Since violence began, Reform UK leader Nigel Farage has argued that violence will be self-defeating. Once again, Farage might be wrong.
Not too unreasonably, the focus of coverage on the riots has primarily been the human suffering it has caused. Although hard numbers are still unclear, many consider the damage to be the worst since 2011.
As well as the direct effects of the riots themselves, the events of the last week are having significant effects on national politics itself. Whilst leaders like Nigel Farage of Reform UK argue that violence will ultimately undermine its own causes, Conservative leadership hopefuls, have used the unrest to frame their stances on law and order, distancing themselves from more extreme elements.
History suggests that rather delegitimising the far right as some have suggested, these riots could bolster opposition to immigration, despite the violence primarily targeting immigrant communities.
How Have Politicians Responded So Far?
The riots have been near-universally condemned across the political spectrum. Starmer’s first speech on the issue referred to rioters as “thugs”. Home Secretary Yvette Cooper echoed this line in calling rioters a “thuggish minority”.
The Leader of the Opposition condemned the “shocking scenes” as “violent, criminal behaviour”. Shadow Welsh Secretary was quickly reprimanded by Sunak after stating that the “disorder” was “politically justified” due to Labour’s opposition to the Rwanda scheme. Lord Davies has since apologised.
Reform Leader Nigel Farage has also condemned the rioting. Although initially spreading claims that the Southport stabber was a Muslim immigrant, he has argued that he opposes violence, something that his YouTube subscribers did not get the memo on.
According to YouGov, 47% believe Farage to be responsible to some degree for the unrest compared to 25% who blamed ‘Muslims’.
How Will This Affect The Conservative Leadership Race?
As was explained in Chamber UK’s guide to the Conservative leadership election, certain candidates on the right are keen to come across as more moderate, and moderates the reverse in order to appeal to both MPs and the membership.
It is not too surprising then that Patel has used this opportunity to distance herself from a perceived closeness with Reform. Since the beginning of the unrest, Patel appeared to formally reject a partnership with Reform and criticised Farage for comparing ongoing riots to the BLM protests.
Patel has framed the riots as a question of law and order, drawing particular attention to “disgraceful” actions taken by counter-protestors in Birmingham. Whilst highlighting the lack of police presence during counter-protests, when asked whether she considered there to be a “two-tier policing system”, she refused to use the term, but expressed that she had ‘questions’ about unrest involving Muslims being under-policed. Nigel Farage has called her position “wrong”.
James Cleverly has also primarily focused on the policing angle, criticising Labour’s “standing army” police pledge as a policy that they won’t actually follow through on, stating: “in government you can’t just say stuff, you have to do stuff”.
This may be a good avenue of attack, given that YouGov has shown that the majority of not only the British public, but Conservative party members believe that the Prime Minister is not doing enough to clamp down on protests.
Front-runner Kemi Badenoch has not issued an official statement so far.
How Will The Government Respond?
As stated in Chamber’s initial coverage of the Southport stabbing, Labour has pledged a hard stance on any kind of disorder. Labour have stated that they will not introduce new powers or legislation, arguing that existing powers are sufficient, but should be used more actively. The Prime Minister has stated that he will strengthen the police response, calling for a “standing army” of police.
Some critics, however, allege that government powers will be expanded.
The Telegraph have speculated that the government will make ‘Islamophobia’ a separate criminal offence as-per the suggestion of the Muslim Council of Britain (MCB). This seems incredibly unlikely.
Since Gordon Brown, the government have maintained a policy of ‘non-engagement’ with the MCB, in which they refuse to acknowledge the organisation’s legitimacy as a representative of the British Muslim community. The only other supporting evidence the Telegraph has used is suggestions by Zarah Sultana, a Labour MP who currently has the whip suspended. As was explained in our article on the King’s Speech rebellion, Starmer has not exactly shown a strong willingness to compromise with dissidents like Sultana.
With the sheer volume of pre-emptive anger among right-wing publications regarding any potential new hate-speech legislation, it will likely be politically difficult to introduce new legislation. As per their pledge, they will likely focus on working within the existing policing regime.
According to YouGov’s poll, Starmer is currently being blamed more than Rishi Sunak. The majority of every party (including Reform) believes that the Prime Minister should be doing more to fight the riots. It’s hard to imagine that this won’t damage the government.
Will The Riots Delegitimise the Far Right or Give Them Attention?
In November of last year, Ireland experienced a similar event to that of the UK. An Algerian national known as Riad Bouchaker stabbed four children at a primary school, critically injuring one. In the days the followed, violent riots against immigration broke out in Dublin.
The violence was condemned by Police Commissioner Drew Harris as a “lunatic hooligan faction driven by far-right ideology”. Like in the UK, they received widespread condemnation from all major political parties.
Whilst the riots didn’t significantly shift opinion on immigration itself, they massively increased awareness of the issue. A poll in May of 2024 found that 41% of voters considered immigration to be the most important issue, up from 26%. The way in which the riots shaped political discourse made immigration a more talked about issue and therefore one that people would determine their voting behaviour on.
Sinn Fein, a traditionally pro-immigration party saw their vote share collapse in this year’s local election. Despite being a leftist party and calling for the Varadkar government to enact harsher measures against rioters, Sinn Fein has since toughened its immigration stance to remain electorally competitive.
As well as increasing awareness, there are good reasons to think that these riots may have exactly that effect.
Will The Riots Increase Opposition To Immigration?
You would think that rioters stopping cars to see if their occupants are white before letting them pass is not a particularly good way of convincing normal people to oppose immigration. However, history shows otherwise
In 1948, the Irish Department of Justice justified hard limits on Jewish refugees during the Second World War and its aftermath by referencing the Limerick Pogrom, arguing that the “admission of Jewish Aliens” would “give rise to an anti-Semitic problem”. The irony of this statement was clearly lost on the Mr De Valera.
A similar argument developed on the other end of the channel; that anti-immigrant violence meant that a harder immigration stance had to be taken. The largely white-instigated Notting Hill riots helped propel the passing of the 1962 Commonwealth Immigration Act.
Although most controversially iterated by Enoch Powell, anti-migrant violence has fuelled more mainstream opposition to immigration. Following the Dublin riot in 2023, Boris Johnson made similar points. History shows that violence will often be blamed on immigration, even if carried out against immigrants.
The rhetoric of much of the hard right mirrors this line of argument. Farage has warned of the “danger” that “we become like France”, in which there are “truces” between ethnic communities which “flare up every three months, six months, every year”. Although the prospect of becoming French should terrify any reasonable person, so far polling does not seem to support the idea that immigration is perceived as being to blame for the riots. YouGov polling has found that 38% of respondents believe that immigrants held some degree of responsibility for the riots in comparison to 74% for the far-right.
However, even though most do not hold immigrants responsible for the unrest, history shows that this might not matter. Despite the overwhelming majority of the last week’s violence being committed against immigrants and their descendants, the record shows that these very riots could promote a stronger line on the issue.
Final Thought
It seems likely that the riots could embolden, rather than delegitimise anti-immigration politics.
It is not impossible that Labour will bend to this pressure. Leftist parties have seen similar shifts due to anti-immigrant violence. The 1962 Immigration act received Labour as well as Conservative support. Sinn Fein similarly abandoned its pro-immigration positions in the aftermath of last year’s violence.
Key to Labour’s victory was their percieved preferability on the topic immigration. With Labour likely to experience a dent in popularity, it may be more desperate to recoup losses from the anti-immigration demographic. Labour’s plans to phase out immigration will likely be pursued with new vigour by a government that believes its failure will bring about the rise of the far right.