Main Edition
US
FR
Trump doesn't fear us (Credit: Leon Neal/Getty)
It must be all-so familiar to Theresa May. There she was in 2017, holding hands with The Donald, walking in the White House as the first foreign leader invited to see the new Caesar after his inauguration. Poised to assume her role as the old world’s special envoy to the court of the new emperor, the first question from the British press landed.
“Mr President, you’ve said before that torture works, you’ve praised Russia, you’ve said you want to ban some Muslims from coming to America, you’ve suggested there should be punishment for abortion,” began the BBC’s Laura Kuenssberg. “What do you say to our viewers at home who are worried about some of your views and worried about you becoming the leader of the free world?” Smiling, Trump turned to May and asked: “This was your choice of a question? There goes that relationship.”
It was a joke, of course — and a funny one. The press pack loved it. I remember, because I was part of it. As so often with Trump, however, it was the humour of power: the glint of steel visible, even when sheathed inside a joke. What made it so funny, though, was the fact that everyone knew the special relationship was in his control, not May’s — and he was the type of man who could perfectly well jettison it because of some personal grudge. May had done everything she could to secure a good relationship but she was weak and he was strong. For the rest of her miserable time in power, Trump would remind her of this fundamental imbalance.
Eight years later, and the new PM is in exactly the same position. Keir Starmer has done everything in his power to ensure a smooth relationship with Trump. Through his foreign secretary, David Lammy, the Labour Party has formed close links to Trump’s running mate, J.D. Vance. Starmer was the first foreign leader to speak to Trump after he came within inches of being assassinated in July. The pair even had dinner in New York during Starmer’s visit to the UN General Assembly in September.
And yet, here we are, the British Prime Minister once again caught in a Trump storm, battered from one side by allegations of election interference and from another by claims that the Starmer operation is involved in a shadowy censorship war against Elon Musk.
The furore began on Wednesday when it emerged that the Trump campaign team had filed an extraordinary legal challenge against the Labour Party’s “blatant foreign interference” after Starmer’s head of operations revealed that 100 current and former party staffers were headed to the US to campaign for Kamala Harris. The letter also refers to a report in The Washington Post claiming that Labour has been advising the Harris campaign on how to win, including Starmer’s most important aide, Morgan McSweeney — an allegation Labour denies.
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
SubscribeWhen I heard that the Labour Party had sent 100 people to campaign for Kamala Harris, then my reaction was twofold. First, if those same individuals, and the ones who were sending and funding them, had campaigned for Labour in 2017, then it would probably have won. And secondly, how delusional. The grating poshness would be lost on most people in North Carolina, Nevada, Pennsylvania or Virginia, but the extreme youth would not be, and the sheer foreignness would be immediately obvious. Yet these insolent children just assumed that their intervention would be decisive. There is no one more laughable than those who have been told from the cradle how clever they were.
Although equal hilarity results from assertions such as, “The far-left Labour Party has inspired Kamala’s dangerously liberal policies and rhetoric.” Since Susie Wiles presumably aspires to greatness in the restored Trump imperium, then she ought to know better than to flatter colonial vanity. But to which of Keir Starmer’s policies is she referring? Fiscal drag? The sale of everyone’s NHS data to Peter Thiel’s Palantir? The forcible injection of the unemployed with weight loss drugs? The dispatch of “job coaches” into psychiatric wards to harangue the patients? The two-child benefit cap? The withdrawal of the Winter Fuel Payment? The incitement of the Israeli use of the surrender or starve strategy in Gaza? The assertion that the slave trade had been no cause for apology? What, exactly? The “far-left” policies that Harris has borrowed from Starmer must be why d**k Cheney is supporting her. Starmer’s real policies might indeed have had that effect, if either Cheney or Harris had ever heard of either them or him.
It is obviously hilarious that the Americans, of all people, should complain about foreign interference in elections. But the complaint is sound in principle. And Donald Trump is a vengeful, vindictive man. Imagine that he were to ban from the United States those named in his lawyer’s complaint: Starmer, Morgan McSweeney, Matthew Doyle, Deborah Mattinson and Sofia Patel.
