Guy Fawkes, Revolution and the False Promise of Political Violence

By Huw Edwards for Huwspace.com

The revolutionary argument is as old as politics itself. When institutions cease to serve the people, when governments become unresponsive, and when citizens lose faith that change can occur through democratic means, some begin to argue that violence becomes not merely justified but necessary.

It is a powerful idea. It is also one that deserves far greater scrutiny than it often receives.

Throughout history, revolutionaries have claimed that peaceful reform eventually reaches its limits. If the courts are corrupt, the legislature captured, and the political system incapable of meaningful change, then force becomes the only remaining instrument of political action.

Yet an uncomfortable question remains.

Even if institutions fail, why should anyone assume violence will make matters better?

In modern America, what exactly has failed so completely that civil conflict or revolution is seen by some as a rational answer? And what evidence exists that a bloody struggle would produce freedom rather than simply a different form of oppression?

These are not questions of left or right. They are questions of history, morality and common sense.

The Revolutionary Argument

The intellectual case for revolutionary violence is perhaps most closely associated with Frantz Fanon, whose writings on anti-colonial struggle argued that violence could become necessary when oppressed people were denied any meaningful path towards political self-determination. For Fanon, violence was not merely destructive. It could become a means through which the powerless reclaimed agency, dignity and freedom. [researchgate.net], [digitalcom…ns.usu.edu]

The logic is straightforward:

  • Institutions become irredeemably corrupt.
  • Peaceful reform becomes impossible.
  • Resistance becomes a moral obligation.
  • Violence becomes the mechanism through which freedom is achieved.

History contains examples where such arguments carried genuine force. Colonial subjects denied rights, representation and self-government often found themselves confronting systems designed to prevent peaceful change.

Yet accepting that violence may sometimes become understandable is not the same as concluding it is wise.

Hannah Arendt’s Warning

Political philosopher Hannah Arendt offered one of the most important critiques of revolutionary violence.

Arendt argued that violence and power are not the same thing. Violence can destroy institutions, but it cannot by itself create legitimate political authority. Freedom requires trust, participation, civic engagement and durable institutions. Guns alone cannot provide those things. [digitalcom…ns.usu.edu], [researchgate.net]

Her warning was simple but profound.

Revolutions are often successful at tearing down existing structures. They are far less reliable at constructing better ones.

The French Revolution toppled a monarchy only to descend into terror and eventually dictatorship.

The Russian Revolution overthrew Tsarist rule yet produced one of the most authoritarian systems of the twentieth century.

Again and again, history demonstrates that removing an unjust order does not automatically create a just one.

The assumption that freedom naturally follows violence is one of the most dangerous misconceptions in political thought.

America’s Contradiction

Modern America occupies a peculiar place within this debate.

Many political voices appeal to the language of revolution, resistance and even civil conflict. References to 1776 appear regularly in political discourse. The image of the armed citizen standing against tyranny remains deeply embedded in parts of American culture.

But unlike many societies that experienced genuine revolutionary conditions, America still possesses functioning democratic mechanisms.

Citizens vote.

Governments change peacefully.

Political parties compete for power.

Courts continue to rule against governments.

Journalists openly criticise political leaders.

Citizens organise, campaign, protest and publish freely.

None of this means America does not face serious challenges.

Political polarisation has deepened. Trust in institutions has declined. Economic inequality remains severe. Housing costs, healthcare costs and social division continue to affect millions of lives.

These are serious problems.

But serious problems are not the same as complete institutional collapse.

One can argue passionately for reform. It is considerably harder to argue that all peaceful means of reform have been exhausted.

What Exactly Is Failing?

This is perhaps the question most absent from modern revolutionary rhetoric.

What precisely has failed so completely that violence represents a preferable alternative?

If elections still occur, why abandon elections?

If courts still function, why abandon courts?

If free speech exists, why abandon persuasion?

If activism remains legal, why abandon organisation?

Too often, calls for revolution seem rooted less in objective institutional failure and more in political frustration.

An increasing number of people appear willing to regard democratic institutions as legitimate only when those institutions produce outcomes they personally favour.

That is not necessarily opposition to tyranny.

It may simply be disappointment with democracy itself.

Democracy is frustrating by design. It guarantees disagreement, compromise and political defeat as much as it guarantees victory. It promises a process, not a predetermined outcome.

Remember, Remember the Fifth of November

It is fitting that these questions are being asked on Guy Fawkes Night.

