So UK Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer has decided to resign after a two-year reign of terror that focused on imprisoning “keyboard warriors” who opposed his mass migration policies. Whatever you want to make of Starmer’s departure from British politics and the apparent coronation of newly elected Labour MP Andy Burnham to replace him, it must be seen as at least a possible respite in Britain’s persistent war on free speech that is Starmer’s most obvious legacy.
Starmer, the pudgy “human rights” lawyer and prosecutor who someone earned a knighthood, is almost literally escaping from 10 Downing St., the official residence of Britain’s prime minister. He is viscerally unpopular throughout the land because he enabled a politically-motivated police force and judiciary – both absolutely infected by the strains of DEI – to arrest and prosecute ordinary citizens for saying and writing unpleasant things about the government.
Having the freedom to say those unpleasant things about the government was, of course, a hallmark of British democracy for centuries, going all the way back to the seminal Magna Carta, when the aristocrats demanded some freedom from the monarch.
Starmer not only imprisoned his political enemies he called them all a bunch of racists for objecting to the random rapes of British girls and women by migrant gangs who had not the least conception of that British notion of fair play. The recent exoneration of “Sophie from Dundee,” the 12-year-old Scottish girl who had to defend herself and her sister with an axe from a Bulgarian migrant, provided a perfect backdrop to Starmer’s exit from the public life of the country he has ruined.
It’s incredible to remember that the Starmer government literally made room in British prisons for free speech advocates by releasing real criminals from incarceration. The murderers and the rapists got out of jail early so middle-aged men and women guilty of venting on social media could take their place.
When you watch clips of the British police entering the homes of ordinary Britons and arresting them for “Facebook crimes,” you think you must be watching a recent attempt to put George Orwell’s “1984” on the screen.
But this is what Britain has become. And Starmer was still up to his authoritarian games only a week or so before being forced to resign by a Parliamentary caucus that knew he had to go. There he was, trying to bring in digital ID through the backdoor by introducing a bill to ban children from using social media. And just how do you think people are going to prove their 16 years of age or older? With digital ID of course. Interestingly, a slew of Western governments – including Canada’s censorship-loving regime of Prime Minister Mark Carney – are also proclaiming their concern for children.
I spoke with Neil Oliver on Monday about Starmer’s departure. Oliver, a noted archeologist, historian and political commentator on GB News and his own popular broadcast, is not entirely optimistic that a Great Britain without Starmer will necessarily mean a new beginning.
“The state media may grind into motion to say, yes, here we go, another leader, terribly exciting, but I think for more and more of the population there's a sense that you know this is just not an ill, there won't be an election of a leader, it's the selection of a leader that the same, the same groups and interest groups that were behind Keir Starmer are now behind [the next leader] and they just grind into place behind the next sock puppet,” he told Human Events.
“I think my hunch is that for a growing portion of the population, there's a sense that the political class is just in free fall, and that it's no longer up to them. That clearly, more of us can see that they are just the actors on the stage, playing, delivering the lines, going through the motions; it's a very, very interesting time in which to live.”
What I had forgotten about Starmer was that he was the head of Crown Prosecution Service when it gave the notorious pedophile, Jimmy Saville, a pass. The late Saville, an “entertainer,” who was for decades a fixture on British television, a friend of prime ministers and the current king, is now known and remembered as a serial sexual predator who preyed on children.
Although Starmer reportedly did not personally review the case, he was nonetheless ultimately responsible for the investigation and the decision not to prosecute.
“Sir Keir Starmer, you know, when he was director of public prosecutions … was in charge of public prosecutions during the time when Sir Jimmy Saville, to name another one, was not prosecuted for what posthumously proved to be a decades long … campaign of child rape and the case was put in front of Sir Keir Starmer … the decision was taken to not investigate and/or prosecute Sir Jimmy Saville,” Oliver said, intentionally emphasising the fact that possessing a knighthood is not necessarily evidence of personal integrity.
“They're just as bad as everybody else, you know, they've just got each other's backs, they're protecting each other, they're covering each other … they're making sure that they can go about … their sordid, obscene business … Jimmy Savile is synonymous with Keir Starmer.”
Certainly populism or any affinity with the people was not synonymous with Starmer’s career. He has been the leader of the Labour Party – which historically was supposed to have some empathy and passion for Britain’s working-class population. But of course Starmer was as removed from the reality of blue collar workers as he was from the plight of indigenous Britons who are being harassed and elbowed out by the migrants who are taking their jobs and housing.
So it’s good riddance for Starmer but if the United Kingdom is ever to be united again, Britain’s oppressed underclass has a country to take back.
