Keir Starmer stands in stark contrast to the prevalent belief that an accomplished politician must deploy poetic rhetoric during campaigns and adopt a more mundane, prosaic tone for governance. Starmer’s political journey has been characterized by his unembellished, utilitarian language. Yet, his undertaking now entails infusing some lyrical charm into his administration, a contradiction he must embrace.
Speaking of poetry, one of the clichéd political expressions, derived from WB Yeats’s poem “The Second Coming”, perpetually emphasised, is no longer apt. The statement, “The best lack all conviction, while the worst are full of passionate intensity”, rings true in our contemporary political climate where passion and fervour are associated largely with negative influences.
Much like what Joe Biden initially offered the United States during his successful 2020 Presidential campaign, Starmer’s offering to the nation is, in essence, a break from overwhelming anxiety. After enduring the tumultuous reign of Trump for four years, the muted tone of Biden’s administration came as a breath of fresh air. Starmer’s muted demeanor, post 14 years of chaotic Tory rule, has kind of a similar impact.
Indeed, the centre-left faction in both the US and the UK brought much-needed relief to their political landscapes. However, relief does not equate to resolution. Serious, competent leadership paired with personal integrity is crucial, but insufficient. To effectively address critical issues haunting late capitalism and stagnating democracy, a progressive and impassioned approach is key.
Progressives risk error in assuming that post-war liberal democracy in the West will revert back to its “average” state, viewing political shocks such as Brexit and Trumpism as mere deviations. The stark reality is that liberal democracy is not the standard for western politics any longer.
There are numerous explanations for this shift. The immense wealth generated from globalisation and technological progress has been funneled to exclusive eiltes. The burden of financing measures to mitigate the climate crisis triggers deep-seated economic and social issues that democratic states struggle to navigate. Disintegration of welfare states due to neoliberal onslaught has deteriorated public services. Migration and identity politics have jeopardized the concept of collective unity. The grief of losing the generational promise of betterment – the aspiration of surpassing one’s parents – is shared by many.
Democratic foundations are eroding due to a myriad of forces at play. It is insufficient for the believers of democracy to merely provide temporary relief in this destructive course, a pause for serenity and respect before the gruesome spectacle of native resistance resumes. The left cannot confine itself to offering hospitality during the intermission of extreme episodes of autocratic populism.
In the UK context, one of the numerous issues with Starmer’s reluctance to discuss Brexit is that he is unable to address its effects, let alone consider its origins. The urge to omit the term Brexit from his political vocabulary may be strengthened by the vanishing of its significant supporters, such as Boris Johnson, Michael Gove, Jacob Rees-Mogg, Andrea Leadsom, Ian Paisley Jnr, among others. It’s challenging indeed to find a successful political initiative that has so rapidly consumed its offspring, with the DUP unfortunately relegated to a tangy accompaniment.
However, beyond the inherent inconsistency in seeking swift economic growth without addressing the UK’s largest self-induced economic trauma, Starmer must pay serious attention to Brexit and, in particular, why it resonated with a majority of his compatriots.
He needs to reflect on this, especially since its initiator, Nigel Farage, amassed over four million votes. The dynamics that upset British politics in 2016 are re-emerging in slightly altered forms. In the present state of democratic society – even more so following the swift ascendance of Marine Le Pen in France – no one can ignore the possibility that Farage could commandeer the remaining fragments of the Tory Party to form a comparable far-right entity in England.
Crudely explaining, the allure of Brexit lay in its magnitude. It was conceived as an exceptionally significant action, akin to the surprise election of a celebrity non-politician to the White House later in 2016. These instances provided those who felt impotent in numerous aspects of their lives – whether justifiably or not – with the exhilaration of exerting power. They were given the opportunity to transition from mere observers of history into active participants.
The viewpoint that power felt was for the most part deceptive, directed through fabrications and delusions benefitting the status quo, is both fair and justifiable. Nevertheless, this doesn’t diminish from the palpable demand for momentous politics. It is recognised by the general public that they are immersed within a grand historical context, thus great gestures would serve as adequate reactions.
Contrary to belief, most individuals do not intend to dismantle democracy. In fact, democratic systems may lend a misleading impression of safety. They assume they can enjoy an adrenaline-filled rollercoaster whilst being secure from the grasp of fascism. Politics become akin to an exhilarating vacation; a pumping adrenaline ride with Brexit and a Trump-style leap of faith evoking excitement before returning to the humdrum of reality. However, this thrill-seeking ride possesses a critical point of no return, a point that the US is inexorably approaching.
If Starmer chooses to rule as he propounded during his campaign – modest, prudent, courteous, scrupulous enough not to cause discomfort or bring up uncomfortable subjects – his impact will be reflective of that approach. Likely following will be a period of respite and recovery to relish in the triumph over a succession of abhorrent Conservative governments. However, soon after the cycle of reactionary, ostentatious politics will restart. Whilst radicalism carries risk, prudence ironically translates into recklessness.