This is pretty unconvincing support of Starmer, basically reject the reform party, stick together and be optimistic about the economic future. She lists the bad things that have happened over the last few weeks and things that happened to the middle class and instead of making these foundational they were largely ignored as well as the legitimate grievances of the people supporting the reform party. Now I am not really familiar with the political issues in Great Britain except at a very high level but at the very high level Starmer’s speach sounds a bit like what I have heard in liberal/ progressive speaches. In the US and those fell very flat with the working people.
Labour is basically the party of the faculty lounge while the Torries are the party of Davos Man. It shouldn’t be surprising that normie voters are looking elsewhere.
Indeed. Were this oriented to US politics instead it'd read as at least a decade out of touch. There is a wishful thinking to it as though maybe this same strategy might work this time instead of being yet another center-left ruling party falling out of favor with the nation and losing to right-populists. The voters Labour is losing are their heartland, not the cities. They would be better served by solutions from previous TLP writers like reconnecting with these voters, listening to their concerns to the point of understanding, altering course to more pragmatic positions representative of those concerns, and following through. Optics just aren't enough.
I've re read a couple of times trying to make sense of the parties and the issues, and yes, I thought it sounded like ten years ago Hillary Clinton and company. Passing off voters as the politics of grievance and offering up "economic optimism" as being a better alternative to doing what people actually want, like stopping immigration. I've heard England is even worse for social mobility, sharp class divisions.
Gah. This is awful. Labour makes the Democrats look good and the Tories do the same for the GOPe. Delusional hack didn't notice that Stamer's landslide attracted fewer votes than Cobryn's wipeout. Heck of a job winning back the working class. Memo to TLP. Don't take advice from these fools.
People are free to offer whatever ideas they want on here. And people can yell at me and call me names all they want. But, we will not tolerate personal insults of other writers or other readers/commenters. That's not censorship, it's a simple rule designed to facilitate a mostly laissez-faire and mutually respectful environment for debate and reactions. Cheers.
Well, I expect to considered for a ban as well, because, respectfully, your piece indicates that you don’t fully understand the depths or scope of the problems over there.
The UK is in worse shape than we are, and Starmer is no hero. He’s a coward who has presided over and taken part in petty scandals: free clothes, free concert & match tickets & etc. etc. Then there’s Rayner’s tax evasion — this from a woman who spent years crowing about the evils of tax evasion (when the other team did it). She was his deputy PM! And Wes Streeting wants her back from the back benches.
And then there are the strikes: no Tube today! No trains today! No doctors today!
Labour is a disgrace. The Tories were a disgrace. They all talk, but they none of them act.
I didn't write the piece. I'm the editor of the publication and have the job of maintaining the platform. Your perspective is a perfectly valid opinion shared by many and not a personal insult to the author or another reader. If UK Labour doesn't address the sentiments/concerns you raise among others, they will lose the next election.
Yes, I saw that too late, and thanks. You don't have an easy job today. But to get to a point I made a few minutes ago: her piece reads like Labour propaganda. Personally, I would have pushed back on it before publishing it as it is now. Your site is a rare island of reason based on evidence; please, keep it that way.
I understand, but again leery of having someone slice and dice a comment. Is saying someone has a ridiculous take on something the same thing as saying they are ridiculous and is that or is that not an insult. Will people be 'reported'? You can see how Britain slowly but surely ended up censoring anything and everything that someone in power disagreed with.
Calling someone a "delusional hack" impugns their character and integrity and it is obviously different than saying "this take is ridiculous." We're not going to have people calling other people names on here. There's plenty of that on X. And no, there won't be any reporting and it's nothing like the examples in the UK. Just trying to maintain some semblance of decency on a platform with a multitude of viewpoints.
I have a very hard time even attempting to understand politics from a country that arrests 30 people a day because their speech has offended someone. People here who have business in England have to be careful of what they say on Twitter here because they could get arrested there.
Sounds like the working class in England has no party to represent their interests. Glad we revolted from that poxy island.
The lack of free speech is very disconcerting , but it pales in comparison to tolerance for the systematic rape of children. The West is only 15% of the world's population. Until recently we had very specific beliefs that separate us from the other 7 billion people on the planet.
In the West, first and foremost, we protect women and children, at all costs. That is not the case in most of the rest of the world, even if other non Western nations bother to pay lip service to the idea. We demand equal rights for all. Women are not chattel. Jews, historically chastised and abused all over the globe, have been safer in the US than anywhere else, but Israel. The LGBTQ community does not fear physical attack or a lack of rights in the West.
