Thread by @AndrewPRLevi

How Do You Solve A Problem Like @Keir_Starmer?

The UK hills are alive with the sound of silence.

@BorisJohnson’s Brexit’s a disaster. Claiming it’s “done” & not mentioning it won’t win a @UKLabour majority. Nor will opposing it. What’s the point of the opposition?

A long🧵/1.

There’s pretty much no way any UK electoral calculus leads to an outright Labour majority at the next general election.

That’s even if a free & fair election is held.

Given the gerrymandering has already started, that seems unlikely in itself. /2.

Courting the “Red Wall”, winning among disillusioned southern Tories … None of it will work. Unless Labour pulls off an extraordinary victory in Scotland. Which looks extraordinarily unlikely. To put it kindly.

So, what indeed is the point of Keir Starmer & the opposition? /3.

Well, remarkably enough - this gets a bit lost in contemporary political discourse - it’s to narrow the government’s options, by effective opposition which shifts parliamentary & public debate, & to replace the government with a better one, at the earliest opportunity. /4.

There have been times when all this felt a bit pointless, or at least boring. Because things seemed reasonably OK & it wasn’t all that clear what the big differences on policy really were.

Can we all please agree on one point? Things aren’t reasonably OK. They’re terrible. /5.

And they’re terrible because of government policy.

The worst economic shock in 300 years, it turns out, isn’t.

Because it’s only a fraction as bad as the really worst one. Which is entirely self-inflicted. And taking place (no, it isn’t “done”) now.

The Johnson Brexit. /6.

That partial description greatly understates the malignity of the Johnson Brexit.

It’s nothing less than the destruction of the UK’s security, prosperity & well-being to serve the narrow political & economic interests of a tiny group. /7.

One dedicated to holding power for its members’ own benefit. At any price.

Their chosen method has been tech-turbocharged, industrial-scale lying & manipulation. Gaming & trashing the fragile UK constitution, electoral system & rule of law. /8.

To exploit the authoritarian views & anxieties of a minority of the population.

A significant one. But a minority nonetheless.

So as to obtain & retain an absolute majority in the House of Commons.

It could have happened at various points in the last 30 years. /9.

But the continuing aftershocks of the 2007/8 Great Financial Crisis - appallingly mismanaged in the UK for the last decade - & the increasing signs of instability arising from the relative erosion of US global dominance, helped propel this disastrous group to power in 2019. /10.

Please, former No. 10 advisors & other lightweight debaters, spare us your mockery of the supposedly hopeless “Remain” campaign, pro-EU MPs, the BBC etc etc ad nauseam. Whether or not your opponents were useless, you did what you did. It wasn’t clever. It wasn’t good. Enough./11.

Keir Starmer’s approach - focus-grouped & opinion-poll-led - is to attack the Johnson government’s competence, not the Johnson Brexit. /12.

But that’s like prosecuting a thug for lack of style in how they beat someone to a pulp, rather than the fact of the grievous bodily harm.

As though the GBH is now just a fact of life. “Done”. With no serious, continuing, even worsening, consequences. /13.

The Johnson Brexit isn’t the settled future for the country.

Not if the objective is a prosperous, secure UK in which the rule of law & decent, liberal democracy are safe.

Or, even, exist at all. /14.

For the simple reason that the Johnson Brexit is a deliberate, so far quite effective, & escalating, attack on all of that.

Nothing, by the way, in itself to do with “Europe”. /15.

Except that the effective UK constitutional provisions which “Europe” - the European Union & the European Convention on Human Rights - put in place, greatly helped constrain any potential extremist application of power by a tyrannical House of Commons majority. /16.

The EU provisions couldn’t be touched by parliament as long as the European Communities Act 1972 was in force. (It was until 31 January 2020, & effectively until 31 December 2020, the end of the UK’s EU “transition period”). /17.

That, in turn, couldn’t be touched as long as the UK hadn’t withdrawn from the EU treaty framework. Which in turn couldn’t happen - regardless of public or parliamentary votes - as long as the cabinet hadn’t invoked the international legal steps required to do so. /18.

Not a bad set of protections. Unless you have a cabinet determined to rip them up. An accompanying parliamentary majority of like mind. And a fatal weakness - both in your underlying national constitution & the international treaty framework - which allows them to. /19.

Labour think they won’t win if they call out the Johnson Brexit. Because (they think) they would lose the votes of anxious authoritarians, in key seats, such as the northern English “Red Wall”. /20.

They’re mainly split between wanting to reverse the Johnson Brexit once in power & wanting to maintain it, but with a different set of economic & social policy priorities. /21.

Of those who want to maintain the Johnson Brexit, some are card-carrying authoritarians themselves. Full marks for consistency. Zero marks for suitability as leaders of a liberal democracy.

Others don’t get it. /22.

They’re “Lexiters”, believing there’s a better economic & social path available to the UK outside the EU, which the Johnson Brexit can enable.

Or they’re cynics. Wanting power & believing the Johnson Brexit is the price they have to pay to get it. /23.

