Nigel Farage could soon be devoured by the great revolution he proudly ignited

Here was a man in pink trousers weaved through the Palace of Westminster who didn’t seem to be in a bad temper – indeed, had every reason not to be so. It was Nigel Farage. 
 
It referred to the ‘General Election’ he had won in Clacton, just days earlier. He briefly made a pause for the conversation. I’m a member of the Conservative Party, but congratulated him on his result none the less: Thus, it was quite an accomplishment. He said that political culture of Britain is in very transitional phase at the present time. I agreed. He declared that the main parties were bewildered how to act. I agreed again. And he went his happy way – or at least the end of the last verse expressed it this way: 
 
I later realized, in l’esprit de l’escalier fashion, that I might have retorted that it is not just the established political parties that have a problem with not being able to adapt – because revolutions have the annoying tendency of swallowing their young. Of course, Farage’s rather unsure reaction to the riots this week could make the argument perfectly. 
 
The bare facts that can be summed up are these. His first thought, following on from the grim events in the series of terrible murders in Southport, was again to speculate about whether there are facts which the public is not being told. 
 
Of course, the fact that the state might not be telling the whole story was appreciated by some of those who said that the rioters were right. However, in a few days, Farage started emphasizing on non-Use of Violence asserting that, ‘Speaking of Tommy Robinson and other hatemongers, I have never had anything to do with them. ” 
 
Still later, he pointed to Andrew Tate as the author of his questions regarding the Southport suspect explaining that “there were some stories on the Web from rather influential people with many followers, including Andrew Tate, who claimed that the man had crossed the English Channel in a boat in October 2023”. 
 
Of course, you may respond that these pieces of rhetoric are perfectly logical – although heaven knows why Farage thought that Tate can be trusted for any information. However the Reform leader was on the receiving end from both sides – from the Right, but wait a minute if it can be called that, from Robinson and his friends. 
 
And from Right and centre and Left if YouGov is to be believed, for what was described as his ambivalence towards the rioters. They fully support law and order after all the British people are quite civilised. 
 
This, I bring out not to have a go at a member of another political party, but because like majority of people, including Farage, the riots has pulled at us in different directions. 
 
At the same time, the Government, the Conservative Opposition, and even Farage in person are against violence. So far, so uncontroversial. 
 
However, appeals against crime and the disorder, for instance, do not suffice for most of the Right or Left. Relative to this perspective, which Farage is excusing, the Right coherently fixates, as it usually does, on the scope or extent of mass immigration. The Left, however, to poverty – pointing out that the riots have happened in majorly deprived regions in towns. 
 
The same applies to ‘ ‘two tier policing ‘‘. Essentially, this division of the population was not satisfied with the actions taken to police BLM protests on the Right. At least, two of the Conservative leadership contenders, Robert Jenrick and Tom Tugendhat were unhappy, when ministers, with the police’s reaction to the thuggery, anti-Semitism and violence, which threatened the pro-Palestinian protests. (Just in this particular week, to support the Palestinian cause, aggressive demonstrators broke into the Uk headquarters of an israeli owned arms dealer that is and allegedly assaulted the police officers with sledgehammers. 
 
And – let’s face it – most of the Left has been whining about two tier policing for years. It was only last year when a file by Louise Casey for the Mayor of London provided evidence of racism, misogyny, and homophoby in the Met. 
Her conclusions were eagerly endorsed by the Left which is always only too eager to tell anyone who will listen that the police in Britain are discriminate against ethnic minorities, women and gay people. 
 
It is ironic that some of these activates whose booing caused the police to be labelled as bias will this week be cheering these same police for professionalism. In relation to these the wokeists claim to be friends of minorities and against police brutality when the courts bang up people the leftist do not agree with. 
 
There has to be a limit to this, surely? As Policy Exchange researchers have pointed out this week, while the Government is only too keen to talk about the far-Right, it says little about the counter-protests staged by those people wearing masks and claiming to be Muslims. 
 
Of course, the former or rather white criminals and rioters have been the culprits of the recent actions and Muslims were right to panic over the possible attacks on mosques. 
 
Yet communities must be policed by the police. They can’t be allowed instead to police themselves: That way lies communalism, which often means that a big brother will disturb the sleeping rights of others, or even claim the rights of others for his family. There was more than a hint of this in last month’s general election; Indian-origin Hindus voted for the Conservatives and Pakistani-origin Muslims for the Labour party – or, rather, for the pro-Gaza ‘independents’. 
 Labour has competition both from them and the Greens, which if course explains the Governments sudden threat to Israel of an arms embargo. 
 
The pendulum is swinging. At the beginning of the week, one got a feeling it was a week of fascism turbo-charged by the far-Right. At the end of it, it was the Left-wing Protest and the activists who were on the streets and nowhere to be seen of the other side. 
 
Maybe the riots will just die down on their own as the temperatures drop as it is with most disturbances in the society. Perhaps the media has built them up out of all recognition. I’m not so sure. The official opposition Labour party certainly does not have a believable strategy to stop the boats and it seems to be willing just to accommodate everyone who comes in them. Despite them being banned protests can be organized on the spot on X which was formerly twitter, Tik Tok why has it not been banned, and in the WhatsApp groups. Weak though the far-Right may be, it has not died out. Neither have the Islamists. 
 
The flippancy of it all takes me back to Farage. In the last election, he managed to becoming the rider of the tiger of angry voters who have lost their faith in politicians. But just as revolutions do not fail to eat their children, the tiger can dislodge those who attempt to sit on its back, and consume them. Farage isn’t for me: I am shocked by his view about Putin and like other people I was grossed out about a few Reform contestants in the latest elections. That is why the Conservatives are right wanting no deal with him and he is right wanting no deal with Conservatives. 
 
Further, Farage can by no means be called a fascist. Indeed, he is an overt democrat, who, with every right, prides himself on contributing to the avoidance of genuine far-Right, neo-Nazi parties in the elections. Are you still sure that Farage is an extremist? Say what you will about him, at least he is somewhat more moderate than we could have ended up with. And may get yet.