supporters of that cause continued to support Hamas as a legitimate response to Israeli oppression.

Such misguided support would no doubt encourage Hamas as it clung to power.

The End
Top 🔼
Feel free to comment. (I answer all comments.)

Gilligan, Blair and the Iraq war

Whatever happened to Andrew Gillingham?

August 2023 | 1,250 words | Contents

The **sycophant** and his **rottweiler**: UK premier **Tony Blair** and his director of communications **Alastair Campbell** in 2007 | *Photo: Ben Curtis / PA*

Gilligan, Blair and the Iraq war

Top🔺

Introduction
The ‘dodgy’ dossier
Gilligan’s Today report – and its aftermath
The Hutton inquiry
Fake intelligence and war
Whatever happened to Andrew Gilligan?
Misguided Muslim criticism of Gilligan

Gilligan, Blair and the Iraq war

Introduction

In my post about the 2022 anti-Muslim Hindutva march in my home city of Leicester, UK, I said a Muslim activist who’d muddied the waters with misinformation had been exposed in 2014 as an Islamist. The reporter who exposed him was Andrew Gilligan.

Gilligan was the BBC reporter who in 2003 famously broke the ‘dodgy’ dossier story in the UK shortly after the Iraq war began. His report kicked off a massive row with the Labour government of premier Tony Blair.

Tragically, Gilligan’s source, civil servant David Kelly, committed suicide after being outed by Blair’s spin doctor, Alastair Campbell. Criticised by the inquiry into Kelly’s death, Gilligan was forced to resign from the BBC.

So was Gilligan a good journalist? Was his Islamism exposé reliable?

And whatever happened to him?

Gilligan, Blair and the Iraq war

The ‘dodgy’ dossier

In 2002 in the wake of al-Qaeda’s 2001 9/11 attack on New York, idiotic US president George W Bush was planning to attack Iraq – and sought the UK’s support. Sychophantic UK premier Tony Blair agreed immediately, famously writing to Bush, ‘with you, whatever’.

In February 2003, UK government director of communications Alastair Campbell released a dossier assessing weapons of mass destruction (WMD) in Iraq. Crucially, Blair’s foreword to the dossier, referring to Iraqi president Saddam Hussein, said:

WMD

ready within 45 minutes

[My bolding]

In March 2003 sychophant Blair took the UK to war – without waiting for UN approval, and in spite of an anti-war protest in February in London by over one million people.

Gilligan, Blair and the Iraq war

Gilligan’s Today report – and its aftermath

On 29 May 2003, Andrew Gilligan, then defence correspondent for Today, the BBC’s flagship radio news programme, reported that the February dossier’s ‘WMD in 45 minutes’ claim was unreliable, but had been added to make the dossier ‘sexier’.

After the broadcast, furious government director of communications Campbell went into spin overdrive; and went on the hunt for Gilligan’s source. But Gilligan and the BBC stood firm.

In June a newspaper article by Gilligan was titled:

why Blair misled us

Campbell

[My bolding]

On 8 July spin doctor Campbell, having found Gilligan’s source, outed him to the media. The source was David Kelly, a top UK government weapons expert.

On 15 and 16 July, Kelly was questioned by parliamentary committees. Some of the questioning was overtly hostile.

On 17 July, Kelly died, supposedly by suicide.

Gilligan, Blair and the Iraq war

The Hutton inquiry

In August 2003 the government appointed judge Brian ‘Lord’ Hutton to hold an inquiry into the circumstances surrounding the death of whistleblower David Kelly.

In his report in January 2004, Hutton concluded Kelly died by suicide.

As for the ‘circumstances’, Hutton’s BBC-bashing, government-whitewashing report deliberately missed the point: Blair’s dodgy dossier.

Ignoring most of the evidence presented, Hutton ridiculously exonerated the government of blame (apart from criticising them for not warning Kelly he was about to be named); and – even more ridiculously – said Andrew Gilligan’s original accusation was ‘unfounded’.

In the face of Hutton’s anti-BBC nitpicking, Gilligan admitted careless note-taking, and asserting some uncorroborated facts; and the BBC admitted editorial lapses.

