The Hollow Crown: A Shakespearean Reckoning — Keir Starmer as Richard II, and the Kingdom of Corpses
“For within the hollow crown
That rounds the mortal temples of a king
Keeps Death his court and there the antic sits,
Scoffing his state and grinning at his pomp.”
— William Shakespeare, Richard II (Act 3, Scene 2)
There is a specific kind of tragedy reserved for the man who believes that the office itself confers authority. He fights for the crown, schemes for the crown, purges his rivals for the crown, and finally places it upon his head, only to discover that the power he sought was an illusion. He has the title, but he has alienated everyone who might have sustained him. He is the king of an empty room. This is the tragedy of Richard II. It is also the tragedy of Keir Starmer.
As the Labour Party fractures under the weight of catastrophic local election losses, ministerial resignations, and a Prime Minister who refuses to accept that his mandate has evaporated, the collapse of the Starmer project feels more like the final act of a play that was doomed from the prologue. Starmerism was built on a foundational lie: the belief that you could win power by pretending to be one thing, govern by being another, and that the electorate would simply accept the bait-and-switch as the price of competence.
But competence is a fragile shield when the winter fuel allowance is cut (BBC News, 2025), the Muslim vote collapses over Gaza (Bylines Supplement, 2024), and when the Prime Minister is forced to admit to Parliament that he made a “wrong judgment” in appointing a man with ties to Jeffrey Epstein as the UK’s most important diplomatic post (AP News, 2026). When the illusion of competence shatters, what is left? Only the hollow crown.
Waiting in the wings, ready to inherit the wreckage, is not a new generation of visionary leaders, but Nigel Farage: the Fortinbras of British politics, a man who has built nothing, governed nothing, and solved nothing, but who stands ready to claim a kingdom of corpses simply because everyone else has failed.
The Foundational Betrayal
In 2020, Keir Starmer ran for the leadership of the Labour Party on a platform of ten socialist pledges (Campaign for Labour Party Democracy, 2020). He promised to increase income tax for the top 5%, abolish universal credit, and bring rail, mail, energy, and water into common ownership. He pledged to defend free movement, oppose a two-child benefit cap, and scrap tuition fees. He presented himself as the unity candidate, the man who could retain the radical energy of the Corbyn years while adding a veneer of forensic, prosecutorial competence. He would be the left’s best chance of power.
He knew exactly what he was doing. The Labour membership, traumatised by the 2019 election defeat, desperately wanted to believe that they did not have to abandon their principles to win. Starmer offered them that comfort. He wore the pledges like a costume. Then, once the leadership was secured, he systematically dismantled every single one of them (The Big Issue, 2024). It was a purge rather than a pivot. The left of the party was humiliated, expelled, and told that its very existence was an electoral liability. Starmer’s allies briefed the press that ditching the pledges was proof of his “real politics” (Politico, 2023), a necessary shift to win over the centre ground. The message was clear: the left had been used as a vehicle for his ambition, and now that the vehicle had served its purpose, it could be discarded.
In Shakespearean terms, this is the moment Richard II seizes the lands of John of Gaunt to fund his Irish wars. It is an act of supreme arrogance, a belief that the king can do whatever he wants because he is the king. Richard does not consider the consequences, or ask who will remain loyal once the compact is broken. He simply takes, because he can. Starmer believed that the left had nowhere else to go. He believed that the electorate would reward his ruthlessness. He did not ask who would remain loyal once the betrayal was complete. The answer, as it turned out, was almost no one.
The Sandcastle Majority
For a brief, intoxicating moment, in July 2024, it looked as though Starmer had been right all along. Labour won a landslide majority of 412 seats (House of Commons Library, 2024). The Conservatives were routed. The headlines declared a new era. Starmer stood on the steps of Downing Street and spoke of “national renewal.”
But the numbers told a different story. Labour’s 33.7% vote share was the lowest of any party to win a majority government in modern British history (Electoral Reform Society, 2025). Two-thirds of the electorate did not vote for Labour. The victory was not an endorsement of Starmerism; it was a desperate, exhausted rejection of the Conservative Party after fourteen years of austerity, corruption, misery, and chaos. The electorate did not choose Starmer; they simply had nowhere else to go.
