The Daily Telegraph and The Daily Mail seem to think so. And (at least in the absence of anything better) quite a lot of their readers will agree at the ballot box, because the Tories are simply no longer the default option in Britain, or even any option for most people: it would just never occur to well over half the electorate to vote Tory. I'm not saying that that's a good thing or a bad thing. It's just a fact. When even Patrick Mercer sees more hope of doing anything politically as a Brown adviser without even being paid, then it really is all over.
Together with the Keynes-Beveridge-Attlee Settlement and with all round patriotism (i.e., both southwards and westwards, not to say eastwards as globalisation's erosion of sovereignty really kicks in), moral and social conservatism will be a key plank in the platform of the desperately needed new party.
Those three elements all play well to core supporters of all three parties. Do Labour voters want the Euro, or the Iraq War, or the unrestricted immigration, drinking, gambling, drugs, prostitution and pornography all required by the "free" market? Do Tory voters want to abolish farm subsidies or the NHS? For that matter, do they want the Iraq War, or the unrestricted immigration, drinking, gambling, drugs, prostitution and pornography all required by the "free" market? The Lib Dems' strongest support is in rural Scotland, Mid-Wales, and the West Country. And so forth.
Britain needs a pro-life, pro-family, pro-worker, anti-war party of economically social-democratic, morally and socially conservative British and Commonwealth patriots who really care about the North and South of Scotland; about North, Mid and West Wales; about Northern Ireland; about the North of England; about the Midlands; about the West Country; about East Anglia; and about the less chi-chi parts of London, the South East, Central Scotland, and South Wales.
So let's get on with it!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
"pro-life, pro-family, pro-worker, anti-war party of economically social-democratic, morally and socially conservative British and Commonwealth patriots"
ReplyDeleteIt's funny, most people who believe in a social democratic, "pro-worker" economy are not socially conservative. (Although there are a number of social conservatives in the Labour party). Equally, most social conservatives don't want a social democrat economy.
Says who? You need to get out more, and specifically you need to get out of Notting Hill or wherever it is that you are writing from, instead making contact with people who really do believe in any of these things, or indeed in anything at all.
ReplyDeleteUnfortunately there are now almost no social conservatives among Labour MPs. Wareing forcibly deselected, who's next? Field? Hoey? And then there were none, pretty much. Contast that with Labour voters or with such Labour members as there still are.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous should consider that no opponent of social democracy is really a social conservative and most don't even pretend to be any more. Capitalists and Marxists alike cannot be by definition.
Also that no opponent of social conservatism is really social democratic and most don't even pretend to be any more. Again, capitalists and Marxists alike cannot be by definition.
Precisely so, Martin.
ReplyDeleteMoral and social conservatism, including patriotism, is the only reason to want social democracy, in order to conserve those values against capitalism, Marxism, anarchism and Fascism.
Can anyone think, either of another reason for so wanting, or of another means of so conserving? I bet they can't.
Yes, Labour is systematically driving what remains of this tradition out of Parliament. Just look at which Campaign Group MP, specifically, has been removed. And his particular replacement is a spectacular addition of insult to injury.
So we need a new party.
Perhaps Martin should consider that the statement "Capitalists and Marxists alike cannot be by definition" doesn't really mean anything.
ReplyDeleteExplain to me why an opponent of social democratic economics couldn't also be a social conservative. I think I could find you plenty of people who at least claimed to be . ..
Surely you can want social democratic economics to improve people's lives. That's as valid as wanting it to preserve your social conservatism and patriotism.
ReplyDeleteSo that's the first part of your challenge. I don't want to preserve social conservatism or patriotism, particularly (although I don't want to drive them out either) - so that's the second part of your challenge.
Well, how would such a person counteract or prevent the corrosive effects of the "free" market on conservative social values?
ReplyDeleteYes, there are, have been, and will no doubt continue to be people who CLAIM to hold this position. But just look at their actual records, and the point is more than made. For example, was Britain in the 1980s a period of high moral standards? Come on!
Improve them how, exactly? Surely, by conserving or restoring family life, strong communities, law and order, civil liberties, and so much else that capitalism corrodes to nought either directly or by driving despairing millions into equally corrosive Jacobinism, Marxism (including neocnservatism), anarchism or Fascism?
ReplyDeleteIf not that, then what?
It is also worth pointing out that the patriotic approach is necessary if the delivery of social democracy is to be possible at all.
Well, one would have to believe there was a corrosive effect of the free market on social values. I don't think that's proved conclusively. Indeed, many people, rightly or wrongly, believe that the welfare state is a reason for a decline in moral standards - they think that the rugged individualism, self-reliance and entrepreneurial spirit is reinforced by the free market . . .
ReplyDeleteThat depends what your social vaues are.
ReplyDeleteIf they are such good things as national self-government (the only basis for international co-operation, and including the United Kingdom as greater than the sum of its parts), local variation, historical consciousness, family life, the whole Biblical and Classical patrimony of the West, agriculture, manufacturing, small business, close-knit communities, law and order, civil liberties, academic standards, all forms of art, mass political participation within a constitutional framework, and respect for the absolute sanctity of each individual human life from the point of fertilisation to the point of natural death, then I can't see how anyone, examining the evidence all around them, can possibly dispute the corrosive effects of the "free" market.
And if you do not hold those values, then you are not a conservative. Whereas most people, who do hold them, are.
In reply to your post at 11.28, most people who hold such values don't examine the evidence about the free market, and as I said, some believe that the free market supports these values because it promotes rugged individualism, self-reliance and entrepreneurial spirit.
ReplyDeleteAs interesting as this has been - I must go and work to earn my living.
No, they believe in what they call by those names (which could much more accurately be described in rather less favourable terms) precisely because they do NOT hold the conservative values that I set out.
ReplyDeleteEither that, or they have allowed themselves to be hoodwinked into supporting the economic, social, cultural and political ambitions of those in the first category, because, as you say, they simply have not examined the evidence, even though it is all around them.
Ps why have you not put up two of my posts during this discussion responding directly to some of your points?
ReplyDeleteWell, one of them talked about the NSDAP and the other was no more civilised in its way.
ReplyDelete