In the midst of this, after almost two decades of Conservative government, Tony Blair appeared. The feel-good politics of Bill Clinton’s 1992 campaign—socially progressive but fiscally, as it turned out, conservative—had taken a few years to reach British shores. By 1996, though, “Things Can Only Get Better” was ringing out in conference halls up and down the country.

This was Labour, but not as before. The language of its party constitution, for example, had changed: once committed to nationalization—providing workers with “the full fruits of their industry” and “the most equitable distribution” of wealth—it now talked vaguely of “community” and “respect.”

The same fuzziness extended to social issues. Just as Clinton was jokingly referred to as the “first black president,”⁵ so Tony Blair sought a more outward-looking, diverse leadership. In May 1997, the week Labour won the election, The Observer ran the headline “Goodbye Xenophobia.” The last Conservative Prime Minister, John Major, had balked at discussing race, saying that “policy must be color blind,”⁶ but the New Labour manifesto boldly claimed “our attitudes to race, sex and sexuality have changed fundamentally.”⁷

This seemed to be a turning point: an admission that Britain had failed on race—along with “sex and sexuality”—and that New Labour’s policies would work to redress the legacy of empire and its accrued inequalities. Instead of detail, though, there was a caveat: “our task is to combine change and social stability.” For Stephen Lawrence’s family or for those South London communities living with the threat of racist attacks and police brutality, there was little “social stability” to protect. But this kind of rhetoric gave a clearer idea of what to expect. On the one hand, “change” would be necessary and loudly proclaimed; on the other, Labour would remain the party for those who didn’t want—and were even terrified of—“change.”

For Blair, like Clinton, the appearance of change and compassion was all-important. He didn’t want to risk looking callous, overlooking the needs of ethnic minorities, but neither did he want to appear weak, giving in to the demands of identity-based “pressure groups.” So toward the end of his tenure in 2006, Blair could give a speech in praise of “multiculturalism,” which also said: “Our tolerance is part of what makes Britain, Britain. So conform to it; or don’t come here.”⁸

“Multiculturalism” became New Labour’s rallying cry. It was a term which offended no one by including everyone. It suggested tolerance, while saying conform or else. Beneath its harmonious veneer lay the threat of violence.