Displaying the most recent of 93530 posts written by

Ruth King

Christopher F. Rufo The Left-Wing Terror Memeplex Here’s how the nature of political violence works now.

https://www.city-journal.org/article/left-wing-political-violence-terror

Many of us who work in politics have felt sickened since the assassination of Charlie Kirk. We sense that a line has been crossed, perhaps permanently.

For years, the Left had accused conservative intellectuals of fomenting “stochastic terrorism”—incendiary rhetoric that inspires violence. This accusation was used to purge conservatives from social media, and, during the Biden administration, contributed to the F.B.I.’s decision to monitor conservatives, including parents who opposed critical race theory. The Left sought to use the stochastic terrorism construction as an all-purpose censorship tool.

This year, the tables have turned. Donald Trump is in power and left-wing violence has surged. Even The Atlantic, which previously seconded the idea of stochastic terrorism, has now conceded that political violence from the Left outstrips that from the Right.

After studying several recent incidents of left-wing terrorism, I want to articulate some initial thoughts about what I call the “left-wing terror memeplex.” This system, in which left-wing narratives inspire decentralized acts of violence, has four elements: prestige narratives, radicalized memespaces, copycat models, and disturbed individuals.

The memeplex is not organized like the older model of left-wing political terrorism, which relied on organized groups (such as the Weather Underground and Black Liberation Army), decentralized cells, ideological formation, and meticulous planning. By contrast, the memeplex is decentralized, mediated through the Internet, and, on the surface, appears unorganized. Left-wing media and political figures peddle narratives through the digital sphere; an individual commits an act of terrorism inspired by those narratives; and the media and political figures pretend that the two are unrelated and that the terrorist was a “lone wolf.”

But if you dig beneath the surface, it becomes apparent that these dots are often connected and that the memeplex, though decentralized, is designed to radicalize disturbed individuals and generate bloodshed—with plausible deniability for political actors. In other words, the progressives who seed the memeplex are fomenting precisely the “stochastic terrorism” that they previously decried.

Let’s examine the elements one by one. First: the prestige narratives. For the past decade, the Left’s elite media and political figures have entrenched a series of hyperbolic and highly polemical narratives: that Donald Trump is analogous to Adolf Hitler; that America is about to fall to fascism; that conservatives are organizing a genocide of transgender people; that deportations are laying the groundwork for martial law. These narratives have taken root not only on the fringes of activism and academia, but are reflected in the headlines of the New York Times, The New Yorker, The Atlantic, National Public Radio, MSNBC, and other mainstream outlets.

Santiago Vidal Calvo Some Bright Spots in Immigration Policy Several recent policy shifts point toward an approach that emphasizes U.S. values and interests.

https://www.city-journal.org/article/us-citizenship-test-naturalization-exam-immigration-policy

The United States has never promised newcomers an easy path, but it has always offered them a meaningful one. For the hopeful immigrant, citizenship is meant to be not a participation trophy but a solemn commitment to a constitutional republic that asks the same of every citizen: knowledge, loyalty, and responsibility.

That’s why U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services’ recent plans to toughen the naturalization exam deserve support. The potential changes include adding an essay, restoring the 2020 civics test, and sharpening the criteria for judging “good moral character” and English proficiency.

The idea behind these measures is simple: if citizenship confers solemn responsibilities, then it should require more than memorization of a handful of facts and slogans. USCIS director Joseph Edlow believes that the current naturalization exam is “just too easy”—and he’s right.

By law, applicants for U.S. citizenship must show that they can read, write, and speak basic English, and that they understand U.S. history and how our government works. USCIS assesses this knowledge during the naturalization interview and test. Under the current format, citizenship applicants must answer six out of ten basic civics questions correctly (drawn from a list of 100) and demonstrate modest English skills.

The updated test will ask applicants up to 20 questions, drawn from a 128-question study bank. Applicants who answer 12 correctly will pass; officers will stop the examination once the applicant meets that threshold or answers nine incorrectly.

A genuinely pro-American immigration policy starts with assimilation and civic education. Tougher naturalization standards should be paired with higher expectations—expanding basic civics and English requirements for permanent residency and certain work visas that have a path to citizenship—so newcomers are prepared to participate fully in America’s political system.

