More stories

  • in

    UK marketplace sellers face ‘second Brexit’ hit from Trump’s US import rules

    Many UK-based independent sellers on marketplaces such as eBay and Amazon could suffer a significant hit to US sales from planned changes to import rules under Donald Trump, with experts comparing the impact to a second Brexit.The new rules, which mean all parcels originating or made in China and being sold into the US must pay import duty – of as much as 15% on fashion items – and an additional 10% tariff, are also expected to impact bigger online clothing retailers such as Asos and Boohoo.The changes were introduced at the start of February in an attempt to protect US retailers from a surge in competition from the likes of Chinese online marketplaces Shein and Temu, but were indefinitely paused after the US customs service struggled to cope with the massive increase in parcels requiring checks last week.However, they are expected to be implemented within the coming months, potentially driving up prices for US consumers and hitting sales for online retailers.Before the change, parcels with a value of less than $800 (£635) shipped to individuals in the US were exempt from import tax and did not pass through the usual customs checks. That scheme, originally designed to help smooth online shopping, is being revoked after it emerged that the number of shipments under the “de minimis” rules had ballooned to more than 1bn, valued at $54.5bn by 2023 – most of them from China or Hong Kong via firms including Shein and Temu.“You are looking at an increase of $30 to $50 per consignment [group of parcels],” said Brad Ashton at the advisory firm RSM. “It is creating a perfect storm for online retailers putting goods into the US market. It has a lot of the hallmarks of Brexit in terms of its potential impact on small traders.“Businesses will see their margins eroded because costs will increase. We may get to a point where the changes make a UK business uncompetitive in selling to the US.”The widespread use of Chinese factories for many British brands, particularly in fashion, means businesses such as Asos and Boohoo will be drawn in, as well as many UK independent marketplace sellers.It will not just affect goods made in China and then sent from the UK, but potentially a much wider array, as any package containing even one product made in China may have to pay import tax and pass through customs checks, further increasing costs, according to experts.There is also an expectation that the de minimis rules will eventually be scrapped for all imports, no matter their origin.About $5bn worth of parcels were exported to the US from the UK under de minimis rules in 2021, according to a Congressional Research Service analysis of data from US Customs and Border Protection. About 80% of that was estimated to be related to online retail, with fashion likely to be a large proportion of it.Chris White, at the logistics company Fulfilmentcrowd, said that during the brief period when the rules were in place in early February, one-third of the parcels it shipped to the US from the UK were found to be of Chinese origin and subject to the new taxes.Fast-fashion specialists Asos and Boohoo sell about £300m of clothing a year to the US. Both are already struggling to compete with the rise of Shein and high street retailers, which have revived after the Covid pandemic. John Stevenson, a retail analyst at Peel Hunt, said Asos and Boohoo would have to “adjust prices or take a view on [the] profitability of operating in the US”.As well as the higher tax charges, customs checks required after the rule change will add as much as two days to the processing of orders, making UK retailers less competitive with US-based operators on the speed of delivery.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionStevenson said the hit to Asos and Boohoo was “not business-critical” in the way it could be for Shein or Temu, which he believed were heavily reliant on the tax benefit, but that it would have an impact.In the short term, online sellers will probably have lower sales because of uncertainty among US shoppers over possible taxes. White said that during the period when the new rules were in place, similar parcels were loaded with different levels of duty as local customs officers made different decisions.He said a further element of the rule change might be to expose brands that were “trading on an image of being British or European” as being “made in China and not Savile Row”, potentially damaging their appeal.There would be “lots of crossed fingers and puzzled faces” over the changes in legislation, with retailers potentially opening more US warehousing or, longer term, to switch sources of supply, White added.Boohoo closed its US warehouse earlier this year, and Asos is scheduled to close its facility there in November. However, a reversal could be on the cards if the de minimis rules are confirmed. Many fast-fashion companies have already diversified their supply chains – making more in India, Bangladesh or Turkey. Trump’s tax changes could accelerate this further.Shein is reportedly incentivising Chinese suppliers to set up in Vietnam, according to a report by Bloomberg.It is not clear when the new rules might be implemented as the US tries to put the technology and workforce in place to handle the new system. Experts say it could take weeks or months.While there is a chance that Trump will change his mind, as he has done on tariffs with Canada and Mexico, no business can bet on which way the US might jump. More

