Obadiah Mbatang
@residentadviser.bsky.social
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.
I think the Tories’ collapse was in part because of a failure on immigration (which created space for Reform). But chasing Reform *now* would be a disaster. I think with Labour, failing on migration has fuelled radical right (a minority of defectors). But chasing them is a disaster too.
Fascinating that the cause of collapse of both major parties has not just been basically identical (cost of living and service failings creating unpopularity, chasing radical right tail on immigration fuelling in-bloc schism), but that doubling down has persisted long after failure became clear.
November 16, 2025 at 9:39 PM
I think the Tories’ collapse was in part because of a failure on immigration (which created space for Reform). But chasing Reform *now* would be a disaster. I think with Labour, failing on migration has fuelled radical right (a minority of defectors). But chasing them is a disaster too.
Right. But the problem is that Badenoch’s speech wasn’t poor. It was a very good speech. The content may or may not have been nonsense. But the delivery and the performance was best since Cameron.
It’s not new. IDS in 2003 (dreadful) and Brown in 2007 (poor even if not in the IDS league) both saluted as Cicero in a lounge suit at the time. It’s just how it goes.
October 9, 2025 at 7:33 PM
Right. But the problem is that Badenoch’s speech wasn’t poor. It was a very good speech. The content may or may not have been nonsense. But the delivery and the performance was best since Cameron.
👀😬
Not seen a kiss that awkward since Elton John married Renate Blauel #CPC25
October 7, 2025 at 1:11 PM
👀😬
A new PM. There’s a fiscal crisis and the PLP don’t accept cuts. Or possibly they feel the need to do it having called for an election in 2022. Or they think things might get worse and best off fighting Reform as a fresh face. It’s very unlikely (a new PM is a racing certainty) but plausible.
Labour has a majority of about 150. What is the internal turmoil this person imagines that would lead to a Labour PM voluntarily calling an early election. Because that’s the only way one happens.
Or to put it another way: what are these people smoking?
Or to put it another way: what are these people smoking?
October 6, 2025 at 10:26 PM
A new PM. There’s a fiscal crisis and the PLP don’t accept cuts. Or possibly they feel the need to do it having called for an election in 2022. Or they think things might get worse and best off fighting Reform as a fresh face. It’s very unlikely (a new PM is a racing certainty) but plausible.
Purnell’s wasn’t really a coup. he was just being honest with himself.
Top 5 failed 21st century Labour leadership coups:
5) Tom Watson vs Blair
4) Owen Smith vs Corbyn
3) James Purnell and (not) David Miliband vs Brown
2) Andy Burnham vs Starmer
1) Geoff Hoon and Patricia Hewitt vs Brown
5) Tom Watson vs Blair
4) Owen Smith vs Corbyn
3) James Purnell and (not) David Miliband vs Brown
2) Andy Burnham vs Starmer
1) Geoff Hoon and Patricia Hewitt vs Brown
October 1, 2025 at 10:41 AM
Purnell’s wasn’t really a coup. he was just being honest with himself.
And this doesn’t include Your Party. Labour is probably behind the Tories.
Whatever Labour's strategy is, it isn't working.
Reform hit 35 per cent in today's i poll – the party's dream of the magic 40 figure now in sight
August 29, 2025 at 10:09 PM
And this doesn’t include Your Party. Labour is probably behind the Tories.
She wasn’t a minister under Theresa May. She was first appointed to govt under Boris. Tbf to her, part of her rise to the Tory leadership is precisely b/c of a controversial policy stances - and winning the argument within Whitehall. It can’t be “she killed trans kids” and then “she does no policy”.
August 24, 2025 at 11:14 AM
She wasn’t a minister under Theresa May. She was first appointed to govt under Boris. Tbf to her, part of her rise to the Tory leadership is precisely b/c of a controversial policy stances - and winning the argument within Whitehall. It can’t be “she killed trans kids” and then “she does no policy”.
No, it would've been far worse. Much, much worse. His polling is worse than Badenoch's. Focus group performance with ex-Tory voters is dire. And his strong anti-ECHR line would've really divided the Tories in Parliament and really undermined his authority. Possible that there'd have been defections.
I don’t agree with him or his politics. But it is hard to argue that Jenrick would’ve fucked it this badly. For one he would’ve actually put a degree of effort in that she seems allergic to.
August 16, 2025 at 2:38 PM
No, it would've been far worse. Much, much worse. His polling is worse than Badenoch's. Focus group performance with ex-Tory voters is dire. And his strong anti-ECHR line would've really divided the Tories in Parliament and really undermined his authority. Possible that there'd have been defections.
Thatcher had posters saying “Labour call him black, we say he’s British”. Tory critics of Thatcher’s “swamping”. And people forget she did while denouncing the NF. Tory position in 1950s was opposed to colour bar on immigration. In fact, Spectator and some Tories opposed Commonwealth Immigration Act
I'd also say there is something v pernicious and depressing in the idea that the right were only holding back on this stuff to seek liberal approval - you can still be a conservative and think racism is, prima facie, wrong.