Because so many temporary immigrants eventually become Americans, we should expand the “pro-Americanism” filtering and civic-readiness screening before they arrive. About 53 percent of immigrants living in the U.S. (roughly 25 million people) are now naturalized U.S. citizens. In FY2023 alone, roughly 878,000 immigrants were naturalized (down from 969,000 in FY2022 but still above the 2010–2020 average of 721,000). The administration could implement a less extensive version of the civics tests for applicants with green cards or work visas.

China and Russia: The Axis of War by Gordon G. Chang

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/21941/china-russia-axis-of-war

The [Washington Post] report, based on a study issued by the U.K.-based Royal United Services Institute, notes that China is undoubtedly planning an airborne assault on Taiwan.

Trump’s plan is not working. Russia’s forces are making progress in Ukraine, and, viewing the response of the great democracies to his invasion as feeble, Putin is already taking on other neighbors.

On July 2, Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi told Kaja Kallas, the EU foreign policy chief, that Beijing does not want to see Russia lose in Ukraine because then the U.S. would focus on China in East Asia. China, by implication, also wants to see the war drag on to tie down the United States.

The West and friends are finally realizing how close they are to catastrophe.

Russia is providing equipment, technology, and training to China for an airborne invasion, the Washington Post reported on September 26. The report, based on a study issued by the U.K.-based Royal United Services Institute, notes that China is planning an airborne assault on Taiwan.

The day before the Washington Post article, Reuters revealed that Chinese experts had traveled to Russia to help that country develop drones. According to the wire service, Sichuan AEE, a Chinese company, sold attack and surveillance drones to Russian company IEMZ Kupol through an intermediary sanctioned by the U.S. and the EU.

The two reports highlight the close cooperation between Russia and China in military theaters around the world. These two aggressive states, from all appearances, have effectively formed a military alliance.

Fact Checking Trump’s Climate Claims

https://issuesinsights.com/2025/09/30/fact-checking-trumps-climate-claims/

Editor’s note: We expect that Google’s AdSense will strip ads from this page, saying the editorial contains “unreliable and harmful claims.” It’s done that to us before, many times. You can tell Google where to stuff its censorship by donating directly to I&I. Just click here.

President Donald Trump spoke at the United Nations last week in an address that the world needed to hear. It was of course picked apart, particularly his claims about global warming. He twisted facts and made “false claims,” say the gatekeepers of the Great Climate Narrative. Is this so?

Let’s look:

Trump called the global warming scare a “hoax.” Not a word we would use, but he’s closer to the truth than the climatistas. It’s obvious to those with open minds that the global warming tale is the product of academic fraud, gross exaggerations, and an effort to lie to the public to move opinion and force politics into what should be a scientific debate.

Trump said renewable energy sources “don’t work,” are “too expensive” and a “joke.” They work, but not as advertised. Renewables are unreliable and they are far too costly (without taxpayer-funded subsidies they’re dead). “Joke” is another word we wouldn’t use, because the damage done by the blind drive to net zero emissions is not funny.

“All of these predictions made by the United Nations and many others, often for bad reasons, were wrong,” Trump said. “They were made by stupid people.” They are not stupid. But they are conniving, deceitful, shameless, wrong and vicious. They are also dangerous (see the point above).

Trump called the global warming account “the greatest con job perpetrated by the world.” The predictions of doom have not materialized. The models they are based on are overheated. The real motive for clamping down on fossil fuel use is not to save the sky but to break capitalism, phase out human existence, force a false religion on others and take control of the economy. Sure, it’s a con, and it’s worked fairly well. As Elon Musk recently said, “legacy media propaganda is very effective at making people believe things that aren’t true.”

Wind turbines, the president said, are “so pathetic.” Still not a word we would use but we are in agreement with the greater point. The world is shunning wind and solar power. More than 1,000 proposed projects have been blocked globally. In addition to the inferior nature of renewables, land-use conflicts are constraining their growth as are investors, who don’t want to squander their capital on investments that won’t earn them a profit.

“Now,” said Trump, the zealots “just call it climate change, because that way, they can’t miss. It’s climate change, because if it goes higher or lower, whatever the hell happens, there’s climate change.” He’s correct. The green jihad was rebranded because the warming argument wasn’t working – the climate was not cooperating with fantastic tales about an overheating planet.

Two Historic Speeches at the UN General Assembly Trump and Netanyahu bring truth to the globalist hall of lies. by Joseph Klein

https://www.frontpagemag.com/two-historic-speeches-at-the-un-general-assembly/

President Donald Trump and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu delivered stern but much-needed addresses to the United Nations General Assembly during this year’s annual General Assembly High-Level Week. Both leaders presented stark truths rather than the platitudes and strident rhetoric that normally permeates the General Assembly Hall. 

