X Close

Meet Britain’s radical New Right Anger is growing on the fringes of conservatism

Uncle Nigel (Photo by Brendan Smialowski / AFP) (Photo by BRENDAN SMIALOWSKI/AFP via Getty Images)

Uncle Nigel (Photo by Brendan Smialowski / AFP) (Photo by BRENDAN SMIALOWSKI/AFP via Getty Images)


November 9, 2022   7 mins

British conservatism, as a political force and a philosophical creed, is dying. Brexit has failed. The Tories face destruction at the next general election. Demographically, conservatism faces extinction in the decades ahead.

If it has any future at all it is being formed at the Reasoned Student Summit in the City of London’s Dutch Hall. Reasoned is the YouTube soapbox of the Brexit campaigner and pundit Darren Grimes. Today, Grimes has managed to gather around a hundred young conservatives — about 19% of 18- to 24-year olds voted Tory at the last election — to network, and to listen to Nigel Farage, Steve Baker and Daniel Hannan. The outlines of a new conservatism — despairing and angry — can be glimpsed here.

Trembling in his tweed blazer, John is 23, and worried, like many on the Right’s youthful fringes, about central bank digital currencies.

Soon, he believes, the Bank of England will track your movements, monitor your spending, and push electronic tentacles into every aspect of your life. John tells me that such currencies will be “China’s social credit system on steroids”. He has the luxury of believing that this depressing moment in British politics is something bigger and scarier — a totalitarian dawn. “If we could go back in time, you know, we would do something about Hitler.” He thinks the same of the Bank of England.

John’s talking points are paranoid and his outlook is bleak. He is representative, not of the young Tories who hole up in the Carlton Club or hand out leaflets for Blue Beyond, but those who form conservative opinion online. They are not yet a movement, like the National Conservatives or the “New Right” in America, though in their frank apocalypticism, stridency, and saturnine sense of embattlement, they are heavily influenced by both.

They remain, in organisation and physical appearance, embryonic. There are trad aesthetes and High Tory Anglicans, young fogeys and BNP haircuts, Turning Point UK influencers, Scrutonians and boys who just love Peter Hitchens. Among this hundred students and recent graduates, there are dozens of ideological tribes. But whether they are suited or slobbish, at Russell Group universities or without a job, what unites them is a sense that Britain is declining. This anger is what flourishes when a generation believes it will be far worse off than its parents.

Like Hitchens, the young men in this room think Britain has been abolished, and that the Conservative Party is not conservative at all. Ambient British culture — whether it is Ru Paul’s Drag Race or footballers taking the knee — bristles with personalities and causes that unsettle them. They see “wokeness” as a virus, infecting every aspect of British culture.

This is why they love Nigel Farage. In 2016, he proved to them that conservatives — real conservatives — could beat the Left-wing establishment. They are anxious teenagers; Farage is their feckless uncle. As soon as he takes the stage he enters freewheeling bombardier mode. The theme of his speech, pockmarked with jokes, is Brexit: A Revolution Betrayed. “Theresa May”, he says, rolling his eyes, well her deal was the “closest thing to treachery I have ever seen. Maybe the Tower of London shouldn’t be a museum exhibit. Don’t quote me on that for God’s sake. I’m in enough trouble as it is
”

“Anyone got a light?”

Farage is in trouble with all the right people. His enemies, listed at length — the Today programme, ESG, corporation tax, Jeremy Hunt, Tory wets, Westminster generally and the House of Lords specifically — are their enemies too. He describes listening to Radio 4 as “agony”. This is conservatism as hay-fever. Irritant Lefty spores are everywhere; they make you ill, angry, prickly.

He tells his story about Brexit. He wanted Britain to become “a genuine global trading power again”. Now, after six years of political bloodletting, we have returned to 2010. Globalists in the treasury, Osbornomics in the ascendant, austerity back on the menu. “The great unwashed” and “the silent majority” are ignored once more. “We are back to where we were before the referendum”. The ancien rĂ©gime has fluttered back in, deathless as a vampire. To whoops, Farage promises a “third coming” — a return to frontline politics — if the state of the nation keeps deteriorating. One better than Jesus.

Their love for him cannot be understated. “Nige, big, big fan” is the way they frame their questions to him. Yet Farage, beyond his Brexit boosterism, is so unmistakably Eighties. His agenda, where it rises above being a disgruntled mood, is not theirs. A global free trading power? At least half of the audience is protectionist, restrictionist, anti-globalist. Farage calls on them to be “happy warriors”, but they are pessimists. Do they want more unreconstructed libertarianism?

I doubt it. They are not like Farage: Thatcher’s children — they are his children. They like Farage’s positions on British identity and borders, not markets. They hoot their affection at Farage, not for what he says about free trade but for the way he says it. Farage gave them 2016, and that year was their political awakening. They would follow him into the deepest ditch if that was what he asked of them. His insurgent energy is undiminished, his pugnacity undiluted, his rhetoric undaunted in the face of all those enemies. More than any Tory in parliament, and though they do not agree with everything he says, Farage inspires this generation of conservatives.

When an actual MP arrives — Steve Baker — the contrast with Farage is sharply apparent. A third of the audience goes outside to vape. His role during the Brexit years made Baker a liberal hate figure — recently called a “cunt” by Channel 4’s Krishnan Guru Murthy. But in this room he is not Right-wing enough. He is accused of promoting, to loud and prolonged applause, “Marxist Identitarian politics” through school reading programmes in his constituency. “I don’t know why you’re applauding that,” Baker says, forlornly.

Baker’s crime is to be involved with the 2022 group of senior black conservatives. They are Tories who are trying to devise ways of shedding the perception among black people in Britain that conservative politics is “toxic”. Baker told the group at Conference this year that “footballers taking the knee isn’t a neo-Marxist act, it’s a statement of solidarity”.

Today, Baker attempts to extract the better sides of these young men from their blatant nihilism. “We have to think about our moral centres
 some of the things I’ve heard today are dangerous.” It doesn’t work. The young conservatives are not interested in being nice.

When I find him after his speech, Baker is close to despair. Youth politics, whether on the Left, or the Right, is wreathed in gloom. He understands that young people in Britain have the rawest deal. But Farage, who captivates them, only offers “easy answers
 a populist shadow of libertarianism”. Baker broods about the room’s “radical aggression” on migration. (There are calls for the borders to be shut down completely from the crowd.) The young, unjustly treated, are “turning to radical ideologies”. Baker worries about them. He is right, but has no idea what to do. Baker cannot see that these young men are as much his responsibility as Farage’s. He is just as complicit in their radicalism. They are the Brexit generation, coming of age.

This generational divide that Baker senses and Farage seems unaware of, becomes ever more apparent. The speakers are less furious than the spoken to. The crowd are unimpressed with another Brexiteer, Dan Hannan. The libertarian boilerplate of his speech, a Trussian paean to enterprise culture and tax cuts, is shredded in the Q&A. “I come from a more tribal school of thought,” says one of the boys. To him, identity matters more than economics. “If everything is more globalist, then everything will move to London, and my community in East Bradford will become even more of a dump.”

Dan Hannan, preaching to the unconvertible

Hannan has no convincing counter-argument. He just looks depressed. Like every successful revolutionary, Hannan was discovering that the people are not what he thought they would be once he had unlocked them from their cage.

Outside, the boys are smoking and giggling. “We need our own Nick Fuentes,” says one. British conservatives, he says with vehemence, whether they write for the Telegraph or are on the staff at CCHQ, are “spergs”. Like most of the summit, he looks to the American Right for a model. They are more splenetic, more successful, more based. The idea that Baker had been going on about — that it takes strength to be gentle and kind to strangers — is ludicrous to him. There is none of that “bullshit” in America.

These young Tories are stripping the American Right for parts. They believe that until the British Right comes out fighting, it will keep losing the culture. Hard-line positions on migration and identity must be found. Cultural enemies must be identified, then ridiculed. For them, politics is about figuring out who hates who, then sharpening those hatreds into flints. “Once the States are taken back,” one lad says, once Donald Trump wins again, “it will influence conservatives here. Then the Tories will stop being so shit.”

Not all of these young conservatives will end up in politics. I suspect the one who stood up and asked, gesturing to the sub-Brideshead outfits sitting around him, “How do we make ourselves cool?”, won’t stay the course. But others here want to be journalists, or pundits like Darren Grimes, or to enter the Conservative Party. They want to shape it from within. Soon enough their foetal moods and ironic tweets will be coherent policies, newspaper editorials, and viral clickbait videos.

Do not expect them to sculpt a future of fair dealing, pragmatism, patience, moderation or high intelligence. Expect the restless opposite of these virtues. A generation in the image of Nigel Farage, not Jeremy Hunt. A recent poll found that 61% of 18- to 34-year-olds supported “a strong leader who doesn’t have to bother with parliament/elections” taking control of the UK. If the 2020s really are set to be the first decade of an “Age of Scarcity”, then expect a conservative politics harsher than whatever today’s cabinet ministers can come up with.