This is the crucial distinction that Starmer never grasped. Richard II, too, inherited a kingdom that appeared stable. He had the crown, the court, and the symbols of power. What he did not have was the genuine loyalty of the people who sustained the system. His authority was wide but shallow and when the first real test came, it evaporated. Similarly, Starmer’s majority was a sandcastle built at high tide. The question was never whether it would be washed away, but when.
The Manager Who Could Not Manage
The central promise of the Starmer project was not vision or transformation. It was management. After the chaotic psychodrama of the Johnson, Truss, and Sunak years, Starmer offered the quiet, joyless prudence of a technocrat. He would balance the books, make the hard choices, and be the adult in the room. He would not be exciting, but he would be competent. But when you offer nothing but management, you cannot survive a crisis of management. Starmer’s government has been a series of management crises, each one chipping away at the one thing he had to offer.
The unravelling began almost immediately. In September 2024, the government announced the abolition of the universal winter fuel payment, stripping support from 10 million pensioners (The Independent, 2025). It was framed as a necessary sacrifice to fill a “black hole” in the public finances — a classic symptom of what commentators called “Treasury brain,” the notorious syndrome by which chancellors demand savings that look ingenious in a spreadsheet but prove disastrous in the real world (The Guardian, 2024). The policy was cruel and politically illiterate. It told the electorate, in the starkest possible terms, that the government’s first instinct when faced with a difficult choice was to take from one of the most vulnerable groups.
The optics were catastrophic. Here was a Labour government, elected on a promise of change, cutting support for pensioners in its first months in office. The party that had spent fourteen years attacking Conservative austerity was now implementing its own version. The message to the electorate was unmistakable: there is no alternative. There is only management of decline.
Then came the collapse of the Muslim vote. Labour’s equivocation over a ceasefire in Gaza, and Starmer’s own disastrous LBC interview in which he said Israel had the right to withhold power and water from the civilian population, alienated a core constituency that had voted Labour for generations (MCI Maps, 2024). The party lost heavily in Muslim-majority areas during the general election, and the bleeding continued. By early 2026, Labour sources were privately acknowledging that the party had not been forgiven for its stance on Gaza, and that the damage was structural rather than temporary (The Guardian, 2026a).
Starmer had calculated that he could afford to lose these voters. He had calculated that the centre ground was more valuable than the left flank. He was wrong on both counts. The centre ground, it turned out, was not a stable political base. It was a temporary coalition of people who had voted Labour in the absence of anything better. And the left flank, once lost, did not come back.
Subscribe to Notes From Plague Island and join our growing community of readers and thinkers.
The Mandelson Catastrophe
In February 2025, Starmer appointed Peter Mandelson as the UK ambassador to the United States. It was a classic Starmer move: a signal to the establishment that the adults were back in charge, that New Labour’s most formidable political operator was once again in service to the nation. Mandelson was a controversial choice, but Starmer was confident. He had done his due diligence. He had followed the process…
Except he had not. Mandelson had failed his security vetting. The Foreign Office had overruled its own vetting officials and approved the appointment anyway, allegedly without informing the Prime Minister (The New York Times, 2026). When a trove of Jeffrey Epstein-related documents was released, revealing supportive emails that Mandelson had sent to the convicted paedophile, the appointment became untenable. Starmer fired Mandelson in September 2025 (Reuters, 2025), but the damage was done. By April 2026, as the full extent of the vetting failure became public, Starmer was forced to address Parliament and admit he had made the “wrong judgment” (AP News, 2026).
The Institute for Government was blunt: “The initial failure of judgement was Starmer’s choice to make Mandelson ambassador” (Institute for Government, 2026). The forensic prosecutor had failed to ask the most basic questions. The competent manager had overseen a catastrophic failure of governance. The king who had promised to restore trust in public life had appointed an Epstein associate to the country’s most prestigious diplomatic post.