July 2, 2025 at 9:32 AM
Thatcher had posters saying “Labour call him black, we say he’s British”. Tory critics of Thatcher’s “swamping”. And people forget she did while denouncing the NF. Tory position in 1950s was opposed to colour bar on immigration. In fact, Spectator and some Tories opposed Commonwealth Immigration Act
Yes. Though the problem is (and I’m saying this to be Bluesky audience) even the BL of back then was unpopular. And Stears ignores while Maurice backed Strangers into Citizens, he favoured an end to free movement and was criticised for talking about talking to non-outright fascist members of EDL.
Is it possible to rescue the spirit of blue Labour's centre-left communitarianism from Maurice Glasman's pro-Trump fantasies on immigration & trade?
Marc Stears @mds49.bsky.social - a founder of the blue Labour conversation - would like to try
www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/politics/703...
Marc Stears @mds49.bsky.social - a founder of the blue Labour conversation - would like to try
www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/politics/703...
What’s wrong with the new Blue Labour?
How the delusions of Brexit and Maga have alienated the ideological movement from ordinary people
www.prospectmagazine.co.uk
July 1, 2025 at 6:56 AM
Yes. Though the problem is (and I’m saying this to be Bluesky audience) even the BL of back then was unpopular. And Stears ignores while Maurice backed Strangers into Citizens, he favoured an end to free movement and was criticised for talking about talking to non-outright fascist members of EDL.
They’re already planning an electoral pact. The debate is just whether to have a new party that is a formal alliance with the Greens or whether to join the Greens under Polanski. But they’re almost certainly getting together in one way or another if ZP wins.
In the short term, at least, I suspect a Corbyn party would help Labour in urban areas in next year's locals by splitting the left vote. Particularly in London where the Greens would expect to take quite a few seats.
Excl: A new Corbyn-led party would win 10% of the vote, polling by More in Common shows, taking three points off Labour.
Full details in my column from this week's NS. www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk-...
Full details in my column from this week's NS. www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk-...
June 27, 2025 at 4:09 AM
They’re already planning an electoral pact. The debate is just whether to have a new party that is a formal alliance with the Greens or whether to join the Greens under Polanski. But they’re almost certainly getting together in one way or another if ZP wins.
I’m probably to the right of Ben on this stuff. Actually I am to the right of him on this stuff. And I think this is pretty much spot on.
Have written up some of my thoughts about the increasingly sinister use of 'non-UK born' and 'white British' in the British press. The obsession with 'white British' citizens over other British citizens harms all of us and needs to be called out.
benansell.substack.com/p/who-counts
benansell.substack.com/p/who-counts
June 20, 2025 at 10:02 PM
I’m probably to the right of Ben on this stuff. Actually I am to the right of him on this stuff. And I think this is pretty much spot on.
Yup. Norms need enforcement. But liberals made a mistake with cancel culture. And broadening what we consider “racist” or “prejudiced” to the point views that aren’t racist or prejudiced were included. As such, it confused people and weakened some of these norms online.
This is a great piece - anti-prejudice norms matter. Making it career ending to say racist things was a valuable social development. One of Musk’s most insidious effects is corroding this as politicians on the right mistake the voice of DavePatriot789 for the voice of a kingdom.
Have written up some of my thoughts about the increasingly sinister use of 'non-UK born' and 'white British' in the British press. The obsession with 'white British' citizens over other British citizens harms all of us and needs to be called out.
benansell.substack.com/p/who-counts
benansell.substack.com/p/who-counts
June 20, 2025 at 9:44 PM
Yup. Norms need enforcement. But liberals made a mistake with cancel culture. And broadening what we consider “racist” or “prejudiced” to the point views that aren’t racist or prejudiced were included. As such, it confused people and weakened some of these norms online.
Yup. The funny thing about the Tebbit test is that despite its crudeness, it was still technically a form of civic nationalism. A lot of the right online are flirting with white nationalism.
Very good piece.
I mean, ffs, even the Tebbit Test assumed some people *would* pass it.
I mean, ffs, even the Tebbit Test assumed some people *would* pass it.
Today’s newsletter: on the Tory party’s lurching language:
June 20, 2025 at 7:56 PM
Yup. The funny thing about the Tebbit test is that despite its crudeness, it was still technically a form of civic nationalism. A lot of the right online are flirting with white nationalism.
Quite a few defections from pro to anti and a few defections from abstention to anti. Only Chris Bryant has gone from abstention to anti. Runcorn by election/Pochin’s victory means a switch from pro to anti. So it’s likely to be very close.
June 18, 2025 at 11:30 PM
Quite a few defections from pro to anti and a few defections from abstention to anti. Only Chris Bryant has gone from abstention to anti. Runcorn by election/Pochin’s victory means a switch from pro to anti. So it’s likely to be very close.
I hate this kind of take but does the King count? Is he not “White British”?
'the white British share of the population – defined as people who do not have an immigrant parent' 😂😂 www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/06...
White British people will be a minority in 40 years, report claims
Shifting ethnic dynamic of the UK driven by immigration predicted to cause dramatic changes
www.telegraph.co.uk
June 4, 2025 at 9:52 AM
I hate this kind of take but does the King count? Is he not “White British”?