This work by Middle East Monitor is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Thousands of people carrying Palestinian flags and banners march as they protest Israel’s attacks on Gaza and Germany’s arms support to Israel in Unter den Linden Street, Berlin, Germany on April 13, 2024 [Halil Sagirkaya/Anadolu via Getty Images]
The German federal ministry has dismissed a lawyer in Berlin due to her opposition to the Israeli assault on Gaza, the Palestinian Information Centre reported.
On Saturday lawyer Melanie Schweizer posted a video on X stating: “Yesterday I got fired as a civil servant working at the Federal Ministry in Germany. Why? In a nutshell because I was speaking out against the genocide in Palestine committed by Israel, against the German support thereof, against the violence and crimes happening there.” Highlighting the German government and police’s efforts to silence pro-Palestine voices, she added: “This is where we’re at in Germany. This is a blatant attack on our constitutional rights to freedom.”
She called on supporters of Gaza to make their stance clear and “keep speaking up, keep using your voice, losing your job is not the worst that can happen to you, losing your life is. Losing your freedom right is.”
Yesterday I got fired as a civil servant in Germany. Why? In a nutshell because I was criticizing Israel for its ongoing genocide in Palestine and Germany‘s complicity. pic.twitter.com/z3mYVabBtn
— Melanie Schweizer 🇩🇪 (@schweizermel) March 1, 2025
Many European and American companies have previously dismissed employees over their stance on the war on Gaza and their opposition to genocide.
In October 2024, Microsoft dismissed two employees after they organised a sit-in at its headquarters in Washington, D.C., in solidarity with the victims of the Israeli assault on Gaza.
On 22 January, the Washington Post reported that Google had dismissed more than 50 employees last year after they protested against the “Nimbus” contract, citing concerns that the technology could support military and intelligence programmes used by the Israeli occupation army in its war on Palestinians in Gaza.
In September 2024, the Noguchi Museum in New York announced the dismissal of three employees for allegedly violating the dress code by wearing keffiyehs, which have become a symbol of solidarity with the Palestinian cause.
The Palestine Coalition condemns the decision of the Metropolitan Police to issue letters ordering a range of activists, including Stephen Kapos, an 87-year-old Jewish Holocaust survivor, to attend formal interviews over their alleged roles in the Palestine solidarity protest on January 18th, 2025.
Letters have also been issued to prominent actor Khalid Abdalla, Stop the War Coalition officers Lindsey German, Alex Kenny and Andrew Murray, CND General Secretary Sophie Bolt, Friends of Al-Aqsa Chair, Ismail Patel, and probably will be to others.
The police claim in the letters sent to these activists, that they breached conditions imposed by the police to limit the right to protest against the genocide in Gaza.
These restrictions almost certainly came as a result of political pressure from supporters of Israel’s pro-genocide policies.
The protest’s chief steward Chris Nineham and Palestine Solidarity Campaign director Ben Jamal have already been charged with offences arising from the same protest, along with many others. Chris Nineham was violently arrested on the day.
MPs Jeremy Corbyn and John McDonnell have also been interviewed under caution by the police.
This apparently co-ordinated attack against the Palestine solidarity movement is endeavouring to halt public protest on the issue, through harassment of those involved in the movement, and through increasingly draconian restrictions on demonstrations.
That a Holocaust survivor is called in by the police for the alleged offence of carrying a bunch of flowers into Trafalgar Square, underlines the unjustifiable extremes to which the Metropolitan Police are prepared to go, to restrict the right to public protest and silence the Palestine solidarity movement.
What is claimed by the police as justification for this massive overreach of their powers is a complete misrepresentation of what took place, not just on the day but beforehand.
Our cause is to mobilise support for the Palestinian people suffering a genocidal onslaught by the Israeli state, backed by the British government. To pursue this just cause, we must also defend the right to protest – alongside many others who face similar restrictions.
We will not be cowed by these attacks on our rights.
We demand that the Metropolitan Police halt any prosecutions or proceedings against those involved in this entirely peaceful protest.