The macabre populist shadows Steve Baker fears will become solid one day. Only a fool would try to predict what happens then.


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.

Subscribe
Subscribe
Notify of
guest

247 Comments
Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Brian Villanueva
Brian Villanueva
1 year ago

I’m an American, so I may be wrong, but…

“British conservatism, as a political force and a philosophical creed, is dying. Demographically, conservatism faces extinction in the decades ahead.”
“The outlines of a new conservatism — despairing and angry — can be glimpsed here.”

It sure sounds to me like this author has a horse in this race, and it’s not the one he’s been tasked to cover.

Matt M
Matt M
1 year ago

I’m English and it sounds like that to me too, Brian.

Patrick Nelson
Patrick Nelson
1 year ago
Reply to  Matt M

“John’s talking points are paranoid and his outlook is bleak.”
Unfortunately everything John said was true.

Prashant Kotak
Prashant Kotak
1 year ago

Oh, he clearly does have a horse in the race. The author is it seems to me, a secret, not-so-secret, supporter of the ancien régime, the Osborne/Hunt/Sunak axis, and this writing is a double take stance designed to throw us reactionary old fogies BTL off the scent.

CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago

“Tomorrow belongs to me” perhaps?

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=qbgr1VoRn_s

Last edited 1 year ago by CHARLES STANHOPE
Paul Wright
Paul Wright
1 year ago

Who’s going to be singing that song, though? Not the people who agree with the author, rather, the people he’s reporting on. It always seems to be about Jews, sorry, “globalists”, with that lot.
“Baker cannot see that these young men are as much his responsibility as Farage’s. He is just as complicit in their radicalism. They are the Brexit generation, coming of age.”
Do you still think you can control them, Mr Baker?

John Riordan
John Riordan
1 year ago
Reply to  Paul Wright

That particular point made in the article is idiotic: if it was that simple, why aren’t these young anti-Semites simply voting labour, where they’d be welcomed with open arms?

Patrick Nelson
Patrick Nelson
1 year ago
Reply to  Paul Wright

“John’s talking points are paranoid and his outlook is bleak.”
…nor does he mention Jews. To accuse those who point out the failure of globalism and the damage that it has caused the UK of anti-Semitism is so so wishy washy.

Ibn Sina
Ibn Sina
1 year ago

That is one of the most effective and terrifying movie scenes I know. Even as a very young man with a right-leaning bias at the time I found it chilling. Thanks for sharing it with us.

Last edited 1 year ago by Ibn Sina
Sam Barkes
Sam Barkes
1 year ago

I don’t see the comparison it’s an unfair demonization. British nationalists fought to the death to defeat the Nazis. Advocating Civic nationalism and cohesion doesn’t equal racial supremacy.
Besides It’s the labour party that are obsessed with Jews and Identity.

John Allman
John Allman
1 year ago

Or this?
https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x2ohhib
I even sang a version of mine of this song, entitled “Tomorrow belongs to May”, at a pub open mic, whilst I was a candidate at the 2017 general election.

Last edited 1 year ago by John Allman
Peter Dunn
Peter Dunn
1 year ago

The author doesn’t factor in Rotherham Teford etc rape gangs.. Manchester Arena..knife crime..the fact their country has no borders..
These youngsters do..

Cathy Carron
Cathy Carron
1 year ago
Reply to  Peter Dunn

Aside from the crime, no matter your party – a nation can’t keep offering welfare-on-steroids and entertain open borders-illegal immigration. Stability just breaks down. It’s just a matter of how long it takes.

Last edited 1 year ago by Cathy Carron
Jerry Carroll
Jerry Carroll
1 year ago
Reply to  Cathy Carron

Do others detect a notable swing to the left by Unherd?

Alphonse Pfarti
Alphonse Pfarti
1 year ago
Reply to  Jerry Carroll

Yes

Hugh R
Hugh R
1 year ago
Reply to  Jerry Carroll

It may be so, but it would be hard for Unherd to ignore the upticks supporting you viewpoint.
THE Staff writer at Unherd it states.

Last edited 1 year ago by Hugh R
Paul Wright
Paul Wright
1 year ago
Reply to  Hugh R

It’s easy to ignore upticks as they’re largely bots and sock puppets. In the good old days when you could see who’d upvoted something, I used to upvote my own comments (under my own name) to wind up the people who’d spent all that time creating sock puppet accounts to do the same.

polidori redux
polidori redux
1 year ago
Reply to  Paul Wright

You’re a sad guy.

Ibn Sina
Ibn Sina
1 year ago
Reply to  Peter Dunn

If you want to know what lies behind the latest version of fascism, it’s the liberal left and their disconnection with reality.

Patrick Nelson
Patrick Nelson
1 year ago
Reply to  Ibn Sina

Spot on woke cancellations = fascism and lockdown with coerced GMjabbination = tyranny. People would not fall for 1930s style fascism now but they are happy to accept the new type and fascists by the way always were more like progressive lefties than they were like actual conservatives.

Last edited 1 year ago by Patrick Nelson
Andrew Wise
Andrew Wise
1 year ago

Sure he has a horse in the race (arguably every Brit does as its our future) – but I thought the article brought up some interesting points
For there to be an opposition it needs to coalesce around some key issues / policies / remedies – I am “one of Thatcher’s children” and its interesting see someone point out the next generation interprets things differently to the way I do.
Whether you agree with the analysis or not, its an interesting observation.

John Sullivan
John Sullivan
1 year ago
Reply to  Andrew Wise

“Analysis” lol.

Last edited 1 year ago by John Sullivan
Jonathan Andrews
Jonathan Andrews
1 year ago

I suspected the same thing but, by God, I hope he’s got it wrong.

We really need a wise and decent right. People like Trump cannot defeat the illiberal left.

Farage might be a contender but I fear he will be captured by this sort of audience

Alphonse Pfarti
Alphonse Pfarti
1 year ago

He thinks that you make blazers out of tweed, so there’s little more to be said.

John Sullivan
John Sullivan
1 year ago

This utter garbage, disguised as a piece of writing worth anyone’s time, is nothing but an attempt to troll the mythical “gammon”. Unherd is going downhill fast; the author is a delusional fool and should be ignored.

Michael Saxon
Michael Saxon
1 year ago

These ‘new conservatives’ have every reason to be despairing and angry. They have been betrayed by the political class and could do a lot worse than look to Frarage for leadership

Steve White
Steve White
1 year ago

The way the author selects, and displays for us these creatures he despises, dispassionately brings up issue after issue is amazing. Then he shows his true intent. He is afraid that having such a gloomy set of information described to young males is radicalizing them. These men, whom he despises are doing this. They pick things apart, take the worse aspects, and for what seems like pragmatic purposes fit things together in such a way as to make this detestable new thing.
What they should be doing is what he suggests, teach them to sculpt a future of fair dealing, pragmatism, patience, moderation, and cultivating high intelligence.
The author delivers his smug observations, moralizing suggestions based purely on his own pragmatic worldview that people are like a machine, you just need to add the right inspirational ingredients and influence them right into the kinds of things you like to have them be.
This is of course the age of the “influencer”, where you inspire people to move the way you want them to with the right messaging. You nudge them to use less energy, to eat the bugs, to support endless war. What these younger people need is not so much negativism, but a more positive view of things like he has
 

michael stanwick
michael stanwick
1 year ago

Baker told the group at Conference this year that â€œfootballers taking the knee isn’t a neo-Marxist act, it’s a statement of solidarity”.
But isn’t “solidarity” is a feature of neo marxist thought? I am minded of “solidarity featuring in Marcuse’s thought to DiAngelo’s thought.

Deb Grant
Deb Grant
1 year ago

Conservatism with a small ‘c’ hasn’t been a big thing in Britain since the 50″s. Its not like USA, because we dumped mass reliigion and social conservatism along with abortion laws in the 1960″s. The rump of those who have historically voted for the British Conservative party have been industrious business people, realists and pragmatists, who know how hard it is to generate wealth and want their taxes to be spent wisely.

Steve Murray
Steve Murray
1 year ago

Will, you can keep repeating your mantra “Brexit has failed” as many times as you wish, it won’t change the fact that Brexit is a process that will unfold over forthcoming decades. It will be for history to judge, not defeatist naysayers with the judgement of a two year old (time elapsed since the legal entity of Brexit occurred). Get over it, and grow up.

Last edited 1 year ago by Steve Murray
Jeremy Smith
Jeremy Smith
1 year ago
Reply to  Steve Murray

Is Will saying that “Brexit has failed” or is he reporting on what Farage (and others) said?

John Sullivan
John Sullivan
1 year ago
Reply to  Jeremy Smith

Who cares? The article is clickbait rubbish.

Jeremy Smith
Jeremy Smith
1 year ago
Reply to  John Sullivan

Clearly 218 that upvoted the comment care.
My question still remains – and Will’s argument is hardly a new thing.