This is the moment in the play when Richard II’s divine right begins to look like arrogance. He has convinced himself that the crown protects him from consequence, confusing the symbols of authority with authority itself. Now the consequences are arriving, and the crown offers no shelter.
Starmer’s response to the Mandelson crisis was, characteristically, to blame everyone else. He accused Foreign Office officials of deliberately withholding information from him (BBC News, 2026). He fired the top civil servant, Olly Robbins, within hours of the revelation. He ordered reviews, made statements, and did everything except acknowledge that the fundamental problem was his own judgment — the same judgment that had led him to appoint Mandelson in the first place, and led him to believe that the establishment’s approval was a substitute for the public’s trust.
The Kingdom of Corpses
In Hamlet, the play ends with the stage littered with bodies. The Danish royal family has destroyed itself through betrayal, hesitation, and revenge. And then, marching through the doors, comes Fortinbras, the Prince of Norway. He has done nothing to earn the throne. He has not fought for it or suffered for it. He has simply waited for his enemies to annihilate each other. He surveys the carnage and claims the kingdom.
Nigel Farage is the Fortinbras of Plague Island.
In the May 2026 local elections, Labour suffered heavy losses, losing over a thousand municipal seats, while Reform made sweeping gains in working-class areas in the north of England that had been solid Labour territory for decades, as well as former Conservative strongholds in Essex (AP News, 2026). In Wales, Labour’s unbroken twenty-seven-year run in power came to an end, with the party dropping to third place behind Reform. The scale of the collapse was historic.
Farage has not built a coherent political movement. He has not offered a credible plan for governing the country. He has not proposed serious solutions to the structural problems of the British economy, the NHS, or the housing crisis. What he has done is position himself as the beneficiary of other people’s failure.
His personal conduct tells a story that his supporters prefer not to examine too closely. He has spent his time flying to Abu Dhabi at the expense of the United Arab Emirates to attend events and meet officials, despite building a political brand centred on opposition to immigration from the Middle East (Al Jazeera, 2026). He attended the Conservative Political Action Conference in the United States, flown there by a Lebanese-Nigerian billionaire donor, at a cost of £55,000 (Al Jazeera, 2026). He has claimed Russia was “provoked” into invading Ukraine, blamed NATO and the EU for the war, and described Putin as the world leader he most admired (The Guardian, 2024).
His party’s finances tell their own story. Reform UK’s treasurer and three of its largest donors are all linked to One Hyde Park, a London apartment block whose residents and buyers have included at least five individuals associated with sanctioned Russian or post-Soviet wealth (Byline Times, 2026). A parliamentary debate in February 2026 heard that Reform’s former leader in Wales, Nathan Gill, had been convicted and sentenced to ten and a half years in prison for taking Russian bribes.
This is the man who stands to inherit the kingdom that Starmer has destroyed, and this is the crucial point that the Fortinbras analogy illuminates so precisely. In Shakespeare, Fortinbras does not win because he is better than Hamlet — he wins because Hamlet has failed. The tragedy of Hamlet is not that Fortinbras is triumphant; it is that Denmark’s own dysfunction has made his triumph inevitable. The kingdom does not fall to a conqueror. It falls to a scavenger.
Starmer’s tragedy is that he created the conditions for Farage’s triumph. By abandoning his pledges, by purging the left, by offering a joyless, managerial centrism that failed to improve the material conditions of the country, Starmer further drained the political landscape. He told the electorate that there was no alternative to his brand of prudence. When that prudence failed, the electorate turned to the only man who was offering something different, no matter how dangerous that alternative might be.
The geopolitical risks of this are not abstract. Farage’s links to Trump, his positive statements about Putin, and the persistent questions about Russian money in his party’s finances are not incidental details mark a broader pattern that we have explored elsewhere on Plague Island: the deliberate fragmentation of the Western alliance, the weakening of NATO, the project to pull the United Kingdom away from Europe and into the orbit of an authoritarian axis. If Farage inherits the kingdom, he inherits it as part of a network that has been working for years to make exactly this outcome possible.
