John Harris said this in the Guardian this morning:
A decade after Trump opened his first term with that apocalyptic speech about “American carnage”, British voices along a rightwing continuum have followed suit. Robinson tells his followers that “a massive civil war is going to happen in Britain”.
The shadow justice secretary, Robert Jenrick, says the UK is “like a tinderbox”. Reform UK's Nigel Farage – who has 1.3 million TikTok followers, more than all other MPs combined – constantly talks about social collapse: when I went to Reform's recent conference, it was not hard to find people who endorsed his claims that Britain is on the brink of “major civil disorder”.
As proved by the fact that the summer failed to explode into the riots that some politicians and media voices predicted, the real world shows this is so much hyperbolic rubbish, but Farage contests any such suggestion with a nod and a wink to his supporters. “I don't think anybody in London even understands how close we are to civil disobedience on a vast scale in this country,” he says, a claim that comes with an implied instruction: “Have a look at your phone. See?”
After a torrid few days, including the biggest far-right march in the UK ever (apparently), which Diane Abbott has called openly racist in every element, we have to understand the backdrop that the likes of Farage are seeking to create.
They are not suggesting that we might have a spontaneous breakdown in order. What they are doing is the promotion of civil disorder as the precursor to violent change in the UK.
Just think about Musk's messaging on Saturday, playing to and fuelling the far-right demand for change. He said this parliament must be dissolved and a new one elected. He, and all who heard him, know that is not going to happen, of course. But that was not his intention. He intended to set up a demand for the impossible to happen as a provocation for the violent overthrow of this government if it does not happen.
And the theme is violence.
The flag has been chosen.
The calls are being made - inclduing one for the assassination of Keir Starmer that was filmed on Saturday - and the lines are being drawn.
And in all this, the only thing Starmer can say is that he will defend the flag, which is meaningless.
He not only has to defeat the despair which does exist in this country by abandoning fiscal rules, austerity, the pandering to markets and the failed politics of neoliberalism, as I explained yesterday - effectively reviving the spirit of William Beveridge's World War II report on reviving a country that had hit a pre-war low in opportunities - but he to also make clear he will defend:
- All migrants, whenever they arrived
- All people from ethnic minorities
- People of all faiths, and none
- People, whatever their sexual orientation
- People with disabilities
- Women
- People, whatever their political beliefs
You cannot build a country free from fear without doing so.
Farage is building fear, as are those even further to the right.
Starmer has to do otherwise.
We need a new economy based on new economic thinking, for sure. Nothing less will do.
But we need something more than that. We must have a commitment to people so that they have the right to live as who they are. Nothing less will do.
Now will Starmer deliver, or will he, with Trump here this week, give in to the demands he will make that diversity, equality and inclusion in the UK be destroyed? That is the 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!
Musk’s words in paticular incited violent reaction. That is still an offence in the UK.
He needs to be arrested and tried, but he won’t.
Yet Toryboy Starmer is ok with arresting pensioners and Irish rappers.
Dark days.
As you often say, we cannot separate economics from morality. And those who seek to lead will be attacked. It takes courage as well.
This is a multi-layered phenomenon. It is complex.
1. The social/economic reality of poverty and inequality affecting real people’s lives – hunger – homelessness -ill health – drugs – crime – overcrowding – domestic violence. Every day. Relentless.
2. Politicians and pundits who are comfortable, detached and safe, and who deliberately rile people up with speeches, comments on air and social media. (nasty exploitative social vandals that they are)
3. Minority armies of flag raisers, and thugs who actually DO the violence, often coming from outside the area. Large numbers are not necessary for big headlines. One thug can set several fires, or raise a streetful of flags. Then it gets unpredictable.
4.Those whose financial, media and political careers feed off the phenomena, and those whom they interview in their selective vox pops.
5.Tens of thousands of ordinary protesters who turn out on the street, alongside smaller much nastier organised groups who make the comments and incite the violence. Plus some agent-provocateurs. Plus the police tactics on the day, kettling, riot gear, numbers deployed.