People who were taught about the American Revolution at school hear in the word “Tory” something in relation to their own country that has never become wholly anachronistic. James Cleverly had been negotiating much the deal that was eventually struck over the Chagos Islands, but no Conservative Government would ever quite have signed up to paying for the American base practically in perpetuity.
The right wing of the Labour Party, on the other hand, can never do enough for the Americans. Both of the previous betrayals of the Chagossians also happened under Labour Governments, and were indeed perpetrated by those whom the Right regards as its two greatest lost Leaders since Hugh Gaitskell, Denis Healey and David Miliband.
Labour Rightists often speak in a weird mid-Atlantic accent, use New York or Californian turns of phrase, think that The West Wing (which I also loved) was real or at least realistic, and bang on about things like Thanksgiving, Saturday Night Live and the Superbowl in the sincere belief that such preoccupations were mainstream in Britain. For its party and factional Leader, and other key movers and shakers, to be sanctioned by the President of the United States, even if that President were Trump, would plunge the Labour Right into an existential crisis.
You last sentence!
I can’t wait.
Almost worth the election of Trump on its own.
Someone should set up a site called UnSeen, for all the comments that disappeared from UnHerd.
I know what you mean. I once posted a comment that praised an author’s article, but it was instantly removed by the moderation software (it was reinstated several hours later, presumably when a human being had confirmed it didn’t breach the site’s code of conduct).
I don’t mind adhering to a site’s code of conduct, but I’m tired of my comments being disappeared based on a random set of rules embedded in the moderation software.
I guess the reality is that they just don’t care about comments. Quite frankly it’s a pretty poor site.
If you think this is bad, try commenting on the Guardian.
Nonsense I’ve never had anything taken down by them.
Seriously? I’ve had heaps of stuff removed. I guess you must be far more “progressive” than me.
What is your username there?
Quelle surprise…
Nonsense. You’ve had literally hundreds removed. I know because my rather more intelligent responses have also been removed as a result. Which is a far greater loss to the world.
No thanks. That would mean having to read the guardian first.
Content moderation is harder than you think. Commenters figure out how the algorithm works and work around it, getting their spam or offensive comments through to the site. So the filter has to be strengthened, and more false positives get caught. It’s a battle that never ends.
The New York Times is especially bad. Over many years I’ve seen how they have tightened up their filter. My comments used to almost always get posted. Then there would be brief periods where almost everything of mine would get caught, and either not get posted or removed soon after, but it would revert to normal after a few days. Lately for several weeks almost none of my comments get through. They say “comments are moderated for civility” there. But all of my comments are civil, and they still get censored.
On the flip side, I have a screenshot of a comment someone posted on the New York Times that says: “Clarence Thomas dissents. Just another [n-word] who doesn’t have a clue.” I watched it for an hour and it was never taken down. Got several “recommendations” too. But I checked a day later and it was gone. So it’s clear the New York Times has a tough time fighting improper comments too.
So be a little patient. I’ve had plenty of comments delayed here on UnHerd, and they have always responded to my complaints. They don’t always get it right, but they try. That’s much better than the New York Times. They don’t bother.
The problem is that if your comment is delayed (happened to me quite a few times too), you are missing out in the conversation because by then it will have moved on.
There isn’t much difference between “delayed a few hours” and “deleted” in practical terms.
Content moderation is either expensive (and a horrible job) or terrible (done by AI) but it’s the price we pay for removing the gatekeepers. Yes I’m commenting but I think removing comments makes it better over all. 11,000 comments yet we all only read the top one or two
It’s weird. I cancelled my subscription once because of comment censorship, then re-upped at a low price, and I’ve only had one comment moderated in months.
Ah you must be drifting to Centre and home of fellow moderates JV. Welcome.
You do realise JW that you just implicitly endorsed censorship on this site based on political views ?
Why would you feel the need to do that ?
I don’t always agree with your views – or Jim’s – but I don’t want either of you moderated. I’d rather know the truth. Even if it’s that you are a closet censor.
I gave you an upvote.
I think you mean Left, not Centre. Definition of Left: somebody who believes that poverty is in relation to people who earn more.
