Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Submit Guest Post

Using ‘cancel culture’ as a tactic in politics

Using ‘cancel culture’ as a tactic in politics

EVERYONE knows that the easiest way to win an election is to “encourage” the opposition candidate to stand down.

In Pakistan, Imran Khan has been cancelled by the army. He should have known those who live by the army die by the army.


He has been given a three-year jail sentence, allegedly for flogging state gifts. This seems like a trick to ensure he does not stand in the forthcoming general election. At least, he is luckier than Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, who was hanged by General Zia-ul Haq.

The first time I came across this practice of disqualifying the opposition was in Iran. An organisation, called “the Guardian Council”, controlled by the country’s supreme leader (first, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, and then Ali Hosseini Khamenei), vetted the candidates’ list and simply crossed out those deemed insufficiently “Islamic”.

In India, the Congress leader Rahul Gandhi was disqualified as an MP and rendered ineligible to stand in next year’s general election after a court in Gujarat gave him a two-year prison term for saying rude things about Narendra Modi’s surname.

LEAD Amit 1 Rahul Gandhi Rahul Gandhi

Last week the Supreme Court suspended his conviction, so it’s possible he will be able to fight in the 2024 election, after all.

Meanwhile, in Russia, Alexei Navalny, considered president Vladimir Putin’s principal adversary, has had his jail term extended to 19 years.

Many people think that the former US president Donald Trump should be in jail, but the more indictments he gets, the more popular he seems to become with his Republican supporters.

But then American democracy and the way the country elects its president defy logic.

Each of these cases – Imran, Rahul, Navalny and Trump – is different, but what is going on in Pakistan is of particular concern to British Asians.

Last weekend, the Sunday Times (6) called Pakistan “one of the most dangerous, violent and corrupt countries on earth”.

The irony of Imran’s predicament is he is no democrat. He was soft on the Taliban and used the army to get to power.

The real problem is 76 years after Muhammad Ali Jinnah forced the partition of India and demanded a safe homeland for Muslims, the military are entrenched in Pakistan. This is not the country Jinnah had envisaged. Even in Africa, the army has been told to return to barracks after the coup in Niger by other countries on the continent. But no one seems capable of doing the same in Pakistan.

And that is the cancer that needs to be cut out.

Add EasternEye As Your Trusted Source
preferred source on google news

More For You

Tackling hostility against Muslims matters for everyone

Anti immigration protesters attend the 'Glasgow Reclaims The Streets From Far-right Hatred And Violence' anti-racism protest on June 13, 2026 in Glasgow, Scotland.

Getty Images

Tackling hostility against Muslims matters for everyone

Sunder Katwala

Born in the mid-1970s I felt part of a lucky generation, which gained from pushing back the overt racism of that era. When we talk about stronger “social norms”, what we mean is that few people thought that monkey chants at the football or racist jokes on the telly were normal anymore – while more had Asian and black colleagues, neighbours and friends.

That past progress is put to the test today. A terrible crime in Belfast saw organised efforts at indiscriminate racist attacks on migrants and ethnic minorities, whose only connection to the crime was the colour of their skin. Those seeking to make racism fashionable again have the online megaphone of the world’s richest man, Elon Musk, on their side.

Past progress could be experienced unevenly, too. Being of mixed Indian and Irish Catholic parentage, I saw both identities rise in status once the BBC comedy Goodness Gracious Me inverted who could tell the jokes, and peace broke out in Northern Ireland. Yet, British Muslims of my generation felt under more intense scrutiny after the 9/11 terrorist attacks.

Efforts to tackle anti-Muslim hatred risked being stalled by arguments over what to call it and how to define it. The government’s new definition of anti-Muslim hostility seeks to transcend the confusion that the term “Islamophobia” could generate. But the challenge is not just to define the prejudice – but to find effective ways to shrink it.

There are sobering findings on the starting points in new research from British Future and the British Muslim Trust. More than half of British Muslims report experiencing prejudice based on their religion last year – a quarter in person and over a third online. A third of the public hold mostly negative views. One in six endorse sweeping and often indiscriminate hostility. Anti-Muslim hostility can have about twice the social reach as prejudice against other faith or ethnic minorities.

Tackling this hostility cannot be the responsibility of Muslims alone. It will take a whole-of-society effort. After all, this is foundationally about the attitudes towards a six per cent minority group, held among the 94 per cent of us who are not Muslim.

Keep ReadingShow less