Social work professor at Royal Holloway University of London - equality, social justice, human rights- Views all my own ☮️🕊️🇵🇸🍉💚
London, England
Joined November 2013
- Tweets36.5K
- Following2.7K
- Followers6.8K
- Likes47.6K
Anna Gupta retweeted
One of the clearest speakers in the world right now about Zionism.
“Zionism has brought millions of people to a state of utter derangement,” Pulitzer Prize winner Benjamin Moser said, noting that pro-Israel commentators struggle to even acknowledge that Palestinians are human.
Moser questioned the value of platforming such views in the name of “balance,” comparing it to debating the merits of Nazism or inviting a member of the KKK to provide an opposing perspective when interviewing a Black guest.
@WeTheBrandon | @BenMoser123
Anna Gupta retweeted
Andy Burnham: "I cannot support this antisemitic policy."
Perhaps Andy Burnham should reflect on why he is conflating a political ideology with an entire religious community. Zionism and Judaism are not interchangeable. Treating them as though they are is deeply problematic,
Zionism is a political ideology, not a religion.
Calling for recognition that Zionism is racism is neither inherently racist nor antisemitic.
To me, this looks less like Andy Burnham standing up against antisemitism and more like him protecting Israel from legitimate political criticism.
Shame on you @UKLabour
BREAKING: Labour has announced it's pulling out of coalition and power-sharing with the Greens in 11 local authorities over the party's 'Zionism is racism' policy.
trib.al/rIdzsOQ
📺 Sky 501, Virgin 602, Freeview 233 and YouTube
Anna Gupta retweeted
It looks like working class Americans are turning out to tell Trump what they think of his racist ICE.
Palantir works for ICE.
It’s a disgrace Labour haven’t booted them out of the NHS.
Anna Gupta retweeted
I followed this wise man today, and honestly, u should too.
The way he dismantles Israel’s carefully manufactured image and puts into words what so many are afraid to say is an absolute art form.
Every word hits. Go give him a follow @BenMoser123
Anna Gupta retweeted
The right wing of the Greens would rather be a party of one MP and 50,000 members, than a party of multiple MPs and hundreds of thousands of members that actually stands for something!
Anna Gupta retweeted
People don't seem to understand that if police didn't act, we'd have 4,000 of these terrorist grannies out there, not hurting anyone at all. It doesn't bear thinking about.
Anna Gupta retweeted
I saw this happen in Labour in real time.
A new Party Leader that inspires tens of thousands of young people to join the party who are then accused by the party establishment of being "infiltrators" "extremists" and "hard left" for having the temerity to hope and organise for something different. #bbclaurak
Anna Gupta retweeted
A meeting was scheduled between @ShabanaMahmood, @AndreaEganGS & Kolade, a Nigerian careworker. Kolade wanted to explain how the changes to the immigration system would impact on people like him.
So what did Mahmood do?
She banned him from the meeting
theguardian.com/uk-news/2026…
Anna Gupta retweeted
Please take a few minutes to read this exceptional response to from @Farida_N.
Farida is a writer, Pan-Africanist and human rights activist from Togo, who has spent much of her life fighting authoritarianism and campaigning for democracy.
Her response is a powerful reminder of the sheer scale of Britain's involvement in the transatlantic slave trade, and the extraordinary wealth accumulated through the exploitation of millions of people.
But there's an even bigger conversation we need to have.
The exploitation didn't simply end with the abolition of slavery. It continued through colonialism, resource extraction, unequal trade and economic systems that concentrated wealth and power in the hands of a few.
And the consequences are still with us.
Look at the extraordinary imbalance in global wealth, economic power and governance today. Look at how much of the world's resources come from poorer nations, and how much of the wealth generated ultimately accumulates elsewhere.
This isn't simply about assigning blame for the past, or even reparations.
It's about confronting the structures that continue to perpetuate inequality today.
We cannot change history. But we absolutely can change the economic system that continues to reproduce so many of its injustices.