Until recently, free speech, unknown in the vast majority of the rest of the world, was a cornerstone of Western values. Now as the mess in England clearly demonstrates, Western values are at risk of disappearing. If they do so, at the alter of multiculturalism, they will not be returning anytime soon, anywhere on the planet.
The notion that England must be saved from Populists, is sadly amusing to anyone who has watched the changes in the nation over the last few decades. More than a decade ago, we arrived in London to stories of an English Judge who refused to imprison a newly arrived Muslim migrant for raping a 13 year old girl, because the migrant was unaware sex with children was a crime.
I remember it vividly because I did not believe it, when we first heard the story. We were living in CA at the time, and I remember thinking not even San Francisco lunatics would abide such a travesty. This was long before there was any reporting on the grooming gangs and mass rape of poor English girls by Pakistani men or Brits watched Jews executed on their streets, on the most sacred Jewish day of the year.
Starmer has an 18% approval rate. More than 80% of English voters want him gone. Some diseases are more popular. The last time Western voters had that much buyer's remorse, Biden was sitting in the WH and 5-10K migrants a day had been streaming across the Texas border, for the better part of 2 years.
Perhaps Starmer will limp along with his French and German compatriots. 40% of London is now foreign born, and the birth rates of immigrants far exceed those of native Brits. It stands to reason Progressives are producing new voters at a far faster rate, than Populists.
Or maybe the ghosts of Thatcher and Kohl will save Western Europe from Progressives hellbent on the destruction of Western values that demand equal rights for women, Jews and the LGBTQ community. And most importantly, the protection of children. Perhaps by the end of the decade, Farage is running England, the AfD will hold the most seats Germany and a LePen disciple will at the helm in France.
More likely, Progressives will realize, a la Denmark, they can support open borders or hold power, but they can no longer do both. Faced with with such a dilemma, ultimately, Progressives will pick power every day of the week, and twice on Sunday.
Any saving of Great Britain REQUIRES power going to the national populists... aka the center working and middle class... and taken away from the upper class elites.
Yes, but populism and nationalism must also be disciplined by the guard-rails of liberalism. (as in 'liberal democratic norms', not as in progressivism)
Indefinitely pushing in the direction of right-wing populism without any guiding liberal principles has never worked out well for anyone, the working and middle classes most of all. Last time Europe tried it, it resulted in two World Wars, the decimation of every Western country sans the U.S., and the gruesome deaths of millions of people.
I don't think that's something that will be of any benefit to the working or middle class.
And the French Revolution is another good example of populism going very wrong . And that did not even require a head of state to make it happen That doesn’t mean the underclass did not have very legitimate grievances, they did but grievances not addressed and then exploited for power with no legal restraints and personal liberties respected ends badly
The elites are committed to continuing to squash the working class. If the elites could be satisfied with all they have and not be so damn greedy to take more and more and more at the expense of everyone else, I would never be in support of bottom-up populist uprisings. But the elites have lost the care for the people and see the people as their threat... rightfully because the policies of the elites are harmful to the people. Instead of listening to the people and changing those policies, the Elites are moving toward more oppression, destruction, cancellation and now even assassination, of the people. There is no remedy to all of this except a popular uprising.
Any saving of Britain will.require rejoining the EU, so that the workers who used to man the engine e room of the economy can return and EU countries have an incentive to cooperate with illegal.migration. Right now, any illegal migrant hopping on an inflatable boat to Britain is effectively self deporting from the EU.
There is not one industry in the UK that has benefited from Brexit.
This piece uses the term liberal patriot liberally, but the author doesn’t appear to understand what those words mean. First and foremost, it means implementing policies that will unite a nation and benefit it.
Starmer gave a nice speech, but that’s all that Labour (and the Tories) can manage these days.
Starmer’s nickname is “two-tier Keir.” This is because there are two justice systems in the UK: one for favored groups and one for everyone else. Thus, mostly-Pakistani rape gangs in Rochdale and environs have been raping white girls for decades. Many of those girls have been arrested for prostitution, some after being gang-raped. Some were in state care homes, where workers let them be “groomed” by these men. All at ages as young as 10.
Almost nothing was done until Musk re-re-re-exposed the scandal, to the whole world (it was already a scandal in Britain). Now a little is being done. But one Labour MP has protected the gangs by refusing to hold an enquiry. And the rest are talking more than they’re acting.
