At This Point, It Will Take A Political Revolution To Save Britain
Samuel Kimzey
Despite voters consistently expressing concerns about cultural replacement, Britain’s leaders dismiss grassroots opposition as bigotry.
The recent resignation of British Labour Prime Minister Keir Starmer is a symptom of the discontent that the British people have with the current Labour government, but the larger problem is that the current manifestation of the British government operates almost entirely without the possibility of voters’ consent exercising any meaningful control. While British voters may be frustrated with an incompetent, corrupt, and leftist government, there remains almost no outlet by which they can translate their frustration into an electoral victory with accompanying political control of the government.
Successive Tory, or nominally “conservative” prime ministers such as David Cameron, Theresa May, Boris Johnson, Liz Truss, and Rishi Sunak either opposed Brexit, presided over record non-EU migration, continued the embrace of green energy and deindustrialisation, or proved too incompetent to enact meaningful reform. Labour’s 2024 victory under Starmer expressed voter frustration with that record, not affection for global liberalism.
Similarly, the present ouster of Starmer is the result of Starmer’s growing unpopularity, but Starmer’s party (Labour) is still the majority in Parliament. Andy Burnham, who just won the Makerfield by-election and whom many are expecting to become the new Labour PM, will likely continue Labour’s leftist governance if he becomes PM. Burnham has talked about leading the country away from “divisions,” but he simultaneously denounced Trump and MAGA as “the path of a divided, dark politics of the kind we see in the United States.” While Burnham may criticize the presently unpopular Starmer to support his own political rise, his actual governance would likely be more of the same.
To the extent that the British nation is also demographically changed through immigration and naturalization of non-white, non-British people becoming British “citizens,” this also does not bode well for the political future of Britain. An imported class of voters brought in to permanently change Britain will not stop supporting the uniparty which funds it through generous welfare programs and is ideologically committed to these imported minorities over the native British people.
The Road to Reform
Within their current framework of political parties, it seems the only possibility for a better government would be if Nigel Farage’s Reform UK party could win a majority of seats in Parliament (next general election is scheduled for 2029). However, the Reform Party is plagued with its own problems and accordingly faces criticism from Rupert Lowe’s fringe party of Restore Britain. While Restore attacks Reform from the right, Restore has almost no chance of winning national power. The political situation for right-wing voters in Britain does seem very bleak.
Even if an outsider, right-wing political party could win control of Britain’s parliament and the prime ministry, this would not change the fact that much of the actual policy-making, governance, and criminal justice in Britain is conducted by the leftist administrative state in Britain (similarly to the American administrative state and deep state) through its judges, administrative agencies, bureaucrats, police forces, and intelligence agencies. These are notoriously impervious to political control by voters, and they are the ones truly exercising most of the control over British life.
As political commentator Christian Heiens recently wrote on X, “… The unholy blob that Tony Blair constructed runs everything, and they answer to no one. Starmer himself literally said that he pulls a lever and nothing happens. His replacement will find those levers still do nothing. Without a massive purge of the NGOs, the Quangos, the courts, the civil service, and the administrative state, changing Prime Ministers will do about as much good as swapping out a kid’s steering-wheel toy in a car that’s hurdling off a cliff.”
This unresponsiveness of the government to the voters is a feature, not a bug, of the liberal administrative-intelligence state. Even as leftists prattle about “our democracy” and the “will of the people,” this is just a smokescreen for achieving their own ideological ends, which are achieved by a permanent administrative-intelligence state. If the will of the voters clashes with these goals (such as in the MAGA movement or Brexit), then this is “democratic backsliding” and must be resisted by the permanent organs of the state, even to the point of intelligence agencies propagandizing and censoring their own citizens. The people must be protected from their nativist, nationalist instincts and kept under the globalist yoke.
It is worth noting that, unlike the American constitutional system, the British government features Parliamentary sovereignty in which Parliament is basically a sitting constitutional convention. Thus, a right-wing political majority in Parliament truly could resort to the “fix everything” option by reorganizing the government, dissolving and defunding corrupt organs of the liberal state, denaturalizing and deporting people, and more with no constitutional constraints. This would require secure majorities with an incredibly strong and popular party and party leadership.
The key problem is that the entire permanent state apparatus at present exists to suppress, ban, or block such a populist movement from ever coming into national power. The whole point of the permanent state apparatus is to maintain the cosplay of “our democracy” (the fake choice between open left Labour vs. slightly softer left Tories) while doing its work without any challenge.