And a lesson from Labour
J’ACCUSE
Most commentary on British politics since about this time last year has been a waste of time. Reform has gone from around 30% to 28%. They still maintain the same massive lead that they had over the Tory/Labour which allowed them to win big during the 2025 local elections. There was no ‘Badenoch bounce’. The only real change has been the doubling of Polanski’s party in the opinion polls from around 10% to 20%, although at time of writing it would seem that their advance in the polls has been moderately overstated.
So a challenger party to the Left of Labour has seen some success. But to Farage’s right – the online anglo-celt rebellion – has done nothing to dent Farage’s momentum. J’accuse was correct to say in March 2025 that Lowe was wasting people’s time by rebelling – whilst many thralls were rattling their chains against Farage. At time of writing it is not yet clear precisely what has happened in Greater Yarmouth but in any event the overwhelming dominance of Reform nationally means that their impotent fury is just that.
What lessons can we draw from the success of Farage and the failure of Starmer in the last two years? Here is my suggestion: Farage has successfully avoided falling into the trap of attempting to chase voters who have come to irrationally despise him.
McSweeney and various pollsters are correct to say that the public have attitudes to the right of the Labour Party on immigration and welfare reform. The problem with this analysis, however, is that for the 30-40% of the electorate who care about immigration more than any other issue will never, ever, ever, ever believe the Labour Party when they say that they care about immigration. It doesn’t matter how many videos you make showing illegal immigrants being flown away, the people you are trying to win over believe that the Labour Party are complicit in the great replacement and helped cover up Pakistani rape gangs.
A proportion of anti-immigration voters believe that the Labour Party is the anti-white party. To try and win these people over with promises of tough control on immigration is to misunderstand how people perceive political parties. They feel tribal affiliations and tribal dislikes regardless of the policies that are put forward. This categorical misunderstanding may have something to do with the fact that McSweeney comes from a Fine Gael family in Ireland, a country where the two main parties no longer have any real ideological differences and instead compete on ‘Competence’. Britain, thankfully, is still a real country, with a real Parliament and real politics. Not a patch of grass where various chancers try and scam other countries out of their corporation tax.
McSweeney made the same mistake that Nick Timothy and others made when they tried to recast the Conservative Party as a post-liberal institution under Theresa May. People thought the Tories were evil austerity addicts even when they promised to hose money on pointless nonsense. Their voting base wanted evil neoliberalism because evil neoliberalism means they get to keep more of their money. Theresa May called it the ‘nasty party’. When she got her chance to make it something else, rebranding it as the party of banning stop and search and modern slavery she almost handed the country to Messr Corbyn on a silver platter. Why? Because if people wanted a bigger state, and less punishment for BAME criminals, they vote for Labour.
These digressions bring us back around to Farage. Yesterday this publication wrote a closely argued case in favour of Reform’s pledge to build deportation centres in Green areas. One could object that punishing some of your own voters is wrong. As an example, Farage lives inside the M25 and so he is eligible to vote in the Mayoral election. This does not mean he should be punished if the Greens win the 2028 Mayoral election.
Nonetheless I can see how vindictive building is better than nothing. My first concern was that the policy might signal that Reform are trying to win back the ‘online right’. That Reform staffers are getting upset that they are being accused by online accounts of being ‘subversive’, complicit in White genocide or in the pay of international Zionism, and think a bit of populism is the way back into their hearts.
I must come forward with some advice about the next three years, if anybody reading this is within such a position, and feels such a way.
Just as many pissed off business owners are convinced Starmer is a Muslim who goes for rent boys, many cartoon animal AVIs have convinced themselves that Nigel Farage is in hoc to an anti-White genocidal Zionist international cabal.
From that starting point there is nothing, no press release, no policy announcement that you can make which will convince them that Farage is now ‘based’ again. They will always believe that he is part of the controlled opposition.
When they scroll and see Farage, everything that he says is filtered through a conspiratorial worldview in which Farage is the reason that ‘nationalist’ politics in its many forms (the BNP, UKIP under Gerard Batten) has failed to have an electoral breakthrough since he became active in politics in the 1990s. They will continue to repost the same footage of him telling Steven Edginton that Mass deportations are impossible even if Nigel pledges to deport Rishi Sunak to the Ganges. Outflanking whichever flavour of Retard they are subscribed to rhetorically simply will not influence their opinion.
To hammer home the impossibility of winning these people around, understand how central the threat of Zionism is to their worldview, and how impossible it is for Reform to now pivot into a position on Israel which would please these people. Nigel Farage is never going to denounce Netanyahu’s plan to build a ‘Greater Israel’.
That is not just because Farage is himself sympathetic to the plight of the chosen people. It is also because he realises that his job is not to win over digital animals and altar boys, but to convince fifty-five year olds who have grown up their entire lives watching Gogglebox and learning at school that a whiff of racial prejudice is automatic social suicide, that they can bring themselves to vote Reform and give an untested political party a go at running the country.
That is an extremely difficult balancing act which Farage has been attempting to do for the last twenty years, something he (with some help from the Vote Leave team) was successfully able to pull off with the Brexit referendum. I trust his judgement on how to execute this task completely.
But for the sake of those around him; know that you will have to endure a lot of nonsense in the next three years, possibly from people whose content you once enjoyed (Gamergate, anyone?) Make your peace with that. You will never please the Wolf, nor the squirrel, the Horse.
This article (The triumph of Reform) was created and published by J’Accuse and is republished here under “Fair Use”
See Related Article Below
UK Council Elections and a Prime Minister in Denial
Starmer’s absurdist, obtuse take on his latest drubbing.
