Support our Nation today - please donate here
Opinion

Kneecap’s offence is tiny in comparison with Israel’s crimes

03 May 2025 6 minute read
(left to right) members of Kneecap, Mo Chara, JJ O’Dochartaigh and Moglai Bap attending the Irish Film and Television Academy (IFTA) Awards Ceremony. Photo Brian Lawless/PA Wire

Martin Shipton

This week a reader took me to task for the first sentence in a story I wrote about the cancellation of a netball tournament in Cardiff.

The offending sentence read: “The governing body of Netball in Europe has decided to call off an Open Competition it was organising in Wales rather than exclude Israel because of its slaughter of more than 52,000 people in Gaza.”

The offended reader wrote: “This seems less of a news story and more of a political editorial and I’m in no doubt of your political allegiances.”

I disagreed and exchanged a few emails with the reader, who accused me without a shred of evidence of supporting Hamas because I opposed Israel’s deadly activities in Gaza.

Euphemisms

Given the overwhelming evidence available over a long period, it seems incontrovertible to me that the Israel Defence Forces’ activities in Gaza amount to slaughter. It’s the deployment of euphemisms by media outlets and politicians that softens the impact of Israel’s genocidal war and enables more atrocities to be committed. It also diverts criticism from the fact that the UK continues to supply arms to the aggressors.

Another diversionary tactic seen in recent days has been the demonisation of the Irish language rap band Kneecap. Firstly they were criticised for making pro-Palestine and anti-Israel statements during concerts. Calls were made by the likes of Sharon Osbourne for them to have their US visas revoked.

Then some old concert video footage was uncovered in which a member of the band shouted: “The only good Tory is a dead Tory. Kill your local MP!” In a later video a band member shouted: “Up Hamas, up Hezbollah!” As a result, the band is now under investigation by the Counter-Terrorism branch of the Metropolitan Police.

While the shouted comments may be crass, they should be seen as performative rather than inspired by a terrorist motive.

Rampage

When the 18th Century French philosopher Denis Diderot wrote the provocative statement: “Man will never be free until the last king is strangled with the entrails of the last priest”, he didn’t literally expect that citizens would go on a rampage, killing priests and kings.

Instead he was hoping to shake socially conservative forces out of their complacency while providing republicans with a rallying cry. To interpret his words literally is absurd.

More than 100 years ago the Dada artistic movement put on performances and “happenings” in Paris and other European cities that were geared to offending the powerful in society. Again, they were performative in content, intended to shock rather than provoke criminal acts.

Likewise, punk rock was as much about undermining and overturning conventional musical expectations as about the music itself. It was a way of channelling rebellion in an artistic context, laced with satire in its most effective examples.

When Sid Vicious of the Sex Pistols sang, in his parody of Frank Sinatra’s My Way, that he killed a cat “and did it my way”, he wasn’t confessing to an authentic act of animal cruelty, but mocking a self-satisfied ballad form.

It will be interesting to see whether any evidence is gathered by the Counter-Terrorism branch that indicates a rise in terrorist crimes as a result of Kneecap’s shouted comments. Equally, it would be an interesting research project to establish whether those who have been most vocal in their condemnation of Kneecap have also condemned Israel’s genocide in Gaza.

A superficial Google search suggests there is little, if any, correlation.

Ironically the performative nature of Kneecap’s “offensive” comments is matched by a performative reaction to it by politicians.

We are living through a time where performative politics is seen by many politicians as the preferred way for them to practise their trade. Regrettably, this is a substitute for engagement with reality.

Nevertheless, performative politics can be successful – at least for a while. In the United States, where the notion of “big government” raises the hackles of many voters, Elon Musk’s DOGE (Department of Government Efficiency) was undoubtedly a vote winner when it was a performative offering before the presidential election. When put into practice, however, it hasn’t taken long for the idea to unravel. Dismissing huge numbers of federal employees and closing down sections of government is creating what should have been predictable chaos. Coupled with the negative impact of Trump’s tariffs, it is causing serious damage to the US economy.

