Keir Starmer’s Original Sin Comes Back to Haunt Him Keir Starmer, the current leader of the Labour Party, has been dogged by his past support for Article 50, the mechanism for the United Kingdom to leave the European Union. This decision, initially seen as a pragmatic attempt to unite a divided Labour Party, has now come back to haunt him as the consequences of Brexit become increasingly apparent. Starmer’s support for Article 50 was rooted in his belief that the 2016 referendum result had to be respected. However, he has since acknowledged that he underestimated the complexity and challenges of the withdrawal process. The protracted negotiations, economic uncertainty, and social divisions that have characterized Brexit have eroded public trust in the Labour leadership. Moreover, Starmer’s stance has alienated a significant portion of the Labour electorate, particularly those who voted to remain in the EU. Many Labour voters feel betrayed by the party’s shift away from its pro-European roots. This disillusionment has contributed to a decline in support for Labour, with the party trailing the Conservatives in recent polls. Starmer’s decision to back Article 50 has also weakened his position on the wider issue of Brexit. Despite promising a “Brexit that works for the whole country,” he has been unable to articulate a clear and coherent policy on the matter. This has left him open to criticism from both pro- and anti-Brexit factions within the party. Furthermore, the government’s handling of the COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the negative consequences of Brexit. The UK’s exit from the EU has hindered its ability to collaborate with European partners on public health measures, vaccine procurement, and economic recovery. This has exposed the folly of pursuing a “go it alone” strategy and has intensified public dissatisfaction with the government’s Brexit policy. As the UK approaches the end of its transition period with the EU, Starmer’s original sin will continue to shape his leadership and the future of the Labour Party. His decision to support Article 50 has created a legacy that will be difficult to escape and will likely haunt him for years to come.In a recent interview, Keir Starmer faced the question of whether he would have served in Jeremy Corbyn’s Cabinet had Labour won the 2019 election. Initially evading the question, Starmer ultimately admitted that he would have accepted a position to address important matters from the frontbench.In a recent interview, Keir Starmer faced the question of whether he would have served in Jeremy Corbyn’s Cabinet had Labour won the 2019 election. Initially evading the question, Starmer ultimately admitted that he would have accepted a position to address important matters from the frontbench. This admission contradicts Starmer’s current stance on Corbyn, whom he now denounces as unfit for the role of Prime Minister. Starmer’s prior support for Corbyn as a “great prime minister” and a “friend” has raised questions about the authenticity of his current position. Starmer’s explanation that he did not believe Labour would win the election appears implausible, and critics accuse him of rewriting history to justify his past actions. Corbyn himself has expressed disappointment over Starmer’s change in attitude, accusing him of double standards. The article highlights Corbyn’s controversial actions, such as suggesting that Russia could be trusted to investigate the Salisbury chemical attack, as reasons for his unsuitability for office. It also points to Starmer’s support for a second Brexit referendum as an example of his own wavering principles. In conclusion, the article argues that Starmer’s current judgment on Corbyn is accurate but raises concerns about his own conduct and the motivations behind his change in stance.