We need to talk about Nigel. It’s the cognitive dissonance that gets you first. The charming common sense everyman voice, the pint in hand, the easy confidence of someone who sounds both posh and plausible. And then come the words. Bitter, divisive words, spouting the worst kind of rhetoric, but delivered as if he’s just commenting on the weather. As if it’s perfectly normal, perfectly acceptable, to speak of your neighbours and fellow citizens with such casual contempt. The truth is, it isn’t. And that gap—between the slick presentation and the toxic substance, is the most dangerous political space in Britain today.

This performance is not an accident. It’s a finely-tuned political instrument designed to do one thing: to make the unthinkable seem reasonable. The charm is the anaesthetic before the surgery. It lowers your defences, making you receptive to the simple, satisfying diagnosis for that low, persistent hum of anxiety we all feel. It takes your legitimate anger about a broken system and, with a friendly wink, points it towards a simple enemy. It’s a strategy, and it works by making prejudice sound like common sense.

Once you’ve accepted the premise, the policies write themselves. Look at the plans for immigration. They are the logical conclusion of this normalised division. Abolishing the right of people who have lived and worked here for years to call this country home? It stops sounding cruel and starts sounding like ‘management’ when you’ve been told they are a burden. Tearing up international human rights laws? It’s no longer a shocking breach of our values, but a ‘necessary step’ to deal with an invasion. Each policy is another brick in a wall built to divide us, turning the complex failings of the state into a simple story of ‘us versus them’.

Then comes the second front of the attack, aimed not at our borders but at the very heart of our communities. The war on “woke.” The crusade to scrap diversity and equality initiatives. This is the mission to purify the ‘us’ group. It’s a direct assault on the messy, complex, brilliant reality of modern Britain. It sends a clear message that fairness has gone “too far,” that protecting minorities is an attack on the majority. It is a project designed to dismantle empathy, to label tolerance as a weakness, and to give bigotry a political permission slip.

And here is the raw truth we must confront: none of this is about fixing the problems that keep you up at night. Your council tax, the state of the NHS, the price of the weekly shop—these are just the emotional kindling for their fire. The goal isn’t to solve anything. The goal is to keep you angry. It is a political model that thrives on our exhaustion and profits from our division. It is a poison that paralyses our ability to look at our real problems and work together to solve them.

So, what on earth do we do? The first act of resistance is to break the spell. It is to see the performance for what it is: a con. It means actively refusing to swallow the daily diet of rage being served up. Practise ‘informational hygiene’. Guard your own resilience as if it were armour, because that’s exactly what it is. To stay calm and clear-headed in a storm of manufactured hysteria is a radical act.

But personal resilience is just the start. The real antidote to this division is connection. This is the unglamorous, vital, and urgent work ahead. It means rebuilding the bonds they are trying to sever, one conversation at a time. Talk to your actual neighbours. Have the quiet courage to challenge the divisive rhetoric when you hear it from a friend, not with aggression, but with a firm refusal to let it stand. And yes, get involved. Join the most boring-sounding local committee you can find. Be part of the levy that shores up the flood defences of our shared civic decency.

Because that is precisely what is at stake. They are selling a story of a broken Britain that can only be saved by breaking it apart even further. Our job is to tell a better story—and not just to tell it, but to live it. A story built not on fear and suspicion, but on the quiet, stubborn, and profoundly British belief that we are, and always will be, better than this.

In more detail with links

London, UK – A range of policies proposed by Reform UK, particularly concerning immigration, multiculturalism, and equality, have faced widespread criticism for being racist, divisive, and detrimental to social cohesion, according to analyses from political opponents, media reports, and think tanks. While Reform UK asserts its platform addresses legitimate public concerns, critics argue that many of their proposals target minority groups, fuel anti-immigrant sentiment, and could erode community harmony.

Immigration Policies at the Forefront of Controversy

Reform UK’s stringent immigration policies have drawn the most significant condemnation. Proposals to freeze non-essential immigration, leave the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), and implement offshore processing for asylum seekers have been labeled as “racist” and “immoral” by opponents.[1] Critics, including Labour leader Keir Starmer, argue that such measures scapegoat immigrants for broader societal problems and normalize state-sanctioned racism.[1][2]

One of the most contentious proposals is the plan to abolish Indefinite Leave to Remain (ILR), a move that could affect hundreds of thousands of legal residents. Starmer has vehemently opposed this, stating it would “rip this country apart” by targeting neighbors and contributors to the economy.[1][3] In response, Reform UK’s head of policy, Zia Yusuf, accused Labour of telling the electorate to “pay hundreds of billions for foreign nationals to live off the state forever, or we’ll call you racist!”[1]

Further proposals, such as a 20% National Insurance surcharge on employers hiring foreign workers and restrictions on international students bringing dependents, have also been criticized as discriminatory and echoing past anti-immigration rhetoric.

Challenges to Multiculturalism and Equality

Reform UK’s stance on multiculturalism and its pledge to scrap Diversity, Equality, and Inclusion (DEI) initiatives have intensified accusations of divisiveness. The party’s manifesto states it would replace the Equality Act, which it claims “requires discrimination in the name of ‘positive action'”.[4] Party leader Nigel Farage has been a vocal critic of DEI, and following success in local elections, has vowed to dismantle what he terms the “DEI industry” in councils under Reform control.[5][6]

Legal experts have warned that abolishing DEI roles could breach the Public Sector Equality Duty, a legal requirement for public bodies to eliminate discrimination and promote equality.[5] Critics argue these policies threaten years of progress on workplace equality and could embolden prejudice.[6] The Good Law Project has accused Reform UK of using women’s safety as a “cover for racism” by linking migration to sexual assault without credible evidence.[7][8]

Divisive Rhetoric and the Impact on Social Cohesion

Commentators suggest that Reform UK’s policies and rhetoric are tapping into a sense of public disillusionment and despair, refracting class anger through a racist lens.[9] The party’s success is seen by some as being built on exploiting fears about immigration and a loss of national identity.[9][10] The rhetoric used by some associated with the party has also come under fire. An undercover investigation revealed a Reform UK canvasser using a racial slur against Prime Minister Rishi Sunak and suggesting migrants crossing the Channel should be shot.[11]

While Keir Starmer has labeled some of Reform’s policies as racist, he has been careful to state that he does not believe all Reform voters are racist, acknowledging their frustration with the political status quo.[2][12][13] However, critics maintain that the party’s platform risks normalizing extremist views and undermining the social fabric of the UK.[9][10] A poll by British Future found that four in ten people believe Reform is a racist party, a perception more pronounced than that of UKIP in 2015.[14]

Reform UK defends its policies as necessary for border security and preserving British culture and values.[15] The party’s rise in popularity, particularly its strong performance in the 2024 general election and its significant presence on social media, indicates that its message resonates with a substantial portion of the electorate.[16][17] Nevertheless, the divisive nature of its platform continues to be a central point of contention in British politics.