JUPPLANDIA
The Keir Starmer reaction to big Labour losses in UK council elections is a perfect summation of modern leftism.
His government was elected with just 19% of the potential vote in the last election. Only 33% of those who bothered to vote.
In these council elections he has lost more seats than any other party. The only reason Labour haven’t been wiped out in England at council level is because only a third of the seats are up for vote at the moment.
In my area, Labour tried to deny 5 million people a local vote altogether by refusing an election and going over a year past their terms limits while they tried to gerrymander Essex into new council districts that would favour them.It took a judicial challenge to give us any vote. Everywhere we have had a vote, Essex has voted Reform and Labour have had massive losses. But they still have councillors because of the seats that aren’t being contested in this vote.
Labour have lost just under half of the seats they were fighting so far. If you are popular you gain seats. If you are unpopular but it’s not hatred you should retain about two thirds of seats, at least. Losing hundreds of seats means you are hated.
Scotland is heavily leftist. And the SNP have been in government there now a long time. That should mean Labour recovery. It doesn’t. It’s still SNP. Wales was a Labour heartland. It isn’t any more. It’s the same picture of relentless Labour decline. London is a Labour heartland. They are losing that to the Greens. There are places in former Northern Labour strongholds where if 22 seats are up for grabs, 22 go to Reform. Northern cities with big Muslim populations are going Green or voting for independents who run on Gaza and Palestinian bullshit.
All this bodes very badly for Labour. The only things propping them up still is 1. Places that don’t get a vote that they retain 2. The split in the vote of the Right still helping them and 3. The existing boundaries and huge number of urban seats systemically favouring them.
If every council vote or every MP national election vote counted equally, Labour would be utterly fucked. They need fewer to get in…..and are still doing badly.
Starmer’s personal approval ratings are the lowest of any modern UK Prime Minister. He heads an old Establishment party. He institutes Globalist Progressive policies that are favoured by global elites and the comfortable middle class. He and his party are hated and their results show it.
How does he respond?
“…..days like this, they don’t weaken my resolve to deliver the change that I promised at the general election, they strengthen my resolve to do so. Let me be clear, I am not going to walk away and plunge the country into chaos. I am going to see this through.”
He also insisted:
“We won a landslide victory in July 2024. I led our party to that victory, that is a five-year mandate to change the country. It was a five-year term I was elected to do, I intend to see that through.”
In other words I’m going to keep doing the things you hate and have voted against, only I’m going to try to do them faster. He got a tiny endorsement in 2024 with an obscenely inflated Parliamentary majority from that low vote count, due to the stupidities of our voting system, and insists this is the basis for him to keep radically changing the country when his vote and popularity are in the toilet and being flushed away altogether.
His own party are less convinced of this magical mandate that no results change than he is:
“Daren Hale, the Labour group leader in Hull, stated that while voters liked local council work, they repeatedly refused to support Labour because they viewed candidates as representatives of Starmer, saying, “If we want to get a message to him we have to get it through you.”…..internal pressure has mounted, with Labour MP Jonathan Brash calling for Starmer to set a timetable for his resignation after his wife lost her seat to Reform UK, and Lord David Watts urging Starmer to step aside for Andy Burnham to provide necessary leadership.”
While there are of course no ACTUAL sane moderates in the modern Labour Party (it’s very like the US Democrats in that) there is a business oriented, let’s pretend to be normal wing who are panicked about just how extraordinarily detested they have become. These tend to be the internal voices raised against Sir Queer (a Ukrainian rent boys allusion, and not a blanket condemnation of gays, if anyone is bothered). In truth, factions that want Burnham or (even more hilariously) want Angela Rayner to replace Starmer the Harmer are simply suggesting, to use a restaurant analogy, that one unpalatable turd on a plate is switched for another while insisting ‘zis is fine dining, monsieur’ to the sickened customer. It’s that, the appalling lack of ANYONE good, that has let a robotic clown like Sir Queer both rise and remain.
All that personality and mediocrity stuff aside, though, Starmer’s attempted defiance of the results is in one way important. It’s important not as proof of determination or ‘courage’ (like most people who assume the most stubborn postures while talking about their indefatigable will to deliver Starmer is a DNA deep coward) but as reflection of the central reality that everyone like Starmer now views elections as a really irritating inconvenience which are constantly ruined by the public not doing as they are told.
In Globalist thinking, any victory of theirs, no matter how fortunate or slight, is a permanent mandate for any level of change no matter how hated or disastrous. But any loss they suffer is not a mandate to those who defeat them, but rather a sign that the Globalist needs to do hated Globalist things even MORE rapidly and even more extensively.
Their truest attitude was expressed in the high handed, corrupt and bureaucratic manner in which they decided that Labour councillors in my area should sit in their seats for months and months after their legitimate terms had ended, with local voters disenfranchised and berated and condescended to if they complained. That’s how they would like all ‘elections’ to go (e.g. to be gone altogether).
After all if you don’t stop this ridiculous practice of ordinary people having a say, there’s a slight chance that the stupid voters could stop you doing the Very Important Changes you’ve decided on and which you know they (in their ignorance) don’t like.
All this before one notes the absolute obscenity of parties standing candidates who aren’t even British citizens, candidates who campaign in other countries, candidates who campaign in other languages, and candidates who campaign on Gaza because nobody in their constituency is British.
This article (UK Council Elections and a Prime Minister in Denial) was created and published by Jupplandia and is republished here under “Fair Use”
••••
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