Mike Shallcross

Veteran magazine journalist.Interested in health, politics, and stuff that makes you better. Opinions entirely own and vulnerable to informed, opposing argument

[Mike Shallcross @Mikey_Health]

@DBanksy @EllieCumbo Yet another piece by this guy based around a conveniently lurid anonymous quote. Hmmm

[Mark Hammond @MarkHam80780803]

“Do you have a copy of ‘My struggle with graceless, aggressive personality disorder,’ by Kemi Badenoch?”

[David Aaronovitch @DAaronovitch]

Short version: he didn't go to Eton

[Andrew Lynch @andrewglynch]

if a toddler puts a sticker on you, that’s a sign of great respect in their culture

[Mike Shallcross @Mikey_Health]

I think this is absolutely spot on.

[Damian Low @DamianLow3]

Seeing some of the embarrassingly hateful reactions to Starmer's resignation today, I thought it was worth resharing this.

The level of personal hostility directed at Keir Starmer deserves scrutiny in its own right. Not because he should be immune from criticism, but because the tone and intensity of the attacks tell us something unhealthy about the state of democratic politics.

Starmer is a conventional political figure. Cautious, legalistic, incremental. He frustrates people precisely because he is managerial rather than messianic. Yet the reaction to him often goes far beyond disagreement, tipping into visceral hatred more commonly reserved for authoritarians or demagogues.

Much of this hostility is disconnected from concrete policy. It is not about specific votes, proposals or outcomes, but about projection. A belief that Starmer embodies betrayal, bad faith or hidden malice. That kind of politics runs on suspicion rather than evidence.

This matters because democracy depends on the assumption of good faith among opponents. You can think a leader is wrong, timid, or misguided without believing they are fundamentally illegitimate. Once politics becomes moralised to the point of demonisation, compromise is reframed as treachery and pluralism as weakness.

The pattern is familiar. In fragmented, polarised systems, anger concentrates not on extremists, whose intentions are clear, but on moderates, who disappoint maximalists on all sides. The centre becomes the lightning rod precisely because it resists totalising narratives.

There is also a media and online dynamic at work. Incentives reward outrage, not proportionality. Algorithms favour contempt over analysis. Over time, this creates a political culture in which relentless personal attack feels normal, even virtuous, rather than disgusting.

None of this is a defence of Starmer’s decisions, instincts or record. Those should be argued over robustly as you do in a democracy. The problem is the substitution of critique with hostility and the quiet erosion of democratic norms that follows when political opponents are treated as enemies rather than rivals.

A democracy cannot function if every election is framed as an existential struggle against internal evil. At some point, the target may change, but the damage to trust, restraint and culture remains.

[Deanne DuKhan @DuKhanD]

At some point we’re gonna need to talk about *our* role in getting the politicians we get. They have very little room for manoeuvre and frankness is never rewarded. If we do want a more honest relationship with those who govern, let them tell hard truths without getting clobbered

[Jake 🌹🏴󠁧󠁢󠁷󠁬󠁳󠁿 @ToryWipeout]

Starmer bad, not socialist enough, communist blah blah

The largest real terms increase to public spending in 25 years, Sure Start, social housing, free childcare, workers rights, renters rights, Hillsborough law, student grants, 1,000 more GPs, nationalising rail, homes for heros, neighbourhood policing, children's wellbeing bill, ban on onshore wind lifted, warm homes plan, child poverty taskforce, household support fund, national wealth fund.

Do I need to go on because I can?

[Will Hutton @williamnhutton]

Starmer is resigning because he became unreasonably hated - partly because of too many self-inflicted mistakes and partly because social media+Farage +the wider right have created a loathing and hatred culture. Burnham is right to seek time to prepare. The same forces await him.

[Mike Shallcross @Mikey_Health]

@pequod51 I would say that he encapsulates everything that's terrible about British political journalism, but there are so many other candidates.

[Adam Fox | Essex @AdamFoxUK]

I genuinely cannot believe we're in this position.

Keir Starmer won a huge mandate from the British people. He transformed the Labour Party from one that had suffered its worst defeat in generations into a party capable of winning power and changing the country.

And yet, just two years into government, we're talking about leadership speculation instead of the job we were elected to do.

I'm not pretending everything is perfect. Government is hard. The challenges facing Britain are immense. There are difficult choices to make and there are no easy answers. If solving these problems was simply a matter of better communications or finding a catchy slogan, someone would have done it already.

What frustrates me is the idea that replacing one leader magically makes those challenges disappear. It won't.

Whoever leads Labour will face the same economic realities, the same fiscal constraints, the same online discourse and the same difficult decisions.

Some seem determined to oversimplify those realities in pursuit of their own ambitions. I think that's a mistake.

This Government has real achievements to be proud of. Growth is returning. NHS waiting lists are falling. Interest rates are coming down. Small boat crossings are down. There is still a huge amount of work to do, but progress is being made.

The public don't want a Labour Party consumed by itself. They want a Labour Government focused on them.

Right now, our energy should be on delivering for the country, winning elections and building on the progress we've made…not tearing ourselves apart.

Because if we don't learn that lesson now, what happens when the next leader faces the same difficult decisions in a year or two's time?

[Mike Shallcross @Mikey_Health]

@IrkthePurists Also there is at least one fantastic jobsworth character in Dad's Army.

[Mike Shallcross @Mikey_Health]

@bristol_citizen It does sound like an imminent snafu which will require the intervention of Jeeves to resolve.

[Mike Shallcross @Mikey_Health]

@chrisandmarkuk It sounds like a crappy misogynist trope backed up by a load of anonymous quotes.

[Bristol Citizen @bristol_citizen]

'The party plans to send its chief organiser in London, Elfrede Brambley-Crashaw  to run the campaign.'

Sounds like the plot of an early Evelyn Waugh novel:

https://t.co/AILNkAAxK1

[David Aaronovitch @DAaronovitch]

fhs will just one political correspondent find a named person
of any kind to make a comment? Just once? This is crazy

[Mike Shallcross @Mikey_Health]

That's quite a ballsy statement for an unelected peer to make about one of a select bunch of Labour leaders who has actually won a general election.

[Widmerpool Appreciation Society @AtticumFloreat]

Starmer has ‘absolutely no authority’, says Labour peer as pressure grows on PM to step aside for Burnham – UK politics live https://t.co/NzZqj80rq4

[Neil Stone @DrNeilStone]

"Only very sick kids should die from measles"

No, Secretary Kennedy

NO child should die from measles.

Because there's a vaccine to prevent it.

[Jamie Reed @JamieFonzarelli]

TLDR; unfounded rumour unravels, journalists embarrassed.

[Ellie Cumbo @EllieCumbo]

It's fair to say literally nobody's opinion could be less relevant.

[Grev Williams 〓〓 @JusticeTrousers]

I'll go out on a limb here and suggest it's because she knows more about it than this prick.