William Shaw
William Shaw
1 year ago

There’s a reckoning coming.
Mock it all you want.
The unfinished Brexit and illegal immigration will destroy the Tory party.

chris Barton
chris Barton
1 year ago
Reply to  William Shaw

I always found it strange that people thought the most Pro EU party (Tory) could be trusted with overseeing the nations exit from said union.

Jeremy Bray
Jeremy Bray
1 year ago
Reply to  chris Barton

Well I certainly didn’t but what was the alternative? It certainly wasn’t Labour and if you vote for a Conservative party other than the Tory party you risk getting Labour.

Bill Tomlinson
Bill Tomlinson
1 year ago
Reply to  Jeremy Bray

That is the overwhelming argument for getting rid of FPTP.

Jeremy Smith
Jeremy Smith
1 year ago
Reply to  chris Barton

Marina Hyde (in the Big Bad Guardian) reported on a conversation with a Brexiter after the Referendum. He complained that the establishment had to deliver Brexit. When Marina asked “who do you think was going to deliver it Pep Guardiola” the Brexiter had a blank look. It had never crossed his mind that someone had to deliver Brexit.
Talk about planning.

Andrew D
Andrew D
1 year ago
Reply to  Jeremy Smith

Well, the obvious answer is the government, along with all the other main parties, as they promised to do when the referendum was announced. They then all conspired to do precisely the opposite.

j watson
j watson
1 year ago
Reply to  Andrew D

Brexit was never properly defined and therein lay the problems all stacked up and ready for multiple collusions with reality. Even Farage thought we’d stay in the Single Market and just negotiate away the free movement element. Cloud cuckoo stuff. The guy’s making a fortune out of being a media-celeb. Why would he want it sorted? He can be a professional campaigner all his life and avoid the reality of governing. And he’s got his gullible fee-paying audience begging for more.
The problem was the Brexiteers had a prospective that was half baked and not fully considered. (Bojo quite deliberately too because he didn’t expect to win so why bother working out how on earth you’d actually make it work). And then these Brexiteer ideologues spend 6 years arguing amongst themselves what it means and what the trade-offs have to be as truth be told they hadn’t really told the public who’d voted for it what the trade-offs would have to be. Confronted with this car crash of conflicting priorities they switch to blaming somebody else. It’s utterly pathetic.
Free movement certainly needed some changes, but we ran away from a much more adult negotiation and application of existing opportunities to exert more control. That’s what will be in the history books.

Last edited 1 year ago by j watson
Andrew D
Andrew D
1 year ago
Reply to  j watson

It’s one thing to say ‘how can we make this work?’ and quite another to say ‘how can we frustrate or better still prevent this?’

Jonathan Andrews
Jonathan Andrews
1 year ago
Reply to  Andrew D

Moreover, such planning was not possible. It was clear that the leavers and many remainers believed that the EU had become anti-democratic. The argument was whether the separation would cost too much (at least for those remainers)
With Brexit, we removed on layer of government (particularly undemocratic compared to Blighty, I thought at the time). This, despite our rotten government was an end in itself and all the other issues would fix themselves or be fixed in time.
Figuring out exactly what relationship we would have with our neighbours will take years, it is not something that could have been determined in advance. After all the post war settlement developed until the collapse of the Soviet Union in the early 90s also half a century later

j watson
j watson
1 year ago

It is true the EU has a democratic-deficit, although much of that is more via lack of understanding on how it works. Nonetheless if people ‘feel’ it then that’s an issue. Perhaps though the questions are: i) should/could we have stayed, engaged and helped address that? ii) have we actually ended up with better?

On (i) I think we could have done a better job and had many allies. Problematic though when one has spent years just criticising and playing to the Daily Mail headlines. On (ii) the position is far from clear. NI and Scotland feel we’ve gone backwards on democracy. The Executive has not transferred powers to Parliament and is hoarding them. And economic realities mean whilst we may have left the Single Market we haven’t moved away from all its standards because we know that would cobbler us – yet we have no say in them anymore. It’s a form of deceit

These were complex issues, whether we stayed or left. The problem is we infantilise ourselves in the form of public discourse that has arisen.

Jonathan Andrews
Jonathan Andrews
1 year ago
Reply to  j watson

I quite agree that our government has failed. They can only blame this on covid to a small extent, they show little appetite for making the UK a more democratic state.
I was never going to get what I hoped for, I was the Singapore on Thames type but they have done nothing, achieved nothing.

Matt M
Matt M
1 year ago
Reply to  Jeremy Smith

What’s a Brexiter? I’ve heard of Brexiteers with two Es. Is it a Guardianism?

Last edited 1 year ago by Matt M
Andrew D
Andrew D
1 year ago
Reply to  Matt M

Yes it is. They don’t like Brexiteer because it sounds swaggering and glamorous, like buccaneer

Hugh Bryant
Hugh Bryant
1 year ago
Reply to  Jeremy Smith

You don’t really believe she had that conversation, do you? Surely not? I thought everyone knows she makes it all up.

Katy Hibbert
Katy Hibbert
1 year ago
Reply to  Hugh Bryant

Of course she made it up. Leftards always do.

Paul Wright
Paul Wright
1 year ago
Reply to  Hugh Bryant

Jeremy has inaccurately reported what Hyde said in the article (“On Brexit island it’s all getting a bit Lordships of the Flies”, May 2018):

Last year, a senior figure on the leave side reflected to me that “the trouble with Brexit is that it’s the British establishment that has to deliver it”. I mean 
 who did they think would deliver it? A technocratic brains trust featuring Pep Guardiola, the late Steve Jobs and Oprah? Alas, such fantasising is common among Brexit’s architects, who will eventually tell us that the problem wasn’t Brexit itself, but the way Brexit was done.

So, no “blank look” was claimed by Hyde, and her response wasn’t delivered during the conversation.
Still, that bit about leavers eventually claiming “the problem wasn’t Brexit itself, but the way Brexit was done” looks pretty prescient for 2018, doesn’t it?

Jeremy Smith
Jeremy Smith
1 year ago
Reply to  Paul Wright

Thanks for the correction.

Peter Joy
Peter Joy
1 year ago
Reply to  Jeremy Smith

I see. So for that reason he should have, er, voted Remain?
Despite wishing to Leeeeave….the European Union.

Jeremy Smith
Jeremy Smith
1 year ago
Reply to  Peter Joy

So for that reason he should have, er, voted Remain?

Did I say that?
My point (how did you manage to miss it) is about COMPETENCE!

Walter Marvell
Walter Marvell
1 year ago
Reply to  William Shaw

All the existing political parties are stone dead Zombies with barely any members. Lets stop pretending they wield real power. We exist under a 30 year New Order established by Blair which shifted actual power to a vast Technocracy – the Quangocracy – and to equally unelected Human Rights Lawyers who sit atop and command the political heights . Read up on NMIs and the EU’s deliberate evisceration of national parliaments. Blair signed us up to that process. On top of this structural revolution, a process of ideological corruption and all party consensus/,groupthink on major issues has set it. Net Zero? Tick. Hydocarbons evil? Tick. Welfarism all good? Tick. We voted for Brexit. It has not happened. We voted for control of our borders. It will not happen. We did not vote for Net Zero eco fanaticism – but we have it. Party politics is stone dead; the buildings are there but the old ways have gone. We are ruled by an oligarchy and a vast Blob utterly indifferent to what we want. Why waste time thinking about splinter groups from what are Zombie parties when there has been an unacknowledged revolution??.

Mel Shaw
Mel Shaw
1 year ago
Reply to  Walter Marvell

I would add the Supreme Court to your Blair legacy. The SC has already set itself as a rival to Parliament overturning long established precedent and creating new rules for government and Parliament to follow.

Paul Devlin
Paul Devlin
1 year ago
Reply to  Walter Marvell

Thanks for the post. What is an NMI?

Walter Marvell
Walter Marvell
1 year ago
Reply to  Paul Devlin

Hi. Non Majoritarian Institutions or NMIs are are the bodies which govern us but are neither directly elected NOR directly managed by elected politicians. So it is the Supreme Court, the supranational EU, the Bank of England ..and on and on into the Quangos. A technocracy created specifically to weaken elected Parliaments. Our New World Order!

Rob J
Rob J
1 year ago
Reply to  Walter Marvell

Net Zero was in the Conservatives’ 2019 manifesto. We — (well, not me but probably quite a few people here) — did vote for it. Argue against it by all means, but don’t pretend that it’s an undemocratic outrage.

Last edited 1 year ago by Rob J
John Sullivan
John Sullivan
1 year ago
Reply to  Rob J

How many ordinary voters do you think read the Manifesto? How much “discussion” of the content was there during the election campaign?

Answer those questions honestly and you’ll understand that it absolutely is an undemocratic outrage. A minority of people in the UK and globally know the facts behind the Covid pandemic, and that the response was an utter farce. Ditto the cLiMaTe EmErGeNcY. But the facts don’t matter in a post-truth world of propaganda, censorship and deception.

Its not complicated. The blob/swamp/MSM control the narrative on behalf of the neo-Marxist globalist agenda and fools like the author of this piece – and #SteveFaker – are the useful idiots.