We further insist that the Metropolitan Police respects the right to protest and that it ceases to take instruction from those who are determined to back Israel’s genocidal actions, to maintain British state support for them, and to drive our movement off the streets.
Those who seek to do so will not succeed under any circumstances. We urge all those committed to preserving long-established freedoms to join us in protesting against this mounting campaign of state harassment.
Keir Starmer confirms that his government is cnutier than Suella Braverman on killing the right to protest.UK Labour Party Shadow Foreign Secretary repeatedly heckled at a speech to the Fabian Society over his and the Labour Party’s support for and complicity in Israel’s genocide of Gaza.
U.S. Energy Secretary Chris Wright speaking at the 2025 Alliance for Responsible Citizenship conference. Credit: ARC / YouTube
The Trump appointee and fossil fuel executive called the transition to renewable energy “lunacy” at an event packed with climate science deniers.
Donald Trump’s new energy secretary has today vowed to “get out of the way” of coal, oil and gas, and called the UK’s 2050 net zero target “a sinister goal” that would “impoverish” people.
Chris Wright, an oil and gas industry executive appointed by U.S. President Trump, was speaking via video link at the Alliance for Responsible Citizenship (ARC) conference in London, a right-wing forum run by fierce opponents of climate policies.
He also downplayed the threat from extreme weather, and suggested that climate action is part of a plot to “grow government power” and “shrink human freedom”.
The ARC conference, taking place this week at the ExCel centre in east London, includes speeches by Conservative Party leader Kemi Badenoch, Republican Party Speaker of the House Mike Johnson, Reform UK leader Nigel Farage, and Canadian psychologist and ARC founder Jordan Peterson.
As DeSmog revealed on Monday, a leaked guest list for the event includes executives from oil and gas giants, including BP, Koch Inc., Valero Energy, and Energy Transfer.
Until his appointment, Wright was the CEO of the fracking services company Liberty Energy. According to its 2023 tax filing, Wright was also a director of the Western Energy Alliance (WEA), a trade group representing more than 300 companies in the oil and gas industry. WEA has historically lobbied against oil and gas industry restrictions.
In a video posted to LinkedIn in January 2023, Wright said, “There is no climate crisis”.
‘Sinister Agenda’
Wright told the ARC audience today that he wanted to “increase the supply of affordable, reliable energy” by lifting the pause on natural gas and scrapping regulations on nuclear energy.
When asked about coal, oil and gas, he said: “Oh absolutely. The world today runs on coal oil and gas, and it’s been a tremendous success. I should have said number one [of his plan] is get out of the way of the production, export and enhancement of our volumes of coal, oil and gas.”
The energy secretary also attacked the UK’s legally-binding target of cutting emissions to net zero by 2050.
“Net zero 2050 is a sinister goal”, he said. “It’s a terrible goal. It’s both unachievable by any practical means, but the aggressive pursuit of it – and you’re sitting in a country that has aggressively pursued this goal – has not delivered any benefits, but it’s delivered tremendous cost.”
He added: “This is not energy transition, this is lunacy. This is impoverishing your own citizens in a delusion that this is somehow gonna make the world a better place. It’s not.”
The world’s foremost climate science body, the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), has stated that – without achieving net zero by 2050 and limiting warming to 1.5C – the world will struggle to contain the worst effects of climate change. These include droughts, flooding, poverty, and mass displacement.
Wright went on to claim that “We’re scaring children all the time with stories of extreme weather” when “deaths from extreme weather have plummeted for 100 years”.
Better forecasting and preparation have cut extreme weather deaths over this period, but the number and intensity of extreme weather events have increased, and they continue to be disproportionately fatal in the least developed countries.
The energy secretary also claimed that “climate-obsessed people […] know very little about the climate data”, before alluding to the conspiracy theory that climate change is being used to impose a green tyranny.
“I think the agenda might be different here than climate change”, he said. “It’s certainly been a powerful tool used to grow government power, top down control, and shrink human freedom. This is sinister.”
Oil and Gas at ARC
Senior representatives from several major fossil fuel producers will be at the ARC event, according to a leaked list of attendees viewed by DeSmog.