  • in

    Voices: As Brexit’s impact deepens, Independent readers question the true cost of leaving the EU

    Your support helps us to tell the storyFrom reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it’s investigating the financials of Elon Musk’s pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, ‘The A Word’, which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.Your support makes all the difference.Read moreAs the UK continues to reckon with the aftermath of Brexit, debates over its long-term impact remain heated.While some argue that leaving the EU was a necessary step for sovereignty and regaining control over borders, many feel that the economic and social consequences have been overwhelmingly negative.Five years post-Brexit, critics argue the country faces rising costs, trade barriers, and a weakened international standing, with businesses struggling due to additional paperwork and lost access to EU markets. Economic growth has slowed, and many industries, such as finance, have seen job losses and relocations to Europe. Immigration has surged, contradicting promises of reduced movement.When we asked for your views recently, many expressed regret over the decision, citing the loss of freedoms, opportunities for young people, and access to European services. The lack of tangible benefits even led some to call for a reconsideration of the decision, while others still maintain that distancing from the EU was essential for the UK’s future independence.Here’s what you had to say: ‘Disinformation is huge’I have tried very hard to see any benefits of our decision to leave the EU.At every turn it has made our relationship with our biggest trading partner more complicated and costly with little or no reciprocal benefits.I have not been able to identify any piece of EU regulation or law that anyone can show was holding us back or was imposed upon us.The disinformation and lack of understanding of how the EU functions is huge.The EU parliament is an elected body. It does not enforce laws in member countries; only the council of ministers can agree on laws and rule changes, and then each state parliament has to individually agree. So how this was a lack of sovereignty, I fail to see.We are definitely worse off. I say tell the EU we made a mistake and ask if we can rejoin.EddieMRelocationHad it not been for Brexit, my wife and I would not have become French citizens. We moved here to Brittany in 2001. Since then, every return trip to family in the UK seems to be more expensive than the one before. OK, prices are up in France too, but we have a better life now than when we lived in Orpington, SE London. Not least in health care, a consideration that grows steadily as we grow older.oldnuffHistorical tensions with the EUHistory is the answer, they still hold the memories of being beaten in war by England and then Britain. Even when we were members, they didn’t like us, so now this is shown even more.My opinion is, we stop international aid that earns nothing back and build our security above everything else, rigorously defend our fisheries and all our assets. Accept friendship and nurture Australia, New Zealand, and Canada, they have been our allies even after the Empire. Trade evenly with any willing partners and try to find alternatives to the EU. Australian and South American wines are good, why use European?MartynIreland and trade relocationIt was definitely worth it for Ireland, thank you very much. We took over a quarter of companies relocating due to Brexit (125), with France and Luxembourg also taking around 100 each. In June, London will lose Euro Clearing, which supports 80,000 well-paid jobs.We have also been able to ban bee-killing pesticides and agree on an EU-wide finance scheme for Covid recovery. Britain would have vetoed both, as well as the tax transparency rules. Britain even vetoed the EU proposal to prevent China from dumping steel in Britain. So yes, we in the EU are very grateful for Brit’s jingoistic stupidity.You are now the lapdog of Trump. State visits, rolling out the royal family, and plenty of flattery. For whatever scraps of trade you can get.Damo75Brexit mantra failureI’d like to retire to Portugal, but without a visa I can only stay a maximum of 90 days. The cost of flights and travel each time I go is prohibitive. Also, without the funds in the bank required for a visa, I can never get one. It seems to me that the Brexit mantra of ‘regaining control of our borders’ has failed. As far as I can tell, we can’t stop the tide of immigration to this country (nor should we, since there is a net gain to our economy). Brexit seems to have had precisely the opposite effect, that is, to prevent emigration. Maybe that was the plan all along…MacUnclear intentions and lasting consequencesBrexit was poorly defined in its intentions, expressed as simply being AGAINST EU membership. Not FOR anything tangible. So it’s hard to assess. But the implicit objectives (reducing