Certainly, the actual commenting software is not very good. Needs an upgrade.
I would add I find it mildly annoying when I make an entirely reasonable, intelligent point and then some loon responds with a form of abuse and the whole stream disappears for a period. I suspect subterfuge.
Some people find it a challenge trying to get past the comment moderation filters. I don’t play that game, but I’ve seen others play it.
Care to name the “loon” JW? Maybe your arguments need to be better. Your posts disappear because you are being heavily downvoted.
A lot of very reasonable intelligent posts get removed in The Guardian. The only offensive thing about them is that they go against the accepted left wing narrative. The comment section usually closes early if the concensus goes against the writer’s argument and to be fair, some of the opinion pieces are laughably bad.
Joke is only funny if someone takes it seriously. Thanks AR for confirming my comedic genius.
Were you under impression downvotes a problem for me. Quite the contrary. Means someone who wouldn’t normally read or welcome the point has indeed read it. Who wants to inhabit an echo chamber. In fact you should be paying me for making sure you don’t fall into that.
You are your own echo chamber.
No, not really but that’s what’s causing your posts to go into hiding.
The Guardian Opinion writers are more than happy to inhabit an echo chamber. At least you get a wide spread of opinion articles on UnHerd and they are better written than from the interns, over on The Guardian.
I certainly wouldn’t defend anyone just subscribing to the Guardian’s equivalent. You have to reach out to alternative opinions, hear them, wrestle with them etc. Some excellent articles both there and here though. Plenty of confirmatory bias stuff too.
What makes you think that we all read your comments before downvoting.
Wait a moment. Didn’t you just claim above that you’ve never had a comment removed? Or was that a senior moment ?
In the Guardian equivalent silly. Now who’s havin the senior moment HB.
As regards here, difficult to be totally sure as I don’t look back at them all, but the timing of when I have noticed a comment disappears suggestive of what triggered the algorithm. It looks to me like a subsequent response led most often to whole stream removed. Response with vitriol that the algorithm may have determined more blatant racial stuff or threatening seems to be the thing. Obviously strong references to an ex German Chancellor and his party typically don’t last long, although maybe with Trump and Musk that’ll change?
Not sure I’ve come across any threatening comments myself. Do the algorithms detect vitriol? What is ‘more blatant racial stuff’.
I only ask as I seem to suffer moderation quite frequently.
Sometimes the ‘algorithms’ seem to forget their sense of humour and my comments just disappear. Had trouble talking to you about migrant boats, then after that I had real trouble posting.
Funny that.
I’ve long suspected that some articles are moderated by their authors.
I doubt the Authors look at all personally. Where would they start and would they have the time.
I agree with you. Perhaps their excuse is that they believe that what they say is not abusive, just honest.
I’m not going to be the only person to notice a strange parallel, a mirror, of Johnson/Cummings in Starmer/McSweeney. Since the first one played out as farce, we should expect tragedy this time. Although a stretch, that would make Gray, um, Javid.
I give it six months before it all goes Pop! Or just as likely, BANG!!!
Pinky & The Brain syndrome.
Ah, yes. The Special Relationship. It exists all right. It exists in intelligence-gathering circles, it exists (to some extent) in military circles. It does not exist in politics, not any more. The last great flowering was when Thatcher signalled to the Americans that Gorbachev was worth taking seriously.
It’s not just Trump that reveres strength. They all do. When we have tiny armed forces, it signals to the Americans that we are not worth taking seriously. British politicians don’t get it. They think they can make up the leeway with charm and diplomacy. They’re wrong.
It’s also true with Industry, when it comes to the skillsets in Westminster and Whitehall.
Being ‘intelligent’ in the the Art and Humanties isn’t enough. Knowledge and Experience are required for Science and Engineering, and lots of practice at problem solving.
the Trump campaign team had filed an extraordinary legal challenge against the Labour Party’s “blatant foreign interference” after Starmer’s head of operations revealed that 100 current and former party staffers were headed to the US to campaign for Kamala Harris.
Careful, or the special relationship will become special in a way that Britain will regret. I hope these 100 apparatchiks are quickly rounded up and deported (or jailed).