Please read Farida's response. And consider not just what happened in the past, but what we're still allowing to happen today.
Kemi, congratulations on leading a major British party as a Black Woman. It takes real talent to rise to where you are and deceit is what it takes to rise as a Black leader in a western Conservative Party.
It is a pity the climb did not leave room for a history book and since you chose to argue in the language of history, let us do the history. Let’s dissect your verbal diarrhea point by point.
Everyone participated." Slavery existed on every continent. So did war, and nobody calls a village feud the World War. The transatlantic trade ran for 366 years (1501 to 1866) and put about 12.5 million Africans on ships, of whom about 1.8 million died before they saw the Americas, according to the Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade Database. It ran through joint-stock companies, chartered monopolies, Lloyd's underwriters and acts of Parliament. It was hereditary, because the law made the child of an enslaved mother property from birth. It was racial, because a whole continent was defined as chattel. No other system in history combined those features at that scale. Dissolving all of it into "people from every continent" is far worse than intellectual dishonesty.
Britain was a market leader, not a participant. British ships carried about 3.2 million Africans, second only to Portugal and Brazil. The Treaty of Utrecht (1713) gave Britain the asiento, a thirty-year monopoly to supply 4,800 enslaved Africans a year to Spanish America. The Royal African Company, chartered in 1672 and headed by the Duke of York, later James II, branded its captives "DY". During Edward Colston's years in its leadership it shipped about 84,000 people, and roughly 19,000 died on the way.
You say British taxpayers should not answer for what happened before they were born. They did. In 1833 Britain borrowed £20 million to compensate slaveholders, and taxpayers serviced that loan until 2015, including the descendants of the enslaved. So the principle you invoke was not applied when the cheque went to slaveholders. It only appears when the cheque changes direction.
"Navel-gazing" is a curious charge from someone whose party spends more energy on the past (Empire nostalgia, culture war crusades) than most of those you accuse. Defend Britain if you must. But do not use your Nigerian name as the permission slip for arguments Nigerians know better than anyone.
Anna Gupta retweeted
Kemi, congratulations on leading a major British party as a Black Woman. It takes real talent to rise to where you are and deceit is what it takes to rise as a Black leader in a western Conservative Party.
It is a pity the climb did not leave room for a history book and since you chose to argue in the language of history, let us do the history. Let’s dissect your verbal diarrhea point by point.
Everyone participated." Slavery existed on every continent. So did war, and nobody calls a village feud the World War. The transatlantic trade ran for 366 years (1501 to 1866) and put about 12.5 million Africans on ships, of whom about 1.8 million died before they saw the Americas, according to the Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade Database. It ran through joint-stock companies, chartered monopolies, Lloyd's underwriters and acts of Parliament. It was hereditary, because the law made the child of an enslaved mother property from birth. It was racial, because a whole continent was defined as chattel. No other system in history combined those features at that scale. Dissolving all of it into "people from every continent" is far worse than intellectual dishonesty.
Britain was a market leader, not a participant. British ships carried about 3.2 million Africans, second only to Portugal and Brazil. The Treaty of Utrecht (1713) gave Britain the asiento, a thirty-year monopoly to supply 4,800 enslaved Africans a year to Spanish America. The Royal African Company, chartered in 1672 and headed by the Duke of York, later James II, branded its captives "DY". During Edward Colston's years in its leadership it shipped about 84,000 people, and roughly 19,000 died on the way.
You say British taxpayers should not answer for what happened before they were born. They did. In 1833 Britain borrowed £20 million to compensate slaveholders, and taxpayers serviced that loan until 2015, including the descendants of the enslaved. So the principle you invoke was not applied when the cheque went to slaveholders. It only appears when the cheque changes direction.
"Navel-gazing" is a curious charge from someone whose party spends more energy on the past (Empire nostalgia, culture war crusades) than most of those you accuse. Defend Britain if you must. But do not use your Nigerian name as the permission slip for arguments Nigerians know better than anyone.
