Reflecting on the last five years of Tory immigration policy, Keir Starmer said "the damage this has done to our country is incalculable." Immigration has turned Britain into "an island of strangers". "Enforcement will be tougher than ever and migration numbers will fall" with the target of shrinking new arrivals by 100,000/year come 2029. That means care sector vacancies going unfilled, and because Labour hates universities, institutions face a tax on every overseas student the recruit. This performative toughness has won some support outwith the party. Germany's far right AfD have praised Starmer's position. The right here, however, are performatively unimpressed.
While she fights for relevance, Kemi Badenoch said "this is nowhere near the scale that we need". Writing on Conservative Home, Ted Grainger was more downbeat, opining that the Tories had their chance - especially following Brexit - but blew it. Nigel Farage attacked Starmer for "tinkering around the edges" and said Labour were "panicked" by Reform's rise. An observation that is obviously true. Meanwhile, Starmer continues to upset his base in the media with centrist opinion right royally angry about yet another betrayal of the liberal hero image they invented for him.
We know this strategy isn't going to work. Getting into a bidding war with the Tories and Reform on immigration is a mug's game. Getting Starmer to announce the policy in The Sun, and having Yvette Cooper appear on GB News and refusing to challenge the racist questions put to her won't change the equation at all. For the core pf the racist right, only pulling down the shutters will do for a start. And those for whom it is one issue among many, evidence shows Labour would be better off playing to its historic strengths. But, as we know, this government doesn't want to stand up to the few on behalf of the many because it might raise expectations and generate further clamour for challenging established power and wealth.
Let's try a thought experiment. Knowing that similar efforts everywhere on the continent has ended in ruination for the centre left, taking them at their word why are Starmer and friends asking us to believe they will avoid that fate? It seems they are relying on the politics of demonstration. Contrary to Starmer's disgusting rhetoric about "open borders experiments", the big drivers of immigration since 2021 have been the 150,000 who've settled here from Hong Kong. Since Russia's invasion of Ukraine, over 200,000 refugees have settled here too. Both helped immigration figures spike during the last couple of years and now, very obviously, numbers are going to come down again without any government intervention. They can only migrate here the once. Just like the £22bn black hole fantasy and other data points, this will be spun as the great success of Starmer's "toughness". Therefore, when the Tories and Reform attack Labour they will have the falling migrant numbers ready to whip out to refute their arguments. Genius! It won't convince the hardcore, but Starmer hopes it will assure the Reform adjacent and neutralise the issue, giving Labour political space to showcase their record. Like cutting the NHS, taking money off the disabled, arming a genocide, etc. etc.
The attack on immigration underlines the political vapidity and moral emptiness of Starmerism. If the strategy is expecting that, when push comes to shove in 2029, progressive voters line up behind Labour to prevent the right from getting in, carrying on like this is a sure fire way to replicate the disaster of the American presidential election and saddle us with Farage in Number 10. These are the stakes and, damningly, Labour doesn't give a hoot.
Image Credit
22 comments:
“Danger Stranger. You’d better paint your face”. 1977, Joe Strummer, The Clash.
Like Powell’s apocalyptic ‘Rivers’ speech in 1968, I don’t think this one will go away. Interesting use of the words ‘stranger’ & ‘island’ in the same sentence.
Much like the ‘Stranger Danger’ adverts for children in the 1970s - that Strummer is mocking - it was brought to the attention of the authorities that these broadcasts frightened children rather than educated them and ignored the fact that most children are abducted by someone that they know.
Interestingly, Starmer uses the word island instead of society, playing on the nationalist, go-it-alone exceptionalism of the British as an island race - different (and superior) to our continental neighbours.
This puerile pantomime stuff is straight out the Crypto-fascist Playbook 101. “Look out, they’re behind you!
If you want to understand British politics now, you need to look at what the far right were proposing three years ago. If you want to understand what British politics will be like in three years' time, you need to look at what the far right are proposing now.
This 'policy' will be as successful inrallying support as cancelling Winter Fuel, attackng people with disabilities as scroungers, seeking a forlorn coalition of the willing, signing something with Trump that is clamed to be a trade deal, abandoning planning rules, etc. All have a hint of desperation and a lack of coherence.
I've said it before, Labour don't need to compete with Reform on immigration. They just need to make the British public feel the immigration system is robust and prioritises British interests (the immigrants wouldn't be here if they hadn't prioritised theirs). Britain has experienced not just historically unprecedented volumes of immigration in a comparatively short period of time, but also from cultures markedly different from modern, liberal, Western culture (the benefits of which they desire). It is an understatement to say this has caused some problems. The scale of the immigration means the problems can no longer be brushed under the carpet.