Remember, remember, the fifth of November,
Gunpowder, treason and plot.
I see no reason
Why gunpowder treason
Should ever be forgot.

The rhyme recalls the failed Guy Fawkes plot to destroy Parliament in 1605.

Today, some view Guy Fawkes as a symbol of resistance against a broken system. Yet the same question remains as relevant now as it was then: does violence create freedom, or merely more violence?

Had the Gunpowder Plot succeeded, would England have become freer, or would it simply have descended into retaliation, repression and further bloodshed?

That is the challenge modern advocates of revolution must answer. Destroying a political system is far easier than creating a better one. History is filled with movements that successfully overthrew institutions only to replace them with fresh forms of tyranny.

The Fifth of November reminds us not only to remember the plot itself, but to think carefully about what comes after the explosion.

The Historical Record of Political Violence

Supporters of revolutionary violence often emphasise successful struggles for independence and liberation.

Far less attention is given to the countless movements that produced chaos, instability and suffering.

Civil wars are among the most destructive experiences a society can endure.

Even after the fighting ends, the consequences frequently remain for generations.

Communities fracture.

Infrastructure is destroyed.

Political extremism becomes normalised.

Retaliation follows retaliation.

Research into revolutions suggests that violent revolutions can sometimes prove more resistant to counter-revolutionary threats because they create strong security structures capable of defending the new order. [cambridge.org], [cambridge.org]

Yet that observation raises another dilemma.

A state capable of enforcing stability through force is not necessarily a freer state.

Many revolutionary governments become highly effective at suppressing dissent once they achieve power.

The revolution survives.

Liberty does not.

The Liberal Dilemma

Liberals are often criticised for placing too much faith in institutions.

They are accused of excessive patience, endless compromise and a reluctance to confront injustice.

Sometimes those criticisms contain an element of truth.

Yet liberal democracy rests upon a recognition that violence develops its own momentum.

Once violence becomes an accepted political tool, it rarely remains confined to a single purpose.

It changes societies.

It changes movements.

It changes leaders.

Eventually, it changes the people who employ it.

The danger is not merely that violence might fail.

The greater danger may be that it succeeds.

A successful armed movement acquires armed leaders, armed structures and armed habits. Political disagreements that were once settled through debate increasingly become questions of force.

History suggests those habits often outlive the revolution itself.

Wisdom or Weakness?

Some will always argue that refusing violence is an act of weakness.

That real change requires force.

That power never concedes anything voluntarily.

Perhaps there are moments in history where such arguments carry weight.

But there is another perspective.

Perhaps refusing violence reflects an understanding of human nature itself.

Perhaps wisdom lies in recognising that the destruction of institutions is easier than their construction.

Perhaps wisdom lies in understanding that violence often unleashes forces far beyond the control of those who initiate it.

And perhaps wisdom lies in preserving democratic processes precisely because they provide a way of resolving disagreement without killing one another.

Conclusion

On this Fifth of November, as bonfires burn and fireworks illuminate the night sky, it is worth remembering that political violence has always carried an allure far greater than its actual record of success.

The revolutionary argument deserves to be taken seriously. History contains moments when oppression became so severe that resistance appeared unavoidable.

But modern America is not colonial Algeria. It is not Tsarist Russia. It is not a military dictatorship that has extinguished every avenue for peaceful reform.

Before anyone speaks casually about revolution, two questions deserve answers.

What exactly has failed?

And why should anyone believe that bullets will produce a better future than ballots?

The burden of proof lies with those advocating force, not with those exercising restraint.

History suggests that removing what we hate is often much easier than building what we hope for. The wisdom of democracy may not be that it prevents conflict, but that it offers a way of navigating conflict without setting society on fire.


References

As America wrestles with growing political polarisation and increasingly revolutionary rhetoric, the central question is not whether institutions are imperfect, but whether violence has ever proved a reliable route to freedom. On Guy Fawkes Night, Huw Edwards examines the historical case for revolution and the stronger case for restraint.

Van William – Revolution (Music Video) ft. First Aid Kit

Patrick Stewart: Why His Voice for Social Justice Matters More Than Ever

The death of Sir Patrick Stewart on 29 October 2026 marks the end of one of the most remarkable careers in modern film and television. Yet focusing solely on the actor risks missing something equally important. Stewart was not just a celebrated performer. He was a lifelong advocate for social justice, dignity, equality, and the belief that ordinary people deserve a fair chance in life.