Gilligan, the BBC chair and the BBC director-general resigned. In his resignation statement, Gilligan said:

This report…seeks to hold reporters, with all the difficulties they face, to a standard that it does not appear to demand of, for instance, Government dossiers.

Gilligan, Blair and the Iraq war

Fake intelligence and war

Despite the minor errors uncovered by the blinkered cavilling of Brian Hutton’s inquiry, Andrew Gilligan’s shocking report, far from being ‘unfounded’, as Hutton ridiculously claimed, was substantially true.

As David Kelly briefed and Gilligan reported, the dossier’s WMD claim was known to be highly unreliable but was nevertheless included to boost the case for war.

The ‘WMD in 45 minutes’ claim turned out to be, in fact, completely untrue – as did every single allegation in the dossier. The dossier had been cobbled together from various plagiarised non-intelligence sources.

Tony Blair claims he didn’t know the ‘intelligence’ was dodgy, but he’s widely disbelieved. Hence his nickname: Bliar.

Idiot Bush also used fake intelligence in the build-up to war. False information about al-Qaeda in Iraq was obtained by torture. The real US motive for the war was lucrative oil deals and private military contracts for idiot Bush’s billionaire friends.

World-wide protests by ten million people and Gilligan’s revelation of fake intelligence had no effect on the progress of the coalition’s ‘shock and awe’ bombardment.

UK operations ended in 2009. The US finally withdrew in 2011. By the end of the war, hundreds of thousands of people had died needlessly.

A brutal regime was deposed, but the unplanned aftermath, like the eight-year war, was a shambles. 12 years later, the country’s still ruined.

Blair’s reputation was deservedly destroyed.

Gilligan, Blair and the Iraq war

Whatever happened to Andrew Gilligan?

Since the Iraq war controversy, Andrew Gilligan, having presumably improved his journalistic technique to avoid repeating the errors famously detailed in the Hutton report, has recovered his maligned reputation.

He’s been nominated for five awards, one of which he won.

In 2008 Gilligan was named Journalist of the Year by the UK Press Awards panel for his investigative reports into cronyism and corruption by Labour London mayor Ken Livingstone’s administration.

Gilligan’s award-winning work was described as ‘relentless investigative journalism at its best’.

In 2016, Gilligan lost his job as London editor of the right-wing Torygraph in a wave of redundancies. He joined Murdoch rag The Sunday Times.

In 2023, having held several policy adviser posts, Gilligan became a ‘special adviser’ (aka ‘spad’) – one of about 40, each on about £100k of tax-payers’ money! – to (useless) Tory prime minister Rishi Sunak.

As a spad, Gilligan’s credited with persuading Sunak to drop the northern extension of super-rail vanity project HS2.

(The electorate kicked the useless Tories out in July 2024.)

Having specialised in advising on transport, Gilligan, now a freelance journalist, writes articles on, for instance, why Labour’s rail nationalisation won’t work.

Gilligan’s also a ‘senior fellow’ and head of transport and infrastructure at Policy Exchange, the influential, anti-democratic, neoliberal, far-right, big-oil-funded, lobbyist ‘thinktank’.

So Gilligan’s a right-wing neoliberal. He’s a close friend of disgraced superclown Bonzo Johnson (former PM and self-seeking Tory liar); and his two most well-known journalistic targets were Labour politicians.

But despite that, and despite Hutton’s criticism, Gilligan’s basically a good journalist. He was right about Blair’s dodgy dossier – and he’s won a major journalism award.

Not just a pretty face: **Andrew Gilligan**, award-winning journalist (and former political advisor to the former PM) | *Photo: Scott Barbour / Getty*

So, to answer the question that prompted this post, Gilligan’s exposé of the Leicester Muslim activist seems reliable.

Gilligan, Blair and the Iraq war

Misguided Muslim criticism of Gilligan

Andrew Gilligan’s 2014 report of a Leicester Muslim activist as an Islamist was apparently one of many such exposés he made at that time. His anti-Islamism mission attracted some Muslim criticism – but that criticism was misguided.

