There was a time when accusing someone of being a racist was one of the gravest allegations that could be made in British politics.
It was a charge reserved for genuine racial prejudice because it carried enormous moral weight. Today, however, some Labour politicians appear to use it as just another debating tactic.
This week, Education Secretary Bridget Phillipson publicly described Conservative MP Nick Timothy as a racist over comments he made about mass Muslim prayer in Trafalgar Square. Timothy’s argument was straightforward: religious belief is not the same thing as race, and criticising a public religious demonstration is not the same as attacking an ethnic group.
You may agree with his argument or disagree with it. That is the nature of politics. But it is perfectly legitimate to debate whether criticism of a religion or religious practice amounts to racism. Timothy himself summed up his concern afterwards: “Religious belief and racial identity are different things. That’s what’s wrong with the ‘Islamophobia’ definition. It’s already being used to shut down free speech.”
That is an argument worthy of debate. Instead, Labour reached for one of the most damaging accusations available.
Yet predictably, the moment Kemi Badenoch described Bridget Phillipson as “spiteful” during Prime Minister’s Questions yesterday, the outrage machine sprang into action. Social media filled with indignation, many left-wing commentators declared it unacceptable and Labour MPs rushed online to condemn Badenoch’s language.
She had not accused Phillipson of racism. She had not questioned her integrity. She had called her “spiteful”.
The contrast could hardly be more striking.
Labour appears perfectly comfortable with one of its senior ministers branding a Conservative MP a racist, yet somehow describing that minister as “spiteful” is treated as a shocking breach of political etiquette.
As Badenoch put it: Labour “love to dish it but they can’t take it.”
The same pattern was visible after Prime Minister’s Questions itself. Rather than engaging with Badenoch’s arguments or addressing Labour’s record, many commentators focused instead on her style, dismissing her as a “mean girl”.
Frankly, if being a “mean girl” means relentlessly exposing government failures, asking difficult questions and refusing to let ministers wriggle off the hook, Britain could do with a few more.
The Opposition is not elected to make ministers feel comfortable. Its constitutional role is to scrutinise, challenge and hold the Government to account. That inevitably means asking awkward questions and making ministers uncomfortable. Some commentators seem to have forgotten that.
Politics is not a therapy session. It is one of the toughest professions in public life. Anyone seeking to govern a country of nearly 70 million people should expect fierce criticism, difficult questions and robust exchanges across the dispatch box. If politicians cannot cope with that, they should ask themselves whether frontline politics is really the right place for them.
There is also a much bigger issue at stake.
For years, many on the Left have increasingly substituted argument with accusation. Instead of rebutting opinions they dislike, they question the motives of the people expressing them. Racist. Islamophobe. Bigot. Extremist. The labels come quickly and often.
That should concern everyone.
When accusations of racism become routine weapons in political debate, they inevitably lose some of their force. That is deeply damaging because genuine racism still exists and deserves to be confronted wherever it appears. Recklessly applying the label to legitimate political disagreement does not strengthen the fight against racism. It weakens it.
Britain’s democracy depends upon the ability to debate immigration, religion, integration, culture and national identity without participants automatically having their character destroyed for expressing controversial views. Robust disagreement is not intolerance. It is the essence of democratic politics.
The public are increasingly tired of politicians and commentators who demand complete freedom to insult, caricature and question the motives of their opponents, yet react with theatrical outrage the moment criticism comes back in their direction.
The country wants politicians with resilience. Ministers who can defend their record under pressure. Leaders who can withstand robust scrutiny rather than complain about the tone of the questions being asked.
Britain has faced wars, recessions, terrorist attacks and constitutional crises. It should not descend into collective outrage because one Cabinet minister was described as “spiteful”.
Kemi Badenoch’s assessment was succinct, but it captured the mood of many voters.
Labour has become very good at dishing it out.
It is becoming increasingly obvious that they are far less comfortable when the tables are turned.
Main Image: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
