Is it possible that just three weeks have passed since Nigel Farage and Elon Musk were seen at Mar-a-Lago, standing in front of that cheesy portrait of Donald Trump in a tennis sweater? It’s as surprising as Nigel finding out that his seemingly promising holiday encounter was not built on stable ground. In simpler terms, the billionaire from Africa, who pledged to deposit a fortune into his account, turned out to be quite different than he seemed. This fallout appears to have occurred after Farage couldn’t align with Musk’s idea that he should collaborate with the incarcerated Tommy Robinson on his views regarding grooming gangs.
Now, let’s talk about grooming gangs—more accurately labeled as rape gangs today. It seems that each New Year brings to light longstanding issues that ignite widespread outrage. Last year, it was the Post Office scandal; this year, it’s the rape gang controversy. Next year? Who knows, it might be some issue of Elon’s choosing. We’re living in a time where the same visionary leading us toward the stars is seemingly driving conversations into the depths.
There are some points that deserve reiteration. A national inquiry into child sexual exploitation, expertly led by Prof Alexis Jay, who also spearheaded the Rotherham investigation, already took place. This inquiry included the rape gang scandal, produced a powerful report, and issued urgent recommendations. While these should have been adopted fully by the Conservative government then in power, and now by Labour, that hasn’t been the case.
A growing, though delayed, realization is dawning that the rape gang scandal hasn’t been adequately understood or addressed in the UK. This perception appears justified, particularly with allegations that authorities in several areas where these gangs operated—beyond just Rotherham—might have been complicit in cover-ups. I believe that a new, concise, and targeted inquiry is necessary to shed light on the institutional aspects of this horrific situation. These gangs are still active. Are they thriving due to willful blindness or entrenched corruption? It’s long overdue to address this suspicion.
When discussing hidden agendas, let’s note those who are now stepping into the spotlight. Remember, Elon Musk has done nothing tangible except for posting about this issue he suddenly seems to care about. Jess Phillips, the safeguarding minister frequently threatened and harassed, worked helping domestic abuse victims long before her political career. Ironically, Musk referred to her as a “witch,” suggesting imprisonment over more medieval punishments. This current spectacle of strongmen debating protection of women and girls is grim, filled with implications for the future.
When have figures like Nigel Farage, Elon Musk, Robert Jenrick, or Tommy Robinson shown genuine concern for women’s issues, let alone initiated any policy to support them? Robinson nearly derailed a grooming trial, further traumatizing victims by potentially forcing them to testify multiple times. On Musk’s platform, threats against women occur constantly without action—if he were genuinely concerned, perhaps he should focus on addressing that. If he finds himself incapable, maybe he should consider facing the same accountability he demands of others.
As discussions continue, women and girls should recognize Elon’s perspective on their roles, prominently illustrated by his aggressive pronatalist views. “Instead of teaching fear of pregnancy,” he suggested recently, “we should teach fear of childlessness.” This view echoes his father, Errol Musk’s controversial comments regarding breeding practices in the UK.
In the political sphere, the boisterous Tory shadow minister likened Musk’s dismissal of Farage to Hitler’s betrayal of Stalin—calling the situation a “big moment.” I’m left pondering the phrase “the Kemi retweet” with a sense of disbelief, as it’s reminiscent of less significant cinematic titles. When notable political figures find themselves celebrating mere social media activity, they’ve essentially lost their influence, though they may not realize it.
Let’s not overlook that Boris Johnson, admired by many advocating for new inquiries, once dismissed these serious investigations as a waste of money with an incredibly inappropriate phrase. While inequalities in grotesque actions exist, no political party is solely guilty. I remember, and wrote about, an instance less than two years ago where Keir Starmer endorsed an offensive social media campaign targeting Rishi Sunak, underscoring how racing to the lowest point benefits no one. Politicians like him face the consequences of prioritizing political games over substantive action.
Those starting the new year with anger shouldn’t be written off as “deplorables.” Sammy Woodhouse, a Rotherham victim, has campaigned tirelessly and may feel driven towards the far-right due to perceived failures of mainstream politics. Some might not mind Musk’s overpowering influence despite being unelected, potentially affecting their lives. Traditional politicians need to act urgently, proving that alternative paths exist—rather than merely asserting it.
Marina Hyde offers her thoughts as a columnist for the Guardian. If you have an opinion on the topics discussed, and wish to submit a response for possible publication, please click here to share your views.