For millions, he will always be Captain Jean-Luc Picard or Professor Charles Xavier. For others, particularly those interested in politics and social change, he represented something increasingly rare: a public figure who never hid his values, even when they were unfashionable.

A Proud Socialist in an Uncomfortable Place

While many Hollywood figures carefully manage their political image, Stewart was refreshingly direct about his beliefs. He openly described himself as a socialist throughout his life and frequently spoke about the values that shaped him.

His famous remark perfectly captured both his humour and his conviction:

“There’s nothing more fun than being at a dinner party in Beverly Hills, surrounded by elegant people, and telling them you’re a socialist.”

It was a joke, but it also revealed something deeper. Stewart never seemed interested in political labels as a fashion statement. His beliefs were rooted in lived experience and in the struggles of working people.

Never Forgetting Where He Came From

Born into a working-class family in Yorkshire, Stewart often spoke about how his upbringing shaped his view of society. He credited his father and the labour movement with introducing him to ideas of solidarity, fairness, and collective responsibility.

At a time when many celebrities carefully distance themselves from politics, Stewart remained connected to the values that emerged from Britain’s post-war social settlement. He frequently reflected on the ideals that inspired the Labour movement and continued supporting those principles throughout his life.

His story serves as a powerful reminder that success does not have to result in abandoning one’s roots. Despite becoming one of the world’s most recognisable actors, Stewart never appeared embarrassed by his working-class background. Instead, he carried it proudly.

Social Justice Through Storytelling

One of the most fascinating aspects of Stewart’s life was how his political beliefs influenced the characters he chose to portray. Far from separating art and politics, he saw them as deeply connected.

In Star Trek, Stewart believed the future imagined by the franchise reflected ideals of cooperation, equality, and a society that had moved beyond greed and exploitation. The character of Picard often stood against authoritarianism, censorship, and the abuse of power.

As Professor Charles Xavier in X-Men, he embraced stories about discrimination, exclusion, and the struggle of marginalised groups seeking acceptance and equal rights.

These were not simply acting roles. For Stewart, they were opportunities to explore the kind of society he believed humanity should aspire to create.

Why His Legacy Matters Today

We live in an era of growing inequality, political division, online hostility, and declining faith in public institutions. In many countries, debates about social justice have become increasingly polarised.

Patrick Stewart’s legacy offers a different perspective.

He demonstrated that advocating for fairness does not require shouting the loudest. His approach was thoughtful, intelligent, often humorous, and rooted in human dignity. He encouraged people to see beyond class, race, nationality, and other divisions and instead focus on what connects us.

Whether speaking about workers’ rights, civil liberties, or the importance of standing up for those with less power, Stewart consistently returned to the same principle: society works best when we recognise our obligations to one another.

More Than Captain Picard

For many fans, Captain Picard represented wisdom, integrity, and moral courage. The reason the character resonated so deeply may be because the actor shared many of those qualities himself.

Patrick Stewart leaves behind an extraordinary body of work, but perhaps his greatest contribution was demonstrating that success and compassion are not opposites. One can achieve greatness while still caring deeply about justice, equality, and the welfare of others.

In a world increasingly driven by individualism and division, that may prove to be his most enduring lesson.

His death is a loss for film, theatre, and television. It is also a loss for those who believe public figures should use their platform to challenge injustice rather than simply celebrate their own success.

Patrick Stewart’s voice may now be silent, but the values he championed continue to speak to a world that still desperately needs them.

Whoever Saves One Life, Saves the World Entire

The above clip from Schindler’s List is an emotional clip refer to Oscar Schindler leaving the camp where he had saved so many Jewish people’s lives from and him becoming emotional about what he had or had not achieved in his time there.

We often judge our impact by the scale of what we can achieve. We look at poverty, war, loneliness, addiction, illness, or injustice and feel overwhelmed by the vastness of the challenge. Yet history, faith, and human experience repeatedly remind us that changing one life can alter far more than we ever realise.

The ancient phrase,“Whoever saves one life, saves the world entire,” expresses a profound truth about human existence. Originating in Jewish tradition and echoed within Islamic teaching, the maxim teaches that the value of a single life cannot be measured merely by numbers. Every person carries within them an entire world of relationships, experiences, dreams, memories, and future possibilities.

