‘rumours swirl around Westminster …’
According to our glorious MSM, there’s only one news story worthy of their front pages with photos and headlines: “Newspaper headlines: ‘Lionesses make history’ and ‘heist at the museum’” (link). Good old staff was hard-pressed to come up with that headline, inserting the ‘museum heist’ rather than the far more appropriate report in the FT, about coffee beans being threatened by ‘climate change’.
Regarding yon ‘heist’: it wasn’t a thrilling break-in, alarms and police and all that jazz. According to The Times it was a ‘workman’ taking small items from storage where they were kept for academic research (link, paywalled) while the DM informs us that it took “at least four years in discovering the thefts” (link). Ah well, poor old staff at the British Museum was working overtime to ‘de-colonise’ their exhibits and inform visitors about slavery and all that. How should they find out what all went missing from some storage some years ago …
And so to today’s main subject: a ‘new party’. This seems to be an idea swirling around in the not-so public discourse in the last few weeks. I found it very interesting indeed that today the DT’s Allister Heath has come up with an essay headlined:
“Fury of the silent majority is driving a global Right-wing counter-revolution – Across the Western world, anger at a woke ruling elite is benefiting the Right – apart from in Britain” (paywalled link)
I am increasingly puzzled by the pieces coming from Allister Heath. His analyses of current political problems, correct as they are, seem to lead him into convoluted explanations and warnings better aimed at guardian readers. This piece is no exception. It is full of warnings about ‘populists’ which are of the devil and are always ‘of the right’. It’s certainly odd that apparently there are no lefty ‘populist’ parties around. I wonder how they are getting elected …
Still, I mention his piece because it seems Mr Heath has picked up on the discontent and perhaps even on some of the discussions the MSM aren’t reporting. Perhaps he’s read the long essay by Dominic Cummings which I recommended you look at last Saturday. It’s not paywalled, here’s the link again. Of course, Mr Heath doesn’t refer to this essay although I am certain he’s read it. Not having done so would be dereliction of duty.
Yesterday evening Matt Goodwin published a reply to Cummings on his paywalled Substack site. I’m a paid-up subscriber – it’s far more worth it than shelling out 100 quid for Cummings’ diatribes – and so I’ll quote at length from this essay. Goodwin acknowledges that some of Cummings’ observations and proposals are in line with his own. His summary however shows why he thinks Cummings is on the wrong path:
“Much of it sounds like the end goal is to build a sort-of super-efficient technocracy run in the interests of scientists, big-tech types, entrepreneurs, and intellectual mavericks rather than delivering on several core demands the British people have right now and want to see delivered … right now.” (link, paywalled)
That is indeed ‘Cummings in a nutshell’. In the following, Goodwin lists the five points which he thinks a new political party must address in order to reach all those who’ve been ‘members of the NOTA Party’, i.e. who have wanted ‘none of the above’ for a considerable time now. I’ll quote these points in abbreviated form. Let me know what you think and if you think it would be worthwhile to have an article dedicated exclusively to full quotes of one or two of his points. Meanwhile, here are the first sentences of Goodwin’s Five Points (emphases are mine):
“First. Crime. Get serious about tackling it and adopt a much tougher approach which a large majority of voters want to see. […] Second. Immigration. Get serious about lowering it and do WHATEVER IS NECESSARY to regain control over Britain’s borders. […] Third. Woke Political Correctness. Oppose it. It’s divisive. It’s unBritish. It’s stifling. It’s leaving much the country with palpable sense they cannot say what they want to say (60% feel this way). […] Fourth. Identity. Pledge to preserve and promote Britain’s distinctive identity, culture, and history which many voters —white or otherwise— now worry are being swept away by a relentless tide of bland, hyper-global, liberal universalism. […] Fifth. Economic populism (read: not redistribution). Masses of voters, put simply, are sick and tired of big global corporates, the 1%, and High Net Worths taking the p*ss when it comes to tax avoidance, evasion, dominating and corrupting the property market, and viewing Britain as a private playground rather than a national community to which they have a sense of responsibility and obligation.” (link, paywalled)
There is of course much more to these points. Meanwhile, keep in mind that Goodwin is a professor of politics and is extremely well versed in the black art of polling which he does himself, not relying on our friends at YouGov. His wiki entry is revealing because wiki ‘editors’, alert to his ‘dangerous’ writings, are now starting to smear him:
“Goodwin’s early work was well received but his most recent book, Values, Voice and Virtue, has attracted criticism that he has transformed from being an analyst of populism into a right-wing populist himself.” (link)
Clearly the Westminster denizens are sniffing danger. Thus Matt Goodwin must be peremptorily rejected “because: right-wing populist!”. And so we have an explanation for Mr Heath’s strange essay. He has to sing his paymaster’s song: anything like a New Party has to be stamped down as ‘right wing populism’ which is the darkest political crime known to … Westminster.