migration, deregulation, and prioritizing America or Asia) and the approach used to achieve them (nationalist rhetoric, bellicosity etc.) were not relevant or appropriate to addressing the UK’s main problems. Our main problems were not compromised sovereignty or EU vassal status.After almost a decade, the benefits of Brexit are almost non-existent, hard to measure, and difficult to perceive. But the costs are enormous for the country’s economy, society, and international standing, as well as in every single sector of activity (including fishing, farming, and finance). Not to mention the many families and individuals affected whose lives have been constrained and their rights severely curtailed.Any objective assessment would conclude something similar, but Brexit remains a holy cow that escapes public assessment. It is accorded the status of something untouchable, permanent, and beyond the power of public governance. Elevated from democratic accountability and public discussion, it now exists in the realm of God, king, and country.Marsupial‘The UK will never return to its former glory’Gove should change housing benefits and pay only from 28 years, only child tax credit. Young people should be sent to work… Unfortunately, there is no return to 2006 when people in the UK could find a job everywhere, get large benefits, and quickly get a flat with a union. The UK is changed and will never return to its former glory. Mr Cameron allowed a large emigration from the EU, i.e. seven million people, and Germany gave a five-year waiting period for benefits. People came to the UK for benefits and to Germany to work.If a country has high benefits and a high tax-free amount, then an excess of people will destroy the budget and the country. That is why prices went up and taxes to find money for benefits, the NHS, and schools, but higher various taxes destroy family businesses and small businesses. That is why unemployment is growing. It should be remembered that 17 years have passed since Mr Cameron’s time, so the children of EU emigrants have already grown up and have their own new children. That is why spending on benefits, NHS, and schools is increasing… Only these children have British passports, so we do not count them as emigrants, but social spending is increasing. That is why the UK will have a big problem to develop… People will change governments every four years…Martin‘Britain has sowed, thus it should reap’Efforts to mend ties are proving more complex than expected. On par with having cancelled our subscription to a gym club, it transpires that having been rude for the past 10 years is not helping. Or rather, our new polite behaviour is only handing us comments like ‘tough!’. All we want is to keep on accessing the club premises, but the club refuses to consider this on the grounds that we are not members. How unfair, as we paid the club fees last time just nine years ago… Britain has sowed, thus it should reap.KarmaThe economic falloutAs pointed out so effectively by many already on here, Brexit has failed totally. Tax revenues, which we desperately need, are down £40bn, inward investment is lower than it would be as EU members, business costs have inflated, our international reputation and influence have degraded, our young people are denied opportunities, and our freedoms to work and retire in 27 other countries have been taken away. Immigration has gone up rather than down.We are still following EU rules because there is no practical alternative but have no say in formulating the rules. In short, we have managed to make ourselves poorer, less respected, and have actually lost control and sovereignty rather than gained it.We now find ourselves stranded without European friends and at the mercy of Trump and Musk. And still, the politicians are too scared to say the obvious.When someone – probably the LibDems – breaks ranks and points this all out, I suspect the dam will break.MakeAmericaPottyAgain‘Brexit was always a lie’Brexit was always a lie: the Leave campaign’s 2016 propaganda included promising we would stay in the Single Market yet ‘control our borders’ and forge lucrative trade deals with the rest of the world, all while supporting our struggling NHS.Instead, we have the highest immigration, the longest passport queues, a flatlining economy, and a broken NHS. Any company wanting to serve the EU market will set up in Germany or France. 