The rest of the blog
Let’s not pretend there’s a serious policy debate here. The call to ban the burqa wasn’t a contribution to some Enlightenment café of ideas; it was a dog whistle blasted at full volume, a panic-button press designed to provoke.
Trans people are not confused. They are not misled. They have not been lied to. They are responding, with dignity and resistance, to a sustained campaign of dehumanisation, spearheaded by a cross-section of legal hardliners, culture warriors, so called feminists, and opportunists.
Amazon’s humanoid delivery bots aren’t just replacing drivers—they’re accelerating the creation of what William I. Robinson calls surplus humanity: billions rendered useless to capital.
This isn’t a defence strategy—it’s a subsidy for the arms industry, a performance of deterrence, and a reaffirmation of Britain’s role as obedient junior partner in the global machinery of capital.
On Larry Alan Busk’s Democracy in Spite of the Demos
Lee Anderson doesn’t want a solution—he wants a stage, and the small boats crisis is just the latest prop in Britain’s long-running theatre of cruelty
You don’t take a country back by restoring student exchanges or standardising exports. You take it back by asking who it belongs to—and who it never did.
Let’s not pretend this is clever politics. It’s cowardice. The real danger is not that Labour contines to lose votes to Reform. It’s that it becomes Reform, in language, in policy, and in the cruel calculus of who gets to belong.
A Polemic on Labour’s Immigration Turn
In trading tax cuts for Trump’s tariff relief, Starmer hasn’t negotiated, he’s capitulated, handing the keys of British economic policy to Big Tech and calling it diplomacy.
Britain is rearming, not to defend its people, but to discipline them.
Labour’s embrace of hardline immigration rhetoric isn’t a show of strength but a performance of weakness—an attempt to appease Reform UK’s base while maintaining credibility with big business. By mimicking the far right’s script, Starmer risks alienating the very voters Labour needs, offering border crackdowns instead of the economic transformation that could actually address their grievances.
In this scathing critique, Simon Pearson eviscerates Labour leader Keir Starmer’s recent Chatham House speech on the Israeli action against Hamas, arguing his bourgeois perspective perpetuates imperialist myths and distracts from the radical struggle needed for Palestinian liberation.
In an apparently unwarranted display of political force, the Labour party finds itself entangled in internal power struggles, with Keir Starmer pursuing the undermining of his predecessor, Jeremy Corbyn.
In this blog post, I delve into the complex dynamics of the Labour Party’s response to the war in Ukraine and challenge the oversimplified critiques presented by Kevin Bean in his Weekly Worker article. I emphasise the importance of a nuanced approach, party unity, and pragmatism, exploring the diverse perspectives within the Labour left and their contributions to the broader political discourse.
The contemporary left faces many challenges, including the absence of a powerful mass revolutionary party, and must navigate the complexities of modern struggles while adhering to Trotsky’s guidance, all while enduring the paradoxical nature of Starmer’s Labour Party.