Reform UK's Education Agenda Echoes Authoritarian Nationalist Tactics
In a press conference held in Dudley, West Midlands, on February 24, 2026, Nigel Farage's Reform UK party unveiled plans for a "patriotic school curriculum," sparking immediate comparisons to similar initiatives under Vladimir Putin's regime. The proposal, championed by education spokesperson Suella Braverman, promises to foster a "love of our great country" through history lessons, but critics argue it mirrors the compulsory patriotism classes introduced in Russian schools during the Ukraine war.
Parallels with Russian Patriotism Lessons
Since September 2022, Russian schoolchildren have engaged in weekly "conversations about what is important," classes designed to promote national history, criticize Western actions, and glorify self-sacrifice and Putin's leadership. Authoritarian regimes often distrust organic national identity, which includes dissent and cultural diversity, opting instead for uniform, state-cultivated patriotism that encourages submission. Reform UK's curriculum aims to correct what it calls a "liberal bias" that negatively portrays the British Empire, suggesting a similar approach to shaping national narrative.
Farage, previously a leader of anti-Europe and anti-immigration movements, now seeks to position Reform UK as a government-in-waiting, expanding into education policy. This shift reflects a broader nationalist strategy, where controlling internal identity aligns with strict border policies. Braverman's role in this initiative underscores the party's commitment to embedding nationalist ideals in education, potentially filling textbooks with state-approved narratives.
Farage's Evolving Stance on Putin and Russian Influence
While Farage has distanced himself from earlier admiration of Putin, calling him a "monster" recently, his past comments and associations raise questions. As a former commentator on Kremlin-backed RT, Farage shared Russian perspectives blaming Ukraine for the war, shifting his criticism only as UK public opinion solidified in support of Kyiv. Brexit, which Farage championed, is viewed by some as a strategic self-harm that benefited Russia by weakening the EU, with former party member Nathan Gill's conviction for Kremlin ties highlighting these connections.
Reform UK's usefulness to Russia may not require direct conspiracy; its alignment with nationalist movements across Europe, such as France's Rassemblement National and Germany's Alternative für Deutschland, inherently undermines liberal European norms. Politicians who disrupt European solidarity, whether wittingly or not, serve Putin's interests and often attract support from figures like Donald Trump, whose patronage includes funding from far-right US networks.
Nationalist Ideology and Internal Contradictions
The nationalist playbook, adopted by Reform UK, defines patriotism through a lens of white heterosexual Christian superiority, advocating policies to reverse immigration and boost indigenous birthrates. This agenda resonates with international far-right movements, targeting both domestic voters and global audiences. For instance, Reform UK's proposed UK Deportation Command, modeled on the US ICE agency, and pledges to center Christianity in education, despite spokesperson Zia Yusuf not being a Christian himself, illustrate the party's flexible ideology.
Contradictions within nationalism are often resolved by unwavering loyalty to the leader. Reform UK can shift positions, accommodate diverse members, and adapt its stance on issues like state intervention or Kremlin relations, as long as Farage sets the direction. This approach stems from the complexity of nations, which resist ideological regimentation, leading nationalists to define patriotism as submission to leadership and label dissenters as traitors.
If Reform UK's support plateaus, it may be due to a significant portion of the British public rejecting this narrow definition of patriotism. Many citizens love their country in ways that do not equate to obedience to Farage's vision, highlighting the enduring tension between nationalist agendas and democratic diversity.
