In Australia, Labor won the general election this weekend by opposing anything that looked vaguely aligned with the thinking of Trump.
Mark Carney did the same in naming the Canadian general election.
Neither of these winning parties is remotely left of centre. Both are neoliberal to their core. I am under no illusion about that.
Starmer, meanwhile, continues to pander to Trump, still hanging on to the idea of a 'special relationship'. And simultaneously, he is aping Farage. As the Guardian has reported:
Ministers will crack down on international students applying for asylum in the UK in a move designed to tackle migration figures, after a series of bruising losses to Reform in the local elections.
An immigration white paper setting out the proposed reforms in mid-May will include measures to bring down the numbers of UK student visa holders who make asylum claims, the Guardian understands.
Unpacking that, what ministers want to do is:
- Deny people who realise that they believe in our way of life whilst studying in this country, in a way that then makes it dangerous for them to return to their country of origin, the right to remain here in the UK. As a result, the message being sent out to foreign students is that they should not be persuaded of the merits of our country.
- Deny us the opportunity to access what we know to be a well-trained group of people who have paid considerably over the odds to get that training here in the UK.
- Undermine the financial viability of the UK university sector, because the message is being sent that foreign students should not learn about the merits of life in the UK or seek to integrate in this country whilst studying here.
- Make unattractive a massively valuable source of what is, in effect, foreign export earnings for the UK, which is what overseas student education represents.
- Destroy our soft power in the world.
- Create unemployment in academia by reducing student numbers.
- Make undergraduate education for UK students more expensive by removing the subsidy foreign students now receive.
And why do all that? To pander to the far-right extremists in Reform.
I am not saying that studying in the UK should give you the right to stay here. I am saying that the assumption that all asylum applications from those who make them after studying here are inappropriate is profoundly wrong and deeply detrimental to the interests of this country. It is also racist.
When will we learn to respect people as individuals and to treat them as such, which is a basic necessity for a civilised society, instead of treating them like objects as racists do? I wish I knew the answer to that question.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
There are links to this blog's glossary in the above post that explain technical terms used in it. Follow them for more explanations.
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Buy me a coffee!
Watching and reading the reports of Albanese’s big win in Australia struck me of the difference between Anthony Albanese and Kier Starmer.
Albanese is clearly a seasoned experienced politician and seemed comfortable in his own skin as a guy who has experience behind him and has grown into the job as PM. With his seemingly spontaneous clever sounding quotes after winning yesterday he seemed confident and charismatic. (And no, I don’t think the ALP is a great ‘left of centre’ party either!)
This is in sharp contrast to Starmer, who always seems scripted, never spontaneous and very wooden. Often looking like a rabbit in headlights. An empty vessel for McSweeney to puppet master.
Albanese can ‘do politics’ – Starmer most certainly cannot.
As someone who passionately supports Scottish (and Welsh) independence (albeit from where I live in Bury St Edmunds!), John Swinney is equally as wooden as Starmer (but perhaps a little better at ‘doing politics’ than Starmer), and I worry that he hasn’t got the fire to push the independence cause on to the next level into the future.
‘I am saying that the assumption that all asylum applications from those who make them after studying here are inappropriate is profoundly wrong and deeply detrimental to the interests of this country. It is also racist.”
That is where you and the majority of the country disagree..so in your mind the majority of the country are “racist”. From this it is impossible for you to engage in rational conversation.
The vast majority of people in this country are not racist.
You clearly are.
That is why you will not win.
It’s a knee jerk reaction by the jerks in Blue Labour.
You learn for the top in human society – we take our cues from above, and from the media that props them up.
So some of us are learning how to be greedy, racist, intolerant and ignorant or even saying ‘God wills it’.
For those of us who don’t take such cues, this is hard work.
I suspect that this was stage managed by MacSweeney
I read something yesterday that suggested that MacSweeney has already concluded that the next general election will effectively be a straight fight between LINO and Reform. Given this choice voters on the left will stick with them or return to “keep Reform out”. This together with tactical voting from supporters of other parties voting either for Labour or smaller parties to “keep Reform out” gives them a clear route to winning in 2028/9.