Billed as an effort to “re-lay the foundations of civilization,” the conference will feature panels about energy and environment that are filled with prominent deniers of the climate crisis.
That includes Vivek Ramaswamy, a former contender for the U.S. Republican presidential nomination, who has referred to the “climate agenda” as a “hoax,” as well as Nigel Farage, who has called for the UK’s 2050 net zero emissions policies to be “scrapped” entirely.
They will be joined by representatives of prominent climate denial organizations including the CO2 Coalition, and libertarian anti-climate think tanks such as the Cato Institute.
“I had a chance to sit down one-on-one with Chris in 2022 in his Denver office,” claimed Gregory Wrightstone, executive director of the CO2 Coalition, in a newsletter in late 2024.
Wrightstone “was impressed with his [Wright’s] knowledge and views on energy philosophy, which aligned closely with those of the CO2 Coalition.”
“The key takeaway is that he’s a big supporter of the continuing use of fossil fuels, including coal, oil, and natural gas,” Wrightstone said.
ARC is backed by the UAE-based investment firm Legatum Group and British hedge fund millionaire Paul Marshall, who together own the right-wing broadcaster GB News. Marshall provided £1 million in funding to ARC in 2023, which is run by Conservative peer and UK government advisor Baroness Philippa Stroud.
Speaking to the Financial Times ahead of the conference, Marshall claimed that Britain is “going bust” in its pursuit of net zero. As revealed by DeSmog, Paul Marshall’s hedge fund held £1.8 million worth of shares in fossil fuel companies – including in oil and gas giants Chevron, Shell, and Equinor – as of June 2023. One of Marshall Wace’s biggest investors, U.S. private equity firm KKR, also has a large fossil fuel portfolio, including 188 assets in oil, gas, and coal.
Neo-Fascist Climate Science Denier Donald Trump says Burn, Baby, Burn.Experienced climbers scale a rock face near the historic Dumbarton castle in Glasgow, releasing a banner that reads “Climate on a Cliff Edge.” One activist, dressed as a globe, symbolically looms near the edge, while another plays the bagpipes on the shores below. | Photo courtesy of Extinction Rebellion and Mark Richards
Amazon founder and Washington Post owner Jeff Bezos delivers remarks during the opening ceremony of the media company’s new location January 28, 2016 in Washington, D.C. (Photo: Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)
The Washington Post’s shift toward free-market advocacy is not simply an editorial decision; it is a strategic move to reinforce the dominant ideological framework that benefits the billionaire class.
The recent directive by Jeff Bezos that The Washington Post editorial section should promote “personal liberties and free markets” is a stark reminder of how freedom under capitalism often boils down to the freedom of economic elites to dictate the parameters of public discourse. While Bezos has suggested that social media provides alternative perspectives, thus absolving his newspaper of the responsibility to represent diverse viewpoints, his decision is part of a broader trend of billionaire media ownership shaping acceptable discourse.
This phenomenon is visible across digital platforms as well. Elon Musk’s control over X (formerly Twitter) has demonstrated how ownership can shape public debate—both through direct interventions, such as the alleged suppression of progressive perspectives, and through more subtle changes to platform algorithms. Similarly, Mark Zuckerberg’s Meta has faced repeated allegations of privileging certain political narratives while suppressing others, including ending its “fact checking” policy that could challenge far-right viewpoints.
Perhaps the most glaring contradiction in Bezos’ advocacy for free markets is the extent to which he, and other billionaires like him, have benefited from state intervention as part of an intentional strategy of “corporate welfare.”
In each case, the rhetoric of “free speech” is selectively applied. While these platforms and newspapers claim to support open debate, their policies ultimately reflect the ideological preferences of their owners. This demonstrates a fundamental truth: In capitalist societies, freedom of expression is often contingent on the interests of those who control the means of communication. The Washington Post’s shift toward free-market advocacy is not simply an editorial decision; it is a strategic move to reinforce the dominant ideological framework that benefits the billionaire class.
