After more than a year and a half of silence, numbness, and moral paralysis in the face of Israeli massacres and the starvation of Gaza’s children, the “conscience” of the Western establishment—represented here by the Financial Times—suddenly stirred. In early May 2025, the UK’s flagship financial newspaper broke ranks and issued an editorial condemning the West’s shameful silence and ethical bankruptcy in the face of Israel’s savage assault on Gaza.
In its editorial, the Financial Times directly accused the United States and Europe of increasing complicity with Israel, which it said has rendered Gaza “uninhabitable.” The paper clearly hinted at genocide, stating that the real aim of the war appears to be “the forced expulsion of Palestinians from their land,” in reference to ethnic cleansing.
Simultaneously, The Independent declared that the “deafening silence on Gaza” must end, urging the world to wake up, acknowledge the ongoing catastrophe, and call for an end to the siege and suffering of the Palestinian people.
On Middle East Eye, journalist Jonathan Cook posed a piercing question that offers a key to unlocking the dark vault of Western moral reasoning:
“Why did Israel’s Western allies—and media outlets like The Guardian and Financial Times—wait 19 months before speaking out against this horror?”
Cook explained that parts of the Western media and political elite are now scrambling to express regret before it’s too late—because the mass death in Gaza can no longer be hidden, even after Israel banned foreign journalists, and killed the majority of Palestinian reporters trying to document what he identifies as genocide.
Western media outlets, long complicit in framing Israel’s actions as legitimate warfare, now find themselves attempting to revise the narrative—not out of moral awakening, but to cover their tracks.
Cook noted:
“Even now, much of the Western press continues to push the illusion that Gaza is not under occupation—portraying the massacres and mass starvation as simply ‘war.’”
A Deadly Moral Relativism
In late July 2025, The Guardian’s Matthew Syed attempted to justify Israel’s actions by invoking moral relativism—a deeply flawed Western doctrine that has historically provided the “ethical justification” for global atrocities committed by colonial powers with chilling detachment.
Syed echoed one of Israel’s common arguments: that the killing of 60,000 Palestinians, the destruction of 92% of Gaza’s infrastructure, and the starvation campaign are all “necessary” to defeat Hamas.
Tel Aviv reminds the West of its own violent past:
“You forced Nazi Germany to surrender by killing thousands of German civilians. We must do the same in Gaza.”
This logic lays bare a fundamental hypocrisy. Western philosophical traditions—especially when institutionalised—are not neutral tools of thought. They are weaponised systems, shaping public opinion over decades and embedding themselves as sacred truths within Western political doctrine.
One of the most dangerous of these foundations is social Darwinism.
Darwinism: The West’s Sacred Myth
Charles Darwin’s On the Origin of Species (1859) occupies a sacred space in the Western imagination—arguably more revered by elite power structures than the Bible itself.
In the United States, no official institution dares to challenge Darwinian evolution. Attempts to even teach “Intelligent Design” alongside it have been rejected, all under the guise of “freedom of thought.”
In 2004, secular France confiscated copies of the Atlas of Creation, which debunked Darwinian claims. The European Union upholds strict protections over the theory, suppressing any questioning of its accuracy or cultural implications.
It is astonishing how the “Christian West” clings to Darwinian evolution with religious literalism—despite it still being a theory, not an irrefutable scientific fact.
Why?
Because to dismantle Darwinism is to shake the moral and intellectual foundations of Western civilisation itself.
Darwin’s theory provided the scientific and moral cover for the West’s belief in its own racial and cultural superiority. It justified colonisation, exploitation, and plunder—on the basis that natural selection demands the survival of the fittest and the extinction of the weak.
Under this worldview, impoverished peoples are expendable, and global inequality is the outcome of biological law—not systemic injustice.
Racism Rebranded as Science
Winston Churchill once justified Britain’s massacres of Native Americans and Indigenous Australians by declaring:
“A stronger, wiser, and more advanced race has replaced them.”
In 1906, American anthropologist William Graham Sumner codified moral relativism, stating that terms like “good,” “evil,” “right,” and “wrong” have no universal meaning—only cultural interpretation.
Anthropologist Ruth Benedict echoed the same, claiming there are no higher moral values, only cultural customs.
This ideological framework—rooted in moral relativism and social Darwinism—has saturated the West. After World War II, many Catholic and secular scholars blamed Europe’s moral decline on its rejection of absolute values.
Even Pope Benedict XVI and philosopher Marcello Pera admitted that after the 1960s, Europe began replacing Christian moral principles with ever-evolving subjective ethics.
Gaza: A Mirror Reflecting the West’s True Creed
Today, in its reaction to the Gaza genocide, the West is acting not against its values, but in full alignment with them.
Behind every massacre and every justification lies a pair of deeply rooted doctrines:
- Social Darwinism, which sanctifies the dominance of the strong over the weak
- Moral Relativism, which erases universal standards of justice
These two philosophies—packaged as “progress”—are taught to children in Western schools under the banner of “the worship of power.”
This is the ideological machine that allows Israeli war crimes to be explained away as “necessary,” and that enables the global silence—or selective outrage—toward Palestinian suffering.