In the UK, 30 people a day are arrested for mean Tweets, with many in jail as I type. All are in the wrong group. Favored group members tweet with abandon about the need to murder Jews. Favored group members tweet about killing T**Fs with abandon, while gender-critical tweets can be the subject of “non-crime hate incidents” (NCHIs; think thoughtcrime here). NCHIs don’t (generally) land you in jail, but as they say, the process is the punishment. The point is to silence dissent. I don’t see Labour rushing to fix this.
Starmer is like our own spineless Democrats: all talk and no action. A rousing speech doesn’t change that. It just confirms it.
If Starmer doesn't do something now to stop, or drastically slow, the numbers of illegals entering the country and stop the crime by illegals, he and his party are done for. And he has to stop the arrest of UK citizens speaking and protesting against illegals. So far, it looks like Starmer and his party have gone mad and lost their way.
Thinking about Mr. Halpin's comments about keeping a mutually respectful environment. I agree, but his view is one-sided.
The essay is misleading drivel written by a Starmer partisan. Starmer virtue signals but lacks the courage to act. Ainsley implies otherwise. The comments here reveal this: she overlooked important failures of the Labour party, all of which derive from its core ideology, which overrides all other considerations in Labour, whether they concern stopping rape gangs, stopping small boats, or embracing free speech as a principle.
*It's not reasonable to present misleading opinion pieces and not expect a strong reaction.* It's not reasonable to claim that a coward is courageous. In fact, this very practice is why the Dems are in such trouble: their behavior contradicts their words, constantly. Seth Moulton and Gavin Newsom peep about the unfairness of men in women's sports, yet Moulton voted to let it happen, and Newsom oversees a law that allows it. Harris, a candidate who had never participated in a primary, was going to "save democracy." People see through this stuff and they get angry.
Again, I'm not claiming that throwing nasty insults is a wise thing to do. I'm just explaining why people do it in reaction to pieces like the one published here.
Halpin's comment about being blocked highlight a larger problem in the west: one group pokes a stick in another group's eye, and then gets angry when the other guy reacts. Ainsley was poking a stick.
I like the Liberal Patriot because the writing here tends to be more objective that what Ms. Ainsley has produced. Please, keep to opinions that aren't so blatantly propagandistic.
Starmer's unpopularity is concerning, in that he has largely taken the path of avoiding moving further left on major issues like immigration, and instead tried acknowledging the concerns that are fueling right-populism, and pushing for centrist solutions. Andrew Sullivan did a good job of summarizing a lot of them (although he is also a critic of the Starmer government):
"Higher standards for English fluency, longer waits to apply for citizenship, a tougher values test, a longer period before you can stay indefinitely, and lower migration levels over the course of five years."
These are all liberal nationalist policies that take people's concerns about immigration seriously, without going full-on "throw them all out and stop bringing any in" and without engaging in xenophobia. My hope is that Starmer simply hasn't executed them well enough, not that they are simply being rejected in favor of pure xenophobic chauvinism.
But ultimately it's possible that what we could be seeing, unfortunately, is that we are simply regressing back to the illiberal attitudes and social trends of the interwar years. Hopefully not. Because we all know how that ended. One hopes that this time millions don't have to die and half the world doesn't have to come under the shadow of authoritarian governments preaching gospels about the national 'master race' before it becomes obvious why such illiberal ideas are bad ones.
I could not believe it either that systemic child rape was being swept under the rug. I also could not believe that progressives were not screaming about this after all the uproar of the “me too” culture. I don’t think there is much the British ruling class can do to redeem themselves if they do not address this and the reasons behind it
It was a major mistake for Starmer to not emphasize free speech. Authoritarian restrictions on speech will always spiral down into power grabs by competing sociopathic factions. In America the right is currently having a debate over how much retaliation should happen against past left censoring of speech, with much debate over the risks of escalation and the certainty of paying a high political price. It's weird that a man as smart as Starmer doesn't understand that no matter what moral case or strategic necessity comes from restricting speech, it can escalate things and it will cost you severely in future elections.
The only thing that could save Britain is time travel - to be able to go back a decade and get a do over on the Brexit vote. Of all the promised benefits of Brexit, how many have come to pass? Buehler? Anyone? Yeah, NONE,
You might as well let the goose stepping fascists or goose stepping communists take over. The most they will be able to do is determine whether the ship capsizes to the left or the right.
This is pretty unconvincing support of Starmer, basically reject the reform party, stick together and be optimistic about the economic future. She lists the bad things that have happened over the last few weeks and things that happened to the middle class and instead of making these foundational they were largely ignored as well as the legitimate grievances of the people supporting the reform party. Now I am not really familiar with the political issues in Great Britain except at a very high level but at the very high level Starmer’s speach sounds a bit like what I have heard in liberal/ progressive speaches. In the US and those fell very flat with the working people.
