I've been wondering about this topic for a while too, and the simple explanation is that most of the conventional elite in Western countries – by which I mean leading politicians, civil servants, business people, journalists – are liberal oligarchs. They are not interested in running a democratic government, but in running things to their own liking, much like the oligarchs of previous eras and in other places round the world. Of course they have to contend with genuinely democratic mechanics, and the oligarchy is a partial meritocracy, but straightforwardly this is about wielding power and keeping it away from other people
The narrative on the centre left in the UK seems to be:
• When ordinary people support right-wing parties they do so because of disinformation: X.com, GB News, The Sun and The Daily Mail. Why aren't the government and Ofcom doing something about this? Ban X or promote BlueSky, regulate GB News, ban internet anonymity.
• Reform is winning elections because the left-wing vote is split. Labour should move to the left to attract more voters (from the Greens). Alternatively, the government should change the voting system from first-past-the-post to some form of proportional representation.
(Personally, I think these ideas are both semi-workable electoral strategies for the left - some left wing ideas are popular among a lot of voters, and more people vote for left-wing parties than right-wing ones)
• The main reason the UK is in the economic doldrums is Brexit. In order to increase economic growth, we need to have a closer relationship with the EU. Ideally, the government should admit that Brexit was a complete failure and commit to rejoining the EU.
I have not seen or heard anyone on the left use the word "immigration" in explaining the result of the recent local elections, or what Labour ought to do about it. It's as if the idea that immigration could be a legitimate political issue is taboo! There's also no recognition that the left might benefit electorally from being tougher on crime, from dialling back some of it's economically harmful environmentalist ideas, from not making life difficult for motorists, or from reversing some of it's "nanny statism".
Actually, there are a small number of Blue Labour types, and a small number of Labour YIMBYs, but both of those groups are minorities outside the mainstream of the centre-left.
Astute article, Conor. And you’re correct that none of this is going to blow over in the next couple of decades, especially here in America.
Our immigration issues are probably not as heated as they are in Europe, but they are significant. Yet, even though the GOP controls the government, it can’t or won’t reform immigration laws to alleviate some of the problems.
I also think that however populist upset does finally resolve, it will be through a manner—and likely an individual—not on anyone’s radar in 2026.
I've been wondering about this topic for a while too, and the simple explanation is that most of the conventional elite in Western countries – by which I mean leading politicians, civil servants, business people, journalists – are liberal oligarchs. They are not interested in running a democratic government, but in running things to their own liking, much like the oligarchs of previous eras and in other places round the world. Of course they have to contend with genuinely democratic mechanics, and the oligarchy is a partial meritocracy, but straightforwardly this is about wielding power and keeping it away from other people
The narrative on the centre left in the UK seems to be:
• When ordinary people support right-wing parties they do so because of disinformation: X.com, GB News, The Sun and The Daily Mail. Why aren't the government and Ofcom doing something about this? Ban X or promote BlueSky, regulate GB News, ban internet anonymity.
• Reform is winning elections because the left-wing vote is split. Labour should move to the left to attract more voters (from the Greens). Alternatively, the government should change the voting system from first-past-the-post to some form of proportional representation.
(Personally, I think these ideas are both semi-workable electoral strategies for the left - some left wing ideas are popular among a lot of voters, and more people vote for left-wing parties than right-wing ones)
• The main reason the UK is in the economic doldrums is Brexit. In order to increase economic growth, we need to have a closer relationship with the EU. Ideally, the government should admit that Brexit was a complete failure and commit to rejoining the EU.
I have not seen or heard anyone on the left use the word "immigration" in explaining the result of the recent local elections, or what Labour ought to do about it. It's as if the idea that immigration could be a legitimate political issue is taboo! There's also no recognition that the left might benefit electorally from being tougher on crime, from dialling back some of it's economically harmful environmentalist ideas, from not making life difficult for motorists, or from reversing some of it's "nanny statism".
Actually, there are a small number of Blue Labour types, and a small number of Labour YIMBYs, but both of those groups are minorities outside the mainstream of the centre-left.
Astute article, Conor. And you’re correct that none of this is going to blow over in the next couple of decades, especially here in America.
Our immigration issues are probably not as heated as they are in Europe, but they are significant. Yet, even though the GOP controls the government, it can’t or won’t reform immigration laws to alleviate some of the problems.
I also think that however populist upset does finally resolve, it will be through a manner—and likely an individual—not on anyone’s radar in 2026.