Musk’s grooming onslaught shows politics needs a new playbook

Unlock the Editor’s Digest for free

Roula Khalaf, Editor of the FT, selects her favourite stories in this weekly newsletter.

Let’s recognise this latest political furore over grooming gang scandals for what it is. The sudden sanctimonious concern among politicians of the right for a subset of child rape victims — only those abused by men of Pakistani heritage — is beyond cynical.

Conservative leaders who failed to implement the recommendations of the last inquiry into child sexual abuse suddenly demand a new one. The runner-up for the Tory leadership blames the abuse on “alien cultures” (was it alien cultures when the perpetrators were in the Roman Catholic or Anglican church?). A Reform UK MP demands an inquiry “into why young British white girls are being raped by men of Pakistani heritage”. The intent is clear and spurred on by competition for the ethno-nationalist affections of Elon Musk.

It is a dream scandal for those exploiting it. Either they secure their demand for a new national inquiry, to then be further milked, or they can cry cover-up. And it plays to a wider agenda of smashing faith in the institutions of liberal society. 

We can see the falsehood in many of the claims. The grooming gangs that preyed on young girls in towns such as Rotherham, Oxford, Oldham and Telford have not been ignored. There have been multiple inquiries over the past decade. Far from being revealed by the street thug Tommy Robinson, it was exposed by The Times newspaper — you don’t get more mainstream media than that. Prime Minister Keir Starmer, at the time director of public prosecutions, has in fact been praised for acting to ensure convictions.

But, once you get past the cynicism, here’s the thing. These atrocities did take place. The abuse was sickening and sustained; the details horrific. Ordinary people were shockingly failed. Misguided sensitivities about the fact that a high number of the gangs comprised men of Pakistani background and a fear of appearing racist were prioritised, shamefully, over pursuing the abusers. As significant was the contempt of police and the authorities for victims they dismissed as an underclass. 

The arguments over another, more specific, inquiry into grooming gang cases are not clear cut. In Starmer’s words “reasonable people” can disagree on this. The core facts and common patterns of failure in abuse cases (a tight community of abusers, a disbalance of power and disregard for the victims) are now well known. There have been many local inquiries though it is not totally correct to say this aspect was fully covered by the wide-ranging Alexis Jay inquiry. There is merit in the view that it would be better to get on with implementing her recommendations.

And yet, even making these points is to know it will not do. The case against an inquiry is a very hard sell. It is difficult to believe the government’s line will hold — although, given the data and incidents of white offenders, there is no case for limiting such an inquiry solely to perpetrators from one ethnic group.

For this flare-up also highlights something else. Politics can no longer be conducted as it was. The direct and manic interventions of Musk on behalf of the hard right across western nations — a form of Maga imperialism — plus the power of TikTok, and Meta’s retreat from fact-checking and moderation mark the final stage in the demolition of the old rules of discourse. Musk has become especially hostile to Starmer since the arrests relating to social media posts inciting the Southport riots.

The days of lofty disdain, or rebutting arguments with one magisterial speech carried live on rolling TV news channels, are over. Debate is no longer concentrated in a handful of media that can be managed. Unwelcome decisions cannot be quietly slid past the public. Social media and podcasts that shape the news agenda operate outside the rules. The fight is conducted at pace, in extreme language, misinformation and relentlessly exaggerated posts. The challenge for mainstream parties is that political success requires mastery of a medium that does not lend itself to nuance, statistics or technocratic detail. It makes it even harder to govern.

This brutal terrain requires almost instant recognition of issues that resonate more broadly. One reason the inquiry demand is so potent is that it seems reasonable, prising ordinary citizens over to the side of agitators.

The mass of the country is not anti-immigrant. It is pro-control, pro-integration and, above all, pro-fairness. Citizens will not tolerate soft-pedalling on deep evil for reasons of racial sensitivity. They expect common standards to be enforced — the epithet “two-tier Keir” is extremely dangerous for Starmer.

A final failing has been the pace of change at national level. Inquiries are held, recommendations are accepted then stalled. Attention moves elsewhere. The Jay inquiry took seven years and two more have passed since. Data is still inadequate. A key proposal on a new criminal offence of failure to act on reports of abuse was not introduced. The Conservatives dawdled and Labour acted, post-Musk. Citizens are rightly disgusted and they now have a way to make themselves heard unfiltered.

This saga is a savage example of how Musk has brought online politics to its inevitable end point. The territory has changed irrevocably. Unless mainstream leaders wish to head further down the unadvisable path of censorship, they need a new playbook. The digital landscape will remorselessly punish those who remain in analogue mode.

robert.shrimsley@ft.com