Daddy Dragon’s Rally is in Warrior Square, Southend, opposite a blank-eyed Travelodge. It is a gathering of the English Constitution Party, which seeks secession from Britain, its oppressor, in support of its leader Daddy Dragon (or Graham Moore) in the Southend West by-election. This is a meeting of the alienated English, and it is desperate, tragic and gay. Before it starts, they blow a horn in the Viking style. They want to travel backwards through space, possibly to King Alfred’s time. They love flags. There is a St George’s flag, a royal arms of England flag with its golden lions, and even a red rose of Lancaster. You don’t see that very often these days.
This is where David Amess, the Tory MP, was killed last year at a constituency surgery. Due to this, Labour and the Liberal Democrats are not standing in the by-election today where they might, in other circumstances, have tried to dent the immense Tory majority. (Amess took 60% of the vote in 2019, in a Leave-supporting seat.) It wouldn’t happen though, and perhaps the opposition parties know that, and their politesse is also cynicism. If there is a Boris Johnson land it is here. This is Essex, the land of spurious self-confidence. Why else build a mile long pier into the mud of the Thames estuary, where no one wants to go? Because you can. The men of Essex have not lost their affection for Johnson because they are like him. When Johnson said “voting Tory would cause your wife to have bigger breasts and increase your chances of owning a BMW M3” — and it is, in retrospect, a very truthful manifesto, in that it is dreams — he was talking to Essex Man and the things he wanted and understood. And, so, when I ask people in Southend about Johnson and the parties, they either admire him or forgive him.
“I broke the [pandemic] rules,” says one man. “I saw my Mum. I wasn’t going to not see my Mum. The thing before the funeral [of Prince Philip]. That was a bit a naughty. God bless her.” But “Naughty” is an indulgence. It is not a critique. “I didn’t get caught but he did,” he says, “I don’t give a monkey’s.”
“There’s nothing wrong with Boris,” says another man, angry even at the insinuation that there might be. The only critical man is a fishmonger, and he only says, “Better the devil you know.” Fish are swimming in the estuary, he says, and customers are plentiful. Things are looking up.
I am looking for the parties to the right of the Conservatives. With Labour and the Liberal Democrats — and also the Greens and Reform — absent from Southend, they have the field to themselves. (The Conservative candidate, the barrister Anna Firth is, as is usual when defending a constituency in a by-election, so elusive as to effectively be a myth. I only email her campaign to exercise my finger joints.) You can learn a lot about what people think when you talk to what is called the far Right, because almost no one begins their political journey there. Something took them there. And sometimes, if you are unlucky, you can predict the future.
But not always. I meet Jason Pilley, the Psychedelic Movement candidate and party leader in the Utopia Coffee Shop off Southend’s main drag. He is wearing a pin-striped jacket. He was once a Green — “they hate each other,” he says, because he has no filter to speak of — and his candidacy is a piece of performance art, or scream. He speaks fast, like a man who is never listened to enough, and calls Southend, “heaven and hell. You can’t win in this town [as an MP] unless you are a Tory.” He says, “I’ve never gone into an election thinking I can win. There’s a couple I’ve thought: ‘I won’t come last’. I write novels and poetry and I kind of see politics as part of that.” He hands me his manifesto. He is for allotments and renewable energy and martial arts training for children and cannabis and LSD clubs “around Southend”. He would burn incense in all public buildings and would replace the Queen with the Christian stabbed at Speakers’ Corner last summer: Hatun Tash. He wants to make Tommy Robinson a peer. It ends: “RIP David Amess”.
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
SubscribeTanya wake up – most people in England feel this way. It’s not ‘far right’ to want to preserve your society and its traditions and values.
Yep, another sneering piece from Gold. No surprise. She will never get it. She seems to be very adept at the ‘back handed compliment’.I normally avoid her articles, after reading a couple of her pieces in the Spectator. She seems very much in the ‘London bubble’.