Hugh R
Hugh R
1 year ago
Reply to  William Shaw

Then what? Labour…rock and a hard place comes to mind.

chris Barton
chris Barton
1 year ago

Also love the Authors attempt to paint anyone who opposes the Left’s extreme agenda on identity politics and mass immigration as the extremists. You sound like the modern Tory party.

Matt M
Matt M
1 year ago
Reply to  chris Barton

*Having to use a passport to enter a country
*The laws of a country being made by elected representatives
*Judging people by the content of their character rather than the colour of their skin
*Stopping men from coming into the ladies changing rooms
*Being proud of your country
These extremist positions must be stamped out!

Last edited 1 year ago by Matt M
CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago
Reply to  Matt M

‘They, already have been, sometime ago now in fact.

Nicky Samengo-Turner
Nicky Samengo-Turner
1 year ago

not sure about anyone called “Darren”…

CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago

HKLP?

Nicky Samengo-Turner
Nicky Samengo-Turner
1 year ago

spot on!!

John Sullivan
John Sullivan
1 year ago

Indeed. Until people get their heads around the fact that the neo-Marxist globalist revolution has already happened, all else is moot.

Jeremy Smith
Jeremy Smith
1 year ago
Reply to  chris Barton

I read the article, can please point me where he made that claim of extremism?!

Matt M
Matt M
1 year ago
Reply to  Jeremy Smith

Meet Britain’s radical New Right: Anger is growing on the fringes of conservatism

Last edited 1 year ago by Matt M
Jeremy Smith
Jeremy Smith
1 year ago
Reply to  Matt M

Radical is not extremism

polidori redux
polidori redux
1 year ago
Reply to  Jeremy Smith

“Reading” without comprehension is just gawping at squiggles on the page, Jeremy.

JJ Lynn
JJ Lynn
1 year ago
Reply to  chris Barton

If you were marginally brighter you’d laugh at the irony of your post.
🙂

polidori redux
polidori redux
1 year ago
Reply to  JJ Lynn

Explain it to us then.

JJ Lynn
JJ Lynn
1 year ago
Reply to  polidori redux

It would be as fruitful as explaining spectroscopy to a donkey.
🙂

Prashant Kotak
Prashant Kotak
1 year ago

“…They believe that until the British Right comes out fighting, it will keep losing the culture. Hard-line positions on migration and identity must be found. Cultural enemies must be identified, then ridiculed…”

That last line about identifying enemies is the zinger. Any movement on the right that borrows from the awful woke left playbook to win the culture wars, would end up creating a society as odious as the culture the left have managed to impart onto the UK. I’m all for fighting the left, but not this, not offering or creating a society that is a mirror of the obnoxious left, but on the right instead. Such a society is not worth having.

A second point. The paradox is that the left have managed to win out over three odd decades, even while the right keeps winning elections and is nominally in power. Because the left has managed to infiltrate and subvert a different set of power centers, not with the aim of governing, but with the aim of spreading values at a low level, but pervasively. It is an interesting question if this was done consciously, but I don’t see any evidence for that, I think it happened organically. And the right have allowed this, because the traditional right as embodied by the Conservative party, has been asleep at the wheel, and keeps harking back to a past that cannot be brought back, no matter how much everyone on the right may wish it.

Jambon Beurre
Jambon Beurre
1 year ago
Reply to  Prashant Kotak

The most insightful comment here, in my view. I say that as somebody probably closer to the views of Darren Grimes et al.
As much as I agree with your thoughts, I suppose that the identification of “enemies” is a natural reaction to a culture which has been actively identifying and villifying “pale, stale, white men” on both a personal level for perceived infractions, and a societal level for “systemic privilege”. How would you feel if, as a young man of relatively modest means and stature, you are constantly being told by the Institutions that you may wish to succeed in that by virtue of characteristics over which you have no control, that you have been complicit in the worst of behaviours perpetuated by humanity? And that any attempt to identify amiguities or complexities in those acts is in and of itself and act of privilege and oppression?
In as much as the left generally explain crime and terrorism through disenfranchisement, the same can be applied to these young men. And what is frustrating to me, is that we are essentially doing the same thing to young white men that we (as in some of us) have done to young black or asian people in the past with the various sterotypes and prejudices. If we are to understand that disenfranchisement has caused ethnic minority people to be attracted to extreme views and ideas, then so we must understand that young white, perhaps conservatively-minded people will be inclinded to do the same back. As it happens, I don’t thank that Farage or Grimes are that extreme either – both are more modest in person than on stage. But their rehetoric and personas are no surprise.
I completely agree that identifying “enemies” and tying to force ideas out by hook or by crook is not desirable. What we need more than ever is more open debate and the freedom for people to challenge popular or mainstream ideas – Climate Change and Covid are perhaps the best example here – without immediate villification and cancellation. That is the only way through. But the problem is, no-one other than Farage, Grimes, GB News the Battle of Ideas and associated people, is really interested in that.

John Sullivan
John Sullivan
1 year ago
Reply to  Jambon Beurre

The people that are deliberately destroying the world are your enemies. Chris Whitty is your enemy. “Just Stop Oil” and all the other virtue-signalling excuses for humanity are your enemies. “Taking the knee'” is not a politically neutral gesture of solidarity. Etc.

Appeasement is neither brave nor clever.

Nicky Samengo-Turner
Nicky Samengo-Turner
1 year ago
Reply to  John Sullivan

ahh Malter Whitty… ghastly little man…

Roddy Campbell
Roddy Campbell
1 year ago
Reply to  Prashant Kotak

The left’s Long March through the Institutions had a deliberate beginning in the Frankfurt School of the 1920s and 30s. The product of this Marxist think-tank was a list of characteristics that made a Western country stable and cohesive that would need to be undermined in order to create the conditions necessary for a proletariat revolution.

These included the nuclear family, objective truth, effective discipline in schools, competitive sports in schools, racial harmony, the Christian faith and the aspiration of sexual morality in society.

The route to undermining these societal qualities lay in changing the young by embedding destructive false educational theories; and the route was via the educational establishment and, specifically, teacher training organisations.

Although Marxism is discredited, it hasn’t gone away, just found other client groups. Moreover, the sabotage of the teaching establishment was a juggernaut that once started, gained it’s own momentum.

Much destructive, unproven education theory has been incorporated and the objectives of the Frankfurt School can be seen in full fruit across the UK and the USA.

Tony Blair was fulfilling many of the aims of the Frankfurt School, probably unwittingly, when he planted left-wing placemen across the institutions that run this country.

Last edited 1 year ago by Roddy Campbell
John Sullivan
John Sullivan
1 year ago
Reply to  Roddy Campbell

Yes. Someone on here that understands. Sadly, the war was fought and won by the Long Marchers before anyone noticed.

Most still haven’t noticed. They think there actually was a once-in-a-millenium pandemic (or something), that the cLiMaTe EmErGeNcY is real, that boys can be girls, that ‘institutional racism’ and ‘white privilege’ are things, and that communist activists on SAGE (and Unherd) are just fine.

Last edited 1 year ago by John Sullivan
Andrew F
Andrew F
1 year ago
Reply to  John Sullivan

But reality is, that war on Judeo-Christian values was not completely won, yet.
That is why neoMarxist institutions of EU are fighting Poland and Hungary attempts of defending those values.

Hugh Bryant
Hugh Bryant
1 year ago
Reply to  Prashant Kotak

It’s much more important to prevent leftists from taking control of what is taught in schools and universities than it is to win seats in Parliament.

The right’s greatest failure has been it’s acquiescence in the centralisation and standardisation of education. If Thatcher had stuck to her guns over vouchers we would be in much better shape both socially and economically.

John Sullivan
John Sullivan
1 year ago
Reply to  Hugh Bryant

“It’s much more important to prevent leftists from taking control of what is taught in schools and universities …”

You’re at least 30 years too late.

Andrew F
Andrew F
1 year ago
Reply to  Hugh Bryant

Exactly.
For whatever reason, losers in context of market economy, drift towards institutions providing employment at taxpayers expense.
Education is one of this areas.
So it is not really surprising that these people resent private sector and try to inculcate in young people the same views.
I am not sure what can be done about it in democracy, though?
Unless you impose particular syllabus on schools, how can this process be stopped?

Geoff Cooper
Geoff Cooper
1 year ago
Reply to  Prashant Kotak

Yes, through higher education and the complete takeover of the state sector professions, civil service, mainstream media etc.

John Sullivan
John Sullivan
1 year ago
Reply to  Prashant Kotak

Completely and utterly wrong, but your post has 101 likes as I write, which simply demonstrates the level of “success” that the decades of Long March indoctrination has had.

It’s time people woke up and smelt the coffee. Not done consciously? Have you even heard of Susan Michie and Stephen Reicher?

