In the midst of a West eaten away by rising far-right movements, populism, rampant polarisation, hyperbolic political logorrhea, histrionics and hyper-leadership, Keir Starmer’s Labour Party has just won the elections in the United Kingdom, the opposite of all that. A hopeful short-circuit of what seems to be the spirit of the times.
Starmer’s Labour is a focused party, which has campaigned on a political proposal that promises fiscal discipline, increased productivity, a friendly attitude towards businesses, quite tough on immigration, empathetic towards Israel and which mercilessly purged Jeremy Corbyn and all his radical left ideology. Starmer is a leader who has often been labelled as grey. Far removed from the rhetorical flares of modern times, from the politics of hacks on X (formerly Twitter), he is seen as serious, solvent, contained, reflective, an appreciable team builder.
One may agree more or less with the specific policies, one may wish for a more progressive position, or less so, but this combination of restraint, moderation, and consideration appears to be a blessed anachronism when one looks at the general political panorama, made up of much verbiage and little preparation, of immediacy that destroys time for reflection, of contempt that annihilates the space for negotiation. Of things that nullify everything that democracy needs. What democracy is. But democracy, shaken, fortunately, has in this case managed to dismantle a party, the Tories, that gave itself over to all of the above shamelessly and unworthily, and that has therefore lost not only the elections, but also its soul.
These hopeful elements, however, must be put into context.
The Labour victory, huge in terms of seats, is much more fragile than it seems. It won with 33% of the votes, the same as the PP now in opposition in Spain, and with a modest turnout rate of 60%. The British electoral system has favoured the projection of a parliamentary force much greater than that which exists in the country.
The question remains, however, as to how much of this victory is attributable to a deep adherence to these positive values and how much to a simple, visceral rejection of the pathetic performance of the Conservative Party, of Johnson’s buffoonish populism, of Truss’s inept libertarianism, of Sunak’s clumsy technocracy, of the lurches, the shamelessness, the lies, a great deal of indignity. And, even with this horrifying balance, if Nigel Farage had not presented an alternative candidate, obtaining 14% of the votes, the panorama would be quite different.
So, perhaps, rather than a profound, mature political shift, it is a circumstantial accumulation of favorable circumstances that have generated a valuable opportunity to demonstrate.
Specifically, the opportunity to show that a politics founded on capability and pragmatism, which avoids extremism, polarisation and ideological dogmatism, led by a person from a working-class family and not from the elites, can achieve far better results than the disaster produced by the Brexiteer populists. Specifically, far better results precisely for the working class and their children, reactivating the social elevator always blocked in favour of the children of the elites, regenerating hope in a better future, which so many have lost. Perhaps there is no worse sentence in life than losing hope.
And an opportunity to show that all this can be done without causing holes in public accounts, without alienating the private sector, embracing an egalitarianism that has no complacency with so-called egalitarian experiments that are in reality nothing more than despicable authoritarian or populist regimes.
Starmer’s victory joins other cases of successful campaigns against various right-wing parties, based on very moderate left-wing positions, almost in the centre, or on the liberal centre, with non-polarising attitudes. Although with different nuances, the victories in recent years of Biden, Scholz, Macron or Costa fit into this pattern. Perhaps there is a political lesson there, although each country has its own history, and nothing excludes the possibility of winning over the right from positions of more intense progressivism.
But there is another lesson here. Apart from Costa, who was ousted from power by a shady judicial manoeuvre, the other three are suffering tremendous electoral wear and tear. Macron is going through an electoral ordeal that has practically left his project dead, Scholz is trembling, Biden is having serious difficulties in retaining power. The fact is that all three are suffering this wear and tear despite having achieved some notable results and approved certain reforms. Under Macron, two million jobs were created and poverty was contained; under Biden, major projects to support citizens and renew the country were launched; under Scholz, energy dependence on Russia was overcome and a fundamental strategic change was set in motion. But, of course, all three have made mistakes and, above all, in this time of anger with the system, enormous successes must be achieved to guarantee continuity and keep away the populist forces that seem to rise almost effortlessly.
Starmer, the son of a factory worker and a nurse, now has a chance, a mandate to try his hand under the banners of social cohesion, inclusion, moderation. Good luck, Sir Keir, against the sad spirit of these times.
.
.
_