Since a cornered Marxist has no principles, Keir Starmer is left with only one nasty option - Alex Story

Having witnessed successive and incomprehensible acts of treason from this and past governments, such as Chagos, the EU and Gibraltar, the good people of these great Islands then had to suffer the ignominy of a Fabian silk, aptly named Mr Bean, finding in favour of illegal immigrants against the taxpaying public of Epping.

Not to speak of the incessant cover-ups, and worse, in relation to child rapes across the country, a stain so shameful as to surpass any horrors that have been inflicted by any government on its people, anywhere in the world, from the beginning of time to now.

At the end of their tether, as the good people of Great Britain, patient and polite all, were about to lose trust in the institutions of the British State forever, Starmer, briefly, gave them hope.

Finally, he seemed to have his finger on the pulse.

There is, indeed, an enemy, implementing a detrimental project on the country and her people.

“It’s you”, the multitude could be heard saying.

All agreed.

We speak of nothing else.

Thank you, Keir, for finally looking in the mirror and telling us what you see.

However, suddenly, the mood music changed from syrupy to hostile.

Starmer, pulling defeat from the jaws of victory, added: “History will not forgive us if we do not use every ounce of our energy to fight Reform”.

“Every ounce of energy” means mobilising State power to crush the nascent “Reform” movement.

Starmer believes, as he says himself, in nothing but the power of the state, which he will use to stop the “enemy”, whose “project” is “detrimental” to Labour’s plans.

No costs will be spared.

“We do not have time for introspection. We have to unite and fight” the real enemy, he said, quivering in his chair.

Attack is the best form of defence, as they say.

That is also, and most importantly, the only thing left for Starmer to do, given his inability to shake off his deep ideological convictions and long-standing Marxist proclivities.

All bets are off. Anything is possible.

Farage quite rightly recognised the danger, which he claimed was “bordering on the inciteful”.

It is exactly that.

Ground zero of the fight will be immigration.

Common sense solutions to problems created by successive dysfunctional governments, such as deportation and repatriation, are bigoted thoughts, Sir Keir, melting the thin layer of goodwill, ephemeral like April snowflakes, he might have garnered.

On deportations: “I do think that it’s a racist policy. I do think it’s immoral”, Starmer said with an air of rehearsed outrage.

Interestingly, only a few hours later, showing off signs of meaningful political schizophrenia, Sabanah Mahmood explained that Labour would force people out of Great Britain if they didn’t contribute to life in the country, claimed benefits, had a criminal conviction or didn’t speak proper English.

Immigrants would have to earn their “indefinite leave to remain” or remain “not at all”, implying, theoretically at least, deportation and repatriation for recalcitrant immigrants.

Starmer and his party thus live in a permanent state of double standards, a twilight zone, far removed from reality.

He and his cabinet have allowed themselves the freedom to muse openly on all topics and propose whatever takes their fancy, knowing they will never deliver; a freedom, incidentally, they have removed from us.

Indeed, deportation and repatriation are only “racist” when Zia Yusuf or Nigel Farage talk about them.

But when Labour does, it’s progressive politics.

In short, they have granted themselves “freedom of speech, thought, congregation”, and much else besides.

When Starmer says “we had free speech in this country for a very long time”, he meant it. But it applies only to him and his followers; not, unfortunately, to us.

In addition, they have given themselves, we observe, an expedient freedom from moral constraints wrapped in the cellophane of self-righteousness.

In fact, it is their greatest weapon. They never tire of using it.

Sir Keir’s language matters, though.

From past experience, we know to discount what he says when it comes to immigration.

That is simply because he says he believes that patriotism “is an attempt to unite people of different backgrounds”.

It is, of course, no such thing.

It is, as we know, to love your country above any other and to be proud of it.

In other words, Starmer has no tools in his intellectual armoury to want to deal with immigration, illegal or not.

For him, it is an inevitable, inescapable and enormously welcome phenomenon.

He can’t be patriotic because he doesn’t know what it means. That is why he keeps talking about owning “patriotism, to define it for what it is”.

Like everything Labour does, the first step is to change the meaning of words to better deceive.

But he knows a patriot when he sees one, as a Salieri would a Mozart, and it irks so unlike him is that person.

So he condemns him as a “racist” or an “enemy” in plain sight.

“This goes to the heart of who we are as a country”, he says, training his sights and the state power he has access to on his only true rival, a much better man than he.

A cornered Marxist has no principles when power is the prize.

Nigel beware.