6. Blend together with a sprinkling of fear, social conservatism, anger, frustration, misunderstanding and generations of low level silent societal racism, and we have a situation that the rulers and opposition politicians are delighted with. Only the ordinary people suffer.
Who pays the price? See section 1, who live in the areas that get torn apart, plus the targeted scapegoated minorities who get attacked, raped, stabbed or lose their livelihoods.
Cuo bono? Anyone interested in hate, violence, factional division, political opportunism, and reporting on same.
How do WE prevent it?
What does loving my neighbour look like and sound like, here, and now, in my sphere of influence?
(As an example of the complexity, study the very different stories of the separate St. Pauls, and Hartcliffe riots in Bristol in the 1980s)
Nothing above is meant as criticism of this blog or its regular contributors.
Thanks
why aren’t some of these thug Right organisations being proscribed under Terrorism Laws? Or is that badge just reserved for groups that seek to challenge Zionism?
Apparently so.
“And in all this, the only thing Starmer can say is that he will defend the flag, which is meaningless”.
The flag nonsense underscores the inescapable inadequacy of Starmer and Labour. John McTernan (Nicky Campbell, BBC Radio 5) defends the Mandelson “error” by calling it an “error”. For McTernan the US justice system that failed Starmer, by giving Epstein an insufficient criminal sentence. That is the apologetics we are sold. Astonishingly McTernan confesses all our woes, from the economy, the grovelling to Trump, to immigration, is caused by Brexit. This jaw-dropping confession comes too late. Labour will not revisit Brexit, or even present the brutal facts of the catastrophe it has wrought on everyone.
Returning to Mandelson, let us examine why the Mandelson appointment was a lot worse than an “error”. We can forget the “new knowledge” excuse; sufficient was known about the Epstein relationship to make it unviable to appoint Mandelson but he was appointed in spite of the known facts. A BBC piece by Joe Pike, ‘Why did Starmer take the risk of appointing Peter Mandelson?’ (11th Spetember, 2025) directs the gaze where people’s instincts have already taken them: “Part of the irony of Lord Mandelson’s relationship with Epstein is that he shares that very same link with President Trump – proof of a top level if murky network among US elites”. Mandelson was hired, not for any special political wisdom or skill, but for his network. The Government wanted the benefits Mandelson could offer Starmer’s Governement, of access to his network. And what did they receive? I do not think I need to speculate wildly, that it was access to the network.
Let me close with a forecast; Starmer has been praised for his brilliant managing of a visit to the Oval Office, into a triumph for British diplomacy. I forecast, that the grotesque, obsequious performance displayed will not wear well in the bigger canvas of history (what would Canada make of a State visit given to a US President, by its own Head of State after the President had tried to bully Canada into becoming the 51st state, and hit it with punitive tariffs – the King had to make a cobbled State visit to Canada to cover that embarrassment).
The question is, how long can Starmer last?
If I recall correctly, Peter Ustinov once said “before I honour a flag I want to see who’s waving it.”
William Beveridge.
Apologies. What did I write?
You misspelled “William” as “Wiulliam”
Or is Wiulliam the correct European spelling of Mr. Beveridge’s name?
All edited.
I took part in a march over the weekend in Manchester supporting the Palestinian cause, as always the march was noisy yet peaceful. As we proceeded on the march I stopped at the cenotaph which had a backdrop of poppies with the words ‘lest we forget’ I was looking at the various campaign signs because my grandparents did service in the first world war, my father did service in Palestine and my uncle who was a regular soldier did service at Dunkirk, North Africa, Sicily and the Korean war. A young woman on the march of South Asian origin attempted to take a photo but was obstructed by a white male silently intimidating her indicating photography was not allowed. The woman not understanding the circumstances apologised to the man believing there was some protocol preventing her. I saw the incident and called the man out saying this was a ‘free’ country and he had no right to impose his views of ‘little England’ on people he considered were not one of them.
The young women was a little confused and wondered why she had been stopped taking photograph, unfortunately I had to explain it was because of the colour of her skin and the prejudices of that particular person. We had a long conversation in which I discovered she is already making a wonderful contribution to society practising in the NHS, yet she now has trepidation when walking in her own city and sometimes feels uncomfortable to visually display her faith.