Gilligan was criticised by Muslim websites including prominent British Muslim news website 5Pillars for his relentless – possibly obsessive – pursuit of Islamism in the UK.

A 2015 5Pillars article indignantly listed the many people and organisations outed by Gilligan.

(The list notably excluded 5pillars favourite Majid Freeman, the Leicester Muslim activist exposed by Gilligan in 2014. Delusional stirrer Freeman was involved in the 2022 Leicester riots and in 2024 was charged with terror offences.)

The 5Pillars article offered no refutations, only saying Gilligan’s campaign, mainly conducted, apparently, in the Torygraph, caused Islamaphobia:

What is of greater concern is how The Telegraph … has allowed Gilligan to feed the general public with this dangerous rhetoric, which has played a significant role in the rise of Islamophobia and anti-Muslim hatred in the UK.

5Pillars and other Muslim websites criticised Gilligan for exposing Islamism, but they should have thanked him – for defending their religion. As with Hindutva and Hinduism, Islamism poisons Islam.

The controversial 5Pillars could address anti-Muslim feeling by rooting out Islamism themselves (and by not publishing homophobic material and false-flag conspiracy theories about Islamist terror attacks).

It’s not Gilligan’s anti-Islamism campaign that’s caused Islamophobia – it’s Islamism that does that.

The supportive or ambivalent attitude towards Islamism shown by some UK Muslims doesn’t help. Neither do the misconceived denials issued by Muslim representatives after Islamist atrocities.

What’s missing is a public campaign by UK Muslims against Islamism. They’d have to start by admitting that Islamism comes from Islam – but the insecure Muslim diaspora hates to admit fault.

The huge political cost of Blair’s decision to allow Eastern European migrants unfettered access to Britain

Top🔺

End

Blog News: Modi to Blair to Brexit

Blog News (a new feature!)
August 2023

Some linked posts, new and not so new

From Muslim killer Modi to Iraq war criminal Blair to all-round disaster Brexit in several complicated moves

I’ve written – am still writing – a new post about the involvement of Hindu-supremacy à la Modi – Narendra Modi – in last year’s Leicester riots:

The riots: Hindutva in Leicester?

During the Leicester riots, a self-important stirrer turned out to be an Islamist supporter. But could the reporter who exposed him be trusted after what the Hutton report said about him?

The reporter was Andrew Gilligan, the BBC journalist who in 2003 exposed the Iraq war’s famous dodgy dossier. He was criticised by Hutton and forced to resign.

I checked Gilligan out and concluded that having won a UK Journalist of the Year award, he could (despite being right-wing and a close friend of disgraced superclown Boris ‘Bonzo’ Johnson) be trusted as a journalist.

Re the case of the dodgy dossier, Gilligan had taken on egomaniac Labour PM Tony Blair (high on his sycophancy to US toytown president George W Bush) and his feral PR rottweiler Alastair Campbell.

It didn’t go well for Gilligan. (It went worse for his source, government weapons expert David Kelly, who – supposedly – killed himself.) But Gilligan recovered – unlike the now disgraced Blair.

I put the story in a separate post:

Gilligan, Blair and the Iraq war

As if Blair’s balls-up in Iraq wasn’t bad enough, there’s also Brexit, Britain’s disastrous 2016 decision to exit the European Union. That was also Blair’s fault.

Blair’s enthusiastic 2004 promotion of EU enlargement and the consequent unrestricted free-movement mass immigration to the UK from Eastern Europe – unrestricted because Blair chose not to use the permitted restrictions that, for instance, Germany and France used – led inevitably to grass-roots precariat pressure for a referendum and to the leave result.

See my (still relevant, I think) older posts:

Whilst double-checking I was right about Blair and Brexit – I was! – I came across an excellent 2016 article by Dr Erica Consterdine in the UK edition of international explanatory journalism magazine The Conversation:

(I emailed Dr C to ask for her comments. Sadly, she didn’t reply.)

Top 🔺

End

Whatever happened to Black Lives Matter?

An investigation

Begun April 2022 | 3,000 words | Contents

Digest

Q: Where has Black Lives Matter gone?