15% of our high tax-paying City jobs have fled to Europe to access that market. Young people can no longer work in the EU to learn a language and culture – we are isolated, diminished, and everyone knows we have made a serious mistake. And yet this Labour government is clinging to the same wrong red lines as Theresa May. Kier Starmer marched with one million Remainers in October 2019 asking for a People’s vote. How about having another vote now, 8 years after 2016, now we know what Leave actually means?Eleanor‘Brexit served Putin’s interest as well’The conservatives tended to use the EU as a whipping post. That is, they blamed the EU for all of the unpopular legislation they wanted to push through. At the same time, British Prime Ministers would sell their grandmother’s for the chance to have their photograph taken on the White House lawn.Add to that the fact that the EU is a socialist construct and the political leanings in the UK are much more capitalist. That did not make us “good Europeans”.Both campaigns lied or lied by omission. The Leave campaign circumvented British rules on campaign spending by using the Canadian offices of a company offering the use of software that targeted potential Leave voters online, promising gold-laden streets if we left.Whereas Remain failed to mention one of the requirements of a previous EU treaty, possibly Maastricht, requiring the UK to give up the London-based financial institutions that generate much of this country’s income. This would break the UK. We would become little Britain.I would also question if there was any foreign interference in Brexit, specifically Russia. Nigel Farage’s principal backer has or had Russian connections. I cannot remember the guy’s name and I am not suggesting any kind of treasonous intent on his part, but Russia does have history in this area. There have been allegations of potential Russian interference in elections in the United States in recent years, and there should be no doubt that Brexit has not benefitted any country more than Russia. A weakened EU and UK eased the risks to him of his attempted annexation of Ukraine, and the same Russian ship that passed over the Baltic Sea pipeline when it broke also passed over the undersea fiber optic connection to the Shetland Islands when it broke. Brexit served Putin’s interest as well.Kadien‘The UK as a whipping boy’Putting aside any type of for and against, the one thing I can’t believe is how vindictive the EU is to Britain now. Why do I get the feeling that they are using the UK as a whipping boy and a warning to other states who are threatening to leave? i.e. If you leave, this is what we will do to you. Was it right to leave? It was because we had a democratic vote, and for being democratic, Europe has taken it upon itself to make life as difficult as it can for us.In a lot of respects, there are many people who will say, “F U, if this is the way you treat us, we have no wish to come back into your German and French-run club, even if we are worse off.”Only my personal view.John Amiri‘Well-paid jobs have been lost’In my industry, we regularly send people to Europe on high-value projects. Their equipment can no longer be driven or flown. Instead, there are reams of paperwork to be completed. Carnets, a thing of the past while we were in the EU, are back. We now must hire extra people to wrangle this. As a direct consequence of Brexit, shipping costs and times have been inflated.In the immediate aftermath, one company ran up a six-figure bill for extended hire of kit because they couldn’t complete the appropriate paperwork to bring the equipment home. This was due to errors on the way out, which in turn was due to receiving wrong advice from the government department. This is entirely typical of the dumbassed incompetence and negligence of those who forced (by willful misinformation) Brexit on us.All this has meant that our European colleagues have learned to be less reliant on our expertise. They have trained locals to replace us. Well-paid jobs have been lost.Since then, I have weeded out ‘friends’ who were found to be guilty of voting for Brexit. Judge people not by what they say, but by the company they keep, and by what they do.TrussedUpTurkeysAssessing Brexit on its own criteriaI assess Brexit using the criteria provided by Brexiters. “Take back control of our laws, borders, and money.” So let’s look at them.Laws – The Retained EU Law bill was scrapped because it was crazy. All we’ve got rid of is stuff that didn’t apply to the UK anyway. Result = Fail.Borders – Immigration has tripled largely because of Brexit. We have no returns agreement for refugees. The primary driver of Brexit has been the most spectacular Fail imaginable. We gave up frictionless trade to control immigration and it tripled. Astonishing.Money – A GDP hit of 4-6% (£100bn+), drop in tax take of over £40bn. And people ask why taxes are at the highest level on record and the Winter Fuel Payment is now means-tested. Seriously, I can’t believe people don’t just admit this was a massive mistake.BigShowSome of the comments have been edited for this article for brevity and clarity. You can read the full discussion in the comments section of the original article here.The conversation isn’t over. To join in, all you need to do is register your details, then you can take part in the discussion. You can also sign up by clicking ‘log in’ on the top right-hand corner of the screen.Make sure you adhere to our community guidelines, which can be found here. For a full guide on how to comment click here. More