The cynics intend to bait their target voters with the Johnson Brexit, then switch to an entirely different policy once in power. High marks for determination. But few for integrity or realism. Voters will choose the original, not the copy. /24.

And, even in the highly unlikely event power were gained that way, the idea that a Labour government could so comprehensively & obviously abandon its electoral commitments without collapsing into crisis & subsequent electoral demolition is … fantastical. /25.

Keir Starmer, of course, has a difficult job managing these factions.

And those who, wonder of wonders, know the Johnson Brexit has to be reversed, fast. And who aren’t afraid to make their views known. Behind closed doors, at least. /26.

But, as leader, he can set the direction. So the fact he’s chosen to direct the party to be silent on the Johnson Brexit - or, even, point out supposed “opportunities of Brexit” - is remarkable. He isn’t authoritarian. He isn’t a cynic. He isn’t, by inclination, a fantasist. /27.

His error is twofold.

First, to think his only task is to win the next election for Labour, when (a) there might not be one worth the name & (b) absent an opposition consolidation, he can’t obtain a governing majority anyway, largely because of the Scottish electoral map. /28.

Extreme national crisis, registered as such by the public at large, might offer him a way through. But it might, alternatively, strengthen extremist forces & leave him & Labour irrelevant. Right now, that looks the more likely outcome of such a contingency. /29.

The second error is to believe - as he has genuinely brought himself to do - that there’s a way of selling competence to deliver a “better Brexit” (while not mentioning Brexit), without alienating the anxious authoritarians he’s trying to win back. /30.

A “better Brexit” is possible. But, because of Ireland & the viability of the UK (overall, & each of its constituent parts), that requires a U-turn on every defining aspect of the Johnson Brexit. In particular, the UK/GB/NI being part of the EU customs union & single market. /31.

Or substantially identical arrangements. For example (just to illustrate), “a” customs union. And “Swiss-style” participation in the single market - involving legally-binding treaty agreements, sector by sector, adding up to more or less total single market alignment. /32.

Including, crucially, freedom of movement for people.

This is just the truth. Sir Keir knows it. He’s afraid to say it. For the reasons already given.

But here’s the reality. /33.

If he calls out the nature of the Johnson Brexit, forcefully & consistently, & spells out the alternative, he can, if he works with others, construct a parliamentary majority which reflects majority UK opinion. And rescue the country. /34.

He might even achieve that without an election, initially. Indeed, he might have to. If the UK’s to avoid descent into a very dark place indeed. /35.

The extremity of what’s underway is clear to scores of Conservative MPs who are currently living through a kind of hostage drama in which some are suffering from a severe case of Stockholm Syndrome. And from which they need urgently to be released. /36.

If, on the other hand, Sir Keir & Labour don’t call out the Johnson Brexit, they & the country are in - most likely irretrievable - deep trouble.

They’re in any case vanishingly unlikely to win an overall majority on that basis. /37.

They’ll have made commitments which will greatly hamper - more likely rule out - support from other parties for a stable, Labour-led government. Rightly, since continued pursuit of the Johnson Brexit, fiddled with around the edges or not, would be ruinous for the country. /38.

Leaving the UK increasingly impoverished, insecure & unstable.

We all know what the Johnson attack lines will be once the Brexit disaster he’s imposed is front & centre of political debate. /39.

But we also all know that the Johnson Brexit is about a revolution in the UK, to benefit a very few, exploiting the attitudes & anxieties of a significant minority, while most suffer & the country is wrecked. /40.

Without reversing the Johnson Brexit, that attack on the security, prosperity & well-being of the people whose votes the opposition needs, can’t be stopped.

Nor the destruction of the UK constitution, the rule of law & liberal democracy. /41.

This isn’t just another policy dispute. Just another run-up to another general election.

Without telling that story clearly, forcefully, fearlessly, every day, Sir Keir & the opposition will never convince voters they’re different, better & what the country needs. /42.

Sir Keir & Labour face a chaotic, incompetent government team.

The direction is clear.

But that shouldn’t be confused with sophisticated grand strategy, or masterful political skill. /43.

If Sir Keir & his colleagues tell the truth clearly, forcefully & fearlessly, day in, day out, from now on, working with all who oppose the current, unfolding national tragedy, they’ll have a chance. And so will the country. /44.

Security, prosperity, well-being. The rule of law, a decent constitution, liberal democracy. Leadership, expertise, integrity & decency. These are a few of my favourite things. /45.

I love raindrops on roses & whiskers on kittens, bright copper kettles & warm woollen mittens. I can also do without. Not the other stuff, though.

Climb every mountain, Sir Keir. It’s hard. It’s what’s needed.

Otherwise, it’s so long, farewell - to the country we love. /46. End

P.S. To be a little more legally precise - tweet 18: parliament could, of course, have repealed the EC Act 1972 at any time. But that wouldn’t have removed the UK’s legal obligations under the treaties to which it was party, & ministers’ obligation to act in … /1.

… accordance with them. The absence of a UK domestic law providing a basis for giving effect to EEC/EC/EU law would, in itself, almost certainly have been a fundamental breach of those legal obligations. /2. End