If Starmerism sought to present the Labour government as more rightwing(右翼的) than it is, Burnhamism seeks to do the opposite.
如果说斯塔默主义试图将工党政府描绘得比实际更右翼，那么伯纳姆主义则试图反其道而行之。
The change in rhetoric is certainly stark(鲜明的，明显的). Unlike his sulking(闷闷不乐的，生闷气的) predecessor, the new prime minister offers both an analysis and a vision. British stagnation and decline, Andy Burnham correctly told the House of Commons, can be explained by a series of “wrong turns” taken from the 1980s onwards: the privatisation of economic power, the deindustrialisation of the country and the ruinous austerity that followed the 2008 crash.(安迪·伯纳姆正确地向下议院表示，英国的停滞与衰落可以归因于自1980年代以来一系列“错误的转向”：经济权力的私有化、国家的去工业化，以及2008年金融危机后毁灭性的紧缩政策。)
言辞上的变化无疑是鲜明的。与闷闷不乐的前任不同，新首相既提供了分析，也提供了愿景。安迪·伯纳姆正确地向下议院表示，英国的停滞与衰落可以归因于自1980年代以来一系列“错误的转向”：经济权力的私有化、国家的去工业化，以及2008年金融危机后毁灭性的紧缩政策。
The solution, Burnham suggests, is public control of the essentials, the devolution(权力下放) of power and the rebirth(复兴，重生) of industry – to rebuild living standards and the economy and give long-abandoned communities a future. Keir Starmer, by contrast(相比之下), had no vision, relying instead on a technocratic(技术官僚的) image of competence that was swiftly shattered by one fiasco(惨败，闹剧) after another. That left him defined by his opponents, and the electorate(全体选民) baffled(困惑的) as to where his government was headed.
伯纳姆提出的解决方案是：对必需品实行公共控制、权力下放以及工业复兴——以重建生活水平和经济，并为长期被遗弃的社区赋予未来。相比之下，基尔·斯塔默没有愿景，而是依赖一种技术官僚式的能干形象，但这种形象很快被接二连三的惨败所粉碎。这使他被对手定义，而选民则对他的政府将走向何方感到困惑。