  • in

    The Guardian view on Labour and Brexit: a subtle but important strategic pivot | Editorial

    For most of the period since the decision was taken to leave the EU, British politicians have overestimated how much thought the continent gives to Brexit. Once shock at the referendum result receded, relations with the UK came to be seen as a technical problem to be solved by hard-headed negotiation.At critical moments, when deadlines neared, Brexit leapt up the agenda. After the treaties were signed, they dropped right down, overtaken by the other issues facing a large bloc with many borders and problems. That represents a perverse kind of victory for Boris Johnson and his chief negotiator, David Frost. The deal they signed was so skewed against British interests that Brussels has little incentive to reopen the settlement.This is a problem for those who think Brexit has gone badly – comfortably a majority opinion, according to polls. The road out was hard, but it was also a unilateral choice. The way back, even to a much looser association, means persuading EU governments and institutions that Britain has something unique to offer and, crucially, that it can be relied on to stay the course.The difficulty with that process is as much a limitation on Labour’s policy as the more commonly recognised domestic electoral taboos against upsetting leave voters. David Lammy, the shadow foreign secretary, understands this, which is why he and Sir Keir Starmer are proposing a new UK-EU security pact as the main instrument for improving the cross-Channel relationship. This is a field where Britain, as one of Europe’s top two military powers (alongside France), has capabilities and expertise that open doors in Brussels. A security partnership could be wide-ranging, covering energy and climate cooperation, without relitigating the terms of trade and regulatory alignment that inhibit discussions of enhanced economic intimacy.The economic cost of Brexit will still one day need to be addressed. On that front, the options are limited for as long as Labour refuses to countenance talk of a customs union or meaningful reintegration into the single market. This may be overcautious, but general public negativity about the way Brexit has worked out isn’t the same as eagerness to go through the whole gruelling exit process in reverse. And the old terms – the opt-outs and budget rebate – would no longer be available. Mr Johnson’s unpalatable cake cannot simply be unbaked.Even the keenest pro-Europeans – and Sir Keir was once counted in their ranks – must see the many complex practical implications of recognising that Brexit is a fait accompli, for Brussels no less than Britain. The starting point for a new and mutually beneficial relationship is an acknowledgment of geopolitical forces compelling the two sides to work together. Russia’s aggression against Ukraine makes that point compellingly. The prospect that Donald Trump could return to the White House next year doubles the urgency. The former US president, if restored to the Oval Office, would be an unreliable ally to Europe’s democracies and a wilful saboteur of international institutions.The Eurosceptic vision of Britain thriving without its home continent was always a delusion. In the current international context it is unsustainably perilous. The Conservative party’s choice to ignore these facts is as predictable as it is dangerous. Labour’s Brexit policy is still marked by caution, but on the need for a strategic pivot back to Europe, thankfully the silence is breaking. More