President Trump asked the fundamental question about the UN today. What is its purpose? “The UN has such tremendous potential,” he said. “All they seem to do is write a really strongly worded letter, and then never follow that letter up. It’s empty words — and empty words don’t solve war. The only thing that solves war and wars is action.”

Even worse, the UN has created problems of its own. “Not only is the UN not solving the problems it should,” President Trump said, “too often, it is actually creating new problems for us to solve.” He noted, for example, that the United Nations is “funding an assault on Western countries and their borders,” including spending in 2024 “$372 million in cash to support 624,000 migrants to journey into the United States to infiltrate our southern border.”

President Trump denounced in his speech what he called the “double-tailed monster” of uncontrolled open borders and the “green energy scam.”

“In the United States,” he said, “we reject the idea that mass numbers of people from foreign lands can be permitted to travel halfway around the world, trample our borders, violate our sovereignty, cause unmitigated crime and deplete our social safety net.” He called upon other nations, particularly in Europe, to follow his administration’s example or risk losing their countries.

What President Trump made crystal clear in his speech is his insistence that each nation is sovereign with its own history, heritage, traditions, and culture that “makes each nation majestic and unique” in its own right.

President Trump reminded the global assemblage that so-called climate “experts” and environmental activists have been making apocalyptic predictions for years that unchecked climate change would wreak catastrophic devastation unless humanity quickly reverses course. According to the fearmongers, we must abandon fossil fuels and convert to total reliance on green energy before it is too late.

Tony Abbott: ‘We Have Got to Roar’ Tony Abbott

https://quadrant.org.au/news-opinions/politics/tony-abbott-we-have-got-to-roar/

Below a slightly and lightly edited transcript of former PM Tony Abbott’s address to the recent CPAC conference in Brisbane. ‘What we need right now in Australia is not a Reform Party,’ he said, citing the rise of Nigel Farage’s populist movement in the UK,  ‘but a reformed party’, especially in the Liberal wastelands of Victoria and NSW.

It’s wonderful to be here in Brisbane! It’s wonderful to be with so many people who love our country and want it to be better. Like me, I am sure that you believe that this is the best country in the world. Our job is to keep it that way. The contemporary tragedy, as we all know, is that this country is drifting backwards. The fact that millions of people would live here if they could is a great vote of confidence in Australia. But we’re not as good as we should be, and our job is to make us better, quickly.

Our economy is stagnant. Real disposable incomes – that’s to say living standards – have dropped almost 10% in the last three years. For the past two years, we have had declining GDP-per-person. Our productivity has gone backwards from where it was a decade ago. Our government wants to close down the great productive industries that have made us rich, whether it’s the coal industry, the gas industry, the salmon industry, the logging industry – and I will get on to the energy train wreck later!

Our society is fragmenting.

We have three flags, not one. Some 80 Labor-Greens councils are refusing to hold citizenship ceremonies on Australia Day. We have too many migrants, and too many of them are living in Hotel Australia rather than joining Team Australia.And yet you can hardly blame them when we have a left establishment which is embarrassed about our Anglo-Celtic core culture and does not like our Judaeo-Christian ethos – even though it’s these things that have made us great.

Our strategic peril is deepening all the time. As communist China continues the biggest and the fastest military build-up in history, we sit complacently. We say it’s all okay because we just might get some nuclear submarines in 10 or 15 years. But on that point, all I can say is, God save the King – who did have a meeting with President Trump and was able to raise the importance of the AUKUS agreement in a way that our Prime Minister never has.

Danyela Souza Egorov New York Charter Schools Aren’t Stealing Public Schools’ Dollars Opponents make the allegation to block educational opportunity.

https://www.city-journal.org/article/new-york-charter-public-schools-funding

Earlier this month, more than 15,000 families from 200 charter schools across New York City marched on the Brooklyn Bridge to support charters. They asked, among other things, that the state lift its cap on the number of charter schools; that charters get equitable funding; and that charters be allowed to share space in existing public school facilities.

The families assembled represented the more than 150,000 New York students currently attending charter schools, as well as the many more on waiting lists. One of their chants—“Stop the no! Let charters grow!”—highlights how New York State has maintained a cap of 460 charter schools since 2015.

