Obadiah Mbatang
@residentadviser.bsky.social
Completely different from the Mandelson news. Assisted suicide bill is going through the Lords. open.substack.com/pub/mbatangs...
The liberal case against assisted suicide
Why the House of Lords should reject the Leadbeater Bill
open.substack.com
February 6, 2026 at 9:18 PM
Completely different from the Mandelson news. Assisted suicide bill is going through the Lords. open.substack.com/pub/mbatangs...
Reposted by Obadiah Mbatang
Somewhere vs Anywheres was overdone. He even makes the point in the book. It’s not as clear cut as Anywhere vs Sonewhere in a straightforward sense. There’s an Inbetweener Group, But you see similar points in Lasch, Guilloy, Pikketty, WVS, Rodrik, Shor. And correlates with segmentation and polling.
Always been the major flaw in this theory. "Anywheres" might be more "cosmpolitan" but they still have a community orienation. I live in a very "anywhere-y" place but there's plenty of school fetes and local book groups.
A thought: what's happening in the US shows that the somewheres/anywheres thing is bollocks. Most of the people mobilising, Goodhart would call Anywheres. And they're mobilising specifically to protect their neighbours and their neighbourhoods.
January 28, 2026 at 9:14 AM
Somewhere vs Anywheres was overdone. He even makes the point in the book. It’s not as clear cut as Anywhere vs Sonewhere in a straightforward sense. There’s an Inbetweener Group, But you see similar points in Lasch, Guilloy, Pikketty, WVS, Rodrik, Shor. And correlates with segmentation and polling.
Nah. Lord True is there. And Chris Philp.
More members of Liz Truss's cabinet are in Reform than in Badenoch's shadow cabinet...
January 26, 2026 at 2:32 PM
Nah. Lord True is there. And Chris Philp.
New Substack: The Moral Case Against Robert Jenrick. open.substack.com/pub/mbatangs...
The Moral Case Against Robert Jenrick
A sequel to Some Thoughts on the Jenrick Defection
open.substack.com
January 23, 2026 at 5:07 AM
New Substack: The Moral Case Against Robert Jenrick. open.substack.com/pub/mbatangs...
New Substack post! open.substack.com/pub/mbatangs...
Some thoughts on the Jenrick defection
Robert Jenrick was not going to become Tory leader
open.substack.com
January 20, 2026 at 8:45 PM
New Substack post! open.substack.com/pub/mbatangs...
Sonia is right.
I just think that if you are a political commentator you should have an understanding of how courts work just a thought
December 14, 2025 at 9:36 PM
Sonia is right.
Michael Meacher and Chris Mullin served in th Blair govt (with Meacher in shadow cabinet and attending cabinet). Clare Short was in Cabinet for 6 years. Ken Livingstone was offered a job in 1998.
They've known not to do deals with the SCG though. Sign of desperation innit
December 14, 2025 at 9:12 PM
Michael Meacher and Chris Mullin served in th Blair govt (with Meacher in shadow cabinet and attending cabinet). Clare Short was in Cabinet for 6 years. Ken Livingstone was offered a job in 1998.
What’s wrong with that? All motherhood and apple but there’s nothing wrong with it Per se.
You'd really think they'd have learnt their lesson by now, but no!
December 14, 2025 at 9:02 PM
What’s wrong with that? All motherhood and apple but there’s nothing wrong with it Per se.
Burnham would be able to win a Greater Manchester seat.
December 13, 2025 at 11:06 PM
Burnham would be able to win a Greater Manchester seat.
Point on Blue Labour aside, it doesn’t matter. Not my point. Am agreeing that the soft left IS the mainstream tendency. And this decision reveals this isn’t a BL govt. I’m just also pointing out that the BL view on welfare is just close to where people are. Which is true.
I don't hate it but the soft left/Blue Labour framing is crude and unrealistic: they just are not comparable entities. One is a broad tendency in the party and PLP, the other a fringe groupuscule of gesticulating trolls.
Many of you will hate this. But I’m not one to say what I don’t think open.substack.com/pub/mbatangs...
December 8, 2025 at 7:51 PM
Point on Blue Labour aside, it doesn’t matter. Not my point. Am agreeing that the soft left IS the mainstream tendency. And this decision reveals this isn’t a BL govt. I’m just also pointing out that the BL view on welfare is just close to where people are. Which is true.
Many of you will hate this. But I’m not one to say what I don’t think open.substack.com/pub/mbatangs...
The Budget spelled the end of the Starmer Project
“This Budget will be remembered for finally abolishing the monstrous two-child benefit cap.
open.substack.com
December 8, 2025 at 5:46 PM
Many of you will hate this. But I’m not one to say what I don’t think open.substack.com/pub/mbatangs...
