Wednesday 3 September 2014

The Assault of George Galloway and the Silence of Westminster

Thomas Kiernan, Respect Party Member (North West)

If you wish, follow me on Twitter @TRKiernan

   When I read that George Galloway had been assaulted in broad daylight, by an opponent of his staunch defence of the Palestinian people, I wondered whether this was a sign of democracy unravelling when certain people are faced with controversial views. First, we saw Jim Murphy pelted with eggs when defending his views on Scottish Independence against loud opposition from ‘Yes’ supporters. This was followed shortly by a vicious, pre-meditated attack on a 60-year old politician who now, due to injuries which include cracked ribs, cannot currently hold his newborn child. What exactly did either of these acts prove? Since when has physical violence demonstrated anything other than an inability to debate and employ reason?

   Regardless of your opinion on George’s politics, everybody should condemn this form of crime. Louise Mensch, the former MP for Corby and a strong supporter of Israel, was one of the few people who condemned the attack, albeit attacking Galloway’s character in the process. Other pro-Israel supporters, instead of physically assaulting their opponents, should engage in debate and prove to other people why Israel should be supported. I am inclined to believe; however, that violence often only occurs when people are unable to support their views through rational thought. Violence occurs when people simply do not wish for alternative views to be made public because, as David Bradley stated in an episode of Ashes to Ashes, it is “fear which closes down [opposition], not arguments.”

   It is apparent that some opponents of George applaud, and will continue to applaud, what this man has done. It was brought to my attention that some of these had, among other things, “hoped he’d finished the job”. Little more needs to be said. What is more apparent, and more concerning, is the complete lack of public condemnation from any other Member of Parliament. Unsurprisingly, John Wight hit the nail on the head when he stated the following in an article published for the Huffington Post:

"If such an attack took place against a pro-Israel MP by a Muslim supporter of Hamas you can bet the condemnation would have been near total and carried on the first page of every mainstream newspaper, not to mention the lead item on every TV and radio news bulletin."

   It is a basic tenet of British politics, and our culture, that any politician should be capable of making political speech without looking over their shoulders out of fear for their physical and mental well-being. Desmond Tutu once said that if you are neutral in times of injustice you are in support of the oppressor. This is undoubtedly more poignant when the speech involves controversial and divisive issues, and the Palestinian crisis is clearly one of those issues. You may disagree with an opposing politician and you may even condemn the words they speak, but you certainly do not support their assailants by remaining silent on the issue. Whether through egg-throwing, making death threats or actually harassing them in the street, an assault on an elected official is an affront to democracy and should be widely condemned whenever it occurs. This basic tenant has been failed in relation to George’s attack.


   When Galloway was sworn in to Parliament in 2012, the Prime Minister half-complimented him in commending that he always spoke with great force. Unfortunately, that did not extend to publicly condemning the suppression of that voice when the six-time elected official was beaten in the street. In a sad case of irony, as well as an apt pun, it is Westminster and the political class which has truly proven to lack respect for democracy.

1 comment:

  1. Recently, while feeling indignant about GG's treatment of a Jewish debater, I drew a comparison by way of retweet, of his position on that and willingness to engage with very nasty people. The inference was that these were incompatible positions unless anti-Semitism was at play. I would like to apologise for that RT and its implications without reservation having reacquainted myself with some of the facts that had faded in memory or had been clouded by misinformation. I also acknowledge the humanitarian motivation for his work. I am not likely to align myself to his party but I cannot help but recognise that he is one of the few politicians of conscience who has repeatedly shown himself able to keep his integrity while no one was watching. Apologies George and much Respect. @MichaelSV

    ReplyDelete