The Final Act
Keir Starmer now sits in Downing Street, facing a split cabinet, ministerial resignations, and demands from over 80 of his own MPs that he step down (Al Jazeera, 2026). He insists that the “fundamentals are sound,” that he will fight on, that he will not resign (Reuters, 2026).
It is the desperate delusion of a man who still believes in the power of the hollow crown. He cannot see that the authority he thought he possessed was always an illusion, built on a foundation of broken promises and shallow mandates. He alienated the people who sustained him, and now, in his moment of crisis, he finds himself entirely alone.
Shakespeare’s Richard II has a moment of terrible clarity near the end of the play, when he finally understands what he has done. He has been so consumed by the performance of kingship — the rituals, the symbols, the divine right — that he has never understood the actual substance of power, which is the loyalty of the people around you. “I have wasted time,” he says, “and now doth time waste me.” It is one of the most devastating lines in the English language, because it captures the precise moment when a man realises that the life he has lived has been a performance, and that the performance is over.
Starmer will have his Richard II moment. It may come in the form of a leadership challenge, or in the form of a general election that delivers the country to Farage. It might come in the form of a quiet resignation, a statement about spending more time with his family, a dignified exit from the stage.
But it will come. The tragedy of Starmerism was always structural, not incidental. It was not caused by bad luck, or hostile media, or the cruelty of the political cycle. It was caused by the foundational decision to build a political project on a lie. To tell the left what it wanted to hear, take the power, and then govern for the establishment. To mistake the crown for the authority it was supposed to represent.
We are witnessing the end of a political project that was dead before it even began. Starmerism was a Ponzi scheme of competence, a promise that the adults in the room could manage the decline of the British state without ever addressing the structural rot at its core. It was a promise that the system could be made to work again without changing the system. It was, in the end, a lie, and like all lies, it could only be sustained for so long.
The tragedy of Keir Starmer is that he knew better. He knew what he was doing when he made those ten pledges, and he knew what he was doing when he abandoned them. He made a calculated, cynical choice to trade his principles for power, and now he has neither. The crown is hollow. The stage is littered with the wreckage of the British political centre, and Fortinbras is at the gates.
Or support us with a one-off tip → Buy Me a Coffee
References
Al Jazeera (2026) ‘Follow the money: How far-right Reform UK built a global network,’ 6 May. Available at: https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2026/5/6/follow-the-money-how-far-right-reform-uk-built-a-global-network [Accessed 12 May 2026].
Al Jazeera (2026) ‘Starmer to face split cabinet as demands for his resignation mount,’ 12 May. Available at: https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2026/5/12/starmer-to-face-split-cabinet-as-demands-for-his-resignation-mount[Accessed 12 May 2026].
AP News (2026) ‘Partial results show losses for Starmer’s Labour in UK polls,’ 8 May. Available at: https://apnews.com/article/britain-elections-labour-starmer-reform-farage-f17a122a0cfcc3595ef01f142517b0b6[Accessed 12 May 2026].
AP News (2026) ‘Starmer says Foreign Office hid Mandelson’s failed security checks,’ 20 April. Available at: https://apnews.com/article/starmer-mandelson-epstein-parliament-statement-1f434ae174c37ae8a1a0c11204573f83[Accessed 12 May 2026].
BBC News (2025) ‘Keir Starmer defends winter fuel cuts in face of calls for U-turn,’ 7 May. Available at: https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cdxnx43kk9ko [Accessed 12 May 2026].
BBC News (2026) ‘Officials deliberately withheld Mandelson vetting result from me,’ 20 April. Available at: https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cx2wllel54no [Accessed 12 May 2026].
Byline Times (2026) ‘Reform UK Treasurer and Donors Share London Address with Sanctioned Russian Oligarchs,’ 7 May. Available at: https://bylinetimes.com/2026/05/07/reform-uk-treasurer-and-donors-share-london-address-with-sanctioned-russian-oligarchs/ [Accessed 12 May 2026].
Bylines Supplement (2024) ‘Labour Needs the Muslim Vote to Stabilise its ‘Sandcastle Majority’, 2 September.’ Available at:
[Accessed 12 May 2026].
