🔗 Share this article

Over the days following the biggest far-right demonstration in UK records, one phrase keeps echoing. Acquaintances discuss the events, how London filled with more than 100,000 protesters shouting xenophobic slogans. Often they remark: “It feels like the 1970s all over again.”

Being of similar vintage, I too remember harassment in schoolyards, being pursued by aggressive groups, and unwelcome presents like a rock through the window. Fortunately, we’re still not quite from those days, but a key difference is much worse. In the past, racism was secretive, a shameful indulgence: deep down, even bigots recognized their attitudes were ugly. Not anymore.

Absence of Shame and Normalization of Radical Views

What was notable about the recent march wasn’t the turnout, which was matched by some protests over Gaza. It’s the lack of shame, the bold insistence on a citizen’s entitlement to belittle others. It’s the normalisation of something once seen as harmful extremism. A major driver isn’t the crowds on the ground, but the officials in the ostensibly progressive administration.

The Prime Minister’s Reaction to Violent Prejudice

Each time confronted with racist violence, the PM hesitates, stammers, and chooses the coward’s way out. He often pretends not see bigotry or appeases to it.

A little a couple of months ago, in communities across Northern Ireland, migrants were forced out of their homes and a place of worship was attacked. The prime minister’s response? Primarily, he condemned attacks on the authorities. Muslims deluged with hostility and afraid for their safety received only a promise of “all necessary measures” to keep you safe. Removed of fancy language, this is the bare minimum any citizen might hope for from the state.

Pandering to Bias for Poll Numbers

Even more troubling is when the leader simpers in the face of intolerance, something he is doing increasingly as his popularity go downward. At the end, Nigel Farage vowed mass deportation of practically anyone seeking asylum, even if it meant handing Afghan women to the Taliban or exiling Iranian dissidents to their demise. To the press, the government did not even show concern at Farage referring to other humans as a “scourge” or an “invasion”.

To the general public, it published an remarkable message: “Whilst he moans from the sidelines, the government is getting on with the job,” it read, featuring an photo of the PM stamped with “deported over 35,000 people”. Why support the full-fat hatemongers when diet racists will do the job just fine?

Impact Over Motivation

Plenty of Labour supporters will claim they aren’t prejudiced at all, and I don’t wish to dispute. But a key insight about prejudice I learned fast in youth was to prioritize consequence rather than debate about intention. An object, simply put, is always a brick, regardless of the excuses of the clown throwing it.

However perfectly progressive Labour ministers might think themselves, they are in effect dabbling in the politics of hatred to gain a point or two in surveys. Getting thrashed by the opposition? Then they have the leader to call migration a “squalid chapter” causing “immense” damage. Voters won’t wear that? Then we’ll say the entire speech erred greatly due to, um, the PM dealing with a lot in his in-tray.

Moving Overton Window and Consequences

To preserve of a few undistinguished positions, no tactic is too cheap and every single principle can be discarded. So after a bit of throat-clearing, the administration tells leftwing outlets how concerned it is about the protest of radicals, while sending a official on TV to tell the broader public that the event shows free speech is “thriving”.

“Citizens have a much more complex view of immigration than the press and political narrative would have us believe,” observes an expert of anti-fascist organisation Hope Not Hate in his new book. Only one out of 10 Britons is outright opposed to immigration, while a significant number who identify asylum seekers as a huge issue have no direct experience with one.

Ignored Chances and Future Risks

Equipped with such findings and a historic majority, the government could readily counter some of the extreme extremism. Officials might point out that Tommy Robinson is an non-UK citizen who hunkers down in Spain and has a extensive record of legal offenses. Starmer might note how much of the UK would collapse without migrants—from hospitals to education to elderly facilities. How universities face ruin without international enrollees and their bumper fees. He might even mention that migrants are human too, with existences and dreams. One could discuss the legacy of empire, or how environmental issues and poverty force communities to move.

But who am I kidding? The administration would rather welcome a group of wealthy foreigners taking land for tech infrastructure, financial support for their businesses, and insist we alter our tax code for their investors. Regarding the rest of us, any hope of economic betterment is blocked by “the markets”, “budget restrictions” and “refugees”.

Significant Task and Failure

The past has a tendency of giving ordinary figures big tasks. Keir Starmer primary critical role is to prevent the hard right. He is not only failing, he is setting the stage for Farage and his associates. The so-called “centrists” are ushering fringe politics into the center and accepting the abhorrent.

But just pay attention to the speeches and chants of the extremists. The ultimate cost for this shift will not be paid by a leader, but by individuals far from power: an Ethiopian boy, maybe, with no family, or a young person gazing out the window one night.