Most of us, however, will never rescue hundreds of people from danger. We will never be remembered alongside figures such as Oskar Schindler, whose actions during one of history’s darkest periods helped save more than a thousand lives. Yet perhaps this is not the point.

The phrase challenges us to think differently about significance.

The Lives We Never Know We Touched

Human influence rarely arrives with an announcement.

A kind word offered during someone’s darkest week. A mentor who spends an extra hour helping a struggling student. A neighbour who notices when someone has become isolated. A friend who answers a late-night phone call. A teacher who sees potential in a child before anyone else does.

In the moment, these actions can seem small.

Yet we rarely witness the full consequences of what we do.

The person encouraged today may go on to raise a family, create a business, discover a medical breakthrough, volunteer in their community, or simply offer the same kindness to countless others. The act that appeared insignificant may become a turning point from which an entirely different future unfolds.

Like ripples spreading across a pond, the effects continue long after the original action has been forgotten.

The Mathematics of Human Potential

We often measure success through visible outcomes. How many people were helped? How many problems were solved? How much change was created?

But human lives do not follow simple arithmetic.

Consider a single individual facing a crisis. Supporting them may help one person. Yet it may also preserve a relationship, strengthen a family, protect future opportunities, and influence generations that do not yet exist.

Every person exists within a network of connections. Change one life and you may unknowingly alter dozens more.

This is why the ancient teaching remains so powerful. It recognises that every life is not merely an individual existence but the centre of an entire web of human relationships.

Saving a life does not simply save one person.

It saves all the futures connected to them.

The Burden of Wanting to Save Everyone

Many people who care deeply about the world carry a hidden frustration.

They look at climate change, conflict, poverty, political instability, biodiversity loss, social division, or economic uncertainty and feel paralysed by the scale of the challenge.

The problems appear too large.

The resources appear too small.

Our individual contribution feels insignificant.

Yet this is where the wisdom of the phrase offers something liberating.

It does not ask us to save everyone.

It asks us to recognise the value of saving anyone.

The reality is that none of us can solve every problem. No one person can end all suffering or fix every injustice. But each of us has opportunities to affect the lives immediately around us.

The neighbour.

The colleague.

The friend.

The stranger.

The person quietly struggling while everyone else carries on.

History is not only shaped by grand movements and famous individuals. It is also shaped by countless ordinary acts that never make headlines.

The Invisible Legacy

One of the remarkable truths about life is that we seldom know our own impact.

Many people who have changed lives never discover it.

A teacher may never learn that their encouragement prevented a student from giving up.

A doctor may never see the generations that exist because one patient survived.

A volunteer may never hear that a conversation changed someone’s direction entirely.

Even parents often do not fully appreciate how their values echo through future generations.

We live surrounded by invisible legacies.

Perhaps somewhere today, a person is alive, hopeful, employed, loved, or thriving because of a small action from someone else years ago.

That chain of influence stretches endlessly backwards and forwards through time.

Why This Matters Today

Modern society often celebrates scale.

Followers. Views. Reach. Influence. Growth.

The assumption is that more people reached means greater value created.

Yet the teaching “Whoever saves one life, saves the world entire” presents a different standard.

Value is not determined by numbers alone.

A conversation with one person can matter more than a message delivered to millions.

A single act of compassion can have consequences greater than any algorithm can measure.

The world changes not only through large institutions and governments, but through human beings choosing to care about one another.

Saving the World, One Person at a Time

Perhaps the greatest lesson within this ancient phrase is not that one life represents an entire world.

It is that we are rarely in a position to know which life matters most.

The stranger we help today may affect the lives of hundreds tomorrow.

The child we encourage might grow into the leader, scientist, artist, carer, or innovator who changes countless lives.

Or perhaps they simply become a kinder person who passes that kindness forward.

That alone is enough.

We live in a world where the scale of our challenges can seem overwhelming. It is easy to become discouraged by everything we cannot do.

But there remains immense power in what we can do.

We may never save everyone.

We may never even know when we have saved someone.

Yet every act of compassion, encouragement, protection, understanding, or support carries with it the possibility of changing an entire future.

And because the future branches out infinitely through every human life, we may discover that the ancient wisdom was right all along.

