The Modern Labor Party has now adopted a Sacredig-U attitude of political correctness on all issues for many years, at least for public consumption.
In the 1980s, her local government, especially in London, aimed the ideology that is now known as 'awake' about every available issue, from sexuality to racism. Especially under the leadership of Tony Blair, Labor embraced this series of ideas nationally and at the very top.
In its milestone legislation, the 2010 equality act, it embodied it in the law of the country, so the country transformed in many ways, some of them very controversial and radical.
It has been behind the most controversial policy of Labor of all, the encouragement of immigration on a scale that has never been seen before in our history, of which a labor employee was once unavoidable, was designed to rub the nose of law in Diversity and their arguments to be outdated '.
In that case you could imagine that the officer class of the workers' movement itself would be paragons of awake, personally dedicated to the secular religion they work day and night to spread all over the country. So they should, given their role in determining these changes.
So how should we respond to the behavior of Labor's long -term political professional Andrew Gwynne? Until last night he was a Minister of Health, who had worked in the Labor Party engine room for decades, first as a very young councilor and then as a member of parliament.
We have the right to ask, in the light of what the mail reveals about him on Sunday today, what this person actually believes.
Many of us remember how the new Blairite Labor party presented itself as 'Servants of the People', a new kind of politician. Even if they hadn't done that, decent members always promise to serve all their voters, not just those who support them.
Andrew Gwynne (photo) was fired as Minister of Health
The prime minister was right to get rid of Mr. Gwynne, but this will not close the issue or prevent questions about how widespread these views are in his ranks
But observe the dirty, insulting contempt that this servant of the people in secret aimed at a pensioner who was frank enough to admit that he had not voted.
Mr Gwynne's remark about the deceased American psychologist and peace activist Marshall Rosenberg, which he sounded “too Jewish” and “in militaristic,” also betrays intolerant ignorance. How can anyone be 'too Jewish' except in the spirit of an anti -Semite?
The lifelong dedication of Mr Rosenberg for non-violence and anti-racism would certainly meet the approval of modern workers. This kind of thing is not just a joke, as the supporters of Mr. Gwynne could claim. It shows that he is simply not what he seems to be public.
His sals at Black Labor politicians do not suggest that Mr. Gwynne is completely in that score. And his rough comments about Angela Rayner sound like one of those old -fashioned club comedians that nobody even tries to defend today. It cannot be defended.
The prime minister was right to get rid of Mr. Gwynne, and his voters may be wise to look for a member of parliament somewhere else. But this will not close the problem. How widespread is this kind of thing to the ranks of waking up? How do we ever find out?
In the absence of answers to these questions, in the future we must treat the moralization of the left on such things with some suspicion and not let ourselves panic to cancel people for much smaller violations, at the game of men and women who may seem like It is very good on Mr. Gwynne than they would want us to know.
