The opening paragraphs from Sir Keir Starmer’s piece for the Sunday Times on Sunday October 6th, marking one year since Hamas terrorists smashed through the Israeli border, killing, torturing and kidnapping innocent civilians in their path, provide a masterclass in what discourse analysts sometimes refer to as passivation: changing a sentence from active to passive voice.
Passivation is a linguistic technique that omits or ‘hides’ the actor performing a certain action or actions in a sentence. In political or media discourse, it’s typically used to obscure agency or responsibility.
(To give you an idea of its rhetorical effects, it’s worth noting that children tend very quickly to become artful proponents of the passive style: “Did you bite your sister?” asks the furious father; “She was bitten,” responds the son.)
Here are some examples of that style as it features in Starmer’s opening remarks. Note that in each case, the material action described (murder, massacre, abduction) has no discernible perpetrator:
- “Jews murdered while protecting their families.” [By whom?]
- “Young people massacred at a music festival.” [By whom?]
- “People abducted from their homes.” [By whom?]
Later on, Starmer’s obfuscatory style intensifies. In the parlance of transitivity analysis, material actions – in which a person is shown causing certain actions to take place – are transformed into existential processes in which there is no actor, and certain actions simply occur, as if of their own volition.
(“Did you bite your sister?” asks the furious father; “There was a nip,” responds the son, who, in this version of the scenario, represents a particularly up-and-coming young rhetorician, well-prepared for his first job as a senior political advisor to a serving cabinet minister.)
“As the hours passed, more and more agonising reports emerged. Rape. Torture. Brutality beyond comprehension.” [Yes, but perpetrated by whom?]
In fact, “Hamas” doesn’t feature once in this, an article ostensibly written to (at least in part) honour the victims of October 7th 2023.
This can’t simply be explained away as a stylistic tic, since later on Starmer is happy to position Israel as a grammatical actor/subject, when it “launches a ground invasion in response [to Hezbollah’s rocket attacks]”.
Oddly enough, when Charles Moore emailed the Muslim Council of Britain (MCB) earlier this year to check its official position on the October 7th massacre, he received a similarly passivated response: “The Muslim Council of Britain condemns the killing of innocent people on October 7th.” (Eliding, of course, whether the MCB considers the Israelis killed to be “innocent”.)
But did the MCB agree that the murders of October 7th “were carried out chiefly by Hamas”, Lord Moore asked in a follow-up email that he says didn’t receive a response. “Apparently,” he concluded, “the biggest British Muslim umbrella organisation cannot bring itself to say a bad word against Hamas.”
Curiously, much later on Sunday October 6th, a separate piece appeared under Starmer’s name on the Government’s website. Far fewer people will read it, of course, but here, thankfully, the Prime Minister dispenses with the passive style, stating:
October 7th 2023 was the darkest day in Jewish history since the Holocaust. One year on, we stand together to remember the lives so cruelly taken.
Over a thousand people were brutally murdered. Men, women, children and babies killed, mutilated, and tortured by the terrorists of Hamas. Jewish people murdered whilst protecting their families. [emphasis added]
It’s almost as if, in writing for the Sunday Times, the Prime Minister was attempting to triangulate his message about the slaughter, rape and mutilation of Jewish civilians to avoid antagonising a certain section of the electorate.
A certain section of the electorate? According to the 2021 census, there are now 3.9 million Muslims in the U.K. Together, they make up around 6% of the population.
Traditionally, Muslims have been electorally loyal to Labour, but amid rising anger at Starmer’s reluctance to more strongly condemn Israeli actions in Gaza since October 7th, that support has been fraying around the edges.
During the 2024 local elections, for example, Labour’s vote share in wards with over 70% Muslim voters declined by 39 percentage points. At the national level, while 80% of Muslims voted for Labour at the 2019 General Election, analysis of the 2024 general election results by thinktank More in Common suggests that Labour’s vote share fell sharply in seats with large Muslim populations.
Muslim independent candidate Shockat Adam caused a huge upset by beating Labour’s Jonathan Ashworth, then the Shadow Paymaster General, to become the new MP for Leicester South. According to Jewish News, Adam’s brother is Ismail Patel, the founder of hardline Islamist group Friends of Al Aqsa, who previously said that he “salutes Hamas”, and has even met with senior figures from the terrorist group while visiting Gaza.
The seat of Dewsbury and Batley – a formerly safe Labour seat – was won by another ‘Gaza independent’, Iqbal Mohamed, who delivered a speech during the election in which he told a crowd to search their homes for “Zionist” items and thrown them out. “Tell your kids too – even candy shops can be dangerous,” he added, to gleeful chants from the crowd of “from the river to the sea”.
Another Labour stronghold, Birmingham Perry Bar, was won by independent Ayoub Khan. Previously a Liberal Democrat councillor, Khan was investigated by the party last year after he questioned the extent of Hamas’s October 7th terrorist attack, posting several clips on TikTok stating he had yet to see evidence that any of the terror group’s members had beheaded babies or committed rape.
Other Labour MPs only just fought off Muslim independents to hold on to their seats: Health Secretary Wes Streeting won 528 more votes than British-Palestinian activist Leanne Mohamad in Ilford North, while Naz Shah held her Bradford with a narrow majority of 707 votes over Muhammed Ali Islam.