Labour is basically the party of the faculty lounge while the Torries are the party of Davos Man. It shouldn’t be surprising that normie voters are looking elsewhere.
Indeed. Were this oriented to US politics instead it'd read as at least a decade out of touch. There is a wishful thinking to it as though maybe this same strategy might work this time instead of being yet another center-left ruling party falling out of favor with the nation and losing to right-populists. The voters Labour is losing are their heartland, not the cities. They would be better served by solutions from previous TLP writers like reconnecting with these voters, listening to their concerns to the point of understanding, altering course to more pragmatic positions representative of those concerns, and following through. Optics just aren't enough.
I've re read a couple of times trying to make sense of the parties and the issues, and yes, I thought it sounded like ten years ago Hillary Clinton and company. Passing off voters as the politics of grievance and offering up "economic optimism" as being a better alternative to doing what people actually want, like stopping immigration. I've heard England is even worse for social mobility, sharp class divisions.
Gah. This is awful. Labour makes the Democrats look good and the Tories do the same for the GOPe. Delusional hack didn't notice that Stamer's landslide attracted fewer votes than Cobryn's wipeout. Heck of a job winning back the working class. Memo to TLP. Don't take advice from these fools.
Stop with the personal insults or you will be blocked. Fine to disagree but do it in a respectful manner.
Mr. Halpin - I both like this comment and am leery of this comment. Censoring posts starts down a slippery slope.
People are free to offer whatever ideas they want on here. And people can yell at me and call me names all they want. But, we will not tolerate personal insults of other writers or other readers/commenters. That's not censorship, it's a simple rule designed to facilitate a mostly laissez-faire and mutually respectful environment for debate and reactions. Cheers.
Well, I expect to considered for a ban as well, because, respectfully, your piece indicates that you don’t fully understand the depths or scope of the problems over there.
The UK is in worse shape than we are, and Starmer is no hero. He’s a coward who has presided over and taken part in petty scandals: free clothes, free concert & match tickets & etc. etc. Then there’s Rayner’s tax evasion — this from a woman who spent years crowing about the evils of tax evasion (when the other team did it). She was his deputy PM! And Wes Streeting wants her back from the back benches.
And then there are the strikes: no Tube today! No trains today! No doctors today!
Labour is a disgrace. The Tories were a disgrace. They all talk, but they none of them act.
I didn't write the piece. I'm the editor of the publication and have the job of maintaining the platform. Your perspective is a perfectly valid opinion shared by many and not a personal insult to the author or another reader. If UK Labour doesn't address the sentiments/concerns you raise among others, they will lose the next election.
Yes, I saw that too late, and thanks. You don't have an easy job today. But to get to a point I made a few minutes ago: her piece reads like Labour propaganda. Personally, I would have pushed back on it before publishing it as it is now. Your site is a rare island of reason based on evidence; please, keep it that way.
I understand, but again leery of having someone slice and dice a comment. Is saying someone has a ridiculous take on something the same thing as saying they are ridiculous and is that or is that not an insult. Will people be 'reported'? You can see how Britain slowly but surely ended up censoring anything and everything that someone in power disagreed with.
Calling someone a "delusional hack" impugns their character and integrity and it is obviously different than saying "this take is ridiculous." We're not going to have people calling other people names on here. There's plenty of that on X. And no, there won't be any reporting and it's nothing like the examples in the UK. Just trying to maintain some semblance of decency on a platform with a multitude of viewpoints.
I have a very hard time even attempting to understand politics from a country that arrests 30 people a day because their speech has offended someone. People here who have business in England have to be careful of what they say on Twitter here because they could get arrested there.
Sounds like the working class in England has no party to represent their interests. Glad we revolted from that poxy island.
The lack of free speech is very disconcerting , but it pales in comparison to tolerance for the systematic rape of children. The West is only 15% of the world's population. Until recently we had very specific beliefs that separate us from the other 7 billion people on the planet.
In the West, first and foremost, we protect women and children, at all costs. That is not the case in most of the rest of the world, even if other non Western nations bother to pay lip service to the idea. We demand equal rights for all. Women are not chattel. Jews, historically chastised and abused all over the globe, have been safer in the US than anywhere else, but Israel. The LGBTQ community does not fear physical attack or a lack of rights in the West.
