reform | Brookeshistoryjourna

Is the Reform UK Party Racist?

Since the 2024 General Election, the political landscape of Britain has shifted. Alongside a historic Labour victory, the election was a massive success for third parties. Reform UK, in particular, gained more votes than all the other parties, except for the main two. With an electoral mandate of 5 MPs and 4.1 million votes, it is hard to ignore the presence of Nigel Farage’s latest attempt at mainstream politics. In the British media, the right wing has never been so vocal in parroting US talking points such as immigration control and ‘woke’ ideology. The Reform UK party has been the leading critic of the Conservative government and their policies in these areas, with platforms like GB News giving the party and its frontman a great deal of coverage. A question persists, however: Is Reform UK racist? By viewing certain policy platforms, usage of specific phrases, and comments from party members themselves, the racist attitude of the party can be clearly documented. So, is the party, which is led by a man who claims young Muslims ‘loathe’ British culture, as racist as people think?

The most important issue pushed by the Reform UK party is clearly immigration. According to party leaders, the country’s housing, healthcare, national security and infrastructure are all suffering under the excess of illegal immigration. It would be naive to discredit the link between Reform UK’s rhetoric and the public image of immigrants in the country; their manifesto clearly favours an ideal type of immigrant, who provides ‘essential’ skills and is without any dependents. The parameters for asylum seeking would also see a dramatic change; traditionally, asylum is a unique kind of immigration that sees a refugee fleeing from persecution in their home country. The process has become flawed in recent years, with a large number of immigrants seeking asylum via illegal routes, often over the Channel. The party promises to penalise those coming from ‘safe’ countries (many have to pass through EU countries before arriving here) by barring their claim to asylum and citizenship. Whilst these ideas are definitely lacking empathy, there is no clear-cut racial bias in their immigration policy. Illegal immigration and immigrants, no matter their race, are the targets of Reform UK party’s proposals.

The area of policing and justice has more overt cases of racial bias. The procedure of ‘stop and search’ has already been scrutinised for unproportionally affecting people of colour, particularly black people. Reform’s renewed focus on this policy would therefore lead to greater persecution of minorities, and their suggestion of life imprisonment for drug dealing would also affect lower income, predominantly minority, communities. The intersectionality of class, race and crime rates all point towards policies, such as increased ‘stop and search’, and the abandoning of any DEI initiatives, having a higher chance of continuing racial discrimination within policing. On top of this, the party seems to have a big problem with the definition of hate crime, and its use in the justice system. Given the type of comments voiced by some members of the party, it is convenient that they would quibble with the definition of hate speech so far as to include it as a key policy in their manifesto. An apparent commitment to ‘free speech’ is becoming the right-wing term for allowing all kinds of hate speech, whether it be online or in person. On the surface this may not be racist, but it would obviously open doors to the normalisation of racist, bigoted language.

The view on education is also another case of covert racism; the implementation of a ‘patriotic curriculum’ in schools suggests that history needs to be balanced, as if simply learning the atrocities of our country is misleading children about their heritage. Downplaying the significance of the British Empire and the Atlantic slave trade would only serve to instil a sense of deniability in future generations, that the actions of our ancestors do not have modern day consequences despite evidence of the contrary. That's not to say that no one should feel pride in their country, however, but pride based in ignorance can only be detrimental for society's progress and civic harmony.

An element that is as important as the party’s policies are the key words that they litter throughout their public interventions. The most significant is the idea of ‘British culture and values’. These values are never laid out or established, but the idea that immigration is somehow antithetical and ruinous to our country suggests that the ‘other’ culture is perverting our own. It is obvious that the ‘other’ is Muslim culture, as the party leader, Nigel Farage has previously made unsavoury remarks regarding Islam. The party manifesto even calls for an end of Sharia law being used in the UK, a claim which is as baseless as it is absurd. Sharia does not supersede domestic law, and is primarily used for settling marriage disputes among Muslims. Why then would the party call for an end to this? The primary reason is that phrases like ‘Sharia law’ scare those who do not understand it, and are likely to assume it is a bad thing that does not belong in Britain. This assumption is grounded in cultural racism, namely on the assumption that the ‘other’ culture is bad and alien to British cultural values.

If the policies proposed by the party were not always open about their commitment to normative, white definitions of Britishness, comments made by various members definitely hint at racist beliefs. Amongst the party members, Nigel Farage has had his fair share of time in the spotlight over racist remarks. From claiming that the Muslim immigrants were “coming here to take us over”, to agreeing with Enoch Powell's infamous ‘Rivers of Blood’ speech, Farage’s stance on foreign cultures is fairly obvious. Not to mention his defence of using the word “ch**ky” to describe those of Chinese origin:

If you and your mates were going out for a Chinese, what do you say you’re going for?

More recently, racist comments made by Reform UK campaigners were exposed during the election period. An anonymous campaigner claimed that Clacton was ‘proper England. You know what I mean, proper English’, and went on to say that its ‘not like in London, when you’re a foreigner in your own country’. One identified individual, Andrew Parker, in canvassing for Farage purposely used the word ‘illegal’ when talking to non-white households about immigration. He was also heard calling Islam ‘the most disgusting cult’ and claimed that Reform would be ‘kicking all the Muslims out of the mosques and turning them into Wetherspoons’. These atrocious comments, according to Farage, are members ‘just speaking like ordinary folks’. While the party did remove those who made the comments, Farage’s response is an effort to rationalise the racist views and make them seem common. If he truly believes that ‘ordinary folks’ speak like that, then attacks on immigrants and Muslims will not cease now that he is part of mainstream British politics.

Yet it is not productive to label entire groups and political parties ‘racist’. Whilst there are parts of the Reform UK party’s policy that can be seen in such a way, the crucial mission should be to call out potentially racist positions and educate voters so that they do not support parties who promote them. All racists may vote for this party, but not all Reform UK party voters are racist. It is key that the left wing does not lose sight and avoids attacking the large swathes of people who voted Reform out of fear, naivety or misinformation. Four million votes is too many for this movement to be on the fringes of politics, and constant name-calling will only serve to push the right wing closer together. The forms of nativism and racism promoted by members of the Reform UK party is typical of the ‘post-racial’ era; deniability is found in the labelling of groups as immigrants, or criminals, so that they are not being racist per say, but rather protective of the country’s national security and social cohesion. Peeking behind the curtain of this rhetoric exposes certain racial biases and negative stereotyping, promulgated by leaders such as Nigel Farage, and perpetuated by uninformed citizens doing what they think is best.

By Tom Eccles, Tom Peck, Harry Skinner, and Thomas Sturgess

Brookes History Journal