I can’t wait to not read her next article
Especially those of us whose roots go back many generations and who have nowhere else to go
I often misperceive things. But I see this piece as a well-written mea culpa. If anything she’s admitting the elite London click consistently unfairly judges anyone outside their bubble – increasingly to their own detriment.
I read it more as “the people have spoke – the bastards“.
I doubt the author is capable of that.
Well I think you and John Redman want to believe your points regardless of the facts. I think Paul Scannel got it right.
Agree totally; and I’m Scottish (and British!). Don’t know why I had to add that last bit; but needs must, maybe a sign of the times.
Totally. This article ends with a slightly high-handed and condescending statement of charity — these people are basically laughable, but we probably shouldn’t laugh at them… this is the sentiment.
I noticed this bit about Katherine Blakelock’s business being targeted with fake negative reviews online:
Only a person financially insulated from the strains of running a hard graft business like the people she’s discussing would throw away those concerns so casually, or compare them to the misery of some abstract figure on the other side of the world. How is it Katherine’s fault that some people are poor and live in warzones? — should she shut up and accept a life of disaffected misery (or in this case persecution on political grounds) just because someone, somewhere is also poor? …the writer makes it seem so.
This attitude really explains a good chunk of the mess we are in, socially and culturally. This is not a good piece. It’s not insightful, as I don’t think she really wanted to know and connect with these folks. It’s just gentle condescension, and I don’t think the forgotten citizens need any more of that.
I enjoyed parts of this article – I loved the depictions of the various people encountered. I particularly like humour in writing and in everyday life.
Where I found the disconnect is the author’s attitude to these people, because despite the final paragraph, she is still laughing – not in enjoyment and observation of diverse eccentric, rich characters who love their country, but in condescension. I’m happy for her to correct me if I got it wrong.
Genuine compassion rather than condescension, I thought.
You have a seriously warped idea of compassion my friend
I agree that there was some tenderness in her descriptions.
More like a little girl’s fascination at examining the tiny creatures you find under a large stone in the garden.
I don’t think she means those creatures any harm, but now she’s just going to put the stone back in place and return to admiring the pretty flowers.
Compassion – Among emotion researchers, it is defined as the feeling that arises when you are confronted with another’s suffering and feel motivated to relieve that suffering.
Nope- that doesn
t define this bit of writing
s it … I think “Taking the p-ss condescendingly” describes this little piece the bestCondescension attitude of patronizing superiority; disdain.
Closer
Taking the p-ss- to make a joke about someone or make someone look silly.>
Almost fits the bill.
Taking the p-ss condescendingly - To be essentially f--king with someone by implying that they are stupid.
Yes, that
This is a rewrite of my original reply which went to moderation, no idea why.
I agree with you, but the condescension only really appears in the last paragraph. I thought there was kindness in the descriptions of the people involved.
In the last paragraph it is finally made clear that the article is written for a Remainer audience only. Disappointing.
I didn’t actually get that from her last paragraph. I’ve read it again and still don’t find it condescending, if anything she is being critical of those (like herself) who laugh at people who act/speak/dress/think differently. The fact that neither she nor the other journos present saw what was coming is a result of this not taking others seriously, and not engaging honestly with them.
Re-read it and I think you might be right, thank goodness for that. If so my apologies to Tanya.
I’ve had to come back to this because I’m just not sure what to think quite honestly.
I admit I might be mistaken but there’s something equivocating about this article. It makes me wonder if Tanya herself is not absolutely certain what to think. Old habits die hard.
This is in answer to Lesley’s reply below as well.
I got to the sentence ‘Essex, the land of spurious self-confidence’ and this hinted at the attitude of the writer’s scorn and false intellectual superiority that became evident in the rest of the article.
It was also evident in the piece – pulling out all the trigger phrases and words like ‘plandemic’, without even a nod to the fact that words like this carry more weight after two years of conspiracy theorists being proven right.
You’re right. It’s typical of wealthy, leftish and above all Remoaner journalists.
We don’t even get condescension in the U.S., just cancelled.
If you love your country, work hard for 40 years, raise a family, pay your taxes, go to church and don’t agree that a man can declare himself a woman, or that overt racism is not a cure for racism, then you are destined for the dust bin.