Sometimes, when we save one life, we really do save the world entire. ✨

🎉 Fifty Years On: A Birthday Reflection on a Changed Britain and a Changing me

A Huwspace.com birthday essay — July 12, 2026

Today marks fifty years since I arrived in the world on 12 July 1976 — a hot summer, a turbulent decade, and a Britain that feels almost like another country. Turning fifty isn’t just a personal milestone; it’s a vantage point. Half a century gives you enough distance to see the long arc of change, to recognise what’s been gained, what’s been lost, and what still feels unfinished.

This is a birthday reflection not just on my life, but on the life of the UK itself — the country that shaped me, challenged me, frustrated me, and continues to surprise me.

🇬🇧 1976: The Britain I Was Born Into

Britain in 1976 was a place of strikes, power cuts, and industrial muscle. It was a country where:

  • Heavy industry still defined whole towns
  • Unions were powerful
  • Inflation was out of control
  • Technology meant a rotary phone and three TV channels
  • Immigration was modest and society more uniform, racism was more prevalent – ‘No blacks, no dogs no Irish!
  • The class system was rigid but predictable – although if like my dad you were clever and willing and able to learn new opportunities did exist in an ever changing Britain.
  • The idea of “global Britain” meant the memory of empire, not the reality of influence -which was also reflected in cultural expression and taught in history lessons and laughed at though our sense of humour such as monty python.

It was a Britain that felt old even then — worn down by post‑war exhaustion, unsure of its future, and still clinging to structures built for a world that no longer existed.

But it was also a Britain with a strong social fabric or ethical ethos, clear identities, and communities that hadn’t yet been enriched or fractured by globalisation, deindustrialisation, and digital life or a climate crisis.

🚀 The UK Today: A Completely Different Country or most certainly alive in a different time.

Fast‑forward fifty years, and the UK has transformed in almost every dimension.

1. Society is bigger, more diverse, more fluid

The population has grown by more than 11 million since I was born. Cities are multicultural mosaics. Family structures have changed. Identity is more open, more contested, more expressive.

2. Work has shifted from factories to laptops

The industrial Britain of my birth has given way to a service‑driven, digital economy. Unions have shrunk. Gig work has grown. Job security is no longer guaranteed. The idea of a “career for life” feels like a relic as does a pension for retirement. The issue of wealth and where it should lie and why is still a fluid topic open to change and new ideas and power plays.

3. Technology has rewritten daily life

From no internet to living online. From letters to instant messages. From three TV channels to infinite content. From paper maps to satellite navigation. From analogue everything to AI everywhere.

The pace of change has been dizzying — and relentless.

4. Politics has become more polarised and less trusted – or at least that is what we are paid and digitally printed to believe. By keeping us arguing amongst ourselves we tend to not get to grips with the real actors on the stage such as the uber wealthy and those that turn the wheels of an economy that is swiftly or slowly killing biodiversity on and heating up a planet.

The post‑war consensus collapsed. Thatcher reshaped the economic model. New Labour reshaped the social one. Austerity reshaped public services. Brexit reshaped the national story.

Trust in politics has fallen to historic lows. The country feels more divided, more anxious, more uncertain about its place in the world or anxiety about the world within which we live that we now leave to the next generation.

5. Culture has exploded in creativity

Music, fashion, film, literature — Britain has produced wave after wave of cultural reinvention. From punk to rave, Britpop to grime, analogue art to digital creation. The UK’s cultural output has been one of its greatest strengths.

6. Public services have strained under the weight of change

The NHS, transport, housing, local government — all transformed, all challenged. Some improvements, many pressures, and a sense that the old systems are creaking under modern demands. Also the expectation that everyone except me should be taxed and all things should be available to all people at no expense whatsoever. No one is able to calculate the cost of a well run society and no one is prepared to pay that price either.

🌱 What It Means to Turn Fifty in a Changed Britain

Reaching fifty in 2026 means having lived through:

  • The end of the industrial age
  • The rise of globalisation
  • The birth of the internet
  • The financial crash
  • Austerity
  • Brexit
  • A pandemic
  • The arrival of AI

It means carrying memories of a Britain that no longer exists — and navigating a Britain still trying to define what it wants to be.

It means recognising that change is constant, but direction is a choice.

It means understanding that nostalgia is comforting, but renewal is necessary.

🔭 What Comes Next

If the first fifty years of my life were defined by transformation, the next decades will be defined by reinvention.

Britain has the raw ingredients for renewal: creativity, diversity, scientific talent, cultural influence, and a deep well of resilience. What it lacks is coherence — a shared mission, a long‑term plan, and a political culture capable of thinking beyond the next election cycle.