  • in

    Joe Biden signals he has no interest in signing US-UK trade agreement

    Ministers have given up on signing a trade agreement with the US before the next election, after the Biden administration signalled it had no interest in agreeing one.British officials had been hoping to agree a “foundational trade partnership” before both countries head to the polls in the next 12 months, having already decided not to pursue a full-blown free trade agreement.However, sources briefed on the talks say they are no longer taking place, thanks to reluctance among senior Democrats to open US markets to more foreign-made goods. The story was first revealed by Politico.A British government spokesperson said: “The UK and US are rapidly expanding cooperation on a range of vital economic and trade issues building on the Atlantic declaration announced earlier this year.” Multiple sources, however, confirmed the foundational trade partnership was no longer on the table.Vote Leave campaigners said giving the UK the freedom to sign bilateral trade agreements with other countries would be one of the biggest benefits of Brexit, with a US trade deal often held up as the biggest prize of all.Talks over a free trade agreement stalled early on, however, thanks in part to resistance from Democratic members of Congress and concerns in the UK about opening up UK markets to chlorine-washed chicken and hormone-injected beef.Earlier this year, the Guardian saw documents outlining how Washington and London could instead coordinate over a partnership covering digital trade, labour protections and agriculture. The deal would not have included lower barriers for service companies, meaning it fell short of a fully fledged free trade deal, but could have paved the way for one in the future.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionSources say the deal was always likely to prove difficult to finalise, in part because the US still wanted greater access for their agricultural products. The prime minister, Rishi Sunak, said at a food security summit earlier this year that he would not allow either chlorine-washed chicken or hormone-injected beef into the UK.It also became clear in recent weeks that the Biden administration had no interest in signing any kind of a deal before the election, given how Donald Trump had weaponised international trade agreements during his first run for president.A spokesperson for Ron Wyden, the Democratic chair of the Senate finance committee, told Politico: “It is Senator Wyden’s view that the United States and United Kingdom should not make announcements until a deal that benefits Americans is achievable.” More

  • in

    Voices: ‘The devil’s in the detail’: Independent readers give their verdict on UK’s chance to strengthen ties with EU

    Sign up for the View from Westminster email for expert analysis straight to your inbox Get our free View from Westminster email Plans to offer Britain and other European countries “associate membership” of the EU have got Independent readers talking. We asked you what you thought of a blueprint, tabled by France and Germany, creating […] More

  • in

    The Guardian view on Sunak’s foreign policy: a Europe-shaped hole | Editorial

    The alliance between Britain and the US, resting on deep foundations of shared history and strategic interest, is not overly affected by the personal relationship between a prime minister and a president.Sometimes individual affinity is consequential, as when Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan were aligned over cold war doctrine, or when Tony Blair put Britain in lockstep with George W Bush for the march to war in Iraq. But there is no prospect of Rishi Sunak forming such a partnership – for good or ill – with Joe Biden at this week’s Washington summit.Viewed from the White House, the prime minister cuts an insubstantial figure – the caretaker leader of a country that has lost its way. That doesn’t jeopardise the underlying relationship. Britain is a highly valued US ally, most notably in the fields of defence, security and intelligence. On trade and economics, Mr Sunak’s position is less comfortable. The prime minister is a poor match with a president who thinks Brexit was an epic blunder and whose flagship policy is a rebuttal of the sacred doctrines of the Conservative party.Mr Biden is committed to shoring up American primacy by means of massive state support for green technology, tax breaks for foreign investment and reconfiguring supply chains with a focus on national security. Mr Sunak’s instincts are more laissez-faire, and his orthodox conservative budgets preclude interventionist statecraft.The two men disagree on a fundamental judgment about the future direction of the global economy, but only one of them has a hand on the steering wheel. Mr Sunak looks more like a passenger, or a pedestrian, since Britain bailed out of the EU – the vehicle that allows European countries to aggregate mid-range economic heft into continental power.London lost clout in the world by surrendering its seat in Brussels, but that fact is hard for Brexit ideologues to process. Their worldview is constructed around the proposition that EU membership depleted national sovereignty and that leaving the bloc would open more lucrative trade routes. Top of the wishlist was a deal with Washington, and Mr Biden has said that won’t happen. Even if it did, the terms would be disadvantageous to Britain as the supplicant junior partner.If Mr Sunak grasps that weakness, he dare not voice it. Instead, Downing Street emits vague noises about Britain’s leading role in AI regulation. But, in governing uses of new technology, Brussels matters more to Washington. London is not irrelevant, but British reach is reduced when ministers are excluded from the rooms where their French, German and other continental counterparts develop policy.Those are the relationships that Mr Sunak must cultivate with urgency. But his view of Europe is circumscribed by Brexit ideology and parochial campaign issues. His meetings with the French president, Emmanuel Macron, have been dominated by the domestic political obsession with small-boat migration across the Channel. The prime minister has no discernible relationship with the German chancellor, Olaf Scholz. He has not visited Berlin.Negotiating the Windsor framework to stabilise Northern Ireland’s status in post-Brexit trade was a vital step in repairing damage done by Boris Johnson and Liz Truss to UK relations with the EU. But there is still a gaping European hole in Britain’s foreign policy. It is visible all the way across the Atlantic, even if the prime minister refuses to see it. More

