FRANK HAVILAND
Earlier this month, Reform UK, Nigel Farage’s latest political incarnation, proposed one of the sharpest political ideas of modern times: to site new migrant detention centres in areas that vote heavily for the Green Party, which famously advocates for a “world without borders”. Likely locations include the historic Green Party stronghold of Brighton, but after last week’s local election success the list could easily extend to newly-won councils in Norwich, Hastings, as well as the London boroughs of Hackney, Lewisham and Waltham Forest. This is nothing short of a masterstroke in political simplicity: holding people to the professed beliefs they routinely foist on others.
The genius of such a policy lies in its symmetry. For years we have been told that opposing mass, uncontrolled migration is “racist”, “far-right” and “morally bankrupt”. Those who preach this gospel however, have customarily done so from the safety of low-crime, high-property-value postcodes, where the practical consequences of their ideology are someone else’s problem. Reform’s proposal flips the script. It says: you voted for it, you lecture the rest of us about it, you obviously believe in it – now live with it on your own doorstep.
Far from mere politicking, the idea demands the bare minimum of political integrity – for politicians and voters alike. Democracy works best when the electorate understands that their choices have consequences. ‘Virtue-signalling’ meanwhile, that favoured indoor sport of the metropolitan Left, is designed specifically to reward the signaller while costing him precisely nothing. A rainbow flag on a social media profile, a ‘refugees welcome’ hashtag, or a solemn dinner-party declaration that Britain is a “nation of immigrants”, rarely come with the danger that such views will be tested in court.
But this is contrary to any semblance of reality. Beliefs, faiths, and principles carry costs – often expensive ones. Christian faith in a Muslim country can be hazardous to your health; belief in the rule of law when finding oneself at knife-point, equally so. It is only when people are prepared to pay that price that we can believe they genuinely hold those views. Reform’s plan is nothing more than an extension of that principle.
The reaction has been gloriously revealing. Within hours of the proposal, left-wing politicians and activists were queuing up to denounce the move. A Green Party spokesperson said it was a “disgusting idea”, accusing Reform of “making abhorrent announcements in attempts to distract voters”. Labour Party chair, Anna Turley, described the policy as “grotesque”. The ultimate tell however, was voiced by those who somehow saw the manoeuvre as ‘punitive’. The Scottish Greens co-leader, Ross Greer, didn’t mince his words on Farage: “He is threatening the people of Scotland. This is straight out the Trump playbook, where you punish people for voting a way that you didn’t want.”
“Punish” them, by giving them exactly what they voted for!
Far from celebrating the prospect of getting what they say they want, the ‘refugees welcome’ brigade appear to have had a fit of nimbyism. Perfectly happy for small hotels in deprived coastal towns or former military bases in working-class areas to house hundreds of young men they may be, but the moment the same policy is suggested for their own leafy suburb, the mask slips. In other words, they don’t believe their own rhetoric.
Seeing that the Left have suddenly discovered their common sense, I see no reason why such policies could not be rolled out across the board. Why not impose a modest extra local precept on areas that consistently vote for eye-watering foreign aid budgets? Let those who love to spend other people’s money see how they like it, when it’s their pockets being picked. Concerned about climate change? No problem! You can be the first to house the unreliable and unsightly wind turbines that blight the landscape. Insist there’s no relationship between crime and immigration? Perfect! We’ll relocate all the high-risk migrants into your low-crime neighbourhood; let us know how you get on.
Perhaps this approach seems harsh, but it’s worth considering that it’s only ‘harsh’ or ‘punitive’, because of the disingenuous attitudes of leftwing voters and politicians. Small ‘C’ conservative, Reform-voting areas have never pretended to be pro-immigration. Indeed, they have been forced to live with the consequences for years and simultaneously lectured about their supposed bigotry.
This “you voted for it, now live with it” approach is not new. Back in 2022, Republican governors in Texas, Arizona and Florida took the decision to relocate thousands of migrants to Democrat-run states, precisely because of the Biden administration’s lax border policies. Buses carrying people primarily from Venezuela were dumped outside Vice-President Kamala Harris’s residence in Washington D.C., while planes flew migrants to the ultra-wealthy playground of Martha’s Vineyard. The howls of outrage were instantaneous. Suddenly the mayors who had spent years virtue-signalling, found themselves declaring emergencies and pleading for federal cash. The stunt was crude, perhaps, but it worked. It forced reality into the conversation, and exposed the gap between elite rhetoric and practical governance.
Britain’s political class could do with the same dose of honesty. Thus far, those seeking to proclaim their virtue by supporting open borders have paid no price – benefits without (third-world) friends, so to speak. For Millionaires’ Row, mass immigration translates to little more than cheap labour, exotic nannies, and (in those immortal Question Time words) “someone to serve our coffee in Pret”; all the while, feeling morally superior to the vulgarians and plebs who oppose it. That double standard may finally have had its day.
And that, in the end, is what good politics should do: put the price of hypocrisy on full display. No more lectures from the cheap seats. No more consequences for the little people only. Welcome to accountability, Comrades. You might even find it character-building.
“You voted for it, you lecture the rest of us about it, you obviously believe in it — now live with it on your own doorstep.”
Frank Haviland is the Editor of The New Conservative, and the author of Banalysis: The Lie Destroying the West.
If you enjoy my work, please consider buying me a coffee – it would really help to keep me going. Thank you!
This piece was first published in The European Conservative, and is reproduced by kind permission.
This article (Reform’s Radical Agenda: Give the Voters What They Want) was created and published by Frank Haviland and is republished here under “Fair Use”
Featured image: The Frank Report (modified)
••••
The Liberty Beacon Project is now expanding at a near exponential rate, and for this we are grateful and excited! But we must also be practical. For 7 years we have not asked for any donations, and have built this project with our own funds as we grew. We are now experiencing ever increasing growing pains due to the large number of websites and projects we represent. So we have just installed donation buttons on our websites and ask that you consider this when you visit them. Nothing is too small. We thank you for all your support and your considerations … (TLB)
••••
Comment Policy: As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. This also applies to trolling, the use of more than one alias, or just intentional mischief. Enforcement of this policy is at the discretion of this websites administrators. Repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without prior warning.
••••
Disclaimer: TLB websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, health, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.
••••
Disclaimer: The information and opinions shared are for informational purposes only including, but not limited to, text, graphics, images and other material are not intended as medical advice or instruction. Nothing mentioned is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment.
Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of The Liberty Beacon Project.
Leave a Reply