But birthdays are for optimism. And fifty is a good age for clarity.

The UK and myself has changed dramatically since 1976 — sometimes painfully, sometimes brilliantly and in found memories beautifully too. The next chapter can be better than the last, if we choose to make it so.

🎂 A Final Birthday Thought

Fifty years teaches you that life is not about resisting change, but understanding it. The same is true for countries. Although I do not throw caution to the wind and then through all that has gone down the river of life.

There a simple little truths learned along the way that although not always convenient have helped me stay true to who I am and help me calve out my place in this world.

Simple things like being honest where and when you can, listen to what you hear and think on what you do.

So here’s to the next chapter — for me, for Britain, and for whatever comes after this milestone morning in July 2026.

Bob Dylan – Blowin’ in the Wind (Official Audio)

It’s been a beautifully busy month (time)

One idea ticking away on my brain this morning is the concept of time. I sometimes wonder too much about what time is how does it exist and what should I do with it. In many ways time is an illusion. In my mind there is no past now, for it has already happened and there is no future for it has not yet happened the only time that we ever live within is now.

So what time is it well the time is always now. I find this kind of acknowledgment of time as being now not yesterday or tomorrow as reassuring too. As yesterdays trauma is not now and tomorrows worries are also not now and so to focus in the now results in a better ability to make the most out of the time I actually have.

There are also certain things I always try and make time for firstly time to write my blog and express my views on the world and explore my views and interpretations on what is happening.

Secondly time for family and friends – to see them and talk to them and listen to them and if possibly be helped or help them.

Thirdly time for work and play. Work to pay my way and play to recharge my batteries and allow me to fight another time or day.

Fourthly time to vote (I don’t think I have missed an election yet and so long as I can make it to the voting booth I will continue to do so – why have a say if you dont have a vote?

Buffalo Springfield – For What It’s Worth (Official Audio)

Whether To Weather The Storm

Sometimes I find myself and others in crisis, not one of there making but one that they or myself or others are very much being weathered by and emotionally unable to take shelter from what is raining down.

Although the instinct is sometimes to try and wipe them or yourself dry with reassuring words and all knowing answers, such words and answers can not always stop the emotional rain.

its upsetting and frustrating for both you and a person caught in an emotional storm, but sometimes its better to wait for a storm to pass before you look for a place to recharge from the storm. Sometimes you will only know a storm will have passed once the darn thing has finished and not knowing what it will do or when it will stop can be frustrating in its self.

On an economic front there is a storm coming in the UK. Lots of business some long established business have been being announced as going bust in the UK and it really does feel like we are on the cusp of an economic storm of a recession with concerns on job fronts, stock market highs leading to potential stock market lows and Trumps war in the middle east and threats of tariffs and tantrums to those that don’t support his brain rotten madness there really are potentially several economic storms on the horizon.

6 year Blogiversary


On February 2020 I started my huwspace.com blog and have had a great deal of enjoyment expressing myself on this site. With music, thoughts and films that are close to my heart that express who I am and write about my perspective on what is going on in my life and in the world. 2020 onwards has been a crazy time really and the 2020’s decade has been one in which so much has happened it’s like the world is going too fast and there is no chance of jumping off at all as we are here for the ride or until our song stops being written or sung.


My mental health has been at times a challenge to during this time. It’s sometimes difficult to know who I am where I fit in and where I belong. This year I am 50 in July a milestone if ever there was one. I have lived in my home now since 2012 in Exeter and it really is a home and base for me which I important to me. I was born in Wales in 1976 and first moved to Devon in 1982 to the village of Spreyton a place which has been a home from home. Though I know I am Welsh and love watching Wales play rugby I also feel strongly a part of Devon due to the roots I have put down here and friends made too.


Being the youngest Edwards in Devon now at what feels like a ripe old age of 49 is a strange experience to have my mum and me enjoy our life here but it feels sad that we are the last parts of the family that moved to Devon left here. It is a wonderful place which I feel very grateful to be living and would not want to live anywhere else for sure.

Sit down by the fire – The Veils

Discovering a bit of Japanese wisdom this evening!

A microcosm of international politics in Britain’s dealings with Donald Trump

British Politician Keir Starmer working for and with Trump as he sees that he can’t afford to deny his lies for what he calculates the United Kingdom will lose politically and economically.

What red lines if any have been drawn and what will it take to cross them?