A: It’s disappeared back down the postmodern rabbit hole of intersectional identity politics it came from – but the antiracist flame it sparked burns on.

Update, 2025: Psycho Trump is trying to blow the flame out.

**Washington DC, US, 2020** | *Photo: Kevin Dietsch / UPI / Alamy*

Whatever happened to Black Lives Matter?

Top 🔺

Introduction
Coming apart?
BLM’s postmodern mission
What’s wrong with postmodernism?
What next?
Update: the Transparency Center

Whatever happened to Black Lives Matter?

Introduction

Started outstanding

**Trayvon Martin** | *Photo: Splash News / Corbis*

In 2020, Black Lives Matter was big. Huge. Then it kind of faded. What was it? Was it a hashtag, a slogan, a protest movement, a campaign – or what? And what happened to it?

The Black Lives Matter movement was started in the US in 2013 by a small group of radical black feminists after the acquittal of a neighbourhood watch coordinator who shot and killed an unarmed black 17-year-old, Trayvon Martin.

The hashtag #BlackLivesMatter spread on social media, and the project expanded into a national network of local ‘chapters’.

The movement returned to the headlines in 2020 when an unarmed black man, George Floyd, was killed by a police officer. There was widespread disgust, and BLM grew into an international campaign.

**George Floyd and his daughter Gianna** | *Photo: Ben Crump Law Firm*

Here in the UK, BLM got much support – and some opposition. Racists promoted the smug counter-slogan ‘White Lives Matter’ and the more insidious ‘All Lives Matter’.

As a white anti-racist (Hi!), I’ve written a long-form blogpost on racism. I added a section about the racist slogan, White Lives Matter.

Whilst updating that section, I looked into what had happened to Black Lives Matter and discovered this tale of the unexpected. I put it in a footnote and then this separate post.

Despite white allyship being controversial, I considered myself a white ally of BLM. Now, I’m not so sure. Next time the badge falls off, I might not put it back.

(Update, June 2022 – the badge fell off. I didn’t put it back on my jacket. Knowing what I know now, I’d feel a fool. I put it on the shelf: a memento of innocent enthusiasm.)

Whatever happened to Black Lives Matter?

Coming apart?

The centre didn’t hold

**Noir noir: Patrisse Cullors, co-founder of Black Lives Matter** | *Photo: Jason Armond / Los Angeles Times*

After the killing of George Floyd in 2020, some $90m was donated to Black Lives Matter. Yes. 90. Million.

BLM grew fast – perhaps too fast for the small group of organisers to keep up. A year later, the disorganised organisation started to come apart.

BLM’s main organisation is the Black Lives Matter Global Network Foundation. There’s also an international network of locally based chapters.

In February 2021 the foundation said it gave $21.7m to BLM chapters, and its expenses were $8.4m. That left about $60m unexplained.

In May 2021 Patrisse Cullors, one of the three BLM founders, announced she was standing down as executive director of the foundation.

In February 2022 in a UK Guardian interview *, Cullors tearfully explained she resigned after the movement got black criticism for lack of transparency about the donations.

An April 2022 Washington Post column * criticised BLM’s use of its donations, including the secret purchase in 2020 of a $6m house in California.

The WP column drew on an April 2022 investigative article * on New York magazine news website Intelligencer about the BLM house, a 6,500-square-foot compound in Studio City, Los Angeles.

The Intelligencer article is hidden from the hard-up (like me) behind a paywall, but according to WP, it reported a $6m shambles:

BLM said the Studio City house was both a ‘safehouse’ and a place providing:
The article said the only content produced there was a few videos made by Cullors for her YouTube channel.
On Twitter, in advance of the Intelligencer report, BLM urged followers:
On Instagram, Cullors said the purchase hadn’t been announced earlier because:

In a May 2022 AP News interview *, Cullors denied wrongdoing but acknowledged she’d used the Studio City compound for non-BLM purposes, hosting parties to celebrate the inauguration of Joe Biden and Kamala Harris, and her son’s birthday. She said:

* Lest it be suspected these pieces challenging BLM were by racist white hacks, they were all by award-winning black journalists: Nesrin Malik (Guardian), Karen Attiah (Washington Post), Sean Campbell (New York/Intelligencer) and Aaron Morrison (AP News).

