The murder of student Henry Nowak on December 3 2025 shocked the UK. Now the case has also become a pretext for attempts by some on the right to divide communities with demands for “common sense”.
It leaves the Labour government with an important choice: move away from its failed strategy of trying to win over Reform UK voters, or continue down a route that risks normalising divisive rhetoric.
In the wake of revelations about Hampshire police’s handling of the knife attack, media attention focused on violent protests near the site of the killing.
But arguably more important is the suggestion by Reform UK leader Nigel Farage, before the unrest began, that people respond with “pure cold rage”. His comments came after Vickrum Digwa, a Sikh, was jailed for life for the fatal stabbing in Southampton.
In heated exchanges in the Commons on June 3, Farage’s comments were widely condemned. But besides being exactly what Henry Nowak’s family wanted to avoid, it was also an example of the well-worn right-wing strategy of depicting its politics as “common sense”.
In his initial statement, Farage had clearly and calmly presented arguments around two-tier justice, anti-white racism, mass immigration and diversity initiatives as facts that are taken for granted and shared by all rational human beings.
Yet, common sense can take different forms. Political historian Sophia Rosenfeld has argued that without some form of common sense (shared norms, values and judgments), political life could devolve into a contest of pure strength. In other words, for a democracy to function, it requires a “shared realm” or a basic agreement on facts and rules.
Over recent decades, however, there has been an increase in far-right and populist politicians claiming to be torchbearers for common sense. In many cases, this can be perceived as an attempt to solidify reactionary narratives around race, gender and culture as rational and incontrovertible “fact” .
Where this leaves Labour
A key problem for the Labour government now is how to respond to attempts to hijack the idea of common sense.
Until now, Labour has followed other mainstream actors, including the Conservatives, in trying to outflank the far right on its own turf. But this appeal to voters on the right often comes at the expense of its own membership base.
At times, the government appears to have shared far-right language when using “common sense” as a way of framing its politics. Prime Minister Keir Starmer echoed Reform’s demands to bring in stricter tests and higher standards of English for settlement in the UK, as part of a “common sense” policy. Centring language skills as a core element of citizenship was once strongly connected with anti-migrant politics.
Meanwhile, in terms of immigration, Labour has pledged to “restore common sense to our borders”. This dovetails with Farage’s claim that a responsible government has a duty to protect its borders “as basic common sense”.
On top of this, Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood’s recent response to people protesting at immigration reforms as “white liberals”, telling them to “fuck right off”, might look to some like a page from the far-right playbook. It came months after a warning from Starmer (which he later rowed back on) that the UK risked becoming an “island of strangers”.
In general, the government’s response to Nowak’s murder has been measured in comparison to that of Farage. Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch, however, appeared to follow Reform’s demand that the killing be treated the same as George Floyd’s murder in the US.
In speaking to UK multiculturalism, Mahmood’s message that “we cannot allow this murder to turn communities against one another”, and her reminder that “we do not believe in collective punishment in this country”, are noteworthy. These narratives offer basic pathways for a more inclusive common sense from which to build resistance to divisive rhetoric.
Yet these remarks alone are insufficient. Where is such measured language when it comes to, for instance, making a positive case for migration? The long-term impact of normalising far-right ideology by sharing elements of its discourse cannot be undone overnight. Nor should it be a reactive measure.
While the series of events surrounding Nowak’s murder have inevitably been exploited, this tragedy can also serve as a clear watershed moment for the government – and for the political mainstream in general. Trying to outflank Reform UK is a dead end that will lead to more hate and division.
Mahmood spoke about the duty to police without fear or favour, something that has been severely lacking at times. More broadly, the need to build a case for communities that deal with crime and tragedy in a way that avoids further societal discord could not be clearer. The only option now for mainstream politicians, and British society, is to make the case for their own version of common sense.
You must be logged in to post a comment Login