Elected officials often explain their reluctance to lift the cap by citing the persistent argument that charter schools take resources away from New York City public district schools. In 2023, State Senator Jabari Brisport, for example, opposed lifting the cap in exactly those terms: “Every time another (charter) opens, the funding gets shifted there,” he said. “And then the first thing that our public schools cut when they lose their funding is after-school and extracurriculars.” State Senator Cordell Cleare added, “This takes away from the public school students. It shows them inequity, it shows disparities, and it sends a message that we’ve given up on traditional public schools.”

The problem with this view is that the pie of public school dollars isn’t fixed—it keeps growing. Charters now enroll 15 percent of the city’s student population. Yet, this expansion has not negatively affected the New York City Department of Education (DOE) budget. Data from the city’s Independent Budget Office show that the DOE budget exceeded $20 billion in 1999 ($22 billion in inflation adjusted 2022 dollars), when the state’s first charter opened. Since then, despite significant enrollment declines, the DOE budget swelled to nearly $40 billion as of 2024—of which, only $3.17 billion constitutes charter school “tuition.”

Some officials, including Andrew Pallotta, president of New York State United Teachers, are recognizing this budget reality. As of early 2023, he had opposed lifting the charter cap in order to “limit the financial burden on the public school district.” This year, he shifted the focus of his opposition, attacking the “corporate charter school industry” and arguing that “many charters operate without meaningful public input or accountability to taxpayers.”

Some public schools do struggle with reduced budgets due to enrollment loss. But the DOE could address these challenges by reallocating its vast budget more effectively. The district continues to operate many small, financially unsustainable schools that should be closed or consolidated. Doing so would free up resources for the remaining schools, improving educational quality for more students rather than propping up low-enrollment, underperforming institutions. The DOE should also reconsider the need for 32 school districts, which range in size from 4,000 to 39,000 students. Merging the smallest districts and reinvesting the savings could better support schools serving the highest-need populations.

Parents are leaving these schools for charters because they are dissatisfied—not for lack of funding. Polling from EdTrust New York shows that 51 percent of voters and 50 percent of parents believe that the education system is on the wrong track.

Will Meloni give in to the pro-Palestine mob? Protests, riots and strikes over Gaza have pushed the Italian PM to waver on her principled defence of Israel. Dominic Standish

https://www.spiked-online.com/2025/09/29/will-meloni-give-in-to-the-pro-palestine-mob/

Italian prime minister Giorgia Meloni has been one of the few European leaders not to have lost her head over the war in Gaza. Not only has she refused to give credence to the baseless claim of an Israeli ‘genocide’, she has also made recognising Palestinian statehood conditional on Hamas surrendering. After all, it was Hamas that started the current war, and that has ruthlessly prolonged it, with its refusal to return the hostages it captured on 7 October 2023.

Yet Meloni has never been under more pressure to abandon Israel and back Palestinian statehood unconditionally. Last week, Italy went pazzo over Gaza. Protests and riots were sparked by Italy’s refusal to join other Western countries in recognising a Palestinian state. Weathering these protests will be the biggest test of her leadership to date.

The protests kicked off last Monday, when a number of Italy’s powerful unions called for a day of strikes across the country, impacting as many as 75 cities and towns. Among the unions protesting the ‘inertia’ of Italy in recognising Palestine was the Italian General Confederation of Labour, by some way Italy’s biggest union. Consequently, Italy was effectively shut down for a day. In the port city of Genoa, ships and containers were blocked on the unlikely grounds that they were being used to smuggle weapons into Israel, stifling trade and tourism.

The biggest protests took place in Milan and Rome. In Rome, at least 20,000 people gathered outside the city’s Termini station. In Milan, the number was estimated to be closer to 50,000. Clashes at the main train station, Milano Centrale, injured as many as 60 police officers in the process.

The protests have put serious pressure on Meloni. Indeed, there are already signs that she may be buckling. The first hint of this was in her government’s response to the Global Sumud Flotilla, which has Greta Thunberg on board. Last week, the flotilla’s communication system was temporarily disabled by ABBA music, a prank many suspect to have been carried out by the Israel Defence Forces (IDF). As two Italian MPs are part of this woke armada, Meloni’s defence minister, Guido Crosetto, has ordered an Italian naval ship to give safe passage to the boats. Israel has promised to intercept the ship before it reaches Gaza. This raises the question: what does the Italian government intend to do then? Engage in a naval battle with Israel in the Mediterranean?