COME BACK TO TWITTER, YOU BUNCH OF WET WOKESTERS AND LIBS! PLEASE!!!! 🙏🏿🙏🏿🙏🏿🙏🏿🙏🏿🙏🏿🙏🏿🙏🏿🙏🏿🙏🏿
December 8, 2025 at 2:11 PM
COME BACK TO TWITTER, YOU BUNCH OF WET WOKESTERS AND LIBS! PLEASE!!!! 🙏🏿🙏🏿🙏🏿🙏🏿🙏🏿🙏🏿🙏🏿🙏🏿🙏🏿🙏🏿
Dear Bluesky liberals. Come back to Twitter. Please. PLEASE.
December 8, 2025 at 1:41 PM
Dear Bluesky liberals. Come back to Twitter. Please. PLEASE.
Soft right is interesting and where I’ve long put Streeting. Also think it’s interesting that Mahmood is distancing herself from BL (according to “allies”). But space in the New/Blue synthesis which Purnell, Cooke and Phillip Collins were talking about back in the day. Meant to be Kendall‘s campaign
There may be emerging around Streeting the concept of the 'soft right' - ie a more bridging, broadly liberal & communitarian, pro-market & pro-public services labour right that sees itself as a strand of social democracy in a way that the right of blue Labour does not identify itself as such
Angela Rayner and the soft left do not like the idea of a Wes Streeting coronation
Rayner has told friends she would stand in a leadership contest to stop him
This week's New Statesman column 👇🏻 www.newstatesman.com/politics/lab...
Rayner has told friends she would stand in a leadership contest to stop him
This week's New Statesman column 👇🏻 www.newstatesman.com/politics/lab...
December 7, 2025 at 6:01 AM
Soft right is interesting and where I’ve long put Streeting. Also think it’s interesting that Mahmood is distancing herself from BL (according to “allies”). But space in the New/Blue synthesis which Purnell, Cooke and Phillip Collins were talking about back in the day. Meant to be Kendall‘s campaign
Nah. There’s strong evidence it actually correlates with net migration numbers more than news reports. But control - and perception of control - brings down the salience. Why for example Brexit led to a huge liberalisation on immigration attitudes (and a big reduction in salience).
There’s plenty of evidence that the salience of immigration as an issue tracks deliberate (expensive) work done to raise it’s salience at strategically significant moments, more closely than it tracks actual immigration numbers.
November 22, 2025 at 8:52 AM
Nah. There’s strong evidence it actually correlates with net migration numbers more than news reports. But control - and perception of control - brings down the salience. Why for example Brexit led to a huge liberalisation on immigration attitudes (and a big reduction in salience).
I like Mahmood but empirically the argument doesn’t work. Racism has been in decline while salience of immigration has increased over past 30 years. In 1994, concern about immigration was roughly 5%. I suspect far more people would’ve been concerned about a Muslim Home Secretary back then.
It’s just nuts. Even if you accept Labour’s policy diagnosis, we “lost control” of our borders, and concern about immigration was rising long before the alarming rise of racism. The big change on racism has been we traded an anti-racist government for one that is at best Trappist on it.
I find insane that shabana mahmood is going out there and saying "white british people cannot be asked to accept too many of us outsiders, it is not in their nature, and their pushback against all of us is to be placated". What???
November 21, 2025 at 11:51 PM
I like Mahmood but empirically the argument doesn’t work. Racism has been in decline while salience of immigration has increased over past 30 years. In 1994, concern about immigration was roughly 5%. I suspect far more people would’ve been concerned about a Muslim Home Secretary back then.
I think the policies do matter. The Poll Tax was policy. Iraq War was policy. Mini-budget was policy. Corbyn did well in part because of policy. And policy tells you about the outlook, vibes, values etc. But there’s prioritisation and the extent not just policy in isolation.
I'm sorry to break every wonk's heart, but parties do not win elections on the basis of their policy platforms. It's a little more complex, but basically boils down to voters trusting them to pursue the *objectives* that matter to them.
It's the outputs - and trust - that count, not the inputs.
It's the outputs - and trust - that count, not the inputs.
November 18, 2025 at 3:00 PM
I think the policies do matter. The Poll Tax was policy. Iraq War was policy. Mini-budget was policy. Corbyn did well in part because of policy. And policy tells you about the outlook, vibes, values etc. But there’s prioritisation and the extent not just policy in isolation.
