Opinion|A Progressive Future Depends on National Identity
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/06/19/opinion/border-policy-immigration-labour-party.html
You have a preview view of this article while we are checking your access. When we have confirmed access, the full article content will load.
Guest Essay
June 19, 2025, 1:00 a.m. ET

By Claire Ainsley
Ms. Ainsley, an adviser to Keir Starmer before he became prime minister of Britain, is the director of the Project on Center-Left Renewal at the Progressive Policy Institute.
When Prime Minister Keir Starmer of Britain stepped before a lectern at 10 Downing Street last month, he made clear how misguided he thought the country’s immigration policies had been. He described its recent approach as a “one-nation experiment in open borders” that Britons never voted for. In its place, he announced a slew of measures to toughen border controls, raise skill requirements for immigrants and effectively end mass migration.
All this is coming from Britain’s center-left Labour Party, which long favored openness toward migrants. That reflected Labour’s modern base of urban progressive voters. Higher immigration was economically advantageous for them, in particular by holding down prices, and it was consistent with their humanitarian worldview.
The trouble is, these views tend to be at odds with the views of many working-class voters. Those less affluent voters have questioned the impact of mass migration for years, worried about its impact on housing, public services, wages and communities. The response of urban progressives in Britain, as in other parts of Europe and the United States, has often been to denounce working-class voters as narrow-minded or racist. It should hardly be surprising that voters responded by switching their political allegiances. Immigration, more than any other issue, symbolizes the wedge between center-left parties and their traditional class base.
For the sake of the progressive left and all it stands for, Mr. Starmer’s announcement represents a crucial acknowledgment that both the policy and the political direction must change.
Political analysts and rivals interpreted his announcement as a defensive maneuver to lessen the threat of Reform U.K., a right-wing, anti-immigration party. There is an element of truth in this. Labour managed to win back working-class support in the election last year partly based on early moves toward a tighter border policy, although that support is at risk now that the party is trying to govern. Labour politicians are reasonably worried that Britain will follow the path of Germany, Italy and the Netherlands, all countries where the right wing overtook the center left in the last election.
But it is a mistake to see Labour’s new policy as mere tactics. Getting serious about immigration can be part of a coherent progressive vision, not just a bargain with working-class voters to stave off the right. Progress toward a more equal and fair society depends on stability and community.
Comments