Then, there was Meloni’s address to the UN General Assembly on Wednesday. ‘It is Hamas that started the war’, she began by saying. ‘It is Hamas that could end the suffering of the Palestinians by immediately freeing all the hostages. It is Hamas that seems to thrive on the suffering of the Palestinian people.’

Then, she turned her ire on Israel, which she accused of ‘violating humanitarian norms’ and massacring civilians. She said the IDF’s actions against Hamas were not proportionate. And she also promised to recognise Palestine, if two conditions are met: the release of all hostages, and the assurance that Hamas would play no role in government.

The Gaza flotilla: the Woke Man’s Burden Anti-Israel activism is neo-colonial arrogancein the drag of pacifism. Brendan O’Neill

https://www.spiked-online.com/2025/09/29/the-gaza-flotilla-the-woke-mans-burden/

I’m old enough to remember when being a peacenik meant you wanted less Western meddling overseas, not more. Seems things have changed. Exhibit A: the Gaza flotilla. These smug sea-farers pose as peace activists, like Mother Teresa in a keffiyeh. Yet behind the humanitarian pantomime there lurks a brutish neo-colonial urge to rally the mighty nations of the West against the uppity little state of Israel. Some on the flotilla are openly calling on powerful states to send their warships to help ‘break’ Israel’s blockade of Gaza. You can call that ‘aid’ if you like – I call it warmongering.

The war-lust of these oceangoing narcissists was spelt out in a column in the Guardian last week. It was written by David Adler, head of the Progressive International think-tank and sailor on one of the boats headed for Gaza. It is not enough for states to ‘offer protection to our civilian fleet’, he said, referencing Spain and Italy’s decision to send frigates to guide the flotilla through the Med. No, you must ‘join us’. You should be ‘deploying vessels’, he said, and ‘at the scale that corresponds to the severity of Gaza’s present suffering’. He ended with a battle cry that will have had the bourgeois Israelophobes who lap up the Guardian cheering over their granola: ‘It is not too late for states to step up and join our mission.’

There is no vacillation here. Mr Adler did not mince his words. This is an invitation to nations with warships to sail upon a sovereign state and compel it to change its policies. We used to call that imperialism. As if his Guardian call to arms were not clear enough, Mr Adler followed it up with a video missive from his boat. We are not satisfied with ‘states sending frigates to protect the flotilla’, he said. No, you must ‘JOIN the mission, sail alongside us, break the siege’. It is time, he said, to ‘amp up the pressure’. He signed off his imperious cry with the fire emoji. Nearly 10,000 people on X have given a thumbs-up to this plea for the powerful to send their ships to rebuke the Jewish State.

Look, I don’t want anything to happen to the people on these boats. It is not a crime to be an incalculably vain white saviour so high on your own sanctimony that you have convinced yourself you can stop a war. And yet if Israel views this flotilla as a problem, can we blame it? Spokespeople for the flotilla are petitioning for naval intervention against it. They want foreign ships to ‘smash’ Israel’s war aims. ‘We’re just bringing baby food’, they say in one breath, and then ‘It’s time to amp up the pressure’ in the next. There isn’t a nation on Earth that would not be profoundly unsettled by the sailing of 52 boats towards its waters, especially when those boats are praying for foreign armies to join them. It is a rancid double standard so typical of Israelophobia to expect Israel and Israel alone to be chill about such a conceited incursion into its sovereign territory.

Mr Adler is not the only flotilla bloviator who dreams of navies joining their crusade. Witness the glee with which the boat people and their cheerleaders in the bourgeois press greeted the news that Spain and Italy had deployed frigates to guide the flotilla following reported drone attacks and communications interference. The flotilla’s official X account posted video footage of Italy’s navy ship to the delight of followers. ‘Viva Italia!’, tweeters cried. ‘Una bella nave!’ (‘a beautiful ship’), said one. Peace activists calling a warship ‘beautiful’? I don’t recall anything like that from my activist days.

In leftish circles there’s a palpable relish over the sailing of Western warships in the direction of Israel. ‘Wow’, cried Owen Jones. ‘Spain is offering direct military protection to the flotilla…. So what now, Israel?’ He sounds like those white-haired war hawks who said ‘Checkmate, Saddam’ when US frigates besieged the Persian Gulf in 1990. Novara Media could barely contain its excitement when Turkey joined the ‘protection’ of the flotilla. ‘Civilian boats now flanked by four warships from three different countries’, it crowed. And that’s a good thing? Warships in the Med? Next time a Blair-like leader puffs himself up as a ‘humanitarian’ as he engages in militaristic manoeuvres against a state that he’s branded evil, I don’t want to hear a word from the left – for that’s what they’re doing right now.

