Tuesday 9 June 2009

Whatever Happened To The British People's Alliance?

The BPA was driven out of existence by the systematic activities of the Electoral Commission (it is far from unique in having suffered that fate), which after a while, and especially after I had undergone major emergency surgery, with no one else in a position to take on that wretched body's reams of daily correspondence of the most threatening and unpleasant kind, was simply too much to endure any longer. As I say, this is far from an unusual case.

But what we stood for, and stand for, has never been more glaringly necessary: the patriotic, morally and socially conservative, entirely non-Marxist Left now urgently needs to be organised. There used to be something like that called "the Labour Party". But it no longer exists. So we need to get our people into Parliament, so that they can eventually coalesce. That was how all four of the Conservative Party, the Liberal Party, the Labour Party and (albeit at an exaggerated pace) the SDP were created.

27 comments:

  1. A bit paranoid to suggest it was "driven out of existence".

    As No2EU contains many Marxists, it is hardly a good place to "begin". As you admire their organisational ability "from a standing start" then it is certainly possible to emulate them in terms of organisation.

    Presumably the other members of the BPA have not thrown their lot in with other groupings and you can still organise them.
    The Internet can provide Message Board facilities. all it takes is to bombard them with information to generate interest in actually arranging a first meeting.

    To be frank...if I may...you oft appear too much of a maverick to actually be at home in any "party".

    Some or all of your principles might have to be jettisoned to facilitate a "mass movement".
    Difficult to reconcile some of these. Your admirable distaste for abortion might not sit well with modernists who might be anti war. Likewise your support for the monarchy might not sit well with the anti war Guardian reader.
    Likewise your advocacy of (to me) rather insular views on your own brand of Christianity and antipathy to non Christian (Islamist and zionist) values might limit the appeal of a "Party" forever condemned to be in the also rans.

    Id constructively suggest that you untangle those values which are "political" from those that are "personal", the better to attract more people.

    The success of a Political Party is not measured by its ability to attract its "own constituency" but rather an ability to reach beyond it.
    I have not seen much evidence.....or indeed desire...that you wish to do so.

    ReplyDelete
  2. "A bit paranoid to suggest it was "driven out of existence"."

    Not at all. That was exactly what happened. And not only to us.

    "As No2EU contains many Marxists, it is hardly a good place to "begin"."

    It is hardly a good place to end. But it has itself now ended - it was only to contest these elections.

    "As you admire their organisational ability "from a standing start" then it is certainly possible to emulate them in terms of organisation"

    If you are the RMT, yes...

    "Presumably the other members of the BPA have not thrown their lot in with other groupings and you can still organise them"

    We won't be doing it like that again.

    "Some or all of your principles might have to be jettisoned to facilitate a "mass movement"."

    Why?

    "The success of a Political Party is not measured by its ability to attract its "own constituency" but rather an ability to reach beyond it"

    Says a Sinn Fein voter!

    ReplyDelete
  3. All movements are founded by mavericks. I read David's long post in reply to Simon Hughes on Saturday and I found my champion.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Very many thanks inddeed, Frank. But read over http://davidaslindsay.blogspot.com/2009/06/justification.html and consider that not merely holding any of the positions expressed in it, but even so much as ever having heard of many of the figures or events described, is now an absolute bar to first-term selection as a parliamentary candidate for any party.

    ReplyDelete
  5. The Electoral Commission forced the Pro Life Alliance to close down too.

    ReplyDelete
  6. http://davidaslindsay.blogspot.com/2009/06/justification.html

    Don't know why that didn't come out right.

    Anonymous, I know. Same means - bombarded them with demands for the same paperwork over and over again, threats to fine them for not doing things that they certainly had done, that sort of thing. Standard practice, apparently.

    How many people know that a political party's name, Constitution (including Aims and Objectives) and Leader are now subject to the annual, charged for approval of central government? What is this, East Germany?

    ReplyDelete
  7. The last word is "justification"

    Heaven knows why this isn't working.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Well you DO often state that people actually voting for Parties means they are actually voting for something else.

    As to Sinn Féin well......just a few years ago people were saying they were supported by 0.0001% of the population.
    If they attract 126,000 votes this seems to indicate that EITHER....they appeal way beyond their constituency OR they actually had much more support than was actually thought.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Call it appealing beyond their constituency, call it working a proportional system, call it hoodwinking.

    A sort of irregular verb in fact: "I appeal beyond my constituency, you work a proportional system, he hoodwinks".

    ReplyDelete
  10. Are the various regional arms of the BPA still going on? I remember reading about those a few months ago on this blog and thinking that sounded quite good to get involved in. There was definitely one in Bristol, one somewhere in the Midlands I think, and a couple in Scotland

    ReplyDelete
  11. They mean compromise with them, David. There is no thought of them compromising with us. Whatever they say is "the centre ground" and anyone who disagrees with them is "an extremist".

