Over the days since the biggest right-wing demonstration in British records, one phrase keeps echoing. Acquaintances discuss those scenes, the way London was packed with over 100,000 protesters shouting xenophobic slogans. Often they remark: “It feels like the 1970s all over again.”
As someone with comparable age, I too remember harassment in schoolyards, getting chased by aggressive groups, and house-warming gifts like a brick shattering the window. Thankfully, things are not quite from those days, but one important aspect is more alarming. Back then, racism was secretive, a guilty pleasure: deep down, those with prejudice knew their views were ugly. Not anymore.
Absence of Shame and Normalization of Extremism
The most striking about the recent protest was not the turnout, which was matched by some protests about Gaza. It’s the absence of embarrassment, the brazen assertion on an Englishman’s entitlement to belittle others. It’s the normalisation of something once seen as malicious radicalism. And a big driver is not the masses in the street, but the suits in the ostensibly progressive government.
Starmer’s Reaction to Racist Aggression
Whenever faced with violent prejudice, Keir Starmer hesitates, splutters, and chooses the coward’s path. He often pretends not recognize racism or panders to it.
Just over two months ago, in small towns across the UK region, migrants were burned out of their residences and a place of worship was petrol bombed. The prime minister’s response? First and foremost, he deplored violence on the authorities. The targeted community bombarded with hate and afraid for their safety got only a promise of “all necessary measures” to keep you safe. Removed of rhetorical flourish, this is the least expected anyone might expect from the government.
Pandering to Prejudice for Poll Numbers
Worse still is when the leader smirks in the face of prejudice, something he engages in increasingly as his approval ratings slide downward. Recently, the Reform chief promised large-scale removals of practically anyone seeking asylum, even if it meant returning Afghan women to the Taliban or sending activists to their demise. Publicly, No 10 didn’t even raise an eyebrow at Farage referring to other humans as a “scourge” or an “invasion”.
For the great unwashed, it published an extraordinary message: “While Nigel Farage moans from the sidelines, Labour is doing the job,” stating, featuring an image of Starmer labeled with “deported over 35,000 people”. Why support the extreme agitators when moderate racists will do the job just well?
Effect Over Intention
Many Labour people will say they are not racist at all, and I don’t wish to dispute. But one lesson about prejudice I learned early growing up was to focus on impact rather than debate about purpose. An object, simply put, is invariably a brick, regardless of the excuses of the clown throwing it.
However perfectly progressive Labour ministers might consider themselves, they are in effect dabbling in the tactics of hatred to gain a point or two in opinion polls. Getting thrashed by the opposition? Then we’ll get the leader to call migration a “squalid chapter” causing “immense” damage. The public rejects that? Then we’ll say the address was a big mistake caused by, um, the PM dealing with too much in his workload.
Moving Political Discourse and Results
To preserve of a few undistinguished careers, no tactic is too cheap and every single principle can be chucked. So after some throat-clearing, the administration tells certain media how worried it is about the protest of extremists, while dispatching a minister on TV to declare the broader public that the event shows free speech is “thriving”.
“The British people have a far more nuanced view of immigration than the press and political narrative would have us believe,” notes Nick Lowles of anti-fascist organisation a campaign group in his recent publication. Only one out of 10 Britons is outright opposed to immigration, while a significant number who identify asylum seekers as a huge issue have never met one.
Ignored Chances and Future Risks
Equipped with such insights and a historic majority, Labour could easily counter part of the wild extremism. Officials might point out that a leading figure is an non-UK citizen who hunkers down in Spain and has a long list of legal offenses. The PM might observe how much of the UK would collapse without migrants—from hospitals to schools to care homes. How universities face collapse without international enrollees and their bumper fees. He might even point out that migrants are human too, with lives and dreams. We could discuss the history of empire, or how environmental issues and poverty force populations to move.
This is unrealistic? The administration would rather welcome a group of rich Americans taking property for tech infrastructure, financial support for their businesses, and demand we change our tax code for their investors. As for the general populace, any hope of material improvement is blocked by “financial systems”, “budget restrictions” and “refugees”.
Historical Role and Shortcoming
The past has a tendency of giving little men big tasks. Keir Starmer primary historic role is to stave off the hard right. He is not only failing, he is setting the stage for Farage and his associates. The supposed “centrists” are ushering extremism into the center and normalising the abhorrent.
Simply pay attention to the speeches and slogans of the extremists. The final price for this shift will not be paid by a politician, but by individuals distant from power: an Ethiopian boy, perhaps, with no family, or an Asian kid looking out the window one evening.