There’s more. BLM leaders, friends and family have apparently had large consultancy payouts; and the $6m house was apparently bought from a developer friend who’d recently paid $3m for it.

Sorry – racist white hacks may well have been involved in the sources for the above paragraph: they’re both from the right-wing UK Daily Mail. The Mail refers to revelations in New York Magazine – but that’s behind the pesky paywall.

The impression given by the many articles and comments about all this – and by BLM’s defensive and obfuscatory response – is that BLM is more like a nepotistic cult than a well-run campaign organisation.

However, BLM’s financial irregularities seem a matter of incompetence and mission-drift with a dash of ‘looking after’ people, rather than full-on fraud. Cullors said:

Black people in general have a hard time with money. It’s a trigger point for us.

In spite of the irregularities, Black Lives Matter hasn’t quite come apart.

The BLM website gives the impression that all is well. But it’s not – as its mixed-up mission statement shows.

Whatever happened to Black Lives Matter?

BLM’s postmodern mission

Down the rabbit hole

**Fun with Foucault** – postmodernist Michel Foucault at home in Paris, 1978 | **Photo:** Martine Franck / Magnum

So what’s Black Lives Matter about? Supporters may have assumed its idea was to oppose racist violence and institutional racism – but it’s more complicated than that.

According to BLM’s About page, its mission is to:

Eradicate white supremacy and build local power to intervene in violence inflicted on Black communities by the state and vigilantes

So far, so on-point. But the About page then gets more radical:

We affirm the lives of Black queer and trans folks, disabled folks, undocumented folks, folks with records, women, and all Black lives along the gender spectrum. Our network centers those who have been marginalized within Black liberation movements.

There’s more like that: support for black people marginalised in black movements. Fair enough – but is that what the millions of BLM supporters and donors signed up for?

According to a thoughtful 2021 National Affairs article, BLM’s founders have said their ideology is rooted in postmodern cultural theory. The article said:

A few rabid souls have ferreted out what they regard as the Marxist foundations of BLM. But this gives its prime movers too much credit. BLM has been shaped more by post-modern cultural theory than by Marxism. By their own account, the three young women who ignited this proudly “leaderless” movement have been shaped primarily by feminism and queer theory. Hence their vitriolic critique of the male-dominated black church, not to mention the traditional family.

This analysis evokes the controversial phenomena of intersectional identity politics and critical race theory.

Identity politics emerged in the 1960s and 70s from French postmodernism (which emerged in the 1950s and 60s mainly from the writings of Michel Foucault and Jacques Derrida).

Identity politics enables people of a particular ethnicity or other identifying factor to develop a political agenda based on their identity and their sense of oppression.

Some advocates of identity politics take an intersectional approach, addressing the range of interacting systems of oppression which result from people’s various identities.

Apparently, the complex route from postmodernism to identity politics involved:

Critique of modern reductionism
Abstract universalism
A kind of essentialism
Foucault’s genealogical politics

(Foucault apparently wasn’t the godfather of identity politics. Although he challenged ideas of power structure and championed marginalised groups, he criticised ‘essentialism’ – where groups are defined by fixed characteristics – saying it limited freedom and reinforced inequality. Foucault said, controversially, ‘The self is not given…we have to create ourselves’.)

The fragmentation of the 60s ‘movement’ into 70s ‘new social movements’ led to the first written use of the term ‘identity politics’ – in a 1977 statement by US black, feminist, lesbian socialist group the Combahee River Collective. An excerpt:

focusing upon our own oppression

identity politics

My bolding

The radical BLM mission statement seems to continue the Combahee River Collective’s theme. BLM co-founder Patrisse Cullors has described herself and her fellow organizers as ‘trained Marxists’. BLM has been sarcastically dubbed ‘Black Lesbian Marxists’.

Critical race theory (CRT) – also a branch of postmodernism – first arose, like identity politics, in the 1970s. According to Wikipedia, it’s:

A key CRT concept is intersectionality

My bolding

In 2022 US conservatives publicly complained about the supposed surge in critical race theory being taught in colleges and universities.