Until recently, free speech, unknown in the vast majority of the rest of the world, was a cornerstone of Western values. Now as the mess in England clearly demonstrates, Western values are at risk of disappearing. If they do so, at the alter of multiculturalism, they will not be returning anytime soon, anywhere on the planet.
This issue (tiring a blind eye to systemic issues of child rape) more than any really turns me off to the British ruling class.
The notion that England must be saved from Populists, is sadly amusing to anyone who has watched the changes in the nation over the last few decades. More than a decade ago, we arrived in London to stories of an English Judge who refused to imprison a newly arrived Muslim migrant for raping a 13 year old girl, because the migrant was unaware sex with children was a crime.
I remember it vividly because I did not believe it, when we first heard the story. We were living in CA at the time, and I remember thinking not even San Francisco lunatics would abide such a travesty. This was long before there was any reporting on the grooming gangs and mass rape of poor English girls by Pakistani men or Brits watched Jews executed on their streets, on the most sacred Jewish day of the year.
Starmer has an 18% approval rate. More than 80% of English voters want him gone. Some diseases are more popular. The last time Western voters had that much buyer's remorse, Biden was sitting in the WH and 5-10K migrants a day had been streaming across the Texas border, for the better part of 2 years.
Perhaps Starmer will limp along with his French and German compatriots. 40% of London is now foreign born, and the birth rates of immigrants far exceed those of native Brits. It stands to reason Progressives are producing new voters at a far faster rate, than Populists.
Or maybe the ghosts of Thatcher and Kohl will save Western Europe from Progressives hellbent on the destruction of Western values that demand equal rights for women, Jews and the LGBTQ community. And most importantly, the protection of children. Perhaps by the end of the decade, Farage is running England, the AfD will hold the most seats Germany and a LePen disciple will at the helm in France.
More likely, Progressives will realize, a la Denmark, they can support open borders or hold power, but they can no longer do both. Faced with with such a dilemma, ultimately, Progressives will pick power every day of the week, and twice on Sunday.
Any saving of Great Britain REQUIRES power going to the national populists... aka the center working and middle class... and taken away from the upper class elites.
Yes, but populism and nationalism must also be disciplined by the guard-rails of liberalism. (as in 'liberal democratic norms', not as in progressivism)
Indefinitely pushing in the direction of right-wing populism without any guiding liberal principles has never worked out well for anyone, the working and middle classes most of all. Last time Europe tried it, it resulted in two World Wars, the decimation of every Western country sans the U.S., and the gruesome deaths of millions of people.
I don't think that's something that will be of any benefit to the working or middle class.
And the French Revolution is another good example of populism going very wrong . And that did not even require a head of state to make it happen That doesn’t mean the underclass did not have very legitimate grievances, they did but grievances not addressed and then exploited for power with no legal restraints and personal liberties respected ends badly
The elites are committed to continuing to squash the working class. If the elites could be satisfied with all they have and not be so damn greedy to take more and more and more at the expense of everyone else, I would never be in support of bottom-up populist uprisings. But the elites have lost the care for the people and see the people as their threat... rightfully because the policies of the elites are harmful to the people. Instead of listening to the people and changing those policies, the Elites are moving toward more oppression, destruction, cancellation and now even assassination, of the people. There is no remedy to all of this except a popular uprising.
Any saving of Britain will.require rejoining the EU, so that the workers who used to man the engine e room of the economy can return and EU countries have an incentive to cooperate with illegal.migration. Right now, any illegal migrant hopping on an inflatable boat to Britain is effectively self deporting from the EU.
There is not one industry in the UK that has benefited from Brexit.
This piece uses the term liberal patriot liberally, but the author doesn’t appear to understand what those words mean. First and foremost, it means implementing policies that will unite a nation and benefit it.
Starmer gave a nice speech, but that’s all that Labour (and the Tories) can manage these days.
Starmer’s nickname is “two-tier Keir.” This is because there are two justice systems in the UK: one for favored groups and one for everyone else. Thus, mostly-Pakistani rape gangs in Rochdale and environs have been raping white girls for decades. Many of those girls have been arrested for prostitution, some after being gang-raped. Some were in state care homes, where workers let them be “groomed” by these men. All at ages as young as 10.
Almost nothing was done until Musk re-re-re-exposed the scandal, to the whole world (it was already a scandal in Britain). Now a little is being done. But one Labour MP has protected the gangs by refusing to hold an enquiry. And the rest are talking more than they’re acting.