I’ve always believed that I inherited a key British trait, which is to recognise the early signs of totalitarianism and react against them.
I also believe that I share this trait with many Britons (actual Britons; not British citizens labelled as such by the lazy media). As a result, since Blair came to power, I’ve been one of many voices expressing our fears about the direction the UK has been going in. We had a chance to rebel against the EU, but aside from UnHerd and a handful of other media outlets (The Times surprisingly increasingly becoming one), we don’t get to push against the march of soft totalitarianism, which pervades our ability to speak and often act freely.
For people like me, our greatest fear is that having seen this horror slowly unfurl in front of us, is it now too late to turn the tide? We thought that Boris might be the person who spoke for traditional British values, but he’s only served himself and traditional Conservative Party stakeholders. The people of Southend are not going away and will only get more despondent and even angry, so where does this all end? Brexit was a massive FU to the media and we’re ready to raise a finger yet again.
Always considered myself a liberal leftie. No longer. I bristle at the condescending shyte coming from the modern left. We are a people, with a history and a culture. Those who don’t defend it end up going the way of the dodo. kumbaya just doesn’t cut it. And I wouldn’t swap our history and traditions with China’s or Islam’s or Russian would you??
Very well said, Cheryl!
You’ve said all I’d want to – thank you and hear hear.
…but we are being served up a cold soup of that Christian-centric history and a bland desert of that culture; re-written as we speak. It starts small, perhaps with a revision of the dating convention, incrementally excoriating those more indigestible parts others care not to engage with. Just look at the school books.
How does the average dodo defend that?
!7 million upticks Cheryl.
Indeed, I have been on about this for a while and people look at me as though I am mad…however your words are EXACTLY what is and has been happening. Sinister times.
‘I don’t know if he is aware that he is calling for an end to parliamentary democracy, and it will not be as sunny as he thinks. If he is, he does it weeping.’
It looks to me like he is calling for an English parliament, which is not ‘an end to parliamentary democracy’ but more of it. It seemed to be fine when the Scots did it. And he is right – England is the only European nation without its own parliament, and its working people are treated like dirt when they are even noticed.
I enjoyed some of this, but there’s a curious wrenching tone to it. On the one hand, it seeks to hand out a lesson about how ‘we’ should listen to and not sneer at English working people. On the other hand, there is still a lot of sneering.
I too sensed the ‘curious wrenching tone’.
‘I used to laugh at them. It was wrong of me to laugh at them. But, I mean, ya gotta laugh at them, haven’t you!’
Have I missed the point of this article? ‘It’s time we stopped laughing at the disaffected Right’ -then follows 19 sneering paragraphs depicting the clichéd type of Englishman she clearly hates and looks down on.
Is Unherd’s idea of ‘balance’ these days chucking in a few articles that belong in the Guardian? Or is it just purely clickbait for us below the line?
The Guardian would never admit it shouldn’t have sneered, though.
Thankfully Tanya, you’ve all learned from that period of history. So, moving forward, you’re all going to demonstrate the lesson by screaming “raaaaaaacist” that much louder, because, obviously, if they’d just heard you last time, they’d all have gone, “blimey, didn’t realise I was such a despicable immoral thicko, defs going to vote for Jezza this time round…!”
Gold is very anti-Corbyn…
Presumably because she’s Jewish and he’s an anti-Semite – either that or through frustration because she agrees with him but the fool keeps letting the cat out of the bag and thus can’t get elected.
Certainly a bit of the former… but the line in this article about Corbynistas entering politics for personal self-renewal shows me she’s got the broader vapidity and vanity of the man and his followers down to a T.
Why might that be?
This person writes like an effete snob looking down at the hoi polloi like a scientist looks at a petri dish, from.a position of maternal condescension at best and patronising superiority at worst. What is it about the left that they think ‘the right’ must represent everything ‘bad’ and that being working class with a bit of national pride is akin to Nazism, with gas chambers soon following, whereas of course slavish devotion to rabid identity politics and ‘minorities’, no matter their cultural allegiances or practices, is like wearing a halo leading to utopia?