Of course, it is highly unlikely that Spanish, Italian or Turkish warships will cross into the 12 nautical miles off Israel that count as Israeli waters – however much the flotilla’s faux-hippies might desire such a disastrous ‘amping up’ of pressure. And yet even their accompaniment of the flotilla through the Med could cause a flare-up in diplomatic affairs. As the Middle East Forum points out, that literal ‘NATO warships’ are ‘escorting a flotilla’ that is on a ‘collision course… with the Israeli navy’ is a big problem. Imagine if the Armada de México, the second largest navy in Latin America, were to escort to the edge of American waters 52 boats packed with people who think America is the scummiest nation on Earth. The US would be pissed. Well, Israel has a right to be pissed, too.

The flotilla looks less like ‘a protest’ and more like a ‘provocation’, says the Middle East Forum – and one which, courtesy of those frigates and the activists’ call for more navies to join in, could have ‘military consequences’. It’s hard to disagree with this assessment. If the flotilla’s aim were merely to drop off aid to Palestinians, why would it so noisily savour the arrival of warships and dream of their sailing all the way to the shores of Israel-Gaza? We need cool heads. These Israelophobic sailors might want to ‘amp up the pressure’ but Israel should refuse to do so. It should calmly intercept their boats and send the passengers home.

Keir Starmer’s colonial arrogance over Palestine The days of Britain redrawing the maps of the Middle East should be consigned to the history books. Limhor Simhony Philpott

https://www.spiked-online.com/2025/09/28/keir-starmers-colonial-arrogance-over-palestine/

“The uncomfortable truth is that this conflict is not about lines on a map. Hamas is waging a religious war against Jews. To pretend otherwise is wilful blindness. To recognise a Palestinian state now is not an act of courage, but of weakness in the face of pressure from anti-Israel and anti-Western extremists.”

Keir Starmer’s decision to recognise a Palestinian state is being dressed up as a bold moral gesture. His supporters frame it as a step towards peace and justice in the Middle East – all very noble-sounding. But scratch the surface, and the move looks less like moral leadership and more like the latest instalment in Britain’s long, disastrous habit of meddling in the region.

The idea that statehood can be bestowed by Western fiat is pure imperial fantasy. We’ve been here before. From the Sykes-Picot Agreement in 1916, when Britain and France carved up the Ottoman lands like slices of cake, to the Balfour Declaration a year later, Britain has always presumed it could redraw borders and manufacture states with a stroke of a pen.

The results were disastrous. Britain and France artificially created Lebanon, Iraq and Syria, installing pliant kings and ignoring ethnic and religious realities. They split the Kurds across four different states, dooming them to a century of statelessness and persecution. During the Palestine Mandate (1920-1948), Britain swung between contradictory promises, first to the Jews, then to the Arabs, stoking resentment on both sides. In Lebanon, French colonial meddling hardened sectarian divides that still fuel political paralysis and violence today. In short, the imperial powers mistook maps for reality on the ground, and in doing so sowed the seeds of endless conflict.

It is astonishing that, after all this, Westminster still imagines it can ‘solve’ the conflict by declaration. Recognition of Palestine from London doesn’t bring peace closer. If anything, in the wake of the 7 October 2023 attacks, it rewards extremism while sidelining the difficult, grinding work of institution-building, negotiation and compromise.

What makes this even more absurd is the hypocrisy. The same anti-Israel activists who denounce Israel as a ‘colonial project’ are cheering Britain’s latest colonial gesture – a decision taken in Whitehall and imposed on the Middle East, without the consent of the people who actually live there. Apparently, colonial meddling is fine, so long as it’s in service of fashionable causes.

Nor does Starmer seem to have much understanding about the Palestinian cause. Its leaders have never been interested in establishing a state that will live peacefully alongside Israel. Neither the Palestinian Liberation Organisation nor Hamas have ever genuinely sought compromise and recognition of Israel as a Jewish state. Even the supposedly moderate Palestinian Authority, which currently governs the West Bank, has repeatedly rejected two-state offers.