🔗 Share this article

In contemporary Britain, protest has ceased to be a basic freedom. Rather, it has become a conditional permission that those in power grant or withhold at their discretion. This constitutes the underlying meaning of proposed measures that the ruling administration is putting forward, which would determine when and where demonstrations can occur, with potential imprisonment for those who disobey these limitations.

Erosion of Civil Liberties

Earlier administrations had already undermined this essential right: the previous Tory administration had granted law enforcement sweeping additional powers, which global rights bodies had censured as "significant and undue limitations" on democratic freedoms. Taken together, these progressive assaults on liberty have practically abolished the hard-won right to freedom of protest.

Using Atrocity to Rationalize Crackdown

The most recent restrictive measures are being justified by referring to last week's heinous anti-Jewish attack on a Manchester Islamic center. There should be universal agreement that the safety of British Jews must be safeguarded. However, employing this atrocity as a justification to suppress opposition is not only unrelated to that duty but perverts it.

"If you can't set boundaries at genocide, you probably can't draw the line at democratic principles," observed a prominent American author, whose words that rings true for the current government.

Historical Context of Protest

Reflect on Britain's rich history of public demonstration and direct action against racial discrimination and fascism, from the historic 1936 Cable Street confrontation to postwar Jewish groups opposing fascism and the 1970s demonstrations against the far-right organization. Many of these early protesters were branded as extremists in their era, even while they were advocating the freedoms of marginalized groups.

Present Situation

In the current complicated landscape, here's what's actually occurring: Israel – a sovereign nation – is committing acts that international bodies have characterized as systematic destruction. Its military actions have led the International Criminal Court to release legal indictments against Benjamin Netanyahu and his ex-military leader.

Western popular sentiment has shifted dramatically against Israel's violent actions. In Britain, a substantial majority of the public think Israel has likely committed international law violations. Most people would support a complete ban on arms sales to the nation, and approve the detention of Netanyahu.

Silencing Dissent

Having essentially lost the argument, Israel's supporters are now seizing on a despicable anti-Jewish attack to try to silence a mass movement against a moral catastrophe. The British government seems involved in this attempt. Ministers have not enacted comprehensive sanctions on Israel and have permitted arms exports to continue.

People who are protesting against the destruction of Gaza have been labeled as dangerous radicals. Yet there's a important factor why there hasn't been a broader crackdown on these demonstrators until now: extremely few protesters have made genuinely hateful statements about Jewish people, giving law enforcement little justification to take action.

Problematic Association

Merging Jewish heritage with the policies of the Israeli state is not only cynical but also dangerous. The standard interpretation of anti-Jewish prejudice, accepted by the British government and numerous institutions, has been appropriately questioned for potentially restricting valid commentary of Israel. However, there should be no disagreement about one of its central illustrations: that "holding Jewish people collectively responsible for decisions of the state of Israel" constitutes antisemitism.

Increasing Limitations

This is why we've arrived at a situation where law enforcement can suggest that protests opposing Israel's actions should be called off because they might "inadvertently or intentionally" support antisemitism. Similarly, political figures have declared that acknowledgment of Palestinian statehood has made political parties "complicit" in alleged abuse experienced by Jewish communities.

Double Standards

On the very day as the synagogue attack, the Israel's army killed dozens of Palestinians in Gaza – increasing the horrific toll from two years of daily atrocities that have taken tens of thousands of human lives. British politicians and news organizations have hardly hidden the limited value they attach to Palestinian existence. This represents one of the most brazen demonstrations of discrimination in contemporary society.

Crossing Thresholds

Our government has already crossed a concerning boundary by banning Palestine Action, a peaceful, anti-genocide activist collective. Thousands of British demonstrators have been arrested, mostly for carrying placards against genocide and supporting the proscribed group. Many of those arrested are pensioners; including a retired priest and the daughter of a World War II genocide survivor.

Global Comparisons

It's easy to see where this path leads. In the United States, political leaders helped demonize demonstrations supporting Palestine: a ex-political leader suggested that some were "linked with" foreign governments, while the sitting leader characterized such protests as antisemitic. In taking these actions, they helped legitimize the authoritarian crackdown on such protests – and on freedom of expression in general.

Future Concerns

If a conservative administration comes to power, it would be granted extensive authority to suppress opposition. What might a new administration do with this restrictive framework? Our forebears struggled, suffered and died to secure our freedoms. We may eventually regret how casually we permitted them to slip away.