The author wants you to believe, as you apparently do, that the “far right” is as culpable as the loony neo-Marxist globalists for the “culture wars”. No.

chris Barton
chris Barton
1 year ago

Its definitely dying if people like Hannan are the best they can come up with. Recently watched a lecture Peter Hitchens gave at Roger Scruton’s memorial event. Hitchens listed all the things the Tory Party has failed to defend and Hannan at a little Q&A at the end basically came back with “No worries we can get nice TV’s now and GDP is up”. Modern Tories know the price of everything but the value of nothing and are obsessed with material gain at the expense of everything else. They have no idea how to counter the left because that’s exactly what they are.

Jeremy Smith
Jeremy Smith
1 year ago
Reply to  chris Barton

 material gain at the expense of everything else. 

That is the Maggi Revolution for you.
ï»ż

chris Barton
chris Barton
1 year ago
Reply to  Jeremy Smith

Oh Hi Jeremy, nice to see you back out of deep freeze.

Billy Bob
Billy Bob
1 year ago
Reply to  chris Barton

I don’t believe he’s wrong on this occasion though. A large part of Thatcherism was selling off anything state owned in the hope it would slightly reduce prices down the line. In my opinion it was a horrible strategy of short term gain and long term pain, and it’s going to cost a lot of money to reverse the damage

Richard Craven
Richard Craven
1 year ago

“Baker’s crime is to be involved with the 2022 group of senior black conservatives. They are Tories who are trying to devise ways of shedding the perception among black people in Britain that conservative politics is “toxic”. Baker told the group at Conference this year that â€œfootballers taking the knee isn’t a neo-Marxist act, it’s a statement of solidarity”.”
To be involved with senior black conservatives trying to detoxify the perception among black people of Torydom is a perfectly laudable undertaking in itself, but does not imply, justify, or mitigate Baker’s disgusting apologism for “taking the knee” to the fraudulent, violent, racist, and Marxist hate group Black Lives Matter.

Last edited 1 year ago by Richard Craven
John Sullivan
John Sullivan
1 year ago
Reply to  Richard Craven

Precisely. The author is promoting a rigged game and most are only too happy to play it; the indoctrination runs deep.

Richard Craven
Richard Craven
1 year ago
Reply to  John Sullivan

Thank you.

Jeremy Bray
Jeremy Bray
1 year ago

Most people are not interested in politics. Many of the young men I come across have a contempt for the official leftist identitarian ideology that permeates Universities, HR Departments and official bodies that deliberately disadvantages white men in favour of non-white and female but they don’t express these views openly as they know the official ideology regards such views as toxic. They simply try to get on with their lives as best they can without trying to voice their contempt for the prevailing ideology. In this sense the young men attending such an event are not representative as they are vocal about their discontent.

I notice that there seem to be few if any young Conservative women attending the event presumably because as one of the favoured victim classes of the prevailing ideology they don’t feel the same oppression being visited on them. While young white men who are not leftist ideologues are certainly not impressed with the policies of the current Conservative Party ( not that the ideologues are impressed) that offers them little, the future is inherently unknowable as there are too many influences to be able to predict as the author attempts to do. Brexit was not generally predicted even if what we still have is largely Brexit in name only in the sense that the country have not yet forged any radical change from EU policies. I suspect there will be a backlash against identity politics but don’t know how it will manifest.

Andy Blake
Andy Blake
1 year ago
Reply to  Jeremy Bray

Not unlikely, it will manifest as a Gramscism of their own: a White identity politics.

“If the Left can’t let go of identity politics, then let me be clear. What comes next is on THEM. A lot of us did not want to live in a world of tribes [but] if the Left wants tribes, I am siding with my own tribe.” — Zapollo

Andrew F
Andrew F
1 year ago
Reply to  Jeremy Bray

What you describe is a situation similar to late communism of 70s and 80s in Poland.
Few people were killed unless challenging authorities, but dissent resulted in loosing your job, career prospects or chance of your children to go to university.
Sort of “cancel culture” but amplified.
How far are we from that stage in the West?

Guy Aston
Guy Aston
1 year ago

A disappointing article. It may have been useful for the author to try to understand what is going on with these young people rather than looking down his nose at them. I am finding more and more people being drawn to both extremes. There is a dangerous gap opening up between the leaders and the led. No lessons have been learned from Trump and Brexit. The next shock could be much greater. Weimar laughed at the National Socialists and their comical leader. We no longer laugh about them.

Will Will
Will Will
1 year ago
Reply to  Guy Aston

It definitely feels at times that there are echoes of Weimar and interwar France.

Mark Gourley
Mark Gourley
1 year ago
Reply to  Will Will

Yes indeed – not to mention the Italy of Il Duce.

Bernard Hill
Bernard Hill
1 year ago
Reply to  Guy Aston

…perhaps the signal from elections across the West, is that individual personalities as “the leader(s)”, is what is not “working” any more. (The UK is the leading example surely !) For one thing, there is now no separation between the private and the public, and any one person’s life experience, expertise, and personal qualities, can’t stand -up to the exposure meted out by technology. Probably even comical Adolf would be rightly laughed off the public stage in these times.
What’s then to rule in place of parties and “leaders”? I suspect tech will do the business, because AI is set to dismantle the very institutions through which Wokery has been gestated. Thus may The Long March deservedly end in the abyss. (Check out Emad Mostaque’s AI developments on Youtube.)

John Sullivan
John Sullivan
1 year ago
Reply to  Guy Aston

There *is* no “both extremes”. The neo-Marxist globalists have been waging a war on society for decades and they’ve “won” without a shot being fired. Some people – even some young people – have belatedly woken up to the situation and are trying to push back.

Whatever happens next (far more likely to be left wing riots than anything the author imagines) will not be pretty.

J.P Malaszek
J.P Malaszek
1 year ago

I’m a middle aged teacher living in London who became ‘radicalised ‘ by the events of the last 6 years. I can readily identify with many of the views expressed. In a nutshell we have in this country three Liberal parties with slight differences between them. Many People are only now realising this, I’m sure there will be more anger. If it was’nt clear before SURELY it must be now – nobody wants Thatcherism 2..0 on the economic front. Funny to think I used vote Labour back in the day!

Melanie Grieveson
Melanie Grieveson
1 year ago
Reply to  J.P Malaszek

I agree. I’m finding that you need to be somewhat extreme by some standards to escape the Centre-ist sludge that encompasses all 3 main parties, or Uni-party, as I’ve seen it described. To get comfortable with this notion is helpful as anything slightly to the right of Trotsky is now labelled far-right. So far I haven’t sprouted bovver-boots or shaved my head but I’d kind of like to get back to where we were pre-Cameron; that’s radical enough for me.
I had hopes for Steve Baker when leadership contests arose but he consistently disappointed and didn’t turn up for the gig, so he only has himself to blame.

Peter Scott
Peter Scott
1 year ago

Dear Will Lloyd,
Unherd is supposed to be an outlet for commentators and readers who THINK.
If you are going to claim that Nigel Farage and ‘John (23)’ and the rest of us are paranoid loonies, then please first show how their (and my) thinking is in error.
For example: you quote John (23) as believing,’the Bank of England will track your movements, monitor your spending, and push electronic tentacles into every aspect of your life. John tells me that such currencies will be “China’s social credit system on steroids”.’
If this is preposterous, show how not only the Bank of England but all manner of agencies, including government surveillance, could or would never do any such thing.
Such monitoring happens already with the Internet. Why would a ruthless government, whether allegedly ‘Conservative’, Labour, LibDem, Green or Nationalist never, ever start picking on anyone who tries to start a new political party offering something other than the lockstep major policies all those bodies pursue in actual practice (mass immigration, send jobs abroad, make the UK as unself-sufficient as possible in farming, fisheries, energy,and spare parts for machinery….)
We saw how the Establishment, having first with diligent piety promised to respect the result of the 2016 Referendum, then fought all-in to subvert it when that electoral choice went against their wishes. The Supreme Court, Theresa May taking her instructions first from Angela Merkel before consulting with the Cabinet, the Civil Service, the broadcasters &c &c.
If they can be as undemocratic and bullying as that, why won’t they do it to people thinking outside their globalist Big-Money-cum-Loony-Left-alliance box?
As things currently stand right now, Richard Tice’s Reform UK party can obtain no account with any mainstream high street bank.
A Reasoned Case for supposing people like me tin-hat nitwits would be welcome, thankyou.

Will Will
Will Will
1 year ago
Reply to  Peter Scott

The bank thing is shocking.

JJ Barnett
JJ Barnett
1 year ago
Reply to  Peter Scott

Yes, I did think that line re the bank was odd, given that…
— the BoE has published draft plans for CBDCs,
— Rishi explicitly pushed them at the G7 conference (as well as stating in a WEF video that he intended Britain to be “at the forefront” of this agenda; ditto for Net Zero),
— and there is that video that went viral of the BIS (Bank of International Settlements, effectively the central bank to central banks) honcho waxing lyrical about how the Digital money would allow them to see and track all spending, everywhere, and explaining that it’s programmable money (so, more akin to vouchers) which allows control over how money can be spent.

The young gentleman is actually correct on this. Perhaps it is the author that should have done a bit of googling on the subject before sending this to print.