Slavery was an evil in which people from every continent and region participated. We should be honest about the whole history, not select the parts that are politically convenient today, especially given Britain's leading role in ending the transatlantic slave trade.
If Caribbean countries are asking Britain for a formal apology for Britain’s role in the transatlantic slave trade, will they also be asking the same of the descendants of African kingdoms, rulers and merchants who captured, sold and profited from the trade?
On demands for reparations, whether through cash or debt relief, we have been down this track before. Twenty-five years ago, Jubilee 2000, Drop the Debt and Make Poverty History argued that cancelling the debts of poorer countries would give them a fresh start. More than $100 billion of debt was eventually written off, but many of those countries have since built up even bigger debts. Labour are already spending too much on Britain's welfare state, now is not the time for Andy Burnham to be providing global welfare.
There is no reason British taxpayers today should be held financially responsible for things that happened generations before any of us were born. And I have even less patience for political elites in commonwealth countries who don’t know how to make their own citizens prosperous now looking for another opportunity to blame Britain.
As Prime Minister, Andy Burnham should be Britain’s greatest defender. Instead, he is writing articles saying we need to confront our history (as if we haven't done enough of that) and considering another formal historical apology. Tony Blair already expressed Britain’s deep sorrow and regret for our role in the slave trade nearly twenty years ago. There is no need to do so again.
This is all another navel-gazing distraction. The Commonwealth should be looking forward, not endlessly backwards. That means economic partnerships to make us all richer and deeper military and security cooperation against common threats. If every Commonwealth summit becomes an exercise in presenting Britain with demands for cash then we need to start asking if it is worth the effort.
Anna Gupta retweeted
It was a real privilege attending Macklemore’s concert last night.
A few observations:
1. The arena fits 12500 people. All proceedings would go to help three Palestinian people. IT SOLD OUT IN 10 MINUTES.
2. Listen to Macklemore’s message in the clip below. It could not have been more inclusive, pro peace, and pro love. THIS IS THE PERSON THAT THE PRO-ISRAEL CROWD HAS TRIED TO CANCEL - AND WHO ED SHEERAN BETRAYED.
3. Looking at the crowd, the stadium was packed with Brits of all backgrounds and races who were all there for the music AND for the cause of Palestine. Their dedication was impressive. I suspect most of them were unaware of the situation just 4 years ago. But the genocide has been a FORMATIVE experience for them, particularly for the young. The Palestinian cause will remain with them for the REST OF THEIR LIVES, I suspect, just as the anti-apartheid fight has for those who combated apartheid South Africa in the 70s and 80s.
4. Israel is well aware what it has done to the Palestinians, but it appears oblivious to what it has done to itself. An entire generation of young people, including in the West, will likely never side with Israel again.
Anna Gupta retweeted
#Bismillah-c'est la lumière
Palestine-the revealer:
Its martyrdom is awakening the world.
Its struggle against Apartheid, the beating heart of all free beings.
Sumud, the grammar of resistance against all forms of oppression.
Thank you @mackelmore for being the comrade you are
Anna Gupta retweeted
This is the slightly more genteel, Green Party version of what the PLP, Labour Together and the party bureaucracy did to Corbyn.
This isn't complicated. If every time large numbers of, primarily young, idealistic people become enthused by politics and seek to engage in the political process you tell them go away, you are not wanted and call them entryists - it is really, really bad for democracy.
thetimes.com/uk/politics/art…
Anna Gupta retweeted
There's no environmental justice without social, racial and economic justice.
Join.greenparty.org.uk
Anna Gupta retweeted
Mr Burnham, Silencing dissent did not use to be a British value. And certainly not a Labour value!
I know something about being banned. In 2024, the German state banned me from political activity on its soil, even by video link. My crime was helping organise a congress in Berlin congress, along with German Jews, about the genocide in Gaza. So I write as someone who has seen at first hand how quickly a liberal democracy sheds its liberalism once the subject turns to Palestine.
