Truth Social

Loading...

Register

News - 7 September 2025

Starmerism is politically illiterate so why is Labour obsessed with it?

avatar-image

Willem Moore

@willem_moore


While many once wondered what Keir Starmer stood for, it’s become increasingly clear that the three pillars of Starmerism are:

  • Empty Slogans.
  • Kowtowing to the Far Right.
  • Incompetence and/or Corruption.

Starmerism

The problem with Starmerism is that it’s politically illiterate; it’s doomed to failure, and it’s comprehensively unpopular with the wider electorate, and as such the Labour Party went into the summer recess facing some of the worst polling it’s ever experienced:

With parliament taking a break, some wondered if Starmer would rethink his political project and point the party in a direction other than ‘straight down the shitter’. Instead, Labour have started week 1 of the new term by tripling down on everything that the country hates about them.

Welcome to Starmerism Phase 2.

Pillar 1: Empty Slogans

Starmer infamously became Labour leader on the back of 10 pledges; pledges he slowly abandoned at best and did-the-exact-opposite-of at worst. He’s continued to make promises since then, but the problem is we have this story in the UK called ‘the boy who cried wolf’, and as a result you can only lie to a British person 5 to 10 times before they become suspicious.

As a result of his flagrant wolf crying, the public trust Starmerism about as much as they trust gone-off milk:

Poll tracker showing that the number of people who find Keir Starmer untrustworthy has risen to 62% and the number of people who find him trustworthy has dropped to 20%

You know what might win back people’s trust, though?

That’s right – another empty slogan that he has no chance of delivering on, and this latest one is the greatest yet. As the Guardian reported on Monday 1 September:

His internal No 10 reshuffle, which also covered the communications team and the policy unit, comes alongside a new economic pledge to deliver growth that “people can feel in their pockets”, a nod to the millions who are still struggling with the cost of living.

Growth.

That people can feel.

In their pockets.

I’m sorry, but unless this was written by Action Men dolls, there’s no way they can’t have thought: “wow, this sounds an awful lot like we’re talking about pocket wanking“.

People online certainly noticed this:

Ignoring the should-have-been-obvious innuendo, what does ‘growth you can feel in your pockets’ actually mean?

As you’d expect, Labour haven’t fleshed out what we’ll get in practice, but seemingly they’re saying they’ll achieve GDP growth at the same time that people’s personal spending power increases. The reason why they’d need to point this out is because GDP – our primary indicator of how well the economy is doing – often tells us fuck all about how the economy is doing.

As Top Traders Unplugged note:

It starts with a strange paradox: You read the headlines: “GDP is up.” You look around: wages stagnant, housing unaffordable, services crumbling, your groceries cost 30% more than two years ago. Something doesn’t add up.

For decades, GDP has been the scoreboard of economic success. A rising GDP was supposed to mean progress, prosperity, and security. But more and more, it feels like GDP is running victory laps while the rest of us are stuck in traffic. Why? According to economist Diane Coyle, it’s because we’re still measuring the 2025 economy with tools built for 1945.

People have been getting wise to this for some time, and now Labour are getting wise to us getting wise. The problem is they’re not getting wise to actually fixing the problem, as their solution is to do more of what brought us here. This is why the above reshuffle saw Starmer employing Minouche Shafik, who economist Richard J Murphy described as a ‘neoliberal technocrat’. It’s also why Starmer’s second reshuffle on Friday 5 September mostly just swapped loyalists from one ministerial position to another, like the church moving a bad priest to the next town over.

Pillar 2: Kowtowing to the Far Right

Ever since Starmer took power and the country erupted in race riots, he’s been bending over backwards to appease the far-right. Guess how that pillar of Starmerism turned out:

2025 brought more far-right uprisings which were followed by Operation Raise the Colours – a campaign to erect flags all over the place (an operation organised by ‘well-known far-right extremists’ according to HOPE not Hate). In response to this current wave of flag mania, many media outlets began asking ‘are flags racist?’

Guardian article titled 'is flying St GEorge's cross a sign of racism or patriotism'

Channel 4 article titled 'Is England flag flying campaign patriotism or provocation?'

The obvious answer to this is that it depends on the context. Consider the following two examples:

  1. An England supporter in an England shirt holds aloft an England flag in the stands of an England football match.
  2. A racism supporter (who was twice convicted of racially aggravated assault) holds aloft an England flag in the middle of a race riot.

Example 1 is usually going to be non-problematic because football has largely cleaned itself up since the 1970s.

Example 2 is quite clearly racist, though, and it’s not because the flag is woven from racism particles or because all flags are inherently xenophobic; it’s because the dipshit waving it is crudely making the argument that England is solely for people like him.

While the people engaging in this current ‘Raise the Colours‘ movement have maintained some degree of anonymity, we’ve seen enough to know who’s behind all this:

 

Image of a Chinese chip shop which has been vandalised with St George's crosses

It’s clear then that the issue isn’t the flags themselves; it’s that legions of goons are once again conducting a wave of racially-motivated goonery.

So how did Labour react to this latest wave of flag shagging?

Umm:

That’s right, Starmer came out to proclaim:

I’m very encouraging of flags.

The people he’s trying to appeal to think he’s a treacherous paedophile who should get the guillotine; does he really think he can undo all that by pretending to enjoy a good flag?

A charitable reading of all this would be that Starmer is trying to put people off the flag by associating himself with it. A less than charitable view would be that things are only going to get more desperate from here on out.

Remember that episode of Black Mirror in which the prime minister was blackmailed into fucking a pig? Imagine that, but instead of a pig it’s a flag, and instead of being forced into it Starmer is voluntarily broadcasting the scenario to a queasy nation of regretful voters.

It’s an unpleasant scene to imagine, but is it any worse than what we’re getting from him already?

Pillar 3: Incompetence and/or Corruption

On the fifth day of Labour Phase 2, Angela Rayner – the deputy prime minister and housing minister – resigned from her positions. She’d embroiled herself in a housing scandal after paying a lower rate of tax on a property. While her housing situation was admittedly very confusing (involving a trust; a disabled child, and a co-sharing arrangement with a former partner), the situation reflected poorly on her because she was the housing minister, and she allegedly took bad advice on matters relating to housing. This made people think one of two things:

  1. She’s a very incompetent housing minister who doesn’t understand housing.
  2. She’s a very corrupt politician who thought she could fiddle the system.

Her position became completely untenable after the source of her legal advice said they’d advised she get specialist legal advice. Rayner later resigned after Starmer’s independent ethics adviser found “she had broken the ministerial code by not seeking specialist tax advice”.

The problem is that Phase 1 Labour experienced some very similar cases of incompetence and/or corruption, including:

As such, it seems like ironic scandals are a load-bearing pillar of Starmerism, and that they will continue to happen no matter how many phases the party advances through.

Things can only get Starmer

At this point, there really is no question as to what ‘Starmerism’ is in practice. There are many questions around how long we can tolerate such politics, however, as they’re clearly not doing the country any favours.

Featured image via Number 10

 





Source link

Join The Groups That Matter

Help!