Britain's Ban on Andreas Malm Is Political Repression That Warrants Opposition to Burnham's Government
Source: Chris Saltmarsh. "Let Andreas Malm Speak." November 3, 2026. jacobin.com
The Gist
The author says Britain's government banned a prominent climate scholar who criticizes its policies on Gaza and fossil fuels, and that this is political repression rather than a genuine security measure. He argues it signals how the government would treat any critic, so people should oppose it and press for freer protest, an end to support for Israel's war, and no new North Sea drilling.
Conclusion
The UK government's ban on Andreas Malm is an unjustified act of political repression aimed at silencing criticism on Palestine and climate. It threatens free speech for everyone, and Burnham's government deserves unrelenting opposition, along with demands for de-proscribing Palestine Action, repealing anti-protest laws, and ending UK support for Israel and North Sea fossil fuel production.
Premises
- Malm is a widely cited and influential scholar, not an extremist or terrorist, and his work is used by scholars across disciplines and the political spectrum.
- The Home Office banned Malm without giving a specific reason, citing only that his presence is not 'conducive to the public good,' shortly after similar actions against Hasan Piker, Cenk Uygur, and Sally Rooney, all connected to pro-Palestine speech.
- The most plausible explanation for the ban is Malm's opposition to the proscription of Palestine Action and his critiques of the government's conduct on Gaza and climate, the two areas where Burnham's government is failing most badly.
- Burnham's government is in substance continuous with Starmer's: it gives material support to Israel's actions in Gaza, approved new North Sea fossil fuel production (the Jackdaw field), and leaves in place or extends repression of peaceful protest.
- If a government will bar a prominent foreign scholar for his views, it would likely also curtail the political freedoms of its own citizens, so the ban threatens everyone's right to criticize government failures.
- Opposition to genocide and fossil fuel expansion are basic, uncontroversial expressions of humanity that the government rejects.
Assumptions
- The government's unstated reason for the ban is Malm's political views and not a security or legal concern.
- Israel's actions in Gaza constitute genocide, and the UK's support for Israel is materially complicit in it.
- Palestine Action's proscription as a terrorist organization is illegitimate, and supporting it is protected political speech.
- A ban on a foreign visitor is a reliable indicator of how the government would treat domestic dissent.
- Bans on Malm, Rooney, Piker and Uygur form a pattern of coordinated suppression, not independent decisions.
- A scholar's intellectual importance and mainstream citation are relevant to whether barring him is wrongful.