JJ Lynn
JJ Lynn
1 year ago
Reply to  Peter Scott

‘People’ seem to have a lot of enemies. So much paranoia in that post, it’s scarry that you are allowed outside, unsupervised.

JJ Lynn
JJ Lynn
1 year ago
Reply to  Peter Scott

‘readers who THINK’, translation ‘people who agree with me’.

polidori redux
polidori redux
1 year ago
Reply to  JJ Lynn

Oh the irony!

Rob J
Rob J
1 year ago
Reply to  Peter Scott

We can never observe directly whether people are THINKing; we can only infer from the content. One basis for judgement is whether they seem to be slavish to an ideological line (such that the last 90% of their contribution could be predicted from the first 10%) or whether they seem at least to have a mixture and balance of views. On that basis, I’d award Will Lloyd about 4 out of 10 for this piece and Peter Scott 0 out of 10 for this response. I mean: “globalist Big-Money-cum-Loony-Left-alliance”? The only reasonable response to that is: bingo!

Peter Scott
Peter Scott
1 year ago
Reply to  Rob J

You make the same mistake as Will Lloyd, dispensing scorn for people you see as slavish followers of an ideological line without producing an instance, an example, of how erroneous their thinking is.
So all we REALLY get from you is a glib sneer.
It would help if you would disprove one of the young rightwingers’ (or my) assertions – we could all learn from that; but mere dismissal of a point of view unrebutted is like the behaviour of the hardline Remainers since 2016.
As for my ‘globalist Big-Money-cum-Loony-Left-alliance’ phrase, well, consider the facts.
The series of economic disasters we now face – soaring energy costs and shop-prices, power-cuts, then a 1930s-style Slump – have been caused by the malign oligarchy ruling our land and most western democracies these past 30 years. Big Money and the Hard Political Left, finding shared strategic objectives in the short and middle terms, have both pushed
* mass immigration from poor countries: cheap labour for Big Money, a new electorate for the Left;
* sending manufacturing abroad: impoverishes the working class and makes them helpless welfare dependants of a giant nanny state;
* rendering government unaccountable to those it rules: hence unelected quangos galore, love of the EU’s democracy-neutering Constitution, signing up to all manner of supra-national bodies about which we cannot vote;
* political correctness/wokeness rampant: an ace bullying-tool. If anyone objects or rebels, he can be stigmatized as ‘racist’, ‘transphobe’ &c. (They invent lots of phobes.) This jeopardises his job/social life and renders him submissive.
Each crisis caused by these two brutes – the credit and banking crisis (2007/08), the eurozone woes, huge lockdowns in the wake of Covid-19, our new vast dependence on foreign energy and food – has seen a massive transfer from ordinary citizens: wealth to the well-to-do, power to the political left.
Of course in the longer term these two brontosaurs will rip at each other’s throats to decide which of them rules the swamp-ruin they are making us inhabit.
We need to hamstring and hobble them before they enrol us in their civil war.
If I am wrong Please prove me so. It would be a reassuring relief to me.

Last edited 1 year ago by Peter Scott
Francis Lankester
Francis Lankester
1 year ago

Taking the knee factually is supporting Marxist revolution and race baiting. It constitutes a rejection of modern Britain for grievance and id politics.

JJ Lynn
JJ Lynn
1 year ago

Marx was in favour of ‘taking the knee’? Interesting. So many numpties triggered by something that doesn’t affect them at all.
Amusing to watch.

John Sullivan
John Sullivan
1 year ago
Reply to  JJ Lynn

Try the mirror.

JJ Lynn
JJ Lynn
1 year ago
Reply to  John Sullivan

I did, it’s a reflection of perfection. Just because yours displays a tragedy, you shouldn’t extrapolate from that.
Anything else?

polidori redux
polidori redux
1 year ago
Reply to  JJ Lynn

And the tears on my cheeks are from laughter.

Nicholas Rowe
Nicholas Rowe
1 year ago

Kneeling is an act of submission, not of solidarity.
Congregations used to kneel in churches when making petitionary prayers. Few kneel now.

JJ Lynn
JJ Lynn
1 year ago
Reply to  Nicholas Rowe

It could be, it could be an act of anything you want it to be. What’s indisputable is that nobody is forcing anyone to kneel. Yet, perpetually angry simpletons object. Why do you care either way?

polidori redux
polidori redux
1 year ago
Reply to  JJ Lynn

But that isn’t true is it? You do not argue in good faith.

Last edited 1 year ago by polidori redux
Nicky Samengo-Turner
Nicky Samengo-Turner
1 year ago
Reply to  Nicholas Rowe

Us catholics do! no ” Protestant crouch’ for us!!

Nicky Samengo-Turner
Nicky Samengo-Turner
1 year ago

ahhh ” Bend the knee” memories of the Pirbright and Sandhurst drill squares…

Hugh Bryant
Hugh Bryant
1 year ago

Sorry to read this kind of pearl-clutching rubbish in Unherd. I thought you guys were supposed to be offering an alternative to the elitist groupthink of the BBC and Guardian.

Will Will
Will Will
1 year ago
Reply to  Hugh Bryant

It was quite funny, probably unintentionally.

Christopher Chantrill
Christopher Chantrill
1 year ago

I understand modern society using a Three Layer theory.
Upper layer: Educated Gentry, or Creatives. Tribe: global educated elite
Middle layer: Commoners, or Responsibles. Tribe: nation.
Bottom Layer: Clients, or Subordinates. Tribe: ethnic or race.
Another view is Thomas Sowell’s Anointed, Benighted, and Mascots.
In the US we’ve developed a populist middle layer over the past 50 years, from Nixon’s Silent Majority to Reagan’s Reagan Democrats to the Tea Party to today’s ultra-MAGA insurrectionists so hated by all good people.
But I think you Brits have a long journey to get where we are. And young Brits, like young Yanks, have been treated with monstrous injustice. First job, I’d say is to make Sir Humphrey redundant.

William Shaw
William Shaw
1 year ago

Reagan was one of the greatest presidents.
Thank you for electing him.
If only we had someone half his worth in the UK.

Last edited 1 year ago by William Shaw
CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago
Reply to  William Shaw

Concurrently we did have Lady T if you recall?

Paul Wright
Paul Wright
1 year ago

What a lady she was:
“Just think for a moment what a prospect that is. A single market without barriers—visible or invisible—giving you direct and unhindered access to the purchasing power of over 300 million of the world’s wealthiest and most prosperous people.
“Bigger than Japan. Bigger than the United States. On your doorstep. And with the Channel Tunnel to give you direct access to it.
“It’s not a dream. It’s not a vision. It’s not some bureaucrat’s plan. It’s for real.
“[Prior to 1973] Europe wasn’t open for business. Underneath the rhetoric, the old barriers remained. Not just against the outside world, but between the European countries.
“Not the classic barriers of tariffs, but the insiduous ones of differing national standards, various restrictions on the provision of services, exclusion of foreign firms from public contracts.
“Now that’s going to change. Britain has given the lead.
“We recognised that if Europe was going to be more than a slogan then we must get the basics right. That meant action.
“Action to get rid of the barriers. Action to make it possible for insurance companies to do business throughout the Community. Action to let people practice their trades and professions freely throughout the Community. Action to remove the customs barriers and formalities so that goods can circulate freely and without time-consuming delays. Action to make sure that any company could sell its goods and services without let or hindrance. Action to secure free movement of capital throughout the Community.”
Shame the Brexiteer thickies b*ggered it all up, but it looks like they’re about to have an abrupt collision with reality.

Pat Rowles
Pat Rowles
1 year ago
Reply to  Paul Wright

Oh, look – another know-it-all Remainer unable to distinguish between the Common Market/EEC we joined and then voted to remain in, and the European Union we voted to leave.

Paul Wright
Paul Wright
1 year ago
Reply to  Pat Rowles

Thatcher’s speech was about the Single Market, which we have left.
If you agree with me that leaving the SM wasn’t what the referendum question asked, you should take it up with the Brexiteers who control the Conservative party. Given Boris’s majority, the form of Brexit was entirely controlled by them, not the dreaded Remainers.
Much like communists with the failure of communism, now Brexit has failed (see that well known leftist rag the Financial Times‘s video “The Brexit effect: how leaving the EU hit the UK” on YouTube, for example), Brexiteers claim they never got the true Brexit (see many comments here, for example), despite the whole thing being entirely controlled by Brexiteers.

Pat Rowles
Pat Rowles
1 year ago
Reply to  Paul Wright

If you agree with me that leaving the SM wasn’t what the referendum question asked

No, I don’t agree with you, because it did not ask that. The exact wording on the ballot was, “Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?”

Paul Wright
Paul Wright
1 year ago
Reply to  Pat Rowles

You seem to be having some difficulties, u ok hun?
ME: Thatcher created the SM, then later “Conservatives” screwed it all up by leaving.
YOU: We voted to leave the EU.
ME: We did. Leaving the SM wasn’t what the referendum question asked.
YOU: No, you’re wrong, leaving the SM wasn’t what the referendum question asked.
ME: Eh?