  • in

    Brexit: ‘Things can only get better’ say experts

    Sign up for the View from Westminster email for expert analysis straight to your inbox Get our free View from Westminster email The problems of Brexit red tape have hit “low ebb”, according to David Henig, the independent trade adviser, in an Independent online event on Thursday. From this new baseline, “things can only get […] More

  • in

    Today’s rightwing populists aim to disrupt, not to govern | Letters

    LettersToday’s rightwing populists aim to disrupt, not to govern Readers respond to an article by Jonathan Freedland on the decline of politics on both sides of the Atlantic An excellent analysis by Jonathan Freedland on the problems with the far right and their inability to govern as grownups (After Brexit and Trump, rightwing populists cling to power – but the truth is they can’t govern, 7 January). Governance has been reduced to the anarchic whims of individuals who learn their trade on social media, a platform that fuels their infantilism. It is extremely dangerous when these people have access to power. Exhibit A: Donald Trump.Suppose that during the attack on the Capitol on 6 January 2021, the elected lawmakers and the police had rolled over and given way to the mob, let them take up residence in the Capitol and become the new lawmakers. What might have played out? Would one of them (the man in the horned helmet perhaps?) have declared himself a senator/congressman and the leader of the House? Would he have proposed some new laws to his comrades in arms, or laws to help fellow American citizens live happier and better lives? Alison HackettDún Laoghaire, Dublin, Ireland As ever, Jonathan Freedland critically analyses the descent of rightwing politics on both sides of the Atlantic. The deterioration, however, is not restricted to the right. In days gone by, politicians such as John Smith, Gordon Brown, Michael Heseltine and Ken Clarke sought to lead, not follow, the public. They said what they believed and tried to implement and convince. Today, politicians seem to follow rather than lead the public, following, no doubt, the latest focus groups in marginal constituencies.Politicians such as Keir Starmer and Jeremy Hunt undoubtedly know that Britain’s interests are best served by a closer relationship with (if not membership of) the European Union. Rather than be honest about this and try to persuade their fellow citizens, they coalesce around what they believe is the popular position.Brian RonsonSefton, Merseyside The truth is that today’s right wing is not motivated to govern. They have been complicit in, and echo, the rightwing media message that has droned on for decades – a message straight out of the anti-democracy playbook. This is nothing new in recorded human history. “My way or burn it down” has been a consistent theme in radical fascist or fundamentalist mentality. Concern for consequence or social justice is not a guiding principle here. In fact, there is no guiding principle other than a manic five-year-old’s ambition to control the household. When that ambition inevitably leads to a bad end, they blame everyone but themselves and/or reach for a match. Curt Chaffee Seaside, California, USTopicsUS politicsDonald TrumpThe far rightRepublicansBrexitlettersReuse this content More