‹ Back

A recent conversation with a politically inactive friend on our side of the fence summed up nicely: even amongst the people who agree with our other views, most still are primarily interested in their streets staying safe and clean, and being able to put food on the table. They’re not interested in esoteric theories or debates on history, they just want to live decent lives.

 

Here lies the crux of why fringe politics fails: too many people trying to be an ideological messiah, and not enough invested in the minutiae of how things are failing and what will put them right. Because the truth is that immigration IS a major player in why a lot of our systems are failing - particularly when it comes to service user demand, like within the NHS - but it is not the only reason why, and getting rid of every migrant in Britain wouldn’t suddenly make them work. One of the most urgent examples of this is farming; the issues facing the agricultural sector were not caused by migration, and migrant labour might even have been obscuring what trouble they were in for a time. But it’s undeniable that there are issues in this country that must be resolved, and this must happen alongside the long-term plan to end migration and repatriate those who should not have been here in the first place. We don’t have time to wait until they’ve gone home.

 

As democracy demands popular appeal, achieving political power from a fringe position is clearly going to be tough. Not impossible by any means - this essay is not meant to black pill - but certainly tougher than coming with a plan that doesn’t shy away from recognising immigration as a relevant factor, but doesn’t make it the primary factor in every instance. Once an ethnonationalist foundation is revealed, the ship begins to sink; not just because of external attacks from people who want to undermine, but also from within, as infighting and petty debates sap vital energy and confidence from those who simply want to show support for a better future. All the more frustrating when one realises it simply doesn’t have to be this way - our desires are reasonable and our aims achievable, if only we can agree what to work on and how to work on it.

 

So my proposal is this: build a platform not on immigration itself, but on dismantling the systems that keep it in place. It’s entirely true that the only place these changes can be made is from the top, but in order to get to the top the approval of the public who actually go out and vote must be secured - and this is where the current anti-establishment movement, colloquially known as the right, is coming unstuck. If our circles attract largely the disaffected, the extremist, and the misanthropic then we will never win. We need to appeal to the police officer, the shop worker, the teacher, the mechanic, the nurse, and the farmer: the normal people who put their sweat into Britain and simply want to see that their labour leads to creating a society they’re proud to live in.

 

It’s true that, despite this being the case, people will vote illogically - and I’d argue that this is due to appeal, rather than clear difference in main policy. Looking at voting demographics for GE2024, the observations are predictable: Conservatives most popular amongst the oldest voters and least popular amongst the youngest; Lib Dem and Green conversely most popular amongst the youngest and least amongst older; Labour most popular with millennials and Reform with Gen X. But what is the ideological difference between Lib Dem and Labour, Reform and Conservative? Very little - and this goes to show that perception of what your party stands for is, ultimately, what decides your fate in our current democracy.

 

I’d like to address the common responses in our online spaces to this predicament, usually some variant of ‘stop women/commoners/etc from voting’. While I think it’s perfectly fine for people to have those opinions, I also feel quite secure in the conclusion that suffrage will never go backwards and therefore that this resolution will not come to pass. So, accepting that we must play with the hand we have been dealt, how do we move forward? How do we appeal to the masses without betraying our beliefs? Through populist rhetoric, kept true to our ethos through strategic honesty. For example, there is indeed a housing crisis, and it is easy to trace a line from the source of the problem (unnaturally huge influx of foreigners wanting to be housed) through its facilitators (private and corporate landlords, coupled with mortgage lenders and property developers, who want to profit from a scarcity in the housing market) concluding with the impact on everyone else (natives who just want to afford to buy a house and raise a family). It is so easy to gain popular support with a narrative like this because it is simple, it is clear, and it is ideologically neutral because it is well-supported by facts. When this framework is applied to multiple hot topics - NHS, education, crime, and so on - the solution loudly makes itself known.

 

At present I am taking a hiatus from being politically active, because I think I will serve better from a different position. The race is long, and it’s important to pace oneself so that the effort can be expended where and when it will be most effective. I will keep posting my essays though; I’ve been politically-minded since I was a child, and I doubt that will ever change. Thank you for reading my work, and I hope you will stick around to see what comes next.

 

By Lauren Brookes

 

First published on Heiler Sentinel HERE