Pat Rowles
Pat Rowles
1 year ago
Reply to  Paul Wright

You hardly deserve a respectful reply, given your eye-rollingly lame “u ok hun?” comeback, but I concede that I did misread your question.
Are you suggesting that we could have left the EU and yet remained in the Single Market, without a whole lot of strings attached that negated the point of leaving, and that that is what the “Brexiteer thickies” “b*ggered up”?

Paul Wright
Paul Wright
1 year ago
Reply to  Pat Rowles

Nobody really agreed what “the point” was, so it’s hard to say whether it’d be negated by staying in the SM. Clearly you can leave the EU and be in the SM, because Norway exists.
Peter North of the Leave Alliance used to be a strong proponent of staying in the EEA (and hence the SM) and railed against the “Brexit blob” who disagreed with him, but now I see (“Tory remainers want to wind back the clock”, on UKIP’s site) he’s decided that because the old parliament (pre-Johnson) voted against it, the ship has sailed (and it’s the Remainers’ fault, obviousy, as they joined in voting it down, along with MPs wanting a harder Brexit, I’d guess). That seems strange: the current majority means the Conservatives can do what they want (if they can agree what that is), and British parliaments aren’t bound by previous decisions they’ve made. Instead, North now thinks we need more talented people in government to get us a better deal. Good luck!

Last edited 1 year ago by Paul Wright
Nicky Samengo-Turner
Nicky Samengo-Turner
1 year ago
Reply to  Pat Rowles

Norway and Switzerland have it right, no?

Billy Bob
Billy Bob
1 year ago
Reply to  Paul Wright

The question was whether to leave the EU, which a majority wanted to do. Staying in the single market meant the UK would have also had to keep free movement laws and be beholden to EU laws on trade but would have had no say in how those laws were created. Therefore in my eyes to stay in the single market means you’ve never really left the EU

Paul Wright
Paul Wright
1 year ago
Reply to  Billy Bob

The problem, as ever, is that the “true” Brexit is a mirage. It was never defined before the vote and, now it has happened but is a failure, leads to the “not the Brexit I voted for” complaints from the pig farmers who had to slaughter their animals rather than sell them and the Next CEOs who also can’t get the staff (and the “true Communism has never failed” stuff from commenters here).
Before the vote, Nige and Hannan expected us to stay in the SM. Did that mean they also wanted us to stay in the EU?

Last edited 1 year ago by Paul Wright
Sonny Ramadhin
Sonny Ramadhin
1 year ago
Reply to  Paul Wright
Richard Craven
Richard Craven
1 year ago
Reply to  William Shaw

Agreed.

Jeremy Smith
Jeremy Smith
1 year ago
Reply to  William Shaw

Reagan was an average president (total debts went through the roof during his presidency, Lebanon, Iran Contra).
The last great Republican president was Ike, he would not get elected by the Party today.

CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago
Reply to  Jeremy Smith

Yet he ‘won’ the Cold War without firing a shot, whilst his other nano-wars were trivial compared to those of that gung-ho cretin Bush Jnr (& others- too numerous to mention).

Plus we the in the UK must be eternally grateful that he sanctioned our ‘last Imperial hurrah’ with the Falklands adventure. So above average I would say.

David Simpson
David Simpson
1 year ago

And as he left office, it was with his warning about the insidious power and influence of the military-industrial complex. Which has been tragically ignored ever since, so we have had forever wars ever since, everywhere.

CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago
Reply to  David Simpson

He (RR) also realised he was “turning into a cabbage “ UNLIKE the present incumbent.

Last edited 1 year ago by CHARLES STANHOPE
David Simpson
David Simpson
1 year ago
Reply to  David Simpson

To avoid confusion, I was referring to Eisenhower, not Reagan

Kevin Kehoe
Kevin Kehoe
1 year ago
Reply to  William Shaw

With Mrs Thatcher, we had someone even better. A political phenomenon never to be repeated in the UK in my lifetime, I suspect.

Kat L
Kat L
1 year ago
Reply to  William Shaw

He granted full blanket amnesty to illegals, never forget that. He’s the great grandad of open borders.

CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago

So just like the three orders of Medieval society then :
Oratores (“those who pray”), Bellatores (“those who fight”), and Laboratores (“those who work”).

AC Harper
AC Harper
1 year ago

Another view is Thomas Sowell’s Anointed, Benighted, and Mascots.

Or perhaps the Elite, the Dependables and the Deplorables. Yet Elites change and we appear to be in the chaotic gap between the old Elite and the new Elite. I’ve no idea where we will end up although I expect a Global Hanseatic League will emerge – but the gap between the Dependables and the Deplorables will be paper thin.

Geoff Cooper
Geoff Cooper
1 year ago

In the US you still have space, you can hitch up a U-Haul and ship out to pastures new. We’re a small island nation, one of the most densely populated in the world, and our numbers have grown by 10.6 million just in the last decade, half of them hard to assimilate immigrants from Asia and Africa.
I agree though with your model Christopher, I myself am from what you call the educated gentry, but I have given up on my own kind, they are selfish and complacent and foolishly believe themselves above danger. Back in the day it was their job to take a lead but it’s no good now to look to them for help, they’re deluded globalists now.
The clients or subordinates are mostly immigrants who as you say are tribal/racial or else disenfranchised native underclass who have neither the strength nor articulacy to act.
My hope lies with what you call the commoners or responsibles, the respectable, law-abiding working class and lower middle class who I sometimes think of as the yeomanry. These people still make up a huge section of society, they believe in the nation state, they actually like their own country, people and culture. They’re patriotic and it is their children who serve in the armed forces and police, if anyone is going to save us before it is too late it will be these people, I work with them and like them enormously, they are strong, practical and numerous, I have great hope and faith in them.

Slopmop McTeash
Slopmop McTeash
1 year ago

The current Conservative party has shown itself to be full of weak, morally bankrupt liars, who have sold their voters down the river. The contempt I hold them in cannot be understated.

BREXIT has not been delivered
Taxes are rising
Rapists and murderers walk the streets with impunity
Immigrants flood in and are welcomed with open arms as they spread like a cancer, destroying the very fabric of English society.

Meek and polite Covid protesters were met with brutal police violence whilst Just Stop Oil thugs are treated with kid gloves. The outrageous disparity in the way the law is applied is proof that we no longer live in a democracy

Last edited 1 year ago by Slopmop McTeash
Nicky Samengo-Turner
Nicky Samengo-Turner
1 year ago

Hear hear!

Rebirth Radio
Rebirth Radio
1 year ago

Not a very good article. The first paragraph alone is a string of random hypotheses presented as indisputable truths. Misses the point all round really, maybe because the author is a bigot with preconceived notions rather than genuinely open-minded to new paradigms.

Daniel Lee
Daniel Lee
1 year ago

“Brexit has failed”? Really? More like it was strangled in its cradle by the Euro-state bureaucrats and their bosses on the Left, who have simply refused to acknowledge or act on the expressed will of the people. Surprised by that? You haven’t been paying attention.

Jeremy Smith
Jeremy Smith
1 year ago
Reply to  Daniel Lee

Absurd.
What did you want UK GOV (BoJo as PM) to actually do!
Details not generic statements.

ben arnulfssen
ben arnulfssen
1 year ago

Britain, and especially the English have a unique characteristic. In 1945 they voted for a Socislist government to deliver social reform, but voted it out when it became excessively ideological. The PR systems installed across Europe post-1945 mean that no other country can do this, although Italy is coming close.

They did it again in 1979.

However the Left applied themselves to corrupting and subverting tbe structure of governance, especially post-1997. It makes no real difference now, what government is elected; convergence over time means that all are culturally Marxist, inherently globalist.

The Conservstives also have the inherent problem that they have never really represented the masses. Particularly, they always favoured mass immigration of cheap labour; after all, who let the “Windrush generstion” in? Who introduced the controls which stood for thirty years? (It was Labour, seeking to shore up their unworkable 4-seat majority from 1964)

The Conservatives have irretrievably foiled their own doorstep by dividing the nation in the 80s, reviving the spectre of mass unemployment as policy. They have always been deeply divided over Europe.

They won’t help themselves by “rediscovering their past”…

CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago
Reply to  ben arnulfssen

The Windrush docked at Tilbury in 1948 if you recall? Also the British Nationality Act was passed in 1948.
However what Nye Bevan said so notoriously about the Tories has proved to be only too true!

Greta Hirschman
Greta Hirschman
1 year ago

The Tillbury Docks had been opened to immigrants since inception, and all the Windrush passengers found a job within a month. A single event is nothing compared to mass migration of cheap labour.

CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago

The 1948 Nationality Act was the catalyst, the ‘Windrush’ merely the beginning.