Performative politics

Following Reform UK’s victories in local government elections in England, performative politics is reaching new heights in the UK. According to Nigel Farage, local versions of DOGE will be unleashed in the councils won by Reform with a view to making huge savings from “woke” projects that can be diverted into front-line services.

For many, the idea sounds attractive, and undoubtedly it played a role in Reform’s success at the ballot box. But it represents an unrealistic view of local government finance.

The great majority of any local authority’s budget is already committed to paying for the services it is obliged by law to provide: education, social services, rubbish collection, road maintenance etc. The amount available for discretionary spend on “vanity” projects is actually quite small.

Perhaps surprisingly, this point was made well by Glen Sanderson, the Conservative leader of Northumberland County Council, during the BBC election coverage which saw Reform become the second biggest group in the council.

He said that in the previous council term, councillors from different parties had worked well together with a realistic understanding of how local government finances operated. He hoped that would continue.

Nigel Farage has already given an indication of what kind of priorities Reform-led councils will have. He has suggested that the UK Government will be told not to send any more migrants to the areas where his party now runs the council.

This is another act of performative politics. He knows full well that such decisions are made ultimately by the Home Office. It’s easy to envisage how he could manufacture a crisis in the run-up to the next general election, with a stand-off between Reform’s councils and the UK Labour government over where migrants will be sent.

Inevitably this will stoke community tension – something that will not disconcert Mr Farage in the slightest, for whom such disruption is a key to winning parliamentary seats, and possibly winning the general election.

We’re into dangerous territory, and doubtless such performative tactics will be used by Reform in the run-up to next year’s Senedd election.

The only way for other parties to combat this is by being honest with the electorate and offering tangible and credible improvements to their lives. And that’s not easy, given the Brexit drain on our economy bequeathed to us by Mr Farage and others.


Support our Nation today

For the price of a cup of coffee a month you can help us create an independent, not-for-profit, national news service for the people of Wales, by the people of Wales.

Subscribe
Notify of
guest

9 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Chris Hale
Chris Hale
14 days ago

Thoughtful and well written piece. Too many people are happy to ignore the behaviour of those they support whilst focussing on those they oppose. No one group should get a free pass on the basis of someone else’s misbehaviour.

Another Richard
Another Richard
14 days ago

French citizens, not long after Diderot’s death, did indeed go on a rampage and killed their king and queen and hundreds of priests, though admittedly the regal entrails were not employed as a murder weapon. Whether that was what Diderot really intended we shall never know, though he contributed to the climate that allowed it to happen. Similarly a band encouraging its audience to murder their local MP surely makes such an event more likely, and is rightly proscribed for that reason.

Bruce
Bruce
13 days ago

Hamas should be condemned for intentionally provoking Israel into a response they knew would harm huge numbers of the very people they are supposed to be looking after. Israel should be condemned for allowing themselves to be played in this way. The international community should be condemned for leaving them to solve something they cannot solve on their own. We can assume the next 70 years will play out like the last, and everyone is responsible for that.

Ian Michael Williams
Ian Michael Williams
13 days ago
Reply to  Bruce

Just read the book…Line in the sand. You will get a better perspective than that provided by two chairs!!!

Bruce
Bruce
13 days ago

Understanding what went on in that era is for history buffs. We are where we are and all that matters now is finding a way for all kids born in the region today to survive and thrive in the region. The biggest barrier to progress now is the divisive politics that have been taken over by sinister forces. Many on the right are open and unashamed that their support for Israel is just a vehicle for their Islamaphobia because that support is always escalatory and solutions always involve impossible red lines to make sure there’s never future where Israelis and… Read more »

Jeff
Jeff
13 days ago

The politico’s that have come out against this group also pray at the feet of a man that has enabled more killing in Isreal and one who tried a violent coup in his own country resulting in deaths and has multiple felonies and abuse convictions.

Funny how their ire flows when it suits them.

Adrian
Adrian
12 days ago
Reply to  Jeff

That works both ways. Funny how we only see demonstrations on UK streets agains the killing of Muslims when there are Jews involved.

Our Supporters

All information provided to Nation.Cymru will be handled sensitively and within the boundaries of the Data Protection Act 2018.