The banking crisis caused by corrupt bankers. Politicians and their expenses scandal. The media bugging peoples phones. A police force that is no longer capable of preventing crime and in most cases not interested investigating crime. A criminal justice system that is failing ordinary people. Petty minded Councils run by a clique of “can’t quite make it as an MP’ bureaucrats powerless to affect change in the even smaller minded technocrats that manage the councils like their own little fiefdoms. The systematic destruction of affordable social housing and well-paying jobs. All of these institutions are controlled and run by the middle and upper class elites. Yet you reserve your greatest scorn, your greatest condescension, your vailed hatred for the working classes whose only crime is to be vocal in their desire to preserve their identity and way of life. I suppose we should be grateful there was a small amount of contrition in this article.
Hardly. People shouldn’t be prevented from earning a living because they have perfectly sensible views about not wanting to be swamped with hordes of illegal Muslim immigrants, to pay for them with our taxes and to live in fear of terrorism and with knowledge of “grooming” that largely goes unpunished.
Tanya Gold demonstrates, once again, that there is no snob like a left wing snob, especially a Remoaner, which she is, naturally.
Tanya Gold never considers why there has to be a bye-election. She states that David Amess was murdered, but doesn’t consider the murderer, his faith, or any implications that that might have.
I finished this piece thinking that Steve Laws, on the beach, counting the migrant boats, might be seeing more clearly than Ms Gold.
Well said. Steve Laws and his ilk are doing what the paid authorities should be doing.
At least someone out there is recognising the English democratic deficit. As someone who hopes for either a British confederation or total independence for England the words of the weeping gentleman moved me. English identity has been suppressed for centuries.
English identity was expanded to be British identity. Now I have no problem with that, except it didn’t really extend to Scotland Wales or NI who maintained their individual identities and this was celebrated not denigrated because of misplaced guilt over Empire or something (forgetting the enthusiastic participation in Empire by all of them). If I had my way we either all separate back to our constituent parts and maybe have a British Isles free trade zone (which doesn’t include EU members), or we forget being English Scottish etc and just become a new country called Great Britain and we’re all British. Have done with it.
I always remember Hugo Rifkind remarking casually that Scottish nationalism was splendid and romantic, but English nationalism was disgusting, vile, racist.
Don’t include me in your ‘we’ Tanya. Not all of us automatically despise our fellow citizens when they differ from us.
O, beautifully said, Penny – apply for PM, please?
Southend pier is long because it was originally built to allow passenger steamers to dock there. That was far enough out to ensure deep water when the tide is low.
Absolutely correct. There are also swinging moorings next to it, where I have anchored waiting for the tide to turn so we could make it up into the Pool of London.
‘’That is, he sees the crime scene clearly, but he has no idea who the murderer is.’’
I think he has it very clear who the (murder) murderers are. He feels the murders are the lily-livered and spineless liberal elites, who, with faux morality dripping from them like cheap chocolate syrup, keep forcing policies down the throats of native Britons that are ruinous and unsustainable and which undermine the British way of life.
To many Leavers Boris is a hero for achieving the Brexit quest, and heroes are allowed their failings. It humanises them.
To many Remainers Johnson is a villain for ruining their lives, and villains are intensely scrutinised for failings, even trivial ones, to confirm their evil.
So in a constituency which strongly favoured ‘Leave’ why wouldn’t the Conservatives do best?
I am a Leaver for whom Boris has become a villain.
Yes, his failings have made this country an international laughing stock. Average Joe’s haven’t. I don’t see the comparison.
What a shame, I am currently aboard and saw the title thinking (hoping) that one of the very slightly centre right parties had pipped a win in a by election I had somehow forgotten.
The ‘disaffected’ Right is where most of the people I know are…and I do not live in a bubble.
There are also some of us here on the “disaffected” Left.
You may view yourself as the disaffected left but to your former comrades you are now “Tory Scum”.