    Let me quote you:

    "A new movement is now needed to fight for the universal and comprehensive Welfare State. To fight for the strong statutory and other (including trade union) protection of workers, consumers, communities and the environment. For fair taxation. For full employment. For the partnership between a strong Parliament and strong local government. For co-operatives, credit unions, mutual guarantee societies, mutual building societies and similar bodies. And for every household to enjoy a base of real property from which to resist both over-mighty commercial interests and an over-mighty State."

    What are you supposed to "reach beyond" there? The fight for the universal and comprehensive Welfare State? For the strong statutory and other (including trade union) protection of workers, consumers, communities and the environment? For fair taxation? For full employment? For the partnership between a strong Parliament and strong local government? For co-operatives, credit unions, mutual guarantee societies, mutual building societies and similar bodies? Or for every household to enjoy a base of real property?

    You go on:

    "On that basis, that movement must make itself the voice of all those whose concerns are any one or more of rural, monarchist, cautious and organic with regard to constitutional change, Eurosceptical, Unionist, pro-Commonwealth, academically selective, economically patriotic, morally and socially conservative, explicitly Christian, conservationist rather than environmentalist, and foreign policy realist. These are traditional causes of the British Left, inseparable from the battle against poverty, ignorance, illness, idleness and squalor."

    Again, what are you supposed to "reach beyond" there? That basis? All 12 (since you specified "any one or more") of "rural, monarchist, cautious and organic with regard to constitutional change, Eurosceptical, Unionist, pro-Commonwealth, academically selective, economically patriotic, morally and socially conservative, explicitly Christian, conservationist rather than environmentalist, and foreign policy realist" concerns? Or "the battle against poverty, ignorance, illness, idleness and squalor"?

    Don't do it, David. We need you.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Liz, they seem to have closed themselves down.

    The Bristol one, in particular, seemed to be rather a tiresome undergraduate operation which thought that because it had come up with a logo (on and on about this logo), then that made it tremendously important. No Strasbourg candidate for the South West was ever produced. Just a logo.

    Candidates. Those are what matter. Where are you standing, Liz?

    James, very many thanks indeed. Though I say so myself, and especially in view of the "any one or more" that you rightly highlight, we have quite a broad enough potential base without needing to compromise with people who oppose everything (not anything, everything) for which we stand.

    ReplyDelete
  13. I'm not. I have no desire to become an MP. Though that is pretty much par for the course when standing as an independent, of course.

    ReplyDelete
  14. How many seats would you say are currently covered by "your type" of people planning on standing at the moment?

    ReplyDelete
  15. Whatever happened to the league of catcholics, the 99 club, and all those other funny little organisations you dreamed up in a hurry once the BPA fell apart? Haven't heard much about them for a while

    ReplyDelete
  16. Why do you think the Electoral Commission registered you in the first place? Wouldn't it have been easier to deny you then?

    ReplyDelete
  17. The BPA branch at Kings is very active. I am standing on its platform. Unfortunately the leader hasn't been much of an asset to the party's supporters.

    ReplyDelete
  18. David2, you can't, you'd be breaking the law. We've had this argument before. You, too, of course, entirely failed to produce a Strasbourg candidate, the only thing required of you.

    Frankly, organisation specifically around universities is a bad idea. It wouldn't have happened if we'd been consulted in advance. This sort of thing is for grown-ups. Students welcome. But not in charge.

    Cam, they tried extremely hard not to, but we didn't just go away like so many other people.

    Jack, after the Election...

    Ous, I have honestly no idea. Nor need I have, although of course it would be useful if we could help each other out. The first MPs in the movement that eventually became each of the old parties didn't necessarily know each other in advance. But, as I say, it would be useful.

    ReplyDelete
  19. David2, you can't, you'd be breaking the law

    I thought you had de registered the BPA? At which point, anyone is free to sue the name and anything else they want to.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Well, he hasn't. And based on past form, I don't expect him ever to get his act together enough to do so.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Why would he want a party? The way you describe it he never saw the point of putting up candidates.

    ReplyDelete
  22. David, it is completely obvious that "Frank" is you. Why do you fake these things with such obvious stupidity?

    ReplyDelete
  23. I know you can't belive that people exist who agree with me rather than you, but...

    ReplyDelete
  24. "This sort of thing is for grown-ups. Students welcome. But not in charge."

    Correct me if I'm wrong, David, but I thought one of your party officials was a student at St Andrew's? As memory serves, he was the only person apart from yourself listed on the documents you sent to the Electoral Commission.

    And I can't understand what you mean by saying that the BPA was 'driven out of existence' when the Electoral Commission states that it was 'deregistered voluntarily'.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Depends what you mean by "voluntarily".

    ReplyDelete