𝓤𝓷𝓲𝓽𝓮𝓭 𝓝𝓮𝔀𝓼

The word community is the most overused in political language. Ordinary citizens rarely talk about “communities” but the word is never far from the lips of politicians and officials. For them, it is a tool of linguistic appeasement, designed to conceal social breakdown and provide the illusion of solidarity where none exists.

Through constant repetition, it’s become a kind of cringey, progressive codeword to avoid hard-edged reality. So religious belief has been turned into membership of a “faith community,” just as schools are now frequently called “learning communities”. The term “community funding” usually means a subsidy from the taxpayer, while “community leaders” tend to be self-appointed or unelected, and “police community support officers” are inadequate substitutes for real police officers.

The word also hovered over the government’s announcement this week of a new wide-ranging definition of Islamophobia, backed up by the appointment of anti-Muslim hostility Czar. Both steps were necessary, said the Ministry of Housing and Communities, to “ensure that Muslim communities feel safe and protected”.

Although this more comprehensive document is for the guidance of authorities and will not be enshrined in new legislation, campaigners for democracy rightly fear that the move will have a chilling effect on freedom of speech. Legitimate criticism of Islam will become more difficult. A climate of censorship will be established, as if the blasphemy laws had been brought back.

There is absolutely no justification for these steps. We already have powerful laws against racial harassment, discrimination and hate speech. Yet again, Islam is being accorded special treatment. No other religion in Britain is so favoured. We don’t have anti-Sikh hostility guidelines or a Czar to tackle anti-Christian prejudice.

The simple reason for the Labour Government’s action is fear. Enfeebled Ministers are scared not only of the physical threat of militant Islam but also of losing the political support of Muslims, who, until recently, have backed their party. But the Denton and Gorton by-election, where the Muslim votes were crucial for the unprecedented Green triumph, shows that traditional allegiances are changing.

The impulse to appease was further highlighted in an official strategy paper on integration that accompanied the publication of the Islamophobia definition. Amid all the promises about building confidence and cohesion, a sense of weakness ran through the paper’s terminology, reflected in the use of the word “community” 88 times and the word “communities” 82 times.

As that case shows, the deployment of the term has gone into overdrive in recent years, due to the social revolution fuelled by the state’s fixation with mass immigration-fuelled cultural diversity. The dramatic scale of change was hailed in 2000 by the influential Commission the Future of Multi-Ethnic Britain chaired by Lord Bhikhu Parekh, a left-wing political scientist, who argued that our nation should now be regarded as “a community of communities”.

Most of the report’s recommendations were subsequently implemented, such as the recruitment of diversity officers, and the introduction of racial awareness training. Perhaps of greater significance was the idea of British society as a collection of “communities,” a concept that bolstered divisive, grievance-led identity politics, where separatism has prevailed rather than integration.

Too frightened to impose our British values, the ruling elite has allowed brutish alien practices to flourish in our midst, as highlighted by female genital mutilation and the vile activities of predatory grooming gangs. At least the Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood is showing welcome signs of toughness, as she cracks down on asylum abuses and bans the notorious, pro-Tehran Al QUds march this weekend in central London.

But too many of her colleagues have none of that spirit. In a profoundly depressing example of cowardice in the face of the militants, several northern councils have issued extraordinary warnings to art teachers that music, dance and paintings could be considered idolatrous under Sharia jurisdiction.

The warnings concluded that sensitivity is needed to “foster cohesion in local communities”. Submission to Sharia should have no place in British society. It is a wrecking ball at the heart of our civilisation – and no amount of world play or wishful thinking can deny that.

The Ramsay MacDonald you never knew

Ramsay MacDonald, the first Labour Prime Minister who came to be loathed by his party for forming a Coalition with the Tories in 1931 during an economic crisis, liked to pose as the weary, lonely widower whose heart was permanently broken by the death of his wife in 1911.

But as I have found in researching his life for a new biography, he was actually an ardent romantic, whose female lovers included at least two society hostesses, a concert pianist, an aristocratic poet, a Labour MP, a racing driver and a Romanian princess. Even Boris Johnson would struggle to match that record of passionate exuberance.

Armed Forces saga is a disgrace

Even with unemployment on the rise, the Armed Forces are struggling for new recruits. But that should come as no surprise, given service for King and Country can end up with an appearance in the dock after a witch-hunt by money-grabbing lawyers.

This week it was revealed that 242 Special Forces troops, including 60 current serving personnel, are being hounded through judicial inquiries. The entire saga is a disgrace. Brave servicemen and women deserve praise not persecution. Meanwhile senior Irish Republicans, whose movement brought murder and mayhem to our streets, continue to walk around with impunity.

A surprise star for Radio 4

In recent years, I have become a reluctant listener to BBC Radio Four, put off by the air of smugness and perceived bias. But all that has changed as a result of the current war. I have found the station’s coverage to be superb, packed with fascinating insights from experts and vivid reports from correspondents in the region.

The surprise star, however, has been the Today programme’s Anna Foster. She only joined the show a year ago, but she continually displays a nerveless authority and fluency behind the microphone. In addition, she is deeply knowledgeable about the region, having been the BBC’s Middle East correspondent. In this strange conflict, she is an undoubted winner

Democracy will have to wait

The 5th Earl of Rosebery, the last Liberal peer in No 10, always found the House of Lords an absurd anachronism in the age of democracy. From the 1880s he unsuccessfully pushed for radical reform of its structure, much to the fury of Queen Victoria, who described him as “almost communistic”.

Rosebery would have been amazed at the long survival of the hereditary peers. But this West End farce is finally over, for the two main parties have agreed to remove the last of the hereditaries, though they have not come up with a meaningful plan to further reform. Democracy will have to wait, despite the end of the peers show.

A dilemma for The Donald

President Trump’s war on Iran is popular with neither the US public nor the base of his MAGA (Make America Great Again) movement. Some of his key media supporters have turned against him, declaring that the aerial assault is a breach of his promise to keep America out of overseas adventures.

Joe Rogan, the world’s most successful podcaster, describes the war as “so insane”. Cable show host Tucker Carlson goes even further, condemning the attack as “disgusting and evil”. Trump’s dilemma is that the Iranian regime is still in place, battered but not broken and seems to retain the capacity to fight, yet the longer the war goes on, the greater the economic damage across the world. Once again the lesson of modern history is that wars can rarely be won by air power alone.