The Myth of Meritocracy and the Far-Right’s War on DEI
Bezos’ framing of free markets as inherently linked to personal liberties exposes a deeper ideological assumption—namely, that economic success is the result of individual talent and merit rather than systemic privilege. This assumption is not unique to Bezos but is foundational to the way many economic elites understand their own wealth and influence.
The logic behind Bezos’ editorial direction is similar to the arguments used by the contemporary far-right to attack Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) initiatives. The opposition to DEI is rooted in a desire to preserve the myth that success is determined purely by hard work and ability, rather than by racial, gender, or class privilege. By rejecting policies that acknowledge structural inequalities, The far-right seeks to uphold a narrative that justifies existing economic and social hierarchies.
This worldview is deeply intertwined with the ideology of neoliberalism, which insists that markets are neutral mechanisms that reward the most capable individuals. However, history shows that markets are anything but neutral. The barriers faced by marginalized groups are not simply the result of individual shortcomings; they are the product of centuries of systemic exclusion. The far-right’s attack on DEI serves to obscure these realities, just as Bezos’ insistence on free markets seeks to erase the role of privilege and power in determining economic outcomes.
By positioning The Washington Post as a champion of free markets, Bezos is promoting the idea that capitalism functions as a pure meritocracy. This serves not only to legitimize his own position but also to delegitimize calls for policies that challenge structural inequality, whether in the form of DEI programs, labor protections, or wealth redistribution measures.
The Illusion of the Free Market and Its Political Implications
Perhaps the most glaring contradiction in Bezos’ advocacy for free markets is the extent to which he, and other billionaires like him, have benefited from state intervention as part of an intentional strategy of “corporate welfare.” The notion of a truly free market, where economic actors compete on equal footing without government interference, is a fantasy. In reality, corporations like Amazon have thrived not because of unregulated competition, but because of significant government support.
From tax incentives to government contracts, Amazon has received billions in subsidies that have allowed it to dominate the retail and logistics industries. Moreover, the U.S. government plays a critical role in enforcing corporate-friendly trade policies, suppressing labor movements, and protecting the interests of multinational corporations abroad. These interventions are rarely acknowledged in discussions of free markets, yet they are crucial to understanding the power dynamics of contemporary capitalism.
If freedom under capitalism ultimately means the freedom of the wealthy to dictate the terms of discourse, then the very concept of free speech is in jeopardy.
Politically, Bezos’ editorial directive at The Washington Post serves to strengthen a broader ideological alignment between neoliberal economics and far-right nationalism. By framing free-market capitalism as an essential component of personal liberty, Bezos is laying the groundwork for a political agenda that fuses economic libertarianism with nationalist conservatism. This is significant because it provides an ideological foundation for challenging emerging economic policies that deviate from neoliberal orthodoxy—such as the rise of protectionism in response to globalization.
This alignment between free-market ideology and far-right nationalism is not new. Historically, neoliberalism has often coexisted with reactionary politics, as seen in the economic policies of figures like former U.S. President Ronald Reagan and former U.K. Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher. Today, this synthesis is being revived as right-wing populists seek to defend corporate interests while simultaneously appealing to nationalist sentiments. Bezos’ intervention in The Washington Post should be understood within this broader context: It is not just about shaping editorial policy but about consolidating an ideological framework that benefits economic elites while limiting the scope of acceptable political debate.
The Dangers of Billionaire-Controlled Media
Bezos’ decision to impose a free-market ideology on The Washington Post is not an isolated event; it is part of a larger trend in which media ownership is used to shape public discourse in ways that serve elite interests. This phenomenon extends beyond traditional journalism to social media platforms, where billionaires like Musk and Zuckerberg wield immense power over the flow of information.
At its core, this issue is about more than just media bias—it is about the fundamental tension between democracy and concentrated economic power. A truly free and open society requires a diversity of perspectives, yet the dominance of billionaire-controlled media threatens to constrain the range of acceptable debate. If freedom under capitalism ultimately means the freedom of the wealthy to dictate the terms of discourse, then the very concept of free speech is in jeopardy.
