My previous post threw up a question that I’d like to answer in a bit of detail.
Anonymous Confused, Angus said...
Having always been a natural Tory supporter and living in
There are lots of ways by which natural Tory voters can respond to Cameron’s apostasy, and a UKIP vote is only one of them: one, of course, I hope that you’ll take.
If you look at the Peter Hitchens’ blog here you’ll see that he expounds the theory that the Tory party is irredeemably broken and corrupt and needs destroying so conservatives can change their allegiances to form some kind of party or party coalition. This could win power and use it to reverse the Leftwards ratchet effect of all postwar governments bar one (in places), especially in the social sphere.
Now I’m not sure whether C & U P’s utter destruction is the only answer, though I’m mortally certain that a thorough scourging is needed and a new Lib Lab pact should do that. Then the Tories might have a palace coup and throw out Cameron and all the post-Howard Lefty wimpishness and offer something different and identifiably conservative to which the old base might flock along with some of the working class Tories on whom Churchill and Thatcher depended when the Oxbridge toffs and the cricket club boys wimped out and went all appeasy and Europhile respectively.
But by then - say three years or so into a Lib Lab pact that gets PR through - such a scourging would not only help the new Tories, but also any non-Conservative party offering patriotic, traditionalist, anti Big State solutions for those people for whom the word ‘Conservative’ is anathema could gain seats or add more seats to Buckingham?
Call it the Freedom Party, or Family, or just plain United Kingdom Party.
On the other hand, a Cameron-led Tory majority after May 6th would likely:
A) not be much different from New Labour anyway, and therefore,
B) not even start to fix the wrecked economy. It would also be in office when the country changes from merely heading south and being third-rate to Southern Hemisphere/Third World economically and politically, such as having to deal with brown out and blackouts due to lack of energy investment, and the insupportable cost of having to continue to pay our VE Day generation their government final salary pensions from funds (where they are funded at all!) with the Stock Market in the cellar at a time during Obama’s second term when the US economy is being turned over to full-scale industrial sandal production fuelled by the cheap, clean and sustainable use of lentil bakes.
I can’t see the Germans having enough cash or any will at all to bail us out then, and the word ‘Conservative’ would be mud for more than a single generation, like the Tories after the Jacobite rebellion of 1715-1716
Bottom line, Anonymous Confused, Angus, is that I believe that, as empty threats go, Cameron’s “Send me to Downing Street or you’ll get another
4 comments:
Voting Tory is like drinking low-calorie bleach - you can see how it's healthier than the obvious alternative, but it doesn't really address the central 'bleachiness' of it all.
On the other hand we could end up with a revolution in Lab gets in with 5% of the vote.
Is there a tick box for that? I don't see one.
Thanks for taking the time to provide such a thoughtful answer.
I get Peter Hitchin's point but I can't help but wonder how long it might take for a new Conservative party to rise, what damage might be done by successive left-wing governments in the meantime and how much of that would be reversible.
Hitchin's contends that, "...such an opposition, no longer weighed down by the awful record of the Tories and their miserable reputation, could throw New Labour into the sea, perhaps within five years of coming into being." I think that's unrealistic. It could easily be three or four parliaments before a new party would be in a position to challenge. By then, there might be nothing worth saving.
Still, on the bright side, I have another ten days of thinking time left.
DJ
Lo-cal bleach. Heh.
Still and all, you'll have to go a long way to find a zany absurdity which is all at once: a lie, the literal and absolute truth, utterly necessary to the good government of our country and utterly irrelevant.
The campaign slogan "The Conservatives, Vote for change" somehow manages to fit the bill.
Lord T, welcome and thanks for your comment.
With resurgent Lib Dems just waiting to disarm us and sell our few remaining aspects of independent government [such as designing our own postage stamps and education] down the river to the EU and to squat in the government forever under PR, it's looking more and more likely that a Labour government is what we're going to get whichever parties for the official administration. I can't see any of them dismantling the quangocracy.
Confused, Angus.
You’re welcome, and thanks yourself: it was a nice high, slow lob for me to smash, but it seems I haven’t smashed it out of court with you.
Well, a split from a defeated Parliamentary C & U P {say twenty to forty MPs] might be a good way to start. With five years in opposition the Real Tories could easily set up a national network and join with/absorb UKIP and start campaigning for law and order and national debt management from the get-go. There'd be money from some businesses from the start, I'm guessing.
The trouble is, there are enough masochistic Tories in Party and Parliament who would be willing to put up with the let's-look-like-Labour policies started under Howard if they don't have theri noses rubbed in the idea that kinda/maybe won't get them elected. A strong vote for anti-establishment democratic patriotic parties might get through to them.
I'm thinking of UKIP votes here larger than Labour majorities over defeated Tories, or rural Conservatives only getting in by a whisker. THEN they might take the hint.
That might work in Angus, too.
Post a Comment