Hence the tin-eared “faster and further”.
If the Left do not get their act together, and I see no sign of this happening, this is exactly where FPTP will send us.
Two party politics will only truly die when FPTP dies.
@Pilgrim Slight Return
You make a point about learning from the top.
People in the UK believe that their children and grandchildren cannot get the school place the want because “immigrants” are clogging up the schools. Politicians have suggested and encouraged this belief because they do not want to tell voters the truth.
People in the USA believe that the cost of healthcare is increasing because healthcare providers are forced to give free care to immigrants thus causing the healthcare providers to increase cost for insurance companies (which is passed onto policy holders) and private pay patients. Politicians have suggested and encouraged this belief because they do not want to tell voters the truth.
I wonder if politicians are ever going to tell their constituents the truth.
It doesn’t get mentioned much because Trump’s take on these issues is generally so outrageous, but a lot of what we hear from Starmer’s Labour isn’t that many miles away from Donny “two dolls” Trump’s policies, and this proposal is a case in point.
I suppose it was a forlorn hope that LINO would understand the lesson of the local elections, but it’s sad to see the Starmerites MISunderstanding the lesson so efficiently.
Lesson one is that the voters on the right have moved even further out of the reach of any moderate party, making them effectively impossible for even the most extreme right-wing version of Labour to win over. Yes, there will be some more moderate Tories who are repulsed by Reform, but few of them will find comfort in Reform-like Labour policies. They are far more likely to switch to Lib Dems or Green. (Or Plaid or SNP where that’s an option).
Lesson two is that traditional Labour voters have deserted to Lib Dems and Greens in droves. Will they be back to tactically vote come the General Election? Maybe some will, but many, many will not, unless there is a radical shift in this Government’s policies. It’s not yet too late, but time is running out.
I sense I am one of a growing number of people who are no longer prepared to vote LINO merely to keep Reform out.
92.5% of WECA voters chose NOT to vote for Labour this time. (And Labour won).
If McTeam think that’s a safe strategy for a general election round here, they are welcome to their opinion.
No matter how many people LINO deport between now and 2029, it won’t improve the housing situation, or reduce the real cost of living, or improve social care, or reduce energy bills or reduce public transport costs or improve bus services or cut hospital waiting lists or deal with the cost of drinking polluted water, or help SEND provision in our schools or help unpaid carers who can’t get PIP, or reduce child poverty (foodbanks & breakfast clubs don’t reduce child poverty, they just make it a bit less life-threatening).
If I don’t like far right policies, and LINO tack right to meet a Reform threat, why would I possibly want to destroy my soul by supporting Starmer’s LINO?
If I DID like Reform far right policies, who would I trust to deliver them? Fa***e or his poundshop LINO mini-me?
I hope that by 2029, Fa***e has been exposed for the dishonest incompetent snake oil salesman that he is. But whether he’s been toppled from his pedestal or not, I wouldn’t vote Labour unless they had shifted significantly left, and not with the current Cabinet line-up either. I want McTeam to know that. I think there are a lot of us around. Enough to lose LINO an election.
Re your first paragraph, I think this is becoming more commonplace
LINO should look at the Democrats – people would not vote for them to keep Trump out
Precisely Robertj. I am one of those voters. As Richard said, look at the states where voters were not prepared to vote democrat just to keep Trump out. It is a cowardly, stupid and morally bankrupt political strategy being pursued by labour that treats left wing voters with utter contempt.
In fact it is a betrayal of progressive voters.
Given a choice between a party of fascists and a party that has betrayed voters like me, I’d vote for neither.
It’s troubling to see Labour mimic Reform’s hardline stance instead of challenging it. Beyond the ethical implications, pushing away international students who find safety and belonging here seems like a strategic blunder for a country needing global talent.