However, an Aljazeera online opinion piece by a US professor said CRT informs BLM and that’s what scares the conservatives:

Critical Race Theory

informs … Black Lives Matter

fruitful dialectic

frightens the custodians of the status quo

My bolding

That was fine, but perhaps BLM supporters wanted to stop police killing black men rather than have a fruitful dialectic with an academic theory.

Supporters – and donors – might have sympathised with the complex and passionate ideas in BLM’s radical mission statement, but might have been surprised to learn BLM wasn’t the focussed and well-organised campaign against racist murder they – reasonably – expected it to be.

The Black Lives Matter mission, apparently inspired by postmodern intersectional identity politics, made BLM seem more like Snowflake City than a campaign coordinator.

Whatever happened to Black Lives Matter?

What’s wrong with postmodernism?

It betrays the oppressed

Postmodernism critic **Ambalavaner Sivanandan** | *Photo: Jane Bown / The Observer*

The ineffectiveness of the Black Lives Matter organisation is – partly, at least – the fault of postmodernism.

Postmodernism is playful, exciting and seductive, but when its theories inform and shape a campaign against racism, it’s a dangerous rabbit hole.

The danger of postmodernism in this context was nailed by the late Ambalavaner Sivanandan, a founder and director of UK anti-racist thinktank the Institute of Race Relations. Sivanandan accused postmodernists of betrayal.

In his book Catching History on the Wing – Race, Culture and Globalisation, Sivanandan wrote:

betrayal

postmodernists

appropriate struggle without engaging in it

My bolding

Taking on the job abandoned by the treacherous postmodernists, Sivanandan analysed the ‘market’-driven symbiosis of poverty and murderous racism with angry eloquence:

Racism and imperialism work in tandem, and poverty is their handmaiden. And it is that symbiosis between racism and poverty that, under those other imperatives of multinational capitalism, the free market and the enriching of the rich, has come to define the “underclass” of the United States and, increasingly, of Britain and Western Europe… It is there, where the poorest sections of our communities, white and black, scrabble for the leftovers of work, the rubble of slum housing and the dwindling share of welfare, that racism is at its most virulent, its most murderous.

Sivanandan also criticised identity politics as an inward-looking, navel-gazing exercise.

In his 1990 collection, Communities of Resistance: Writings on Black Struggles for Socialism, Sivanandan (echoing Foucault’s reservations about ‘essentialism’) urged black and South Asian groups to look beyond their cultural identity in their struggle against racism:

The whole purpose of knowing who we are is not to interpret the world, but to change it. We don’tneed a cultural identity for its own sake, but to make use of the positive aspect of our culture to forge correct alliances and fight the correct battles.

So what’s wrong with postmodernism? In this context, it’s that Black Lives Matter was entrusted to oppose racist murder, but the BLM postmodernist adherents of intersectional identity politics have lacked the necessary focus.

Like the postmodernists despised by Sivanandan, they’ve appropriated the struggle – and $90m in donations – but haven’t effectively engaged in it.

Whatever happened to Black Lives Matter?

What next?

Good question

**George Floyd: an unarmed black man murdered by the white police** | *Photo: Ben Crump Law Firm*

By May 2022, the Black Lives Matter website gave no hint of any difficulties (except to say it’s a ‘target of disinformation’). However, it continued its mixed message.

On the one hand there was a robust response to US government plans to advance racial justice:

One of the greatest systemic factors affecting the livelihood of Black communities is the continued over-policing, brutalization, and incarceration of our people. Violence by police tears our families apart; leaves emotional, logistical, and financial gaps in our communities; and steals the lives of so many of our loved ones before they get the chance to achieve their dreams. We need the next phase of the action plan to explicitly address how federal agencies will update their policies to hold officers and departments at the local, state, and federal level accountable for the way they engage with Black people.