I recall this story because I have what I call ‘White Privilege’ and was able to call out this type of racist because they are unable to adopt the narrative “if you don’t like it get back to where you belong”. I would suggest to all your readers if you are able and comfortable you show solidarity to those who are considered ‘others’ to these type of people, in doing so you will give them comfort to know they are not alone. To quote Albert Einstein. “The world is a dangerous place to live, not because of the people who are evil, but because of the people who don’t do anything about it”.
Thank you, and so very much to agree with.
I believe that Yaxley-Lennon, Farage and their ilk have their own dysfunctional agendas but the fact that they are able to draw in over 110,000 ‘disciples’ is evidence of the social, economic and, crucially, educational, precarity under which these people live their lives, such that they turn to destruction and revolt as creativity.
“Idle hands do the devils work” and a society and economy that glibly trashes people’s lives, for generations, is naive indeed if it does not expect some repercussions.
The psychology of destruction and revolt as creativity is well studied and historically documented. Indeed it was Edmund Burke, I believe, that identified it as a profound influence in Conservatism, this ready willingness to ‘break things’, to open up potential for something different.
By far the vast majority of Farage’s ‘disciples’, I am sure, will not be intrinsically bad people but Farage is leveraging the perceived hopelessness of their lives.
I suspect the spending of huge amounts of dosh on targeted adverts to the likely faithful was a major factor. It was a massive campaign to get them all to Whitehall. We should not be worried about the relatively small number of cocaine and booze fuelled thugs, but the large number of seemingly nice people who harbour closet racist views who made the effort to turn up. It is the same with local demos against hotels and hostels, there are a vociferous few who are often bussed between venues, but there are also a number of quieter individuals who turn up, some with their families. These views are being normalised and reinforced by individualised social media comms supported by hidden monies.
This incitement to violence and stochastic terrorism seems to be one of the distraction tactics being deployed by the murky operations of the UK/US neoliberal ‘network’ as a precursor to a justification for taking the UK out of the ECHR. This is a good article just placed on a new Labour lawyers substack covering the dire effect this would have on the UK’s international treaties, political standing and interstate relations: https://cosmopolismigration.com/2025/09/11/the-echr-and-united-kingdom-international-relations/
Thanks. Worth reading.
I’ve frequently wondered why the UK and the EU tolerate these peddlers of violence and election interference. Bargaining power? What use is bargaining power if the aim of the other side is to overthrow your way of living and governance? Free speech? What free speech will you have if these men get their way?
And for that matter, why not have your own technological/information ecosystem (social media, phones, search, etc)? Maybe I’m missing something, but it seems to me competition would put downward pressure on gross abuse, if you aren’t willing to pursue legal punishment.
Is it lack of capital or skilled labor? Manufacturing constraints? Pessimism about catching up? Pessimism about being able to overcome AI-driven bot farms? The geopolitics of being caught between competing superpowers? Plain old corruption?
Are the UK and the EU just rolling over and playing dead on this issue? Because it sure looks like it.
Seeing the people out with their flags denigrating immigrants was pretty sad. Most of them seem to be “ordinary people” ie not the wealthy but probably people who are afraid for their jobs and general life security and have been directed toward immigrants by Farage and Co. The immigrants to whom their rage is directed are not so different from them; people who just want to live a secure and decent life but whose circumstances have uprooted them from their countries of birth. Many of those countries of origin have been destroyed economically by sanctions from the west particularly the US for example Venezuela whose economy has been reduced to one akin to the great depression because of US sanctions on its oil, Cuba who has been prevented for generations of US sanctions to grow economically.. many African countries are suffering under economic and trade policies “structural adjustment” imposed by the west. War especially by the US (Iraq, Iran, Libya,…) has also displaced many. So these unfortunate people are now being vilified by an unsympathetic populace who see them as rivals rather than victims of our own governments policies. If we could only see our mutual interests and turn the fury toward those who are actually responsible!
Much to agree with.