You’re probably right there, but you might be suprised at how many there are of us just longing for a decent left-wing political party which doesn’t look-down on those who don’t agree with them, don’t hate our country, and who realise how much damage to our society is being wrought by those on the “progressive” left.
…….and that makes a decent job of opposition.
Try the SDP
I have looked at their website, but I’m still not convinced, and to be honest I don’t think that they have a cat in h*ll’s change of forming a government. I don’t want to vote for a “protest” party, I want a party with a chance of being in power and getting things done. By the way I was a member of the SDP when it was first formed, I was young and ever hopeful.
The warmest of welcomes to you…
In that phrase, what a revealing thing the author has told us … about herself, about her own mental processes, and the way she believes people should present themselves to others.
Now, did she intend it to be revealing about herself? If so, praise is due for the self-insight and the admission.
Or was that accidental? If so, praise not due. No, not at all.
Tanya – perhaps if you thought for a moment about the reason there was a by-election at all, then you might have a better understanding of why Steve Laws is so focused on channel crossings. The murderer’s parents found shelter here from Somalia. David Amess was a Friend of Israel and a supporter of Iranian dissidents. His selection for slaughter may not have been a random act.
There are amusing eccentricities in any English town or city, but there’s plenty for the outsider with an open mind and ears to understand as well.
Steve Laws is also a source of information on the number of crossings daily, statistics we rarely get off the regular news. That same media will at the same time highlight any data it can on Covid to alarm a public whose tendency overall is still to believe the news. See Sky’s laughably hysterical and misleading headline on the increase in Covid deaths the other day. This was rightly called out by others for the scare-mongering it was, but by then the lie had already got it’s boots on and was on it’s journey.
People are worrying themselves sick over uncontexted, misleadingly presented data – maybe not “sneers” a Plandemic – but in my view an Extremely Bad Thing. As a journalist yourself, you might even have some sympathy to that view.
Try getting journalists to understand statistics! Easier for them to find the sensationalist angle and get their story noticed, liked, tweeted etc
Tanya, how do I fit into your picture? I use words like Plandemic, Global Elites, Neo-Feudalism, Neo-Marxists, Post Modernists, Post Structuralists, tell my (true) outrageous stories of my years of Drifting, of drugs, Quote the Bible, and sometimes quote non-woke Poets, Of Banking, the IMF, The WHO, and how the World Economic Forum (Davos – same place as the book, (Thomas Mann), ‘The Magic Mountain’ – which featured here as a book review is set) is out to make the world under one Government of the Elites in ‘The Great Reset’ and we will own nothing – and how all of you out there reading this are sheep……
But it all sounds so reasonable as I write it.
Please finish the WEF sentence ‘you will own nothing….’
You’ve learned nothing. You’re still laughing and – what’s that expression?- you’re still punching down.
A poor article, which contrasts very much with an interesting one by Paul Embery:
https://unherd.com/2019/12/the-town-that-should-shame-our-politicians-2/
I think Tanya Gold needs to ponder his book ‘Despised’. I also think that she should seriously think about the issue of psychological projection when she writes about other people whose opinions differ from hers. especially when she writes comments such as: “His policies are a collection of personal dreams, and prejudices”.
What if “these people” are right, Tanya?
I am from Southend with a working class upbringing but left and have lived in various countries and other parts of England since.
Similar to other commenters I liked parts of this article but in many areas it seems deeply unsympathetic to the people. It seems to sneer at them.
This is a deeply unfortunate aspect of our culture that is increasingly composed of a self anointed metropolitan elite seeking to control the lives and police the thoughts of others.
“Why else build a mile long pier into the mud of the Thames estuary, where no one wants to go? ” Shocking misunderstanding of history. When the pier was built in 1829 there were no railways and the fastest way to get from London to Essex or Kent was by steamer. Services were well used and popular untill the railways came along.
Well I suppose I have to put myself in the array of those mentioned in the article although not in every respect. I do feel we are not being served particularly well with our current government – broken assurances, net zero, levelling up, porous borders, Northern Ireland, inertia in respect to moving the country forward and away from EU interference etc. But I am not from Essex live nowhere near the coast and will definitely vote.