‘Soft’ power of works if there’s ‘hard’ power to back it up. As a famous Yankee once said, ‘speak softly and carry a big stick.’
Don’t abusers routinely tell their victims that their relationship is special, and isn’t it a characteristic of an abusive relationship that the victim believes this.
all of NATO’s Armed forces are small, the US army is 450k Active personal, it was 1.5 million in 2000, post cold war, pre Iraq, Afganistan
Germany (180k) with 12 million more people than the UK (186k) has a smaller Armed forces than the UK
So while the US can go on about the paltry size of the UK Army, the US army is in a worse shape in many ways with it’s higher Commitments, it’s inability to arm itself , while having it’s highest budget in relative terms since WW2
the hollowing out of the US military has gone quite unnoticed, it’s probaly at it’s relative weakest position since pre WW1
the US needs to seriously ask what it’s getting for having 40% of the world’s expenditure on defence.
I’m not saying reduce it, but they seem to be getting really bad value for money and it’s not having the effect it should
Yeah,same poor value in the Yankee medical system..
“…Bad value for the money..” is the New American Way! That’s why we love our politicians so much.
The problem with reading UnHerd articles past midnight in bed, is that reflections merge sporadically with snatches of dreams and nightmares as I drift in and out of sleep.
A Great White of enormous size and with an American accent for some reason, oozing bonhomie and menace, is murmuring repeatedly to himself: “Brits are friends not food”. At this point Dory, um, sorry Starmer, should do everything in his power to ensure that there is no infighting in his team which results in any bloodshed. Because if even a drop of blood reaches the water – Carnage!
It might go a little better if Harris wins and Trump loses.
It almost certainly will, but why even take the risk? As head of the party, he should have known about the activists and squashed it immediately. Mind boggling mistake.
I’m not sure he has the power to actually prevent British citizens travelling to America.
He does, of course, have the power to expel people from the Labour party. As he’s demonstrated.
The fact that he hasn’t here tells you everything you need to know.
Starmer is a prize fool. Even being seen to interfere in the US election is bad enough. Interfering and seeing “your side” lose is idiotic.
The only way this makes any sense is if the people Labour’s sending are completely incompetent (possible) and will help Trump win and it’s all part of a cunning Starmer plan (not possible) !
The Guardian memorably sent people over to help the Democrats in Ohio campaign against George W Bush. Bush won Ohio and the presidency. Ohio’s no longer a swing state.
They never learn.
Would you rather be slightly less entwined with a President who won’t start wars, or joined at the hip with a President whose backers and handlers will start or cause multiple wars?
Be careful what you wish for
Not going to happen
Yes, ‘…..misinformation exists…’; its most prolific purveyor is the government.
This is nothing new. Given that the US paid for World War II with Lend-Lease and bailed Europe out with the Marshall Plan and bailed the UK out of a couple of Sterling crises, the US has treated the UK as a vassal state since about 1940.
Which is precisely what happens when a society chooses butter over guns.
Plus, if you eat too much butter, you get cholesterol problems.
A fact America has failed to understand. It can’t even do guns anymore. Or business.
True enough but all US largesse is far from pure benevolence.
The Lend Lease conditions ensured US penetration of previously totally British markets, the Marshall Plan also ensured Europe as a market for US products and WW2 destroyed both Britain and Germany as serious rivals to US supremacy.
Of course this is precisely what serious states do…look after their own welfare.
Of course this is precisely what serious states do…look after their own welfare.
Absolutely, If you’re not going to take yourself seriously then someone else is going to own you,
Quite! But regrettably there is still a sort of WW2 nostalgia about an alleged “special relationship”…it was merely a relationship of power, such as that of a pimp to a wh*re. I really cannot understand why that isn’t more widely recognised.
Can we have our vassal state back yet, please.
Interesting photo of Trump, He looks like one of the Medici family.
Mm. They were certainly effective political operators in their day.
Donaldo the Magnificent?
With his huge collection of Americana bling?
I always thought of Trump as a sort of Mafioso. He respects the powerful, likes loyalty, but can be deadly for his enemies, especially if they are weak. In a way that’s why he can relate to Putin. This will hopefully bring the Ukraine war to a swift end.
