The best development in British politics in 2025 has been the apparently organic emergence of a new conspiracy theory about the Labour Party which has gone bloody viral amongst booze and fag patriots; the existence of the ‘Fabian society’. Click onto any Facebook post by Sir Beer Korma and you will see hundreds of Union Jack cover photos denouncing the Kriminal for his Fabian connections.
This is a critical development in delegitimising the British centre-left, on a par with the accusation that the Democrats are all harvesting adrenochrome.
I could write a best-selling revisionist history of the first Atlee government, explaining how the economic reforms he carried out were as damaging as those of Juan Perón, complete with a narrative of White flight from Windrush immigration. This hypothetical book, even if it were read by 50,000 people, would have nowhere near the same impact as the popularisation of the belief that the Labour Party is in hoc to a masonic secret society working hand in glove with the WEF.
It cuts through the Gogglebox mindfog. ‘What, what, but I love our Nurses, and our NHS…’, etc. We don’t have the time nor the resource to win the argument intellectually. It is much more practical for the right to either endorse the Fabian conspiracy, or to adopt the Trump approach writ Q Anon, acknowledge and refuse to deny or endorse.
The Fabian society, for the uninformed reader, was and is a real organisation which has sought to promote the broader goals of socialism through an incrementalist approach since 1884. As a historical institution it was influential in the implementation of the welfare state and women’s suffrage. In its modern form it is just a meaningless label that politicians and ‘thinkers’ on the Left affix to themselves to imply unseen intellectual depths, see also ‘Bevanite’ and ‘One-Nation’ elsewhere. There is also a tiny rump official organisation/think tank with a piddling income (£1.3 million in 2024). They have far, far less influence than either Labour Together or the Tony Blair Institute. Gormless Starmer probably thinks Fabian is an Italian with fancy feet who played for United under Sir Alex Ferguson.
I should be clear that there is plenty evil about Labour but I ascribe little if any agency to wannabe rockers like Anthony Blair. The real problem comes from, as your A-Level History teacher would put it, Below. J’accuse has already documented the shocking overrepresentation of sex offenders in the Labour Party and the adjacent criminal failings of Islington council to protect children. Local labour politics has always been vulnerable to entryism of the worst sort and is a font of municipal corruption across the country.
In more recent years, particularly after the Brexit vote took away many White working class voters from the party on a permanent basis, there are also now entire parts of the country where the Labour vote is entirely in hoc to Pakistani and Bangladeshi ‘community leaders’ who act as the political wings of their territories rape gangs. As predicted by J’accuse, the inquiry has already become a whitewash which will not summon local councillors and police officers under oath. It is good that survivors are politically organising against this, but so long as Starmer is in power it is exceedingly unlikely that the full scale and nature of the atrocity will emerge.
Basically, the public are not yet ready to hear the unvarnished truth about the Labour Party, but they are willing to give an ear to conspiracy theories which already resemble other popular narratives which resemble what David Icke and others have been serving up for decades, the Illuminati and ‘Agenda 2030’. The Great Reset. It cannot be overstated how widespread the acceptance or semi-acceptance of the idea that a small cabal of global elites control the world really is amongst the British public. The more that Labour can be drawn into this over-arching narrative, the more difficult it is for McSweeney and his gang to pull of a ’save the Republic’ tactical voting election against Farage. In 2029, we should be aiming for Zero Seats.
Charter 88
To that end, I have identified a new thread of the Fabian narrative which it would be wise for followers to spread widely in order to demonise Blairism. In 1988, the New Statesman (which was set up by Fabians) published an open letter called ‘Charter 88’, signed by all manner of misfits and weirdoes including Clement Freud (posthumously accused of raping underage girls, allegations his widow accepted), Lord Scarman (who wrote a report blaming the police for being attacked by black rioters) and Ralph Miliband (who sired that greasy Net Zero fanatic, Ed). The letter’s popularity was such that it led to the creation of a small pressure group, eventually 85,000 people were signed up and it included almost every left-leaning intellectual of the time including Christopher Hitchens and Martin Amis.
