When we consider the scale of the recent attack on Jews one expects a cacophonous denouncement reverberating through the political landscape.

Astonishingly, however, what we find is a peculiar quietude from the left, a hushed absence that unveils not just a fractured ethical core but possibly a chillingly opportunistic ideological agenda.

The savagery of the attack was unspeakable. A scenario so grotesque ISIS would be proud. Innocent civilians were not merely killed; they were slaughtered and in the most barbaric ways imaginable.

In the immediate aftermath, Hamas continued firing rockets indiscriminately into civilian areas, aiming to maximise bloodshed and terror.

In the face of such unspeakable inhumanity, one might expect a groundswell of global unanimity – a chorus of moral clarity that transcends political divisions. How else would you expect people to react to the rape and decapitation of innocent people?

And, yet, astonishingly, that chorus of moral clarity remains frustratingly fragmented, if not outright mute. Why?

Even if you were a well-intentioned supporter of Palestine – driven not by knowledge but perhaps by the impassioned rhetoric of a university lecturer or the latest social media post of the celebrity du jour – you would now find yourself grappling with a reality that defies your narrative.

The sheer brutality displayed by Hamas would not only shatter the facade of victimhood but also obliterate any credible path to a peaceful resolution. Your shock, bewilderment and rage wouldn’t just be understandable; they would be the only morally conscionable response to an organisation that has laid waste to its own purported cause.

But the Left, as we know, is made of stranger stuff. It is a robust beast, fed by the nutritional support of keyboard activists, social media influencers and celebrities who, while extraordinarily vocal on other matters of moral urgency – say, the imperative of using ‘Zey/Zem’ pronouns – are suddenly stricken with a crippling case of selective laryngitis.

If you were expecting the moral crusaders who expend ample energy policing language with religious zeal, to be at the forefront of condemning the vileness that we’ve witnessed, I regret to inform you that you are sorely mistaken. Their devices have conveniently entered sleep mode.

The closest you’re going to get from them by way of condemnation is a Trumpian “there are bad actors on both sides”, as if they are hedging their moral bets.

And let us not overlook the curious amnesia affecting the feminist stalwarts. These are the people who want ‘femicide’ to be a category of crime all on its own. Yet, their usual clamour turns to whispers when faced with the horrors inflicted by Hamas.

But let’s not be too general in exposing the ideological hypocrisy at play. We have specific examples right here, on Maltese soil. Cast your mind back to not-so-distant episodes where local organisations like the MGRM and Aditus, among other individuals, clamoured to boycott a performance by Israeli artist Netta Barzilai.

The same groups were seen fervently waving Palestinian flags during her performance, paradoxically endorsing a regime under which they would be considered abominations, earning them a one-way ticket off a Palestinian rooftop.

Those very NGOs will condemn Phyllisienne Brincat’s clumsy explanation of her views and call for her to be charged with hate speech but won’t utter a word when confronted with Hamas’s human rights abuses, let alone consider the fate of Israel’s LGBTI population under a Hamas regime.

Those very NGOs will call for Phyllisienne Brincat to be charged with hate speech but won’t utter a word on Hamas’s human rights abuses- Edward Caruana Galizia

But perhaps most disconcerting in this sordid tapestry of ideological contortion is the case of Judith Butler, a professor at the University of California, Berkeley. Butler represents a chorus of intellectual luminaries who believe that misgendering someone is tantamount to human rights abuse.

Yet, there she is on Twitter describing Hamas and Hezbollah as a “progressive” force in global politics and “part of a global left”. This endorsement doesn’t just defy logic. It shatters any facade of any moral consistency.

But the absurdities don’t stop there. A Chicago chapter of the Black Lives Matter movement has taken to social media to tweet their solidarity with Palestine by tweeting a picture of a Hamas terrorist and the caption “We stand with Palestine”. This wholly disregards the virulent strain of anti-Semitism that underpins such violent acts.

This is far beyond mere tone-deafness; it’s a fatal blow to the credibility of any movement reduced to hashtag activism. The alliance with hate-fuelled entities betrays a depth of ideological myopia that is alarming and instructive.

The ‘wokerati’ stand unmasked, not as enlightened guides but as indoctrinated zealots, blindly following their Marxist pied-pipers into alliances that are as morally indefensible as they are astonishingly naive.

For the left, this situation has evolved into an inflexion point ‒ a moment when the ideological veneer cracks and the unsettling reality leaks out. The glaring contradictions and moral lapses in their stance do not merely raise eyebrows; they represent a profound betrayal of the very principles they claim to uphold.

When left-wing ideology converges at the twisted intersection with the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, the road signs point in every direction and none at all. It is high time for a deep, unsettling reflection. To claim moral uprightness while ensconced in this cesspool of inconsistency is intellectually and morally bankrupt.

So, to the left-wing aficionados out there: consider this your clarion call for a rigorous moral audit. It’s not just that you’ve got it wrong on this issue. You’ve bungled the very foundations of ethical coherence.

Edward Caruana Galizia is an actor and has a master’s degree in culture, diaspora and ethnicity from Birkbeck University of London.