Renewal: part 2 – fighting for a free future
(2/2) Christmas and the New Year is a time to let go of bickering about often quite inconsequential events and think seriously about why we are fighting for a free future.
Despair is the conclusion of fools.
– Benjamin Disraeli
In part 1, I set out a scorecard for the UK against the 12 principles for a free society, concluding, “The UK retains the shell of a free society but the core is hollowed out and that is worsening.” This part considers why we should fight for freedom.
The future under Labour
The Labour party forms a government with a working majority of 167. With good leadership and effective party management, that should be unassailable. They lack both however: Labour stumbled over welfare.
Notwithstanding implausible calls for civil disobedience – it seems unlikely the British people will discover insurrection – this government will last five years1.
Having collapsed in a heap, with leadership challenges coming into view, Labour seems most likely to grind miserably forwards until the summer of 2029. Changing leader will not solve Labour’s problems or change their direction of travel: the fundamental difficulty is that Labour MPs believe things which are not true.
Labour will not adopt the principles of a free society as their guiding lights: they are a socialist party. Using coercion is in their DNA, despite their posturing to the right before and after the general election: their MPs won’t vote for lower spending.
We must assume Labour will use the following tools to address the problems we face:
Greater regulation
Higher spending
Higher taxes
Higher borrowing
Inflation
Labour seem unlikely to pursue inflation openly through removing the independence of the Bank of England. Instead, they will pursue credit expansion into housing through deregulation of the City. I have commented elsewhere that this is Treasury orthodoxy as once told to me by a Chancellor: house building funded by cheap credit, preferably with immigration driving up demand.
It is a sick and failed strategy but it seems Labour will try it anyway.
We should expect an expansion of the coercive power of the state across every front, undermining property rights and freedom to contract, increasing surveillance and damaging freedom. Their approach will fail, as it always does. No one familiar with the data can seriously believe our problems arise from too little regulation, too little spending, low taxes, insufficient borrowing and tight monetary conditions.
Labour will leave the country poorer, weaker and still more demoralised. Our best hope is to prepare the way for a government which believes in freedom as the solution to difficulties created by expansive state power. That is what this project is about.
I believe there are about two years to change the terms of public debate. If by the end of 2027 the country is demanding less coercion and more freedom, there is a chance that the centre right parties – the Conservatives and Reform UK – will give them that choice in the 18 months running in to the 2029 general election. Ideally, the Liberal Democrats, Labour and even the Greens would feel the pressure for freedom.
We may find our Milei. Where, we do not yet know.
Why freedom matters
Freedom is not merely a political preference; it is the cornerstone of human flourishing, underpinning our safety, identity, morality, relationships and prosperity. Throughout history, the upward arc of civilization has shown liberty to be the fountainhead of progress, while its interruption by tyranny – whether justified by “iron laws of history” or modern climate alarmism – has consistently led to decline.
Freedom does not imply anarchy. It requires a stable rule of law to protect life, property and rights. As John Locke argued, citizens delegate limited power to the state to enforce justice, creating a secure environment where individuals can plan for the future and trust their neighbours. When laws are general, abstract, and applied equally, they prevent arbitrary aggression and foster a social order based on mutual respect rather than fear.
Liberty is essential for the formation of identity and moral character. Virtue requires the capacity to choose; if behavior is compelled by external mandates, there is no genuine moral agency. As John Stuart Mill observed, individuality develops when people can test ideas and discover personal truths. Furthermore, freedom nurtures authentic communities. The most vibrant civic institutions – churches, clubs, charities – are products of voluntary association, not state coercion. This voluntary principle lowers social friction and fosters deeper bonds than compliance with official directives ever could.
A market economy, founded on private property and voluntary exchange, allows individuals to deploy their talents in service of others. The “invisible hand” identified by Adam Smith coordinates these dispersed efforts more effectively than any central planner could. By allowing entrepreneurs to experiment and consumers to choose, free markets drive innovation and efficiency, generating the resources necessary to solve problems – including environmental ones. Societies that embrace economic freedom consistently outpace those that rely on central planning, providing the wealth that makes environmental stewardship possible.
Ultimately, freedom matters because it enables the pursuit of a life well-lived. Human flourishing extends beyond material comfort to include cultural expression, spiritual fulfillment and the pursuit of personal dreams. When governments micromanage choices, they stifle the uniqueness that makes life meaningful. Liberty removes obstacles to self-direction, allowing each person to chart their own course.
In the face of major threats to liberty, we remember that freedom is not an optional accessory: it is the practical foundation of enduring progress and the moral necessity for a dignified human existence. By preserving individual liberty, we foster the creativity and cooperation needed to secure a just, prosperous and joyful future.
Conclusion
Our difficulties arise from a century of growing statism, the attempt to solve social problems by substituting political power for voluntary social cooperation, ultimately funded by inflation beyond the limits of taxation and sustainable debt.
Today, the public debate reflects an unaccountable faith in that doctrine: if only better people were in power and made the right attempts to pull the levers, things would come right. It is not true. Moreover, that belief is the origin of tyranny, set out in Karl Popper’s Spell of Plato: we have forgotten lessons long since learned.
Our task in fighting for a free future is to undermine that outmoded and unjustifiable faith in the healing power of compulsion to set society right. We start by knowing why freedom matters. Over the course of the coming year, I will write about the principles of a free society in more detail, what a good government ought to do and how it can be done.
Merry Christmas and have a happy new year. We have much to do in 2026.
The Institute for Government has answered common questions:
The Prime Minister decides the timing of a general election by requesting a dissolution of Parliament by the King.
His Majesty acts on the advice of ministers, so he cannot call an election.
Whether His Majesty can refuse a dissolution is ambiguous.
The Cabinet has no power over it.
MPs could try to force an election by voting for no confidence in His Majesty’s Government but that would mean about 84 Labour MPs being willing to lose the Labour Whip and therefore not be candidates in that election. It seems unlikely.
The public cannot force a general election, only apply political pressure.