This feels a bit mean-spirited, although the author seems to be saying ‘we the M25-bubble misjudged’, I came away feeling as if somehow she was still sneering in a slightly condescending way.
Many years ago, in debate with a lefty friend on the subject of ‘England. I used to remark that Brittannia ruled the waves once but now, when anything goes wrong the Welsh turn their backs and said they were busy mining coal for the Imperial Fleet. The Scots were wiping their hands on a piece of cotton waste in the engine room of a tramp steamer off Argentina. The Irish? Potatoes, Cromwell and William of Orange who ‘forget’ it was the Tories of the time who set up soup kitchens while their own ripped them off for a loaf of bread. They can’t have a bad memory, just a selective one.
Now, the disaffected are disorganised. There’s never been a better time for a fourth party and where are they? Too poor, lazy or ill to emigrate with nowhere really any different to go.
Lurid travel writing about your town must always be intriguing – it doesn’t happen much to Southend – and presumably people often say: this is as reflective of reality as Rick Stein’s Cornwall is of the economic circumstances and political opinions of St Austell. Which is to say, not very much, and nor is it intended to be. Although even Rick got to a china clay pit and talked to a couple of Methodists about urban regeneration.
But in UnHerd there must be some correspondence with reality otherwise why would the writer go there at all?
In this case, it looks like she didn’t: she went to the tacky bit of Rochford and Southend East, and therefore she can’t tell whether and how what she saw answers her own implied question about Southend West. To be fair, she did talk to a fishmonger and the only ones I can think of in the area are in Leigh and therefore in Southend West. But did she really get back on the train at Southend to go three stops and walk up the hill to the Broadway to talk to the fishmonger? When she had dinner at the Delaunay to get back for? No, I bet that like any Martian she actually talked to the fish and chip man in Southend High Street under the impression he’s a fishmonger in the right constituency.
It’s not as if it would have been difficult to talk to people actually in Southend West about politics and try to answer the question in the article’s title. She could have talked to a real-life fishmonger and then walked along Leigh Broadway and talked to any passing OAP or mum or truant child or painter and decorator. She could have walked along the queue for tickets on Thursday morning at the station – fewer season tickets now in the age of hybrid working – and talked to the commuters going to work in the world’s second largest financial centre. She could have gone to the golf range or stood outside Waitrose. She could have walked into any number of hairdressers or charity shops or pubs. She could have sat in one of the cafes under the arches on the seafront. She could even have talked to a fish and chip man. This is Essex: they would mostly have been friendly, amusing, open, quotable, and well right of centre.
She could have talked about the Conservative party’s choice of candidate, the decision by the other main parties not to contest and whether David Amess would have disapproved or been secretly chuffed and why, Partygate and Boris (she did get in a couple of questions about that but they didn’t say quite the right thing did they), the future of hybrid working, Ukraine, electric and gas prices and net zero, Rishi Sunak and tax, knife crime, house prices, the state of the NHS, Islam, the future of tertiary education, social care, the new timetables on the C2C, anything. Fresh fish supply post-Brexit. Michael Gove.
But she didn’t. She talked about national identity and immigration with a clump of hopeless and disgruntled extremists who later netted the square root of minus stuff-all in a poor turnout and got them to sound like the people Benedict Cumberbatch goes to see in a mobile home when he’s trying to look clever and populist. She moved the debate on from Goodhart by a whole zero inches.
I don’t know to what extent snooty and lazy journalism contributed to the strengthening of the right in Anglosphere politics over the last decade and a half. My bet is it’s much less than they think and it was much more about the failure of multiple progressive policy areas since the end of the Cold War. If not the First. But it’s not for the want of trying is it.
Tanya Gold, Dripping with condescension as always.
