Nigel Farage is 'the establishment'

Vladimir Bortun, 13 de Julho de 2026
Link para o Artigo original: [New Statesman]
[5 minutos]

After weeks of growing scrutiny over the £5m gift received from the Thailand-based billionaire Christopher Harborne, Nigel Farage resigned his Clacton seat in order to be elected again. In true populist fashion, he framed it as a battle between "the people" and "the establishment". Many voters buy in to this rhetoric. While Farage's general approval rating has somewhat suffered due to this scandal, a survey earlier this year showed that nearly 40 per cent of those in routine and manual occupations and 36 per cent of small employers and the self-employed now support Reform. Even trade union members are reportedly as likely to back Reform as Labour.

How is it, then, that the claim of a privately educated, ex-City trader who received a multimillion-pound gift from the sixth richest Briton alive to be the champion of "ordinary people" still have any traction? It's because his notion of "the people" is deliberately vague – it includes "patriotic" trade union members, sole traders "who actually keep the country running", as well as landlords with over a dozen properties. Depending on his audience, Farage simultaneously presents Reform as "the true party of the workers" and also the party that would deliver "the most pro-business" government this country has seen in modern times.

Uniting capital and labour is easier in rhetoric than in government. Farage's populist formula requires him to simultaneously be pro-worker and pro-business, anti-establishment and the leader of a party that seeks to govern. The contradictions are not merely rhetorical – they have real policy implications. When Reform-run councils have attempted to implement their agenda, the results have often been messy. In Derbyshire, Reform councillors initially proposed closing care homes before reversing course after local backlash. In Lancashire, similar plans to save £4m a year through care home closures faced fierce opposition.

On economic policy, the contradictions become even more apparent. Reform's manifesto promises deregulation and a pro-crypto stance, while simultaneously claiming to champion workers' interests. The party's tax plans have been criticised for disproportionately benefiting the wealthy, despite Farage's populist rhetoric. Meanwhile, Reform's housing policy includes measures that would benefit landlords, not renters – a constituency Farage claims to represent.

The fundamental problem with Farage's populist project is that it attempts to unite fundamentally opposed class interests under the banner of "the people". This is not merely a rhetorical challenge but a structural one. As the TUC has argued, policies that genuinely benefit workers – like stronger employment protections – are precisely what Reform promises to dismantle. The party's fracking policy, backed by the majority of its supporters, would primarily benefit energy companies, not ordinary voters.

Farage's political genius lies in his ability to deflect attention from these contradictions through cultural politics. By framing every issue as a battle between "real people" and "the establishment", he avoids having to explain how his pro-business agenda would actually benefit workers. The evidence suggests that when Reform does gain power, the reality falls short of the rhetoric. This is the fundamental paradox of right-wing populism: it promises to challenge the establishment while advancing policies that serve precisely the interests it claims to oppose.