Now the UK government has banned Andreas Malm, a respected Swedish academic and author, from entering Britain to speak at the launch of Tribune. For generations, Tribune has given a voice to democrats, socialists and anyone who refuses to accept injustice as the natural order. Keeping one of Europe's important thinkers away from its platform is an act of political censorship, plain and simple.
Andy Burnham's admirers like to think of him as the cuddly antidote to Keir Starmer's stone cold managerialism. This decision shows otherwise. When it comes to silencing those who stand up against the genocide of Palestinians, the new Prime Minister is just as authoritarian and just as callous as the man he replaced. Only the smile is different.
Lift the ban. Let Andreas Malm speak. And let Tribune hold its launch without the state deciding who may address it.
theguardian.com/uk-news/2026…
Anna Gupta retweeted
Well. We shall see what Adrian says - I hope this is misreporting. But can we be clear that there is no contradiction between speaking out for human rights and for nature. Why on earth would environmentalists tolerate genocide? Humans being nature after all! People and planet. Both.
Anna Gupta retweeted
A Labour MP has publicly demanded that the @BBC cancel me as a contributor. And when you look at who he is and what he has chosen to scrutinise, it gets rather interesting.
Labour MP David Taylor has been publicly outspoken against Iran. He has also defended Labour Friends of Israel in Parliament and has been in support of the proscription of Palestine Action.
He has now written directly to the BBC Director-General challenging the decision to invite me onto @bbcsml Sunday Morning Live.
He questioned whether I was suitable to appear, asked whether the BBC should review its editorial decision, and questioned whether by giving me a platform the BBC was “lending credibility” to me as a commentator on Iran and the Middle East.
So let's be clear about what happened.
This wasn't simply an MP criticising something I said.
He was questioning why the BBC had given me a platform in the first place.
And he didn't keep his intervention private.
He published the letter himself.
I was on Sunday Morning Live to discuss whether full-face coverings should be banned in public.
I wasn't there to discuss Iran.
Yet Taylor's letter focuses heavily on my views on Iran and Israel, old social media posts, some fake, and my visits to Iran - ultimately questioning whether I should have been given a platform at all.
Taylor has chosen to scrutinise my political views, my commentary on Iran and my visits to Iran.
But where is the same scrutiny of politicians, commentators and public figures who regularly appear on national television despite travelling to Israel on sponsored or organised political delegations and maintaining documented relationships with pro-Israel organisations?
Where are the letters to the BBC questioning whether they should be given a platform?
I am not saying travelling to Israel is inherently improper. I am not equating a visit to Israel with a visit to Iran.
I am asking why the standard appears to be different when it comes to me.
My appearance generated thousands of likes and hundreds of comments across my social media.
People clearly wanted to hear the discussion.
But a sitting Labour MP has gone to the BBC Director-General to question whether I should have been given that platform.
He says in his letter that “both freedom of expression and open public debate are essential.”
I agree.
But freedom of expression and open public debate cannot mean politicians deciding which voices are sufficiently acceptable to appear on British television.
I am perfectly happy to be challenged on anything I have actually said.
What I will not accept is political disagreement being turned into a question of whether I should be given a voice at all.
The Telegraph is now preparing an article about this. I have given them a full statement in response, and they have told me they intend to treat the article fairly.
So im putting these deep concerns into the public domain too.
I've published the letter. Read it.
Look at exactly what a sitting MP asked the BBC to consider about me.
Then ask yourself why my voice has attracted this particular level of scrutiny.
And if you think that raises legitimate questions about political pressure, editorial independence and selective scrutiny, share this far and wide.
Anna Gupta retweeted
On behalf of the free people of #Palestine, I had the honour of presenting @macklemore with a symbolic gift at the end of his electrifying show in London tonight.
A small piece of Palestine: olive wood craft, made specially for him, holding two glass tubes. One contains Palestinian soil, representing our roots, steadfastness and sacrifice; the other holds olive leaves, symbolising our enduring hope for peace and justice.
Free Palestine.
Free all.