The wheeze of telling the British public it's racist to notice the problems no longer works, it pushes them to Reform because at least Reform are offering some sort of solution no matter how unlikely. Trying to con the British public that they're not seeing the problems openly in front of them also doesn't work, because calling out Reform as charlatans whilst also knowingly, unashamedly and unconvincingly lying is just too hard an act to pull off.
Now here's my realpolitik hot take on this. Admittedly it's a bit speculative right now, but I don't think it's a million miles wide. Some on the right argue that Labour have pandered to some immigrant communities because they calculate bloc voting in those communities works in their favour (or at least could swing against their favour if they're not careful). Anyone genuinely interested in modern British politics understands the modern revival of 'rotten boroughs' where people within certain communities control voting blocs, it's an open secret in certain places with high levels of immigration (usually the less integrated places). Now the argument runs that politicians, usually Labour, will make unpalatable deals to secure those blocs, turn a blind eye to certain things etc. But I think we're getting to the point where those blocs will be able to do away with Labour and put forward their own political vehicles (Tower Hamlets is probably the vanguard of this, Gorgeous George Galloway has also had some success exploiting related undercurrents, it's why Labour politicians feel comfortable demanding new blasphemy laws etc...). So, Starmer's got an intriguing decision, find ways of locking in those blocs long-term or find ways of preventing them from becoming powerful enough to secede from those unofficial pacts. Now, you could just say I've put two and two together and got five hundred, or it's just pareidolia (rotten boroughs are too insignificant to drive such nationally important policies), but it will make you think about some things from a different perspective.
Agree with you about "the politics of demonstration", but I think what Starmer may also be counting on is that the unprecedented spike in net immigration in 2022 wasn't just driven by refugees from Hong Kong and Ukraine, but also by international students who would have come here to study in 2020 or 2021, but were prevented from doing so by the pandemic.
These students will be due to complete their studies and return home in 2025 and 2026.
I have a grim feeling this week will turn out to be a turning point. Starmer has chosen to (mistakenly?) write off the Tories and elevate Reform to the unofficial status of main opposition party. Rather than offer an alternative which proves popular and forces Farage on to the defensive, he goes 'all-in' with a speech on immigration that channels Enoch Powell and contains lots of classic right-wing tropes, e.g. about how 'They' won't integrate. It pisses off Labour supporters and bolsters ones favouring Reform (who won't vote Labour anyway). Farage gets an even bigger platform to launder his repellent politics than the one already given him by the media. Rinse and repeat until 2029.
If Kamo is suggesting that Starmer might - for example - try to buy the complicity of Muslim areas on hot button issues like genocide by pulling strings to let them get away with some characteristically unconscionable shit (e.g. honour killings) a bit more often, then he's potentially got a point. Not in that such a play would actually work well enough to make any real difference -but in that Starmer and his people are clearly both cynical enough and stupid enough to actually try that kind of thing.
"These are the stakes and, damningly, Labour doesn't give a hoot."
Not that this kind of scorched earth cynicism wasn't predictable, is it? They demonstrated in 2019 that they are fully prepared to sabotage their own electoral chances purely to keep the possibility of leftward movement (or loss of the state's blank cheque to Israel, no doubt) forever out of the public's reach.
And just like the Democrats in the US, they'd rather lose to an actual fascist takeover than lose their position as "the only alternative" to an actual fascist takeover.
This is an end state of democracy under capitalism: when the entrenched interests are SO entrenched that the system would literally rather feed itself feet first into a wood chipper than oppose them.
If there's any saving of this government, it's going to have to come from the backbenchers collectively realising that what happened to the Tories last year is about to happen to them, and finding the spine to actually do something about it.
@Anonymous, the Enoch-lite stuff will piss off some Labour voters. The Fabian and Guardianista style Labour voters, who may waste their votes on Green Party virtue signalling, or more plausibly go Lib Dem. Pushing against the problematic side of unprecedented mass immigration plays well with Red Wall type Labour voters (those who would once have been described as traditional working class*).
Anecdotal, but I personally know an Afro-Caribbean family in South London who have drifted towards Reform, they are post-Windrush so have been in the UK 50+ years, and current generation find themselves competing for subsidised housing with the much, much larger waves of recent immigration. And whilst that Afro-Caribbean culture has features distinct from 'native' British culture it's much closer than the tribal/honour culture of some of the more recent arrivals. I'm told by others who are active in London politics this isn't that unusual.
* 'working class' is one of those terms like 'fascist' whose usage in popular modern political discourse is very different from it's original semantic meaning.