That’s all I have for today. Let me know if you’d like extra articles just providing the full quotes of those five points. After all, you would want something to read for the weekend, no? Have a good day.
T I N A
There is no alternative
Remember that? All this buzza
About new parties and this and that diddlydums is a wate of space when the bulk of the population haven’t the remotest idea of why we really had to leave the EU. Plainly that they were ( and still are ) the ENEMY, that “they” were out to plunder us lock, stock and barrel and deprive us of our nationhood and democracy , our Independence and our borders and the enemy within, our parliament and much of the rest of the establishment were hand in glove with this abject surrender. Until this is hammered home to our now supine population there is really not much point in hoping that there will ever be a platform of cohesiveness in getting rid of the present elite inmates of the asylum even though treason laws have been modified, the conduct of our state was in many instances treasonous.Again I say there is no alternative to making the population fully aware of where we have been, before we can ever begin tt. Set it right and start afresh
Smack on the money Roger , Well said.
Very grateful to Cummings and Matthew Elliot for their cross party Vote Leave referendum victory but what I have read since then about him is that he is globalist to the top of his boots. For me he is now bad news after he supported lockdowns and removal of personal freedoms/liberties (for others not him) and the vax roll out.
Jake That puzzled me too. The same thing puzzled me about Trump too
I also remember reading about some of Cummins ideas and without remembering the details (way above my head) they were a bit weird I seem to remember.
?link to Cummings should be https://dominiccummings.substack.com/p/4-the-startup-party-time-t
Proof the left have taken over the elite universities. If proof was required of course.
University challenge question.
https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=video&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwjr4YWqzOOAAxXziv0HHfoMAr4QtwJ6BAgLEAI&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3Dc5-6F42y3Hk&usg=AOvVaw3g7fS0r7wfxd8oVVd579kY&opi=89978449..
Goodwin is indeed transforming. I was struck by the amount of emotion – anger mainly – in his recent speeches with increasingly barbed comments directed at the Tories whom he sees as (quite correctly) betraying our country. The detached academic has morphed into a polemicist who appears to be accepting every opportunity to speak. He was at an FSU debate in early June (where Goodwin took on Prof Simon Evans), at the National Conservatism conference, and will be at the SDP conference. He is even speaking at the Carlton Club at the end of October!
HIs arguments for a new party reflect the hunger for one that goes beyond us ID readers but it needs charismatic leadership if it is to have a chance. The abysmal state of our country is such that there is currently only one candidate – Nigel Farage. A dream team would be Farage and Goodwin. That is, Farage with an intelligent advisor actually in touch with reality (which would be a first). Alas, Farage has signed up to cover next year’s US election and I doubt he will give that up – his ambitions are American I am sure not least because it is potentially so much more lucrative than anything here. He and Tice are 50% each shareholders in Reform UK and there are no signs Tice would stand aside for Farage or that Farage would walk away to join or form a new party. Farage has said several times he will only return to frontline politics if in the company of some heavyweights. (He was involved in the formation of the CDO as a friend of David Campbell-Bannerman. Alas, the CDO did not sign up enough heavyweights).
The nucleus of a new party is split across the CDO and Reform UK (which together could swallow UKIP, Heritage et al whole as parties without money go nowhere) with the potential, via the CDO (and funding injection from Cruddas), to immediately inherit conservative associations and so a branch network (the back bone of political campaigning). For the nuclei to unite it would take belief in effective leadership, a belief that a new party really could take off. Tice and Priti Patel/David Campbell-Bannerman are not that leadership. We are destined to remain hungry.
He is indeed becoming passionate about this issue, shown in the change in his language. I’ll publish the full text of the five points he makes which illustrate nicely his passion.
