Gaza's Influence: How Did a New Justice Movement Begin in The UK?

In the early hours at Portslade Leisure Center, an independent candidate joined fellow contenders, including local politicians, on a self-constructed stage to await the results of the 2024 general election.

The candidate, Tanushka Marah, one of many who had put themselves forward for public service, felt a keen sense of disappointment as the final tally was announced: they had garnered 3,048 votes.

This figure, while seemingly modest, was a significant achievement for a campaign that operated without the backing of party infrastructure or media spotlight.

Different Rhetoric

The so-called "Gaza ceasefire" candidates found particular success in areas with substantial Muslim communities, where disenchantment with major political parties was pronounced.

In the constituency of Hove and Portslade, where only 2.2 percent of the population identifies as Muslim, Marah’s performance highlighted a broader national trend.

On that election morning, five independents secured seats, amassing thousands of votes on a platform advocating an end to what they termed Israeli genocide. The Green Party also drew support for its pro-ceasefire stance.

Reflecting on the grueling six-week campaign amidst the morning rain, the candidate perceived a pivotal moment for the British left.

The Palestine issue, often sidelined by mainstream parties and corporate media, had sparked a burgeoning movement for justice and humanity, one unlikely to fade away soon.

This sentiment was underscored by the recent legal developments that made it increasingly untenable for the government to ignore the arrest warrant for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

Throughout the campaign, a certain rhetoric developed among the candidates. The Liberal Democrat representative vociferously opposed Labour’s arms sales policy, while the Reform Party candidate consistently showed respect despite differing views.

Both the independent and Reform candidates claimed to represent the people's voice, though their platforms diverged sharply: Reform targeted the issue of small boats, whereas the independents focused on dismantling the military-industrial complex driving such desperate migrations.

Marah’s campaign was not motivated solely by their British-Palestinian heritage, despite the Green Party’s call for an immediate ceasefire.

Her platform uniquely spotlighted the Palestinian cause, labeling the events in Gaza as genocide—a stance that set them apart in a field often characterized by political equivocation.

She argued that the fragmented response to the Israeli occupation’s actions in Gaza trivialized the conflict and dehumanized its victims, asserting that marginalization perpetuates inequality and racism.

Facing Criticism

Labour's Peter Kyle, who secured his seat with a 52 percent majority, appeared to have anticipated his victory well before the election day, judging by his low-key campaign presence.

His supporters, lifting large Labour banners painted with the Union Jack, were dominant, while the Greens celebrated a significant increase in their parliamentary representation.

Throughout the campaign, Marah’s team faced various forms of hostility. Opinion polls and public reactions frequently labeled her as "the Gaza candidate" or pointedly noted her Palestinian heritage.

Comments ranged from calls to "go back where you came from" to accusations of advocating for “Sharia law.”

Despite hailing from Streatham in south London, Marah often reminded critics of her local roots, underscoring the significance of her platform beyond ethnic identity.

Her alignment drew support from a diverse group of activists, including Jewish intellectual Andrew Feinstein, the son of a Holocaust survivor, who campaigned in Holborn against Labour leader Keir Starmer.

Marah and her supporters united not by ethnicity but by a shared commitment to championing the oppressed.

Marah reflected on the pervasive narrative that frames terrorism as an inherent trait of her ethnic group, reinforcing harmful stereotypes each time violence in the region is reported.

As the deadline approached to declare her candidacy as an anti-war, anti-austerity independent for Hove and Portslade, Marah recognized that her unique background and ability to unite people made her the right representative for this movement.

Her decision was driven by a need to articulate and embody the call for justice and solidarity with the oppressed, disregarding the two-party system’s rhetoric.

Gaza Opportunity

The campaign for Gaza emerged as both an emergency and an opportunity to amplify voices against bipartisan complicity in the genocide.

However, the campaign’s scope extended beyond international issues to include standing against homelessness, the privatization of public services, environmental destruction, and the relentless pursuit of economic growth.

Drawing from experience in theater and studies in leadership, collaboration, and diverse engagement, Marah sought to employ these skills in the movement.

Departing from traditional manifesto writing in secluded bars, the movement welcomed all to participate.

Meetings were inclusive, with plain paper and fluorescent markers replacing formal agendas, rejecting digital revolutions in favor of organic, face-to-face interactions.

Having felt marginalized in various movements for not fitting certain molds—whether it was being perceived as not radical enough, organized enough, or fitting particular racial or class identities—the campaign's leader chose to foster an inclusive environment.

The strategy was to create open public meetings where working groups could form naturally, allowing participants to rise to their roles without top-down appointments.

This emphasis on inclusivity and local expertise aimed to galvanize a sense of urgency and collective ownership.

The campaign transformed into a festival of ideas and creativity, hosting a plethora of events such as music festivals, literary nights, community gatherings, garden parties, and cake raffles. Rejecting bureaucracy and centralization, the movement encouraged grassroots leadership, fostering an open culture that attracted diverse participation.

The campaign, despite being an uphill battle, was approached with optimism and camaraderie, likened to a theatrical production requiring collective effort and faith. The collaboration extended to speechwriting, embodying a spirit of unity and shared purpose that rivaled professional consultancy.

Veteran campaign managers worked alongside political newcomers, creating a dynamic and diverse team. 

A significant boost came from a central Hove shop's generous donation during the campaign's final stretch, fostering community bonds, sharing food, and engaging with curious passersby.

This tangible, real-world interaction starkly contrasted with the detached realm of social media, infusing the movement with genuine connection and trust.

Despite facing a media blackout and lacking party support, the campaign fought vigorously for every one of the 3,048 votes it received. This grassroots effort underscored the power of community and collective action in the face of significant