Keir Starmer’s government (elected in 2024) has prioritized a pragmatic, realpolitik approach to managing the UK’s “special relationship” with Donald Trump’s US administration. While he has publicly condemned Trump’s past rhetoric and some specific actions, he has avoided drawing explicit public “red lines,” opting instead for diplomatic engagement to protect UK national interests. 

Stated Position on Trump 

Starmer has moved from calling Trump’s past comments “absolutely repugnant” to adopting a more measured, Prime Ministerial tone, stating that a leader must work with whoever the American people elect. He has emphasized the need to “make it work” due to the importance of the UK-US relationship. 

In 2026, Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s relationship with President Donald Trump is defined by a “realpolitik” strategy that prioritizes economic and national security over ideological confrontation. Facing a global landscape altered by aggressive U.S. actions, Starmer has adopted a “softly-softly” approach to manage the risks of a trade war and maintain the UK’s influence.

Strategic Pragmatism and “Atlantic Bridge” Diplomacy

Starmer has resisted choosing between the U.S. and the EU, attempting to position the UK as a bridge between the two. This calculation is driven by several factors: 

  • Avoiding Trade Penalties: Starmer led efforts to cut deals with the Trump administration to insulate the UK from high tariffs. However, this has come at a cost; the UK recently ceded to U.S. threats regarding pharmaceutical tariffs, which may increase costs for the NHS.
  • Security Alignment: In recent calls (January 7–8, 2026), Starmer and Trump agreed on the need to deter Russian aggression in the Arctic, despite deep tensions over other U.S. maneuvers.
  • The “Trump Corollary”: Following the U.S. military intervention in Venezuela in early 2026, Starmer declined to condemn the action’s legality, focusing instead on maintaining a “holding position” to avoid alienating the White House. 

Key Areas of Friction in 2026

“Red Lines” and Crossing Them

Starmer has avoided drawing firm public red lines, a strategy that has drawn criticism from opposition parties and some Labour backbenchers who accuse him of “craven subservience”. 

  • International Law: The closest an implicit “red line” has been tested is over US military actions in Venezuela and Trump’s comments on acquiring Greenland in January 2026. While the Scottish First Minister and others urged Starmer to condemn these actions as breaches of international law, Starmer declined to do so publicly, stating it was “for the US to justify the actions it has taken” and that he was waiting for all the facts. This pragmatic approach suggests that verbal condemnation of US military action is not a red line that would break the relationship.
  • NATO Commitment: Starmer has stressed the importance of backing Ukraine and maintaining a strong Euro-Atlantic security alliance, which is a core value for his government. A significant US withdrawal from NATO or security cooperation would force a major UK policy rethink, although Starmer has not publicly stated this would end the relationship.
  • Trade: The Starmer government has engaged in trade discussions with the Trump administration, making compromises such as reducing import tariffs on cars and scrapping tariffs on US beef to secure deals and prevent trade wars. This demonstrates a willingness to make concessions to maintain economic stability. 

Potential Political and Economic Losses

Starmer and analysts have identified several potential political and economic risks associated with Trump’s presidency: 

Political/Diplomatic:

  • Loss of moral compass: By refusing to condemn actions like the invasion of Venezuela, critics argue the UK government risks losing its moral authority on the international stage and its standing as an advocate for international law.
  • Subservience: The perception of the UK as a subservient partner to the US (where the “US says jump, Britain asks how high”) is a significant political risk that can be exploited by domestic rivals like Reform UK.
  • Isolation: Trump’s “America First” approach and hostility to multi-lateral institutions may leave the UK more exposed on security and global issues, pushing Britain into a “strategic bind” between the US and Europe.

Economic:

  • Tariff wars: Trump’s use of tariffs has created significant economic uncertainty. While the UK has so far managed to mitigate some of the worst impacts through negotiation, the threat of tariffs (e.g., on pharmaceuticals) remains and could impact the NHS and other sectors.
  • Trade-offs: Securing trade deals with the US has required painful concessions, such as the potential impact on the NHS through pharmaceutical access or the agricultural sector via increased US imports.
  • Reduced EU cooperation: The necessity to court Trump for a US trade deal may impede Starmer’s goal of achieving closer economic ties with the EU, which some analysts believe offers a larger potential GDP boost than a US deal. 

It seems at this moment time it seems almost like it is the powerless with the most to lose or who have already lost so much, that show the greatest power to stand up against Trump.

Politik by Coldplay