In the UK, 30 people a day are arrested for mean Tweets, with many in jail as I type. All are in the wrong group. Favored group members tweet with abandon about the need to murder Jews. Favored group members tweet about killing T**Fs with abandon, while gender-critical tweets can be the subject of “non-crime hate incidents” (NCHIs; think thoughtcrime here). NCHIs don’t (generally) land you in jail, but as they say, the process is the punishment. The point is to silence dissent. I don’t see Labour rushing to fix this.
Starmer is like our own spineless Democrats: all talk and no action. A rousing speech doesn’t change that. It just confirms it.
If Starmer doesn't do something now to stop, or drastically slow, the numbers of illegals entering the country and stop the crime by illegals, he and his party are done for. And he has to stop the arrest of UK citizens speaking and protesting against illegals. So far, it looks like Starmer and his party have gone mad and lost their way.
An actual small l liberal would be far more concerned with Britain arresting people for posting memes than the populist right.
Thinking about Mr. Halpin's comments about keeping a mutually respectful environment. I agree, but his view is one-sided.
The essay is misleading drivel written by a Starmer partisan. Starmer virtue signals but lacks the courage to act. Ainsley implies otherwise. The comments here reveal this: she overlooked important failures of the Labour party, all of which derive from its core ideology, which overrides all other considerations in Labour, whether they concern stopping rape gangs, stopping small boats, or embracing free speech as a principle.
*It's not reasonable to present misleading opinion pieces and not expect a strong reaction.* It's not reasonable to claim that a coward is courageous. In fact, this very practice is why the Dems are in such trouble: their behavior contradicts their words, constantly. Seth Moulton and Gavin Newsom peep about the unfairness of men in women's sports, yet Moulton voted to let it happen, and Newsom oversees a law that allows it. Harris, a candidate who had never participated in a primary, was going to "save democracy." People see through this stuff and they get angry.
Again, I'm not claiming that throwing nasty insults is a wise thing to do. I'm just explaining why people do it in reaction to pieces like the one published here.
Halpin's comment about being blocked highlight a larger problem in the west: one group pokes a stick in another group's eye, and then gets angry when the other guy reacts. Ainsley was poking a stick.
I like the Liberal Patriot because the writing here tends to be more objective that what Ms. Ainsley has produced. Please, keep to opinions that aren't so blatantly propagandistic.
Starmer's unpopularity is concerning, in that he has largely taken the path of avoiding moving further left on major issues like immigration, and instead tried acknowledging the concerns that are fueling right-populism, and pushing for centrist solutions. Andrew Sullivan did a good job of summarizing a lot of them (although he is also a critic of the Starmer government):
"Higher standards for English fluency, longer waits to apply for citizenship, a tougher values test, a longer period before you can stay indefinitely, and lower migration levels over the course of five years."
These are all liberal nationalist policies that take people's concerns about immigration seriously, without going full-on "throw them all out and stop bringing any in" and without engaging in xenophobia. My hope is that Starmer simply hasn't executed them well enough, not that they are simply being rejected in favor of pure xenophobic chauvinism.
But ultimately it's possible that what we could be seeing, unfortunately, is that we are simply regressing back to the illiberal attitudes and social trends of the interwar years. Hopefully not. Because we all know how that ended. One hopes that this time millions don't have to die and half the world doesn't have to come under the shadow of authoritarian governments preaching gospels about the national 'master race' before it becomes obvious why such illiberal ideas are bad ones.
I could not believe it either that systemic child rape was being swept under the rug. I also could not believe that progressives were not screaming about this after all the uproar of the “me too” culture. I don’t think there is much the British ruling class can do to redeem themselves if they do not address this and the reasons behind it
Britain is slowly going bust
https://www.economist.com/leaders/2025/09/25/britain-is-slowly-going-bust
From The Economist
It was a major mistake for Starmer to not emphasize free speech. Authoritarian restrictions on speech will always spiral down into power grabs by competing sociopathic factions. In America the right is currently having a debate over how much retaliation should happen against past left censoring of speech, with much debate over the risks of escalation and the certainty of paying a high political price. It's weird that a man as smart as Starmer doesn't understand that no matter what moral case or strategic necessity comes from restricting speech, it can escalate things and it will cost you severely in future elections.
The only thing that could save Britain is time travel - to be able to go back a decade and get a do over on the Brexit vote. Of all the promised benefits of Brexit, how many have come to pass? Buehler? Anyone? Yeah, NONE,
You might as well let the goose stepping fascists or goose stepping communists take over. The most they will be able to do is determine whether the ship capsizes to the left or the right.