Always with the Israel tropes - why are parts of the left so obsessed with Jews? Where are all the marches about what's happening to the Uighur in China or the Chechens and other deeply oppressed groups in the Caucasus (both Muslim populations that global Islamic protestors seem to have forgotten about). What about those places where Islamic nations are perpetrating atrocities, like South Sudan or Iran to name just two? What about also, the Tibetans, the Roppongi, the Tamils in Shri Lanka (what's left of them and I know proud lefties who can go on holiday to Shri Lanka no problem but march around with Palestinian flags all day), what about the slow genocide perpetrated on the Mongolians since the second world war by both the Russians and the Chinese (look it up on wikipedia in between googling about how to de-platform Israel in the Eurovision song contest)? What about the endless murders of women in India and South America? What about the killing of indigenous peoples endorsed/paid for by western companies wherever oilfields are located? What about the inhuman treatment of the mainly Filipino and sub Saharan African servant class in the middle east? Where are the flags in support of ordinary North Koreans, ordinary Chinese, ordinary Russians whose daily lives are far bleaker than the majority of Palestinians had it, at least before Hamas perpetrated their atrocity. Where are the flags in support of those Palestinians who tried and failed to oppose Hamas? Am I saying that the Israel response wasn't totally disproportionate and incredibly sad? No I am not. But the obsession with Israel to the exclusion of rationality, to the point of undermining your own political party, feels to me on a par with the extreme end of Trump's supporters. It's less about any genuine empathy for either Palestinians or Jews, and more about finding your own little club of flag waving narcissists in the face of a complicated and hostile world.
"why are parts of the left so obsessed with Jews?"
What part of the left is that then, name names ?
"Where are all the marches about what's happening to the Uighur in China or the Chechens and other deeply oppressed groups in the Caucasus (both Muslim populations that global Islamic protestors seem to have forgotten about)"
In other words, what about what about what about. Not protesting these other struggles doesn't negate the Palestine question, and to my knowledge, our ruling class arent helping to fund them like they are Israel, as well as the fact Britain has a longer historic connection with Palestine.
"What about those places where Islamic nations are perpetrating atrocities, like South Sudan or Iran to name just two?"
More whataboutery again. How about you explain why the apparent lack of protest of the above let's Israel off the hook and/or means there's an "obsession with Jews" which seems like your trying to imply some sort of hefty accusation but don't have the guts to directly say it.
"What about the inhuman treatment of the mainly Filipino and sub Saharan African servant class in the middle east?"
Conveniently forgetting Palestinians have faced pretty bleak, and by bleak, I mean similar, experiences as those peoples.
Seems your some sort of butthurt Labour Party lover, who wants everyone to get in line and vote Labour.
"Always with the Israel tropes blah blah, I'm either triggered or getting paid to write this shite, blah blah blah"
One anon has already called out your specious and intellectually vapid - to take the most charitable available reading - whataboutery. So I'll limit this reply to also pointing out that the Palestinians differ from the Uighurs, the Rohingyas, etc and so forth because OUR FUCKING GOVERNMENT is neck deep in it. We're selling weapons to the people who are doing it, our so-called "special allies" are using their own taxpayers' money to fund it, our foreign policy requires at the very least not lifting a serious finger to stop it even though we actually could (which is not the case with the Uighurs), etc and so forth.
Ethics must have a presence close to home before they can go any further afield.
Oh, and anonymous whataboutery peddler... If you're concerned about people failing to be motivated by "the greater evil" to vote Labour, no matter how shit that Labour get, then you're entirely correct to be. But you're wasting your time telling people who are sick of being complicit in evil to vote for the lesser one. Your message, no matter how you try to sugar coat or disguise it, is not exactly news to them, is it...? If you want to scream at someone, try screaming at Labour MPs, who are the only people with any power to change the course of this currently doomed ship.
Any black Afro-Carribeans who are flirting with Reform had better take a good look at what's currently going on in the US, and realise how inevitable it is that skin colour will be the primary (and in many case the ONLY) determinant of who gets targeted by the terror.
Unless they actually fancy the chance to star in the "fuck around, find out" memes of 2030, that is.
I’m not going to answer the first question - if you don’t know it’s not for me to tell you.
Buthurt - im not actually sure what that means - what is the relationship between a sore backside and the points made? I’m pretty sure the term has migrated from Maga forums and commentary though, as a term of insult towards liberals, which only confirms my final point. But i guess you go far enough left you end up…
Fair point on the questions, these were a framing device but I think there is probably an implicit hypothesis in there - about why with so many terrible things going on in the world, so many people are so focused, so frothing, on this specific issue. Im not gonna call it antisemism, i think its something more basic - akin to the person who hurls abuse at the nerdy student who steps out onto the road prematurely, but is subdued when its two burly blokes doing the same thing.