On the other hand, there was some deep woo*:

Healing justice…a portal for revolutionary visions of Black freedom…something we deserve…something we own…something we embody…something each and everyone of us must have. This month our center is ‘Collective Imagination: The Art of Healing Part III.’ We turn our conversation to sacred and luminous practices of creativity and imagination in the healing journeys of Black people. Our healers examine…the multiple ways to access Spirit and wholeness through the individual and collective body. We affirm that healthy connections hold spaciousness for healing and love…sacred healing practices…can support the transformation of individual and collective grief into collective imaginings, futures, and liberation for cultivating sovereignty and co-sovereignty.

* Woo: short for woo-woo, a sarcastic term meaning unconventional beliefs regarded as having little or no scientific basis, especially those relating to spirituality, mysticism, or alternative medicine

The esoteric beliefs expressed in the BLM woo above were presumably meant to benefit activists who felt oppressed because of their intersectional identity.

But such beliefs seemed out of place in a campaign expected by its supporters to concentrate on protecting ordinary black people – Trayvon Martin, George Floyd and many others – from racist murder by state and vigilante enforcers.

What next? Could Black Lives Matter have been saved from disappearing up its postmodern woo-woo arsehole*?

* I’m English – I can’t write ‘asshole’. Sorry 😉

Maybe it just needed organising properly – with mission focus and financial transparency.

Maybe BLM could have kept the spirit of radical activism, but hived off the woo and postmodern cultural theory to a new sister organisation

(Black Snowflakes Matter? A suitable role for Patrisse Cullors, perhaps.)

I asked the Black Lives Matter Global Network Foundation for their comments. They didn’t reply.

Whatever happens with this complicated and troubled organisation, the central Black Lives Matter idea of opposition to racist murder lives on – and still has the reach and momentum to help make racism history.

Whatever happened to Black Lives Matter?

Update, June 2022

BLM’s Transparency Center

See-through blackwashing seen through

**West Indies cricket fans, 2015** | *Photo: Getty*

In June 2022 the Black Lives Matter website announced a ‘Transparency Center‘ which would address some of the issues raised. It said:

We are embracing this moment as an opportunity for celebration, accountability, healing, truth-telling, and transparency. We aim to move forward into this next chapter with the lessons learned, achievements underscored, and a renewed commitment to justice and powerbuilding in service to our community.

The BLM announcement said returns had been filed with the IRS (the US internal revenue service). It said the foundation spent far less on costs than other similar organisations; and went on to say:

An independent audit has revealed that Black Lives Matter’s finances are strong, the organization is financially sound, and its leaders have been good stewards of the people’s donations.

The BLM announcement said the foundation had been fully reimbursed for private events held at the ‘Creator’s House’ (the $6m LA house). It said:

Black Joy Creators Fellowship

My bolding

(There was an interesting report on the Black Joy Creators Fellowship – a fellowship for black artists and influencers who live in the Creator’s House – by conservative watchdog Capital Research Center.)

The BLM announcement said three new board members ‘with an extensive background in racial justice work’ had been appointed.

That sounded good, but googling showed one of the three had a history of financial delinquency, all three were financially linked through consultancy payments, and all three were connected to BLM co-founder Patrisse Cullors.

Cronyism, mismanagement, consultancy payments – it looked as though nothing much had changed, and the ‘transparency’ was mainly whitewashing. Or should that be blackwashing?

The BLM Transparency Center announcement attacked ‘misinformation from the right wing’, saying:

conversation for our community

My bolding

It was disingenuous of BLM to characterise the tsunami of black criticism as a ‘conversation for our community‘ which had been ‘trashed’ by misinformation from the racist right.

The black criticism wasn’t, as the announcement implied, a cosy private conversation. it was a public condemnation which fell on BLM like a ton of bricks. It caused co-founder Cullors to resign.

The racist right put the boot in, of course, but BLM, in portraying the devastating black criticism as a trashed ‘conversation’, was fudging the issue and swerving the criticism.

The BLM transparency centre announcement was mainly disappointing. In 2020 I was an enthusiastic white ally of Black Lives Matter. In 2022, as a critic of BLM, I’d like to have wished the newly would-be-transparent organisation well. But it wasn’t looking good.

Again, I asked the Black Lives Matter Global Network Foundation for their comments. They didn’t reply.