Campaign for Labour Party Democracy (2020) ‘Keir Starmer’s 10 Pledges,’ 12 October. Available at: https://www.clpd.org.uk/resource/keir-starmer-10-pledges/ [Accessed 12 May 2026].
Electoral Reform Society (2025) ‘How many votes did Labour get in 2024?,’ 25 September. Available at: https://electoral-reform.org.uk/how-many-votes-did-labour-get-in-2024/ [Accessed 12 May 2026].
The Big Issue (2024) ‘All of Keir Starmer’s u-turns and abandoned policy pledges,’ 16 May. Available at: https://www.bigissue.com/news/politics/keir-starmer-broken-promises-tuition-fees-nationalisation-u-turn/ [Accessed 12 May 2026].
The Guardian (2024) ‘Nigel Farage claims Russia was provoked into Ukraine war,’ 21 June. Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/politics/article/2024/jun/21/russia-was-provoked-into-ukraine-war-claims-nigel-farage[Accessed 12 May 2026].
The Guardian (2024) ‘Why did Starmer cut the winter fuel allowance? It’s called Treasury brain,’ 11September. Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/article/2024/sep/11/why-did-starmer-cut-the-winter-fuel-allowance-its-called-treasury-brain-and-that-spells-trouble [Accessed 12 May 2026].
The Guardian (2026a) ‘Labour anxiety and accusations after big shift in Muslim vote in Gorton and Denton,’ 28 February. Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2026/feb/28/labour-green-party-muslim-voters-gorton-denton[Accessed 12 May 2026].
Hansard (2026) Russian Influence on UK Politics and Democracy, Volume 780, 9 February 2026. Available at: https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2026-02-09/debates/F9F28AFA-E1F3-449C-B18B- 63DDCABC411E/RussianInfluenceOnUKPoliticsAndDemocracy [Accessed 12 May 2026].
House of Commons Library (2026) ‘General election 2024 results,’ 3 March. Available at: https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-10009/ [Accessed 12 May 2026].
The Independent (2025) ‘Starmer rules out winter fuel allowance U-turn despite local election losses,’ 6 May. Available at: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/labour-winter-fuel-allowance-payment-starmer-streeting-b2745455.html [Accessed 12 May 2026].
Institute for Government (2026) ‘The Mandelson vetting blame-game is causing serious damage to Starmer,’ 20 April. Available at: https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/comment/mandelson-vetting-blame [Accessed 12 May 2026].
MCI Maps (2024) ‘The Labour Party Collapse Among UK Muslim Voters,’ 8 July. Available at: https://mcimaps.substack.com/p/issue-188-the-labour-party-collapse [Accessed 12 May 2026].
Mowat, B.A. and Werstine, P. (eds.) (2023) Richard II. Folger Shakespeare Library. New York: Simon & Schuster.
The New York Times (2026) ‘Mandelson Became Britain’s Ambassador to U.S. Despite Failing Vetting,’ 16 April. Available at: https://www.nytimes.com/2026/04/16/world/europe/peter-mandelson-epstein-starmer-security.html[Accessed 12 May 2026].
Plague Island (2026) ‘Born After the Future: The Strange Death of British Politics,’ 11 May. Available at: https://www.plagueisland.com/p/born-after-the-future-the-strange [Accessed 12 May 2026].
Politico (2023) ‘Keir Starmer revealed his ‘real politics’ by ditching left-wing pledges, ally says,’ 30 June. Available at: https://www.politico.eu/article/keir-starmer-uk-labour-revealed-his-real-politics-by-ditching-left-wing-pledges-ally-says/[Accessed 12 May 2026].
Reuters (2025) ‘Britain’s Mandelson fired as US ambassador over Epstein links,’ 11 September. Available at: https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/britains-mandelson-fired-us-ambassador-over-epstein-links-2025-09-11/ [Accessed 12 May 2026].
Reuters (2026) ‘Starmer vows to fight on after Labour punished in polls,’ 12 May. Available at: https://www.reuters.com/world/uk/uks-labour-party-suffers-heavy-early-losses-reform-gains-elections-2026-05-08/[Accessed 12 May 2026].