I think part of his appeal is the assertive individuality we rarely see these days. But some of us old enough to remember, or conscious of history, know that such people have been part of great changes in history, good and bad.
That’s it – the Global Disinformation Index. Thanks to Tom McTague for reminding us of this nefarious body which sought to curtail the types of article Unherd was set up to publish, such as those by our esteemed Kathleen Stock.
This is a civilisational battle. As it unfolds, the stakes couldn’t be higher, and having rhe players outlined and identified is vital. It would seem that the very heart of the Britidh Establishment is waging war against the values that our ancestors fought, bled, and died to secure: freedom of conscience and the right to express one’s point of view in the public marketplace.
Once it’s gone, it’s gone, and the digital age will make it all the more difficult to ever row back, as our ancestors did with the printing press. It’s our very humanity at stake, and i’m happy to demonstrate that “i’m not a robot” in order to help protect it.
I agree. This is a civilisational battle. Its battleground is the world of the internet and the fight seems to be for control of the narrative.
In a way, I’m glad that Unherd has been on the sharp end of this already with their exposure of the Global Disinformation Index (curious how these organisations characterise themselves in negatives). Unherd have experienced it directly. I’m even more glad that they won.
Yes, there are protocols to learn as we take responsibility for our own thoughts and try to act accordingly. A learning curve that I welcome.
Precisely. And free speech is more important than any special relationship or individual politician.
Maybe Britain could write that down somewhere?
So I guess that the Redcoats aren’t coming anytime soon.
Why would the Democrats take advice from Labour?
The did win the last election bigly.
But the Donkeys opponents governed well; the Tories not so much.
Not so bigly…
The CCDH eh? I expect Mr Musk could once again consult the renowned expert on such groups, Suggon Dees Nutz.
I bet that the academic left will eventually make the case that the masses should not be taught to read “so that they don’t have to experience so much misinformation”.
I initially laughed at your comment. I thought it was pretty funny. Then I got to thinking that here in the US, quite often the percentage of young children in public schools that can read at grade level can be as low as 30% or so. The Chicago public schools are a good example of this. So, perhaps your joke is nothing to laugh at!
Increasing the number of stupid, illiterate and ultimately unemployable people increases the number of core voters for left wing political parties.
Really? There are some pretty stupid right wing thugs out there!
The new Education Secretary will ensure that happens by here proposed ‘improvements’ to the syllabus
Just gave up on Mary Harrington’s article – aligning with Tony Blair to read this. Questions:
Is Starmer’s clique actually interfering at a cultural level with free speech? yes/no answer would suffice.
Is the author insinuating that Starmer is politically finished by November when Trump takes bake the Whitehouse? if so what the f is next?
(edit back not bake; who not what)
Labour is finishing the process that Obama began. It’s sad because the Special Relationship bore so much fruit. But it probably has outlived its value.
NGO’s are now the common enemy. Defeating them is house-to-house fighting, whack-a-mole tactics.
That’s interesting. Good to know Unherd has been pressurised. We need to know. Does this explain why Gender is a no go subject say in The Times? Do they censor inquiry into Gender for the same fear?
That’s not exactly a superpower. It’s like an elephant sensing gravity
Britain always has to do what the US wants.
Everyone ‘senses it’, in fact it’s been painfully obvious for some time now.
‘Central to this allegation is the “Center for Countering Digital Hate” (CCDH), an organisation founded in 2018 by McSweeney and another Labour Party official called Imran Ahmed. ‘
Regardless of which side, left or right, should people really be setting up censorship organisations like this?
It is very dangerous to have organisations like this, that are independent from democratic government and I assume independent of our intelligence services. I’m not saying this particular one, or the people that run it at the moment are dangerous, but if an organisation like this falls into the wrong hands, or is taken over by some nutter with idealogical preferences one way or the other, their ability to distort and control online discourse could get rather out of hand.
Surely if we are going to have Internet police it should be done by the intelligence services that are answerable to a democratic government and not random, independent organisations.
‘McSweeney’s operation in No. 10 has little time for American progressive politics, which many of those closest to Starmer in Downing Street see as dangerously out of touch with ordinary voters.’
