The left is continuing its incessantly long march through British institutions by seizing on the changing political vibe in the United Kingdom. For some time now, more and more voters are starting to become persuaded that the state is fundamentally broken, a significant outcome of that is its astonishing inefficiency. Voters witness high speed rail projects shattering budget ceilings by the tens of billions and marvel at the perceived excess inefficiencies of the state. The left, accompanied by allies on the right, has decided to seize the opportunity and push hard for digital ID cards; “Show me your papers—not because I mistrust you but because the bureaucracy cares for you and wishes to be made more efficient.”
The push for digital ID cards in the United Kingdom goes back a few decades, most notably to the Blair government; no doubt Tony Blair would have loved to easily identify those that were “Hussein Sympathisers.” So far, ID cards have been stopped from becoming law but now mainstream pundits are beginning to back it. Flanking from the left and the right, the opposition cannot afford to let its guard down. Polly Tonybee, a prominent Guardian columnist, recently wrote an incredibly revealing article pushing for state ID cards, laden with fallacies. It is well worth critiquing.
First, Toynbee quotes Jake Richards, the Rother Valley member of Parliament, who says this is about “the citizen taking back control of their own data and public services” by simplifying all your passwords into one password for everything. Notice, the implicit assumption that the state equals the people; it is an integral pillar to the establishment ideology. “Simple, safe, everything in one place for everyone,” Toynbee explains in a tone resembling that of a cartoonish supervillain.
Toynbee states that some will mourn of the loss of a “romantic freedom…But that’s a fairytale” before pivoting to the all-too-common and incredibly old talking point emanating from the ID card soldiers about how private algorithms already take and manipulate your data to tell you things, using the example of Lampshades. Obviously, history is laden with examples of authoritarian lamps raiding rebellious households, disappearing them and turning their lights off. The initial argument was that centralization of your information into one area, accessible with one password, is a good and convenient thing. But instead of addressing the real concerns regarding centralization of data by government diktat, Toynbee pivots to a fallacious comparison to private data collection. This does nothing to address concerns. In fact, it amplifies concerns. The intellectually honest thing to do would be to address the concerns about centralization of data in the hands of the government, but Toynbee seems to misunderstand the concerns completely. Everyone understands that web browsers, social media apps, and websites all collect our data. Most people are comfortable with this situation because at worst you will be offered a damp squib of a lampshade. Centralizing data in the hands of the state, however, which is constantly misusing power, expanding its power, polarizing the political environment, and scheming to win elections should never be considered a safe and convenient storage plan.
Toynbee cares more about eradicating the political hopes of her most hated political opponents than state efficiency. State efficiency is just a method through which she wants to see the Reform Party, more specifically Nigel Farage, flattened and cast out from the political stage. Farage is perceived as the central threat to the current political establishment because he is not one of them. One need only look at the degree to which he is attacked by both the Labour and Conservative Parties versus the way they attack each other. Fundamentally, establishment figures like Toynbee are realizing that the lack of action on explicit demands to lower immigration by the political establishment for over a decade is coming back to haunt them in the form of Reform and Nigel Farage. Given their acknowledgement of this, ID cards suddenly become much more palatable.
Staunch supporters of ID cards are managing to convince establishment figures that their introduction will put a stop in the surge of Reform by taking control of immigration. It is imperative to thrust home the point that when push comes to shove, politicians do not care about ideology, they care about re-election; this applies to their sycophantic cheerleaders too. Labour are desperate to stave off the Reform surge, and as more and more of their cheerleaders are begging them to introduce ID cards, when the clock really starts ticking down to the election in 2029, let there be no doubt that ID cards will come under serious consideration; you merely must observe Labour Party influencers openly supporting ID cards to purge Reform.
Mandatory ID card supporters are pushing incredibly hard to frame the introduction of such a system as an effective way to combat crime, particularly emotive crimes like domestic abuse. Cast your minds back to the immense power garnered through the panic surrounding terrorism in the early 2000s. The state, amidst people’s insecurities and panic, seized huge swathes of power the Patriot Act in the United States or the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act in the United Kingdom. Readers will doubtless need reminding about the weaving web of illegal surveillance uncovered by Wikileaks, which all started with a pretext of preventing terrorism.
Documents supporting mandatory ID cards are already mentioning right-wing extremism at a time when free speech is withering away in the UK, with councillors locked up for tweets whilst actually violent individuals receive much shallower sentences (sometimes no sentence at all). These ID cards would give the state vast power to ruin the lives of people who are caught up in this massive violation of our natural rights. It’s becoming dreary but you do not have to like what an objectively disgusting person is saying to defend their right to say it. There is an attempt to paint defenders of people like the councillor mentioned above as fighters for the “right to be racist.” The aim is clear: to discredit freedom of speech and whittle away at it until the justice system no longer recognizes it. It is unfortunate that the United Kingdom is already far down this path and an ID card would only further dim the flames of liberty.
The ID card lobby has been fighting this battle for decades, and their arguments mould around the political climate of the day. Terrorism, the environment, COVID-19 and now state efficiency have all been pushed to the forefront of their arguments at the opportune moments. Maybe the establishment figures pushing for these ID cards do care about these issues, but politics is a fundamentally dishonest endeavour. The incentives are so geared to the short-term that politicians, overall, find it impossible to not make decisions that help get them re-elected. Their time preference is artificially high because of the way our democracy works. When some malevolent, abstract goal of providing wealth and prosperity to the people is at risk, why wouldn’t the means justify the ends for politicians? Politicians don’t collapse into themselves with feelings of pure guilt from days spent lying; they justify their lies by comforting themselves that to bring utopia is noble and you must break a few eggs to make an omelette.
The British political scene is incredibly polarizing; hatred for “the other guy” is at extreme levels and societal tensions are at a boiling point. Politics is designed to be emotive. It is one of a gargantuan list of reasons why the current political system does not work. Life experience teaches us that decisions made in states of extreme emotion are usually not thought through well, their potentially positive outcomes diminished and often cause harm. The political left, however redundant these labels are becoming, genuinely believes that Nigel Farage and his ilk are far right lunatics that want to deport ethnic minorities purely for the fact that they are ethnic minorities whilst selling off all our nationalized industries to rich capitalists. The political right genuinely believes that Keir Starmer and the Labour Party are introducing a two-tier justice system and importing immigrants on purpose to destroy British culture whilst seizing as much money as possible for the state.
It is incredibly unlikely either side trusts the other with the reins of power, otherwise neither would do battle with the other. So, given all this, why on earth should anyone trust “the other guy” with such power as is unleashed by mandatory ID cards? If the power is too great, too acute for anyone other than yourself to wield, it should not exist.