I doubt however that Farage as leader of a new party as envisaged by Goodwin would be ‘a winner’: Farage, as we all know, is a ‘marmite politician’.
In any case I think that the ‘leaders’ of the current alt-con parties, Tice, Kurten and Fox, will make useful ‘leaders’ – they are tainted by their losses and are tainted for playing their own egotistical games of ‘political leader’.
Moreover, NOTA ‘supporters’ have had enough of all the current crop of politicians, so why would a new party even try and form itself according to this outdated, rejected model?
Viv 11:11 Agree Viv.
It is the issues that are marmite, issues that attract red and blue as in the referendum. A marmite leader of a new party matters less than someone who can generate attention for a new party and make it credible. I would rather someone other than Farage except there is no alternative.
SY………like you I would I would like a potential leader of a new party to be somebody other than Nigel Farage, but sadly there isn’t an alternative. Farage has the required presence, charisma and pull factor for such a party to succeed. The other day on his GB News programme he hinted at a return to frontline politics, but I want something more substantive than just a hint. And one of his guests Christopher Chope asked Farage if he was going to return to frontline politics, and why would he do that if there was no smoke. However, for me if that were to come to fruition, the new party emphatically must be democratically run, and I for one would prefer if Richard Tice wasn’t part of it.
IMHO Farage and Tice still seek the ‘reform’ of the Tory party rather than destroy it. Nothing I have heard or seen from both of them convinces me they wish to get bums on seats in Westminster. Reform UK never even had an organised candidate campaign day in the recent by-election in Selby and Ainsty.
SY……I think you will find that Farage is the major shareholder of Reform UK with Catherine Blaiklock who actually formed The Brexit Party before Farage left UKIP. Tice is just employed by Farage to lead it.
From the website of the World Resistance Forum, let’s hope that this amounts to something.
“THE WEFMINSTER TAKE OVER
On August 31st from 6 am we shall be uniting with thousands of ex military personnel from all over the United Kingdom to Rise up and Take our Country Back From the unfit for purpose Government and all opposition parties invoking ARTICLE 61 of Common Law
From past experience and past mistakes made in organising the April 21st Shit Show this will be a momentous time in British History as the lessons learnt will pay off we have united with Tens of thousands of Ex Military Personel who are extremely pissed off at how they have been treated since leaving the Armed Services and also they we coerced into fighting unjust wars for and on behalf of the Global Elites not what they signed up for..
We will congregate at Parliament Square London from 06:00 hrs 31/08/23 and remain in situ for as long as it takes to remove the corrupt and genocidal politicians from Westminster.
The House of Lords Return to Parliament from their summer recess on 1st of September 2023 and the House of Commons Return on September 4th.
We intend to Stop them from Entering the Houses of Parliament by any means necessary so please come equipped to FIGHT FOR YOUR FREEDOMS.
THIS IS NOT A PROTEST / RALLY or MARCH”
https://www.worldresistanceforum.com/news/events
Very good. Just one very small gripe though: disappointed to see that they suggest facemasks among the gear that people need to have with them. It’s a symbol of the tyranny we’re fighting and we want to completely de-normalise it.
I really hope this is successful and it may be that masks or face coverings are for other reasons Mary. I do agree with the de-normalising of it.
Jake……….that tells you all you need to know about Reform UK I am afraid. It is an absolute disgrace that no Action Day was held at Selby and Ainsty, and no excuse. Any party worth its salt and wanting to be treated as a serious political party by the electorate SHOULD be holding action days when a general election or a by election is being fought. And they SHOULD be mobilising all available activists to gather en masse deliver to leaflets to all residential addresses and canvass at the doorstep. When I was a registered supporter of Reform UK a few of us wanted to help out when Tice contested the Bexley constituency a couple of years back, but we never received any answers to messages left on the party answer phone, and many were left, and from that moment we grew despondent with that party’s intentions and objectives, if indeed it actually had any. The only party in recent years years that did this properly on this side of the political landscape was the UK Independence Party. And that is hopefully how it will be again in future years.
Viv, extra articles on the 5 quotes would me much appreciated.
I’ll do it then because I think Goodwin’s points are hugely important and exceedingly well made, not least because he uses his own polling data.
Yes, I’d very much appreciate Viv’s analysis of this too if possible.
I second that Chris. Very interesting thank you Viv.