This article was first published in the RPRN’s Red Lines
This question would have seemed absurd a year ago, despite signs that the Labour party, under the leadership of Keir Starmer, had already started to renege on anything remotely left-wing. As the government turns violently and ideologically against trans rights, putting at further risk another marginalised community, this question is not only necessary but urgent for anyone who still cares about democracy.
Based on his record since taking over the party, it was expected that Starmer would copy other centre-left parties across the west in their fruitless attempt to counter the far right by aping it discursively. Some would even suggest that throwing some communities under the bus is necessary at a time when reactionary forces appear to be on the rise: this is the price to pay to protect others’ rights. Yet, while widespread, this defeatist mindset has always proven counterproductive as well as morally and democratically bankrupt. Recent history has shown countless times this strategy only benefits the far right, which finds itself and its politics mainstreamed in the process, that is increasingly accepted or normalised in public discourse. Therefore, it is not just proven to be strategically counterproductive, it is also morally and politically bankrupt: as Lorna Finlayson already highlighted early 2024, the lesser of two evils is still evil.
After almost a year in power and countless attempts to move to the right of both Reform and the Conservative party, it is urgent to consider whether the really existing Labour government is actually enacting far-right politics. By ‘really existing’, I reject the version of the Labour leadership fantasised by the commentariat who still pretend that Starmer must have some grand plan. I also reject the flawed narrative that paints the far right as rising through a bottom-up process rather than a top down one in which the elite, that is those with a privileged access to shaping public discourse, play a crucial role. What I mean is the Labour government that we can all clearly see and hear push openly far-right, reactionary politics, day-in, day-out.
What makes Labour’s politics far-right or reactionary?
Since taking office in July 2024, the leadership of the Labour government has made countless U-turns on the more left-leaning promises in its programme. These had already been seriously diluted since Starmer had become leader promising to be a continuity candidate from the Corbyn era.
While these shifts were for too long explained away as some grand electoral strategizing, it has become clear that this deep dislike of the left is ideological. This could be seen in the many purges which have taken place in the party on spurious grounds. Furthermore, on every issue core to the public agenda, which Labour has a key role in setting, the government has taken a reactionary stance.
During the campaign already, rather than shifting discourse away from the far right’s pet issues, Starmer attempted to outflank Rishi Sunak on the question of immigration. He has since doubled down on a number of occasions, making it one of the key pillars of his premiership, even if that meant emboldening the far right further at a time when racist riots erupted across the country.
The handling of the so-called ‘grooming gangs’, after Elon Musk put it back on the agenda, has also proven to be an ideological turn towards reaction rather than a pragmatic let alone a just and caring one. Indeed, the government conceded that the issue might be one of race rather than class and that the police had failed victims because of political correctness rather than, as had been clearly demonstrated, because of their poverty. Demanding a new inquiry played right into the hands of the extreme right and did nothing for those made most vulnerable as measures requested in the 2022 Inquiry had not been implemented.
The stigmatisation of those in particularly vulnerable situations is also visible in references made to ‘working people’. This rhetoric is reminiscent of the typical petit bourgeois, lower middle-class resentment the far right and fascism thrive on. Traditionally, the far right has primarily catered for independent small businesses and shopkeepers tapping into their latent resentment of taxation and public service. It was therefore no surprise to see Starmer turn against the poor, the disabled, the elderly and the environment so brazenly to protect private ownership, capital and the wealthy, in a manner the Conservative party could have only dreamed of at the height of their austerity era.
While it was clear that many in the upper echelons of the Labour party had already embraced the moral panic on trans rights, Starmer’s reaction to the Supreme Court’s decision made unequivocal where he stands on the issue. Once more, and considering research on the matter, it is clear that Labour’s position is ideological rather than driven by democratic considerations.
Labour has also embraced authoritarian tendencies core to far-right politics. Pride in the flag, law and order and the drive towards militarisation (with its artisan, petit-bourgeois workforce as a backbone) have been core to Labour’s agenda. The historic cut to international aid to increase military spending was a grim echo of Trump’s own cuts. This was not out of character either as Starmer has shown himself particularly amenable to the new reactionary international, whether it is in his personal ‘liking’ and ‘respect’ for Trump or his chummy relationship with Giorgia Meloni. This could also be seen in the courting of reactionary tech oligarchs regarding the NHS or AI, regardless of how these decisions will weaken democratic oversight further.
Finally, Labour has embraced far-right strategies, particularly through whipping up moral panics and diverting attention onto both internal and external enemies. Whether it has been against the left, immigrants, those ‘taking advantage of the system’ or trans people, Labour has claimed that it is only responding to ‘the legitimate grievances’ of ‘the people’. As I have shown elsewhere, these concerns expressed in opinion polls should not be read outside of the mediated landscape they arise from. As graph 1 below shows clearly, we should consider why people are only concerned about ‘immigration’ or other reactionary issues when they are asked about their country.
Graph 1: Immigration chosen as one of the two most important issues when respondents are asked: in dark grey ‘What do you think are the two most important issues facing (OUR COUNTRY) at the moment?’ and in light grey ‘And personally, what are the two most important issues you are facing at the moment?’ (Source: Eurobarometer). S = spring, A = autumn
Instead, when we look at the issues people are concerned with personally, we see predominantly those more amenable to the left when they are asked about their day-to-day lives (rising prices, health and social security, the financial situation of your household, pensions, unemployment, the education system etc) (see Graph 2 for data before the Covid pandemic).
Graph 2: 10-year average (2009-19) for the question ‘And personally, what are the two most important issues you are facing at the moment? (Source: Eurobarometer, Mondon 2022)
What is striking is that this data is widely accessible and that any serious analysis would make clear that focusing on immigration is a choice made in a top-down fashion. At a time when the vast majority of the population have serious concerns about the various real crises affecting their lives and the world, it is telling of the state of our public discourse that much of our mainstream political actors and media actively choose to push a narrative that can only serve the far right for fear of considering asking the real difficult questions about our failing economic system. It is also telling that Starmer is unwilling to support many extremely popular ‘left’ policies, whether it is the wealth tax or nationalisation of key public services.
Of course, one could add that Labour has also done and said things that the far right typically wouldn’t. But this is simplistic as many really existing far-right parties also do things that extreme caricatures of themselves wouldn’t do to ensure that they remain within the bounds of acceptability, by distancing themselves from open racism or the more extreme right for example. And this is where considering Labour’s politics as potentially far right, or more precisely, reactionary, matters. Indeed, whether the party or Starmer are far right themselves is irrelevant and a matter of endless debate subject to plausible deniability. How many unmistakeably racist actors have claimed to be not racist?
What matters, and should be uncontroversial considering the evidence in front of us, is that much of what Labour has done with its huge majority and yet low popularity has served to normalise reactionary politics and discourse, pitting communities against each other, targeting those already marginalised and emboldening far-right actors. In doing so, it has not only hurt the many communities at the sharp end of their reactionary politics, but made them more acceptable to build on for whoever gets to Number 10 next. Crucially, this has only served those already in privileged positions and the wealthy in particular. By mimicking the far right, Labour and Starmer haven’t stolen their thunder, they have made these politics legitimate and reactionary policies ever more entrenched. In fact, it has only made Reform stronger in the polls and helped it gain more attention and legitimacy. As always, the mainstreaming of far-right politics does not find its roots in ‘popular’ demands, but in the action of the mainstream elite who use the far right as a scarecrow to prevent real, popular alternatives to a failing system from rising. By voting for them as the lesser of two evils, we have done our part to normalise evil.