Thank goodness for that. Mr Starmer against ID cards and someone with some sense that hasn’t swallowed the Americans nonsense, allow me to fall off my chair. There may be hope for this labour government.
Mr Trumps team don’t have to much time for the progressive stuff either, I believe. Perhaps they will get on OK in the end.
Keir Starmer has done everything in his power to ensure a smooth relationship with Trump.
is that why multiple Labor Party members are actively working with the Harris campaign?
U.S. Anglophiles are definitely a dying breed. WASPs brought up on Shakespeare, Magna Carta and the King James Bible, still common in the American Establishment 40 years ago, are now a small minority. Even the English language has no official status as the national tongue. The ‘special relationship’ does harm to this country in many ways. Britain slavishly follows every American political fad even when it is irrelevant to U.K. circumstances or even when the U.S. is actually inferior to Britain e.g. with regard to racial tolerance. Sure there are common interests and a mostly common language and we should concentrate on what those offer and forget the ‘special relationship’ schtik.
Elimination of the classics from US education and thought is a cornerstone of the radical subversive destruction of USA, and by association UK.
And the difference between Labour’s interference and Russia’s is?
Yeah, that did cross my mind too.
Don’t the Labour Party have enough on their plate at home? It would have been so easy to just not get involved.
Yes, very odd. No wonder people have conspiracy theories.
The Americans haven’t taken anything.
One has to wonder if this gambit, we’ll call it the “election interference ploy” was identified as a tactic that could be employed if need be.
Much like the dems current campaign, “trump is a fascist”.
And of course, Labouristas in the uk swallowed the bait. I guess we will figure out of it has resonance if they keep bringing it up.
I wonder what democrats would think if hundreds of Russians showed up to campaign for trump? Would the bbc report that?
I guess it begs the question, what’s the next talking point after trump is the anti/Christ.
Trump senses weakness? Starmer and Co are straws in the wind? And, what’s new? It’s the pompous self serving myopic vacuous politicians that we voted for that have got us here. So yeah that’s a fair assessment. As for the rest of it GDI CCDU LGBtranshuman AI robot bo@@ox our elected reps can’t stand up for 99.99% of the electorate on that either. So no maybe be not weakness but pointless.
Rumors of election interference are afloat. Could be fun in the future.
You mean like Labour party operatives fanning out over Pennsylvania in support of DEMs?
“Sir Keir said he believed a working person was somebody who “goes out and earns their living, usually paid in a sort of monthly cheque” but they did not have the ability to “write a cheque to get out of difficulties”. And the moron still cannot define a woman…….
TDR. Is that all you’ve got?
Labour fears Trump. Yet laps up all manner of misguided social and foreign policy from the clinton-obama axis like a whipped cur.
5 Stars for this one Tom McTague
Starmer’s Labour may not be “far left” in British terms, but they are sufficiently left wing to be seen in America as subversive, even by some Democrats, and a danger to a pluralistic open society. Some in the UK have similar fears.
The British should be very grateful that Nigel Farage is best friends with Trump.
Any man in the civil service who wears a dress to work should be sacked. You can have sympathy for this mental illness, but you mustn’t encourage it.
Re Teresa May at the White House with Trump in 2017– I remind you that the “Steele Dossier” was dominating the news at the time, and Trump certainly understood that a retired MI6 desk officer had to have approval from “the highest level” before interfering in a US election by preparing oppo research for his recent adversary’s campaign against him.
Given that, Trump was remarkably and uncharacteristically gracious to even host May, let alone as the first head of government he received. For the tame UK press to then be so churlish as to ignore his magnanimous gesture toward the UK and lead off with such a question. Were I Trump, rather than try to make a joke to defuse it, I might have just turned away from May and walked out of the room.
As for Lammy trying to be JD Vance’s buddy or Starmer dining with Trump—be assured that Trump and Vance know what Lammy said about Trump when out of power, and probably know more than does Starmer about Labour Party apparatchiks working to defeat him. Trump and Vance will smile and play nice, but if the chips are ever down, they know where Starmer, Lammy, and Labour stand.
You got this one right.