A quick reminder:
The far right insists it is engaged in a lonely moral crusade. Its spokespeople posture as truth-tellers, claiming that only they are brave enough to confront child sexual abuse, while politicians, journalists, and institutions “look away”.
This claim collapses the moment you ask one simple question:
Why do they only care when the abuser fits their racial mythology — and go conspicuously quiet when he doesn’t?
Because what we are witnessing is not a movement concerned with justice, but a moral fraud sustained by media amplification, selective blindness, and deliberate amnesia.
Outrage as Performance, Not Principle
Turn on GB News, scroll Telegram channels, or dip into the comment sections of right-wing tabloids and you will see the same pattern repeated endlessly:
- “Grooming gangs”
- “Political correctness”
- “Two-tier policing”
- “White girls abandoned by the state”
These phrases are deployed with surgical precision. They generate rage, clicks, donations, and social media engagement — the oxygen of the far-right ecosystem.
But notice what is absent.
There is no sustained outrage over:
- Elite sexual networks
- Institutional cover-ups
- Abuse facilitated by wealth, power, celebrity, or tradition
Because those stories threaten the very structures the far right venerates.
Jimmy Savile: The Case They Never Want to Talk About
Jimmy Savile should have ended this argument forever.
Savile was a white, English, Catholic, monarch-hobnobbing nationalist icon. He raised money for charity, wrapped himself in patriotism, and was treated as a national eccentric rather than a national threat. He abused children in hospitals, schools, care homes, and broadcasting studios for decades, in plain sight.
The BBC knew. Hospitals knew. Police knew. Politicians knew.
Savile was protected not by “political correctness”, but by deference to authority, celebrity worship, and institutional cowardice, precisely the values the far right continues to defend.
Yet Savile rarely features in far-right discourse except as an aside, an inconvenience, or a whataboutism to be brushed away. Why?
Because Savile proves that the greatest enablers of abuse in Britain were white, British, Christian institutions, not migrants, not Muslims, not outsiders.
Epstein: Where the Outrage Goes to Die
The same silence surrounds Jeffrey Epstein.
Epstein did not operate in the shadows of deprived towns. He operated at the heart of Western power. His social circle included:
- Presidents and prime ministers
- Billionaires
- Intelligence-linked figures
- Media executives
- Royals
His abuse was systematic, transnational, and facilitated by wealth and protection. His death, under supposedly constant supervision, remains one of the most suspicious failures of the modern carceral state.
And yet, the far right treats Epstein as a curiosity, not a cause.
Why? Because Epstein exposes the lie that abuse is a problem of marginalised communities. It shows instead that elite men abuse with impunity and that institutions close ranks to protect themselves.
To pursue Epstein seriously would mean asking questions about capitalism, class, power, and corruption, questions the far right has no interest in answering.
Jon Ruben and the Christian Cloak
This is why the case of Jon Ruben is so revealing.
A 76-year-old man has been jailed for 23 years and 10 months for sexually abusing boys at a Christian summer camp in Leicestershire – after lacing sweets with sedative drugs purchased on the dark web. pic.twitter.com/NlhOhkYtnf
— Channel 4 News (@Channel4News) February 6, 2026
Ruben is a white English Christian man, operating within a trusted religious framework. He abused children precisely because he was trusted. His Christianity functioned not as a safeguard but as a shield, a presumption of virtue that disarmed suspicion.
If the far right were honest, Ruben would be central to their analysis. He is the perfect example of how abuse actually happens: through proximity, authority, and moral cover.
Instead, Ruben is treated as an anomaly, a lone bad apple, because acknowledging the pattern would mean confronting the dangers embedded within “respectable” institutions.
Media Complicity: Manufacturing the Moral Panic
Right-wing media outlets are not passive observers in this process. They are active participants.
Tabloids and broadcasters:
- Overemphasise ethnicity when offenders are Muslim
- Downplay or omit it when offenders are white
- Frame institutional abuse as historical accidents rather than systemic failures
- Platform commentators who treat race as explanation rather than evidence
GB News, in particular, has turned child abuse into a content vertical, a reliable outrage generator stripped of nuance, context, or proportion. Survivors are not interviewed unless their trauma aligns with the narrative. Experts are dismissed as “woke”. Complexity is treated as betrayal.
This is not journalism. It is agitprop.
The Real Cover-Ups
The far right loves the word “cover-up”. It simply misidentifies where they occur.
The most enduring cover-ups in Britain were not driven by fear of offending minorities. They were driven by:
- Fear of offending donors
- Fear of damaging institutions
- Fear of undermining authority
- Fear of challenging powerful men
Savile was protected because he was useful.
Epstein was protected because he was connected.
Ruben was trusted because he looked “respectable”.
Race had nothing to do with it.
Why the Far Right Has Tarnished Itself Beyond Repair
By reducing child sexual abuse to a racial talking point, the far right has:
- Trivialised survivor trauma
- Shielded elite offenders
- Distracted from genuine safeguarding reform
- Exposed its own moral emptiness
Its outrage is conditional. Its compassion is selective. Its principles dissolve the moment power, wealth, or “one of our own” is involved.
That is why its credibility is collapsing, not because it is silenced, but because it has been seen clearly.
Children deserve protection. Survivors deserve justice.
They do not deserve to be weaponised by people who care more about borders, bloodlines, and broadcasters than about truth.