Tbh this was part of the Blue Labour argument in 2010 (Glasman - a child of Jewish immigrants - was in Strangers into Citizens). But things get lost in translation. There’s no point anymore.
why do I emphasize the Manchester-ness of this? because Blue Labour 'thinkers' try to portray themselves as authentic representatives of a neglected Northern working class. But while there's plenty of racism in the North, as anywhere else, there's also a long history of integration and anti-racism.
November 17, 2025 at 7:15 PM
Tbh this was part of the Blue Labour argument in 2010 (Glasman - a child of Jewish immigrants - was in Strangers into Citizens). But things get lost in translation. There’s no point anymore.
Don’t entirely agree with Colm (an broadly supportive of the reforms) but they’re going to lose the politics, it won’t help the Govt in the polls, it’ll be seen (wrongly) as another 68 Callaghan reforms. And the Labour Party will learn the wrong lessons from it.
In the interests of accountability:
These proposals are trying to set up claiming credit for the likely fall in net migration. This misunderstands the media environment and voting patterns; it will help Farage while losing votes for Labour. They are also morally objectionable and costly. (1/2)
These proposals are trying to set up claiming credit for the likely fall in net migration. This misunderstands the media environment and voting patterns; it will help Farage while losing votes for Labour. They are also morally objectionable and costly. (1/2)
November 17, 2025 at 6:54 PM
Don’t entirely agree with Colm (an broadly supportive of the reforms) but they’re going to lose the politics, it won’t help the Govt in the polls, it’ll be seen (wrongly) as another 68 Callaghan reforms. And the Labour Party will learn the wrong lessons from it.
There’s a space for “Labour can stop Reform BUT if we will control immigration BUT not as Reform wish to do.”
“A vote for Labour is the only way to stop Reform”
Or
“Labour can actually do what Reform only claims it can do”
The government needs to pick one strategy, not both. The government seems unaware that voters can actually hear it trying both messages at once.
Or
“Labour can actually do what Reform only claims it can do”
The government needs to pick one strategy, not both. The government seems unaware that voters can actually hear it trying both messages at once.
November 17, 2025 at 11:55 AM
There’s a space for “Labour can stop Reform BUT if we will control immigration BUT not as Reform wish to do.”
Not keen on this argument. Bit like saying Kemi Badenoch wouldn’t be a British citizen if Tories brought forward nationality reforms a year earlier. Or whatever.
Mo Farah would not have been a British citizen for the 2012 Olympics if Labour had introduced their new asylum plan.
Mo Farah, trafficked to UK aged 9 in 1992. Teacher Alan Watkinson secures citizenship after 8 years here, 2000 (aged 17) so he could travel abroad as GB athlete
Under future rules
Renew status? 1995, 98 x6
Eligible settlement after 20 years (2012)
Citizenship 2013
news.sky.com/story/sir-mo...
Under future rules
Renew status? 1995, 98 x6
Eligible settlement after 20 years (2012)
Citizenship 2013
news.sky.com/story/sir-mo...
November 17, 2025 at 1:13 AM
Not keen on this argument. Bit like saying Kemi Badenoch wouldn’t be a British citizen if Tories brought forward nationality reforms a year earlier. Or whatever.
David Willetts‘ Civic Conservatism, Oliver Letwin, Steve Hilton. Danny Kruger wrote the hug a hoodie speech. Jesse Norman‘s Compassionate Conservatism. Phillip Blond’s Red Tory. Some of the social policy stuff (IDS, Montgomerie).
It is worth saying how much ideological and policy work was done around The Big Society. Lots of this stuff was various Tim Montgomery run think tanks but they genuinely did have a huge amount of policy work on "how do we make civil society replace the state"
November 17, 2025 at 12:07 AM
David Willetts‘ Civic Conservatism, Oliver Letwin, Steve Hilton. Danny Kruger wrote the hug a hoodie speech. Jesse Norman‘s Compassionate Conservatism. Phillip Blond’s Red Tory. Some of the social policy stuff (IDS, Montgomerie).
The thing is that it’s a rational argument more widely (for eg. just because Tommy Robinson supports something, it doesn’t mean it’s necessarily wrong). The issue is that the Labour Party and the wider left will not see it that way. And they’ve made this argument themselves about other positions.
Tommy Robinson is claiming credit for the language/policy being used by the Labour government (about deporting people found to be refugees once their home country is deemed safe)
November 16, 2025 at 11:21 PM
The thing is that it’s a rational argument more widely (for eg. just because Tommy Robinson supports something, it doesn’t mean it’s necessarily wrong). The issue is that the Labour Party and the wider left will not see it that way. And they’ve made this argument themselves about other positions.