No doubt it might seem a little far-fetched to suggest Starmer’s passivated rhetoric in the Sunday Times is part of some wider positioning strategy in relation to the Muslim vote and the rise of a dangerous sectarianism in British politics.
And yet it’s interesting to reflect that, of the 220 most marginal seats in the recent General Election, Islam was the largest minority religion in 129 of them (58.6%).
Allied to this is the fact that polling undertaken earlier this year, and described as “the largest of its kind” since October 7th, revealed that just one in four British Muslims believe Hamas committed murder and rape in Israel, while 46% say they sympathise with the group.
The figures, which were provided by polling company J.L. Partners for the Henry Jackson Society, a counter-extremism think tank, also suggested that younger Muslims described as more “well-educated” – who are, of course, part of an age demographic that is more likely to support Labour –were the most likely to think Hamas did not commit atrocities on October 7th.
Dr. Frederick Attenborough is the Free Speech Union’s Senior Communications Officer. You can find him on Substack here.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
The only crime committed here was by the police. Wasting police time.
Just the term “hate crime” makes me shudder.
When did hating something become a crime?
Terrifying, just terrifying.
I don’t think hatred comes naturally to most people. I think it’s usually in response to an event or stimulus. I find myself more inclined to hate certain groups the more I’m told I must love or respect or approve of them otherwise I will be considered Literally Hitler.
Who decides a word or action was motivated by hate? Apparently anyone hearing that word or seeing that action can decide it was hate and therefore it is infact HATE. —How bizarre.
It’s perfect. The more opaque and nebulous the crime definition, the more blanket control they can exert. It’s literally Orwell’s wrongthink.
“we take any allegation of hate crime seriously”
Pity they don’t seem to take actual real crimes seriously any more.
Is there an actual “hate crime” law?
John James is correct. Pride now has nothing to do with the gay community. I’ve even read of gays being called ”TERFs” by the trans loonies FFS! Just one example of how this whole shebang is now used as a vehicle for gender and trans ideologies to push on with their agenda to recruit the vulnerable and infect society with their poisonous madness;
”A female-only lesbian advocacy group in France was excluded from their local Pride parade on the basis that they did not allow the membership of trans-identified males. Femmes Entre Elles was labeled “transphobic” for restricting its advocacy to issues faced by women.
Femmes Entre Elles, which translates to “Women Among Themselves,” is a single-sex association for lesbian and bisexual women that has operated for over 30 years. It has been involved in campaigns to support women’s sex-based rights and the rights of lesbian women.
But on May 27, the group was informed via email that they were not welcome to participate in the annual Pride march in Rennes, which was held on June 17. Leading local LGBT center Iskis explained that the decision was made because Femmes Entre Elles did not welcome the membership of men who claim to be women.”
https://reduxx.info/france-female-only-lesbian-groups-barred-from-pride-month-events-over-transphobia/
And these two peeps from the group Gays Against Groomers make a lot of sense in this short clip;
”There is indeed a “civil war” happening as some in the LGB community try to distance themselves from the TQIA++ because of the madness. Especially the grooming and indoctrination of minors in places like over-sexualized drag shows. They’re both standing with Olympus Spa and are against transgender women with penis’ entering this women only facility. Incredible insight from both of them.”
https://twitter.com/choeshow/status/1670312589992280064?cxt=HHwWgIDS5e2ckq4uAAAA
Trans activists are often anti gay and lesbian as research has shown that a lot of people who go through a gender questioning phase mature into happy well adjusted same sex attracted adults. Convincing them that they’re actually of a different gender is therefore highly damaging to a lot of young people who are gay or lesbian but have yet to figure out that’s their true sexuality. More gays and lesbians need to stand up against the idealogues e.g. by having nothing to do with stonewall or the traditional pride movement and joining the LGB Alliance.
Well there’s not a trans person in sight ( at least, not an attention-seeking ‘in yer face’ one anyway ) but I’d be interested in hearing what men think of Bud Light’s new ad. There’s like, zillions of other lagers and beers on the market so I think anyone who chooses to spend money on this kack is just mental tbh.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wg7iiVKJ2CU&ab_channel=BudLight
I don’t watch much TV nor am I exposed to much advertising in other contexts but I find the majority of the ads I see distasteful or annoying. A lot of them are blatantly political. The advertising industry must be quite a horrible one to work in.
https://www.technocracy.news/universal-basic-income-and-the-anti-human-agenda/
“No less than eighty UBI trials are underway globally, and many more have already started and ended.”
On the back of the bus in front of me at this moment is a police advert telling me that saying “nice legs, Hun” is a hate crime and gives me a number to report it to!
That is really sick.
https://thedailybeagle.substack.com/p/near-to-zero-sterilisation-viruses
Sterilisation was baked in to the so-called “vaccines.”
“Everything is now policed except crime.”————I think I heard that on the Mark Steyn Show . ————–Hey Mark we love you mate. Maybe Laurence Fox could have really confused the police though had he burned a golliwog.
I DO like this guy. Well done Lozza.