The letter itself, printed below, was a series of political demands for the anti-democratic agenda of Tony Blair, who himself acknowledged his sympathy with the its aims, including the subjection of the Executive to the ‘Rule of Law’, the creation of bogus Human Rights and devolution to the nations and regions. Read the first real New Labour manifesto:
We have had less freedom than we believed. That which we have enjoyed has been too dependent on the benevolence of our rulers. Our freedoms have remained their possession, rationed out to us as subjects rather than being our own inalienable possession as citizens. To make real the freedoms we once took for granted means for the first time to take them for ourselves. The time has come to demand political, civil and human rights in the United Kingdom. We call, therefore, for a new constitutional settlement which will:
Enshrine, by means of a Bill of Rights, such civil liberties as the right to peaceful assembly, to freedom of association, to freedom from discrimination, to freedom from detention without trial, to trial by jury, to privacy and to freedom of expression.
Subject Executive powers and prerogatives, by whomsoever exercised, to the rule of law.
Establish freedom of information and open government.
Create a fair electoral system of proportional representation.
Reform the Upper House to establish a democratic, non-hereditary Second Chamber.
Place the Executive under the power of a democratically renewed Parliament and all agencies of the state under the rule of law.
Ensure the independence of a reformed judiciary.
Provide legal remedies for all abuses of power by the state and by officials of central and local government.
Guarantee an equitable distribution of power between the nations of the United Kingdom and between local, regional and central government.
Draw up a written constitution anchored in the ideal of universal citizenship, that incorporates these reforms.
The inscription of laws does not guarantee their realisation. Only people themselves can ensure freedom, democracy and equality before the law. Nonetheless, such ends are far better demanded, and more effectively obtained and guarded, once they belong to everyone by inalienable right.
‘Charter 88’ has such a delicious ring to it but it is important to explain some of the surrounding historical context. The Charter 88 letter came into being because the Left gave up on winning elections and democratic majorities fairly after Thatcher’s third victory in the 1987 General Election.
The explicit purpose of the changes listed in the letter above is to limit the ability of democratically elected politicians to enact change through four attacks on a Sovereign Parliament - by the rule of lawyers, by devolving power into bogus regional assemblies and by the enshrinement of so-called ‘Human rights’ which governments would be beholden to regardless of their mandates and finally by introducing proportional representation (which necessitates coalitions, and thereby limits executive power).
All of these changes were implemented by the Blair government to varying degrees. We had the Human Rights Act (and ECHR), a Supreme Court (which has taken judicial authority away from Parliament) and then devolution to Scotland and Wales - where proportional representation was implemented. Blair even introduced the Freedom of Information Act, as the Charter demands.
So the framing here is simple. Charter 88. The Fabian plot. Drawn up by radical, anti-democratic intellectuals in a Fabian created magazine to destroy the British constitutional settlement because they realised their horrible ideas could never win the support of the public at large, it was implemented by the disgraced Tony Blair.
These secret instructions of the Jesuits. This report from the Iron Mountain. That Charter 88. Where we go one, we go all.
Surely the focus should be on Common Purpose, which has been described as a Fabian freemasonry and which permeates every part of the UK Public sector.
I find the Fabian conspiracism a bit lightweight, personally. I'm quite sympathetic to the view (given some credence by Peter Hitchens' reporting) that the Blairite wing of Labour are basically crypto-communists, in the Bolshevik mold. Ironically, the Michael Foot/Corbynite wing were just less effective/less sinister communists. Peter Mandelson, Jack Straw, Blair himself were all former members of communist parties, among others.
If you look back through the "intellectual" leading lights of Labour in the 20th century, many of them (eg Roy Jenkins) held views that are pretty indistinguishable from Bolshevism, except they managed to successfully mainstream them. And then they gave Eric Hobsbawm a knighthood.
People get hung up on the economic arguments, but in reality Marxist economics was always secondary (except to useful idiots like Corbyn) to the programme of instituting a tyranny of bureaucrats and wrecking the fabric of society through social engineering (in part out of spite from those who didn't fit in to the old order, in part out of ideological fanaticism, in part because this makes it easier to control the public).