So thanks for pointing it out.
Regarding Britain’s historical links with Palestine - do you mean the British ruling class’s historical links via Lawrence? I’ve seen the movie and read the torturous books. Or do you mean the British left’s historical relationship with Hamas and their ilk?
It’s worth bearing in mind, and brings us nicely back round to sore backsides, that while the Brits were agonising over Palestine, they were also stuffing sawdust up the backsides of the Mau Mau, (both the toffs and their subordinates) so its fair to say there is some cognitive dissonance there, a bit like the lefty in Sri Lanka.
A tip for future insults-maybe ‘libtard’.
Ah ‘specious and intellectually vapid’ the endless cry of those who can only engage with alternative opinions with lame insults and capitalisations. As for neck deep in it, when did you last buy something off amazon? We’re all neck deep in it, everyone of us, go tell the Tibetans having their organs harvested that you don’t care about them because the only electable labour leader in fifteen years disagwees you.
"Waaaah, everyone else is doing a genocide, why can't I?" - Israel, via apologists
Hmmm, some of the Labour right's shills seem to be turning their attention here. Congrats Phil, you're noticed!
I'd certainly "disagwee" with Starmer being "electable"! He doesn't look very electable right now. He's chasing voters whose opinion of him is dropping a whole order of magnitude faster than that of Labour voters, and the latter is still heading determinedly south. He was only elected last year because of who he was replacing; the "loveless landslide" is common vernacular now, spoken even by the soberest of centrist election punters.
But we all know that's what "electable" really means when coming from the mouths of certain folks, now don't we? It means "the leftmost alternative that you can be allowed to have, by people who are determined that certain things must be non-negotiable". Because that's worked out SO well across the Pond. You lot have got a decision to make; are you determined to go down with the ship, or are you going to back off?
"Alternative opinions", eh. Are those anything like "alternative facts"?
Pray tell, what do you people who hold alternative opinions do, when the facts don't fit your opinions?
It gets confusing with all these people called anonymous. Are they the same person arguing with themselves? If you haven't got the guts to put your name to it, your comment is almost certainly not worth reading, as clearly you can't even convince yourself to stand by it.
My favourite for massive time waster is the one who basically wrote hundreds of What Abouts and thought that was a)worth their time b) worth anyone else's. And c) meant anything other than what about. Hilariously tedious.
What you are apparently seriously argoung is "Unless you address every injustice in the world everywhere all at once, don't even bother." Fantastic stuff.youmust have been a debating star at the saloon bar of the Raging Boar.
I agree, anon 10:27 is all over the place.
In reply to this Anon 2025 M05 16 17:50 character.
"I’m not going to answer the first question - if you don’t know it’s not for me to tell you"
In other words, you cant, and as you made the original claim re that theres some sort of Jewish obsessed part of the left, its on you to back that up.
"Buthurt - im not actually sure what that means - what is the relationship between a sore backside and the points made? I’m pretty sure the term has migrated from Maga forums and commentary though, as a term of insult towards liberals, which only confirms my final point. But i guess you go far enough left you end up"
Your not sure what it means, apparently, but seem to be really in the know of its origins. Which is it, and what has it allegedly originating in "Maga forums" got got to do with anything ? Further, how about you answer my original question, which was how does protesting about Palestine but not 'insert other injustice' negate the Palestine question exactly ?
"Fair point on the questions, these were a framing device but I think there is probably an implicit hypothesis in there - about why with so many terrible things going on in the world, so many people are so focused, so frothing, on this specific issue"
Fair point, yet you still fail to answer any of the questions I asked, again showing your more concerned with whataboutry then engaging in any real good faith discussion.
"Im not gonna call it antisemism"
No, your just going to allude to it instead. If your going to make hefty accusations, including by implication, you have to back it up.
"Regarding Britain’s historical links with Palestine - do you mean the British ruling class’s historical links via Lawrence?"
Partly. but Im going back to people like Cromwell, who seemed to be an early adopter of the belief in Jews 'returning' to the 'Holy Land', a whole contingent of Protestants, and Balfour/British ruling class.
"Or do you mean the British left’s historical relationship with Hamas and their ilk?"
Such as who, and whats your problems with that ? Are you equally as critical of our ruling class's links with HTS in Syria and Likud in Israel ?
"t’s worth bearing in mind, and brings us nicely back round to sore backsides, that while the Brits were agonising over Palestine, they were also stuffing sawdust up the backsides of the Mau Mau, (both the toffs and their subordinates) so its fair to say there is some cognitive dissonance there, a bit like the lefty in Sri Lanka"
Eh ?
This has to be some AWL/Trot troll or that 'BobFromBrockley' guy.
Soliman
Post a Comment