The second Unherd article in as many days, and I’ve never got past the first sneering paragraph on either occasion
Hold a minute. When I first read this article, I laughed out loud many times. I thought it was written in an auto-satirical way….that is to say, that the article was taking the P out of itself. I did not read it as a person looking down their nose at the ”silly fools” on the right wing, but as a broader commentary on the society on which we live, full of despair, misunderstanding and frustration on all sides—-The final paragraph, seen through my original lens, is particularly funny…
The only sentence in the entire article which (on my original reading) jarred and grabbed my attention was. ”That is, he sees the crime scene clearly, but he has no idea who the murderer is.”, which I have already addressed in an earlier comment.
Now, having read all the other comments, I am thinking that maybe my initial take was wrong and that the author really is what she seems to be— rather than someone extracting the Michael.
Oh dear!
UPDATE: I have read the article 3 more times and she is clearly mocking the situation….she is having a laugh. This is pure satire and I find it very funny.
Proof: Why else build a mile long pier into the mud of the Thames estuary, where no one wants to go?
No one other than a moronic ignoramus could have written that sentence outside of the bounds of satire.
She is taking the P….Honest!
DH your analysis cannot be right. The author had made the comment that Essex was a land of spurious self confidence. That is insulting. She followed that with what she thought was proof – a dismissive and incorrect assertion that no one wants to go (a mile) into the muddy Thames Estuary. In summer alone hundreds of thousands of strollers walk that route into the Estuary along one of Brunlees finest creations. The author doesnt know about what she is talking.
Sneering piece. One very real problem for these voters IS much too high levels of immigration in itself; that is not a proxy for anything else, though they may well have other economic concerns. It is indeed the case that the British people have never been asked whether they wanted whole areas subject to enormous demographic change, often to people with completely different cultures. It would be a perfectly practical proposition which is in fact the policy the majority of non Western countries follow, Japan as an obvious successful example.
It’s a shame that Tanya Gold does not examine her own Left wing assumptions.
As an English Celtic hybrid born in Shropshire, with grandparents from North Wales Glasgow and Cork who all met in Liverpool, I am in favour of a more federal UK with a collaborative elected central governing group dealing with non devolved issues.
Excellent piece: England is so much more ” tribal” than politicians, petrified of the racism gestapo, will admit, or in the case of the Conservatives, actually know ( outside of the ToyliTory Kent ruling HKLP ( ” Hold knife like pen’) tribe…
When she writes ‘all the correspondents laughed at UKIP members at the 2004 conference’ -substitute UKIP for the disgruntled alt right and has anything changed in 17 years? At least Tanya is being honest and that is worth respecting
And how is reducing the rate of population increase not the solution to low wages, housing shortage and infrastructure collapse?
.
I voted for Brexit for purely democratic reasons and am not surprised that not much has happened since; our votes can now affect The Powers that B – and that’s good enough for me. The ‘identity’ politics of the folks described here are embarrassingly like those of trans activists, unstable and tendentious. The best and worst things about the English are what they have done and what they (will) do.
Nice article, thanks Tanya. It reminded me of the journalism from New Society way back. When I read it I saw empathy and compassion, not condescension
“To effectively be a myth” employs a split infinitive.
The only answer to the question which is the title to this piece is “absolutely nothing”. Everyone loves By-elections don’t they the press attention, the ranks of crackpot candidates, spurious opinion polls media and the razz-ma-taz.
As there is no serious challenge the Tory Candidate is spared the task of defending the Prime Minister for which she must be grateful
What tend to be missing of course are the voters. Even in a by-election contested by major parties turnout is way down and almost always below 50%. There will be a by-election soon which we may well call the “was Brexit really worth it” by-election, but that will come in a couple of years.
Thank you Tanya. Suspect you have also had experiences that permit observations of this kind – nobody starts life on the far right. They have had a journey to get there. Great insights (and well told) about both the joyful and often burdensome roads we travel. Delightful reading!
The people described in this article are hardly ‘far-right’, though. I worry that this label is being broadly applied to anyone who thinks differently to the media and education establishment who engage in prescriptive thinking. Ironically, labelling others negatively and perceiving yourself as the ‘good guys’ is a distinctive hallmark of ‘far-right’ thinking.