The r-bomb

42pc say Reform is racist. Why?

The word ‘racist’ is an incendiary and reductive label — and I had my doubts about using it at all in the film. In my view, branding new parties as far-right, racist, or neo-fascist is a substitute for analysis. Usually, when you hear someone use this word to describe an upstart party, it’s a sign that they are out to condemn rather than explain. The journalist’s job is to understand and explain.

By any sensible definition of the word, racist does not apply to Nigel Farage. Saying so puts me in line with 42 per cent of the country. But, as our Survation poll shows, another 42 per cent say the opposite: they believe Reform is a racist party. So what explains this divide?

It’s largely partisan. Most Labour and Lib Dem supporters are happy to use the r-word — as are a third of Tories and, intriguingly, about a quarter of Reform voters. It may come down to how you define the term.

If you go by the dictionary — racism as racial bigotry, for which evidence is required — then there’s no case. But suspicion plays a role. Some voters just think Farage is probably a bit racist, and that’s enough for them to use the word. Others use racism more loosely still, to mean discussing questions of race or culture at all. Especially in blunt terms.

Farage does talk about culture, migration, and demographic change and yes, sometimes crudely. These are important topics. But for parties that find them uncomfortable, an easier (and cowardly) response is to label those who raise them as racist. The trouble is, if that includes a large chunk of the electorate, the label is more likely to alienate than persuade.

In an age of deepening political polarisation — where one side sees the other as malign, motivated by bigotry or woke ideology — such labels have become reflexive. Some Remainer campaigners said Brexit was, if not explicitly racist, certainly fuelled by racism. But name-calling often backfires. It creates sympathy for the target and makes critics sound shrill. This was part of what propelled Trump to power in 2016 — Hillary Clinton’s infamous reference to his supporters as a “basket of deplorables” being a classic example.

Dame Margaret Hodge, the former Labour MP, has seen this up close. She faced the BNP in her Barking & Dagenham seat and pioneered how to respond to the rise of new-right parties. She realised that there are two ways of reacting to a challenge: you can smear your rival by calling them racist, or ask where you are going wrong - and why, if the other guys are so bad, so many back them. 

The name-calling methods lead to defeat, she says: the second to recovery.

I interviewed her for the film, and she tells the story. “Throughout that whole four-year period of campaigning against the BNP, I never called anybody a racist. The moment you do, you belittle their concerns about the impact of immigration on their community and unfairness coming into the system (as to who got a council home and who didn't). If I had accused them of being racist, I would simply have driven them even further into the BNP camp because they would have felt offended that I didn't really understand their concerns.”

What should Labour do now? Keir Starmer has decided to crown Nigel Farage the leader of the real opposition and has given speeches denouncing him. By the Hodge playbook, this is a case study in what not to do.

“I wouldn't even talk about Nigel Farage at this time. People are angry with mainstream political parties; they feel let down by them, that nobody's listening. They feel that people aren't acting on their concerns, whether about migration or the cost of living. So what actually all the mainstream political parties have got to do is rebuild trust with their constituents. If they start attacking Nigel Farage, they offend those voters who feel really let down by us at this point in time and feel that we're criticising them for expressing their anger with us by voting Reform. All they're doing is sort of forcing them all into confirming their support for Farage.”

This dynamic - that a challenger party is strengthened when attacked by a larger rival - is important. It is a dial that can be moved by the challenger: you trigger them. Say or do something to get them talking about you: preferably in hyperbolic tones. This is the basic art of populist war, which Donald Trump mastered because the Democrats rose to the bait every time. This explains the effect of shock-tactics in election campaigns - Farage’s HIV/immigrant line in 2017, his Sunak/D-Day line in 2024 and his Sarwar/Pakistani line in Hamilton. Yes, condemnation comes, but with it, attention. And if you’re attacked for making a point that most voters agree with, it’s a net plus.

So dropping the r-bomb may be gratifying for Farage’s opponents to use. But as Baroness Hodge says, doing so when there is no grounds for it will diminish you and bolster your opponent. It could well be that Reform’s opponents keep playing into its hands.