The consolidation of media power in the hands of a few ultra-wealthy individuals raises urgent questions about the future of democratic debate. If we are to challenge the ideological hegemony of economic elites, we must first recognize the mechanisms through which they shape public discourse. Bezos’ editorial mandate is not just about The Washington Post—it is a reflection of the broader struggle over who gets to define the boundaries of political and economic debate in the 21st century.
U.S. President Donald Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy meet in the Oval Office of the White House on February 28, 2025. (Photo: Saul Loeb/AFP via Getty Images)
“An utter embarrassment for America. This whole sad scene,” wrote U.S. Sen. Chris Murphy.
A White House meeting on Friday between U.S. President Donald Trump, Vice President JD Vance, and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy rapidly devolved into chaos as the two American leaders took turns berating Zelenskyy with television cameras rolling and the global public looking on.
Both Trump and Vance bizarrely demanded that Zelenskyy show more gratitude for the military aid the U.S. has provided Ukraine since Russia launched its full-scale invasion in February 2022 and pressured him to accept an as-yet-undefined deal to end the war.
Vance told Zelenskyy he must “say thank you” and chided him for “trying to fight it out in the American media when you’re wrong,” but Trump intervened to say, “I think it’s good for the American people to see what’s going on here… that’s why I kept this going so long.”
“You have to be thankful,” Trump told the Ukrainian president, who has repeatedly thanked the American public for the U.S. government’s military assistance.
“You don’t have the cards,” Trump continued as Zelenskyy tried in vain to interject. “You’re buried there, your people are dying, you’re running low on soldiers.”
"You've gotta be more thankful" — remarkable scenes out of the White House as Trump and JD Vance team up to do Putin's bidding and demean Zelenskyy pic.twitter.com/wjp8UfqN0G
Insisting that Russian President Vladimir Putin can’t be trusted to uphold a bilateral cease-fire, Zelenskyy is demanding security guarantees against a future Russian attack in any agreement to end the conflict—a demand that Trump has thus far rejected.
“Your country is in big trouble,” Trump, who falsely suggested last week that Ukraine started the war, told Zelenskyy during the Oval Office meeting, which was meant to kick off talks regarding U.S. access Ukraine’s rare earth minerals.
Zelenskyy left the White House on Friday without signing a minerals deal.
“You’re either going to make a deal or we’re out,” Trump told Zelenskyy during Friday’s meeting, a clear threat to withdraw U.S. support for Ukraine. “And if we’re out, you’ll fight it out and I don’t think it’s going to be pretty.”
Trump to Zelensky: "Your country is in big trouble. No, no, you've done a lot of talking. Your country is in big trouble. You're not winning this." pic.twitter.com/SDmKGXMgNl
Observers were aghast at Trump and Vance’s conduct during Friday’s meeting, which was likened to an ambush. At one point, as Trump responded dismissively to Zelenskyy’s call for security guarantees as part of any cease-fire deal, Ukraine’s ambassador to the United States was seen with her head in her hands.
“Wow. Just wow,” said CNN‘s Dana Bash following the meeting.
Zeteo‘s Mehdi Hasan wrote on social media that it is “insane that this just happened.”
“We are governed by children,” he added.
Watch the full exchange:
WATCH: Full Heated Exchange between President Trump, Vice President Vance and Ukrainian President Zelenskyy in the Oval Office. pic.twitter.com/oMJUGPqbSU
U.S. lawmakers also voiced disgust over Trump and Vance’s behavior, with Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) writing that the meeting was “an utter embarrassment for America.”
Shortly after the meeting concluded, Trump took to his social media platform to accuse Zelenskyy of disrespecting the U.S. “in its cherished Oval Office.”
“He can come back when he is ready for peace,” Trump added as backlash over his treatment of Zelenskyy continued to pour in.
“Trump berates Zelensky, the leader of a democratic country courageously fighting Russian imperialism, while he allies himself with Putin, a dictator who started the bloodiest European war in 80 years,” U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) wrote on social media.
“Sorry, President Trump,” Sanders added. “We believe in democracy, not authoritarianism.”