Dave Smith
Dave Smith
1 year ago

My oldest grandson is just 19. He cannot abide the current tory lot or any party. He got very good A levels in proper subjects but dismissed university as rubbish he had to pay for and not for him at any price. He is training to be an engineer . He already is assembling his own workshop and is finding that when older men find out his mettle they are very supportive. Offering help and even valuable machines for free.
Us old timers know a good young man when we see one. We also know that they are holding the future of England in their hands. My grandson never even thinks of London. Never goes there and has no interest in it.
His cousin ,the next in age, hangs on his every word and this is how it starts. I have no idea what he talks about with his friends but they want a different England. That I know.
We are an ancient people and underneath the polite exterior as hard as nails. The progressive left and it’s imitators in the tory party thought that after 1500 years we would roll over and give up our country meekly accepting the second class status they planned for us. From me he knows the history of his forebears and that is my role. I consider myself fortunate that all my sons are independent men and hard to rule. That is my family from way back. All good fortune to the young men you describe. They sound the right stuff. This is no longer about left and right. It is about something much more basic. It seems to be about who we were and who we are and who we wish to be. That is not for me to decide. That is for the young .

CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago
Reply to  Dave Smith

Spot on, and very well said Sir!

Jeremy Smith
Jeremy Smith
1 year ago
Reply to  Dave Smith

Nothing but “patriotic” fluff.

My grandson never even thinks of London.

Ever since the days of Rome London has been …well London. And 100 years from now (global warming aside?!) London will remain the engine of England.

Last edited 1 year ago by Jeremy Smith
B Emery
B Emery
1 year ago
Reply to  Jeremy Smith

No, not patriotic fluff, love this guys comment. My brother 22 has experienced similar, he works in construction, some of the older guys have been really, really good to him, it’s done him a lot of good, I think it’s really important and good of these guys to take the time with the younger lads. His perspective is exactly as described above, he can’t stand either party, and the bit about it not being about left or right anymore but about much more is one of the most insightful comments I’ve read on here. I think he feels voting doesn’t really make a difference because corporate interests are too strong, whichever way you go the elite have got richer and more and more powerful. Like an enormous monolithic power that has become nearly impossible to take on given its global tentacles and enormous spending power. This is where all the conspiracy stuff has spawned from too. Elites and massive corporations abusing systems to their own advantage, this I believe is the root of the problem but how on earth do you start dismantling it? The shadow banking sector? The tax havens? Military industrial complex? Big pharma? How do you take on multi national corporate interests that are much bigger, much richer and will throw the kitchen sink at stopping that from happening? And arguably they are enormous parts of the global economy and provide thousands of jobs. Cop27 is a good example of corporate shenanagins happening right now check this out: https://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/Hundreds-Of-Fossil-Fuel-Lobbyist-To-Attend-COP27.html
My brother never thinks of london either and would have zero interest in visiting, he’s more into mountain bikes in Wales. It might be the ‘engine of England’ but there’s plenty more to the uk than London. Anyone watch Clarksons farm? Kalib visiting London? 🙂 Us more rural folk can’t deal with it. I have to take london in very small doses and it’s that bloody expensive now, quite a hit to the pocket. We only really think of london when the markets have decided to shaft us again.
Kalib visits London 🙂
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=wgBS-P1n4_A

Perry de Havilland
Perry de Havilland
1 year ago

I should have stopped reading at “Brexit has failed” 😀
For most voters, Brexit was about sovereignty according to Ashcroft exit poll, meaning Westminster has nowhere to hide. So, pace Will Lloyd & Nigel alike, we at least got that, mission accomplished. Brexit wasn’t what you thought it was & it still isn’t. What comes next isn’t “Brexit”, it’s just politics; there is no undoing Brexit this side of perpetual civil war.
Much as the author sneers at the Right (whatever that means when not talking about France circa 1790), Jeremy Hunt’s “Conservative” Party isn’t small-c conservative in any shape, way, or form. The Tories have driven a stake through their own heart, ending any pretence of being a ‘broad church’, because if they were, Liz Truss & KK would still be in Downing Street in spite of straying from the Blue Blairite orthodoxy. Hell, they were defenestrated in no small part for trying to put the top rate of tax back to where it was for 12 years under the last Labour govt.
If you want less tax, even slightly less state control of anything at all, no taking the knee, no eco-pandering to the Net Zero cult, an energy policy that allows fracking & expanding North Sea production rather than one that could have been written by Vladimir Putin, no talk of ‘reparations’ (climate or otherwise), why would anyone who wants those things vote Tory? No reason, and they won’t.
The party membership voted for Truss but they got Sunak anyway. Okay, message received, everyone now knows what the party nomenklatura & apparatchiks think of the rank-and-file party membership. The members might as well have voted for Larry the Cat to be party leader for all the difference it made, at least he’s still in Downing Street.
Voting Tory in last GE was essential when the alternative was Corbyn, the most odious mainstream politician since Oswald Mosley (for some of the same reasons). But Starmer is just another dreary Blairite, he’s Hunt without the unfortunate China connections. So the choice is vote for Blue Blairites who likes high taxes and ruinous green policies, or Red Blairites who likes high taxes, ruinous green policies, and don’t know what a woman is. On the plus side, Labour have Diane Abbott, who can take over Boris’ role providing comic relief.
I’ll vote Reform UK then, because at this point, I couldn’t care less which flavour of technocratic Blairite is in Downing Street. Jeremy Hunt & his ilk can get stuffed. Sure, Labour will get in & it won’t be pretty unless ginger growlers are your thing. But perhaps, just perhaps, utterly burning the Tories to the ground might let something better emerge from the ashes.
The author no doubt thinks that’s crazy talk, given that without any detectable irony he wrote:

“Do not expect them to sculpt a future of fair dealing, pragmatism, patience, moderation or high intelligence”

Imagine thinking the soaking wet dunderheads running the Tory Party as of late 2022 represent even a single one of those presumed virtues. It’s not called the Stupid Party for nothing.

Dominic A
Dominic A
1 year ago

“I should have stopped reading at “Brexit has failed. For most voters…”
The polls these days show that for most voters, Brexit has failed. Maybe that’ll change, maybe not – the direction of change is not good, and there are few indications of hope. It’s rather looking as though the weight of opinion from those who know/study/live in relevant sectors (politics, academia, health car, sciences, business, economics etc) – i.e. the despised elites and technocrats – might know a thing or to after-all, over and above the man in the pub, pint in hand, waxing lyrical.

Stu N
Stu N
1 year ago
Reply to  Dominic A

No, those awful ‘elite’ people are bursting at the seams with self-serving sanctimony, just as they always have and always will.

Dominic A
Dominic A
1 year ago
Reply to  Stu N

Things go in cycles. Maybe it’s the populists now that are bursting with entitled sanctimony, inchoate rage, and worse, whose acting out is threatening and damaging society…?

For various reasons that have little to do with me, I have met and spent time with many successful people (politics, military, government, arts, economics, business, medicine) and they always came across as calm, nuanced, realistic, polite – as you’d expect given a lifte-time of studying and working with the issues. Quite a contrast with those with little direct or indirect experience – equally worthy & worthwhile human beings – whose intellectual positions/understanding is often based in …not such sound sources – i.e.emotion, usually of the threat sort, and ‘alternative news sources’.

polidori redux
polidori redux
1 year ago
Reply to  Dominic A

“Things go in cycles. Maybe it’s the populists now that are bursting with entitled sanctimony, inchoate rage, and worse, whose acting out is threatening and damaging society
?”
Well there you go, Dominic. Beware of your own creation. Mary Shelley undersood that: It’s a pity that you didn’t learn from her.

Last edited 1 year ago by polidori redux
Dominic A
Dominic A
1 year ago
Reply to  polidori redux

or that you haven’t understood the problem of infinite regress.

Perry de Havilland
Perry de Havilland
1 year ago
Reply to  Dominic A

The polls these days show that for most voters…

ï»żSure 😀

Dominic A
Dominic A
1 year ago

Want to present the evidence?

polidori redux
polidori redux
1 year ago
Reply to  Dominic A

Watch Yes Minister: Humphrey explains how to get the poll result that your sponsor requires.

JJ Lynn
JJ Lynn
1 year ago

You should join ‘Reform’, it seems like a natural home for most posters here. LT & KK were playing chicken with markets, espousing simplistic Minfordian economics circa the 1970s that everyone else, sans numpties from Tufton St, is rightly laughing at.
‘We fought the markets and the markets won’.
🙂

polidori redux
polidori redux
1 year ago
Reply to  JJ Lynn

If so, then the markets will do the same to you.
I didn’t realise that you were an “economist”, JJ

John Sullivan
John Sullivan
1 year ago

But for you mentioning the soggy cabbage that is Reform UK and, by implication, its ‘leader’ Tice, spot on.

Matt M
Matt M
1 year ago

Yet Farage, beyond his Brexit boosterism, is so unmistakably Eighties. His agenda, where it rises above being a disgruntled mood, is not theirs. A global free trading power? At least half of the audience is protectionist, restrictionist, anti-globalist.

The irony of this piece is that the young men in the audience were probably espousing views similar to those promoted (or at least promulgated) by this very website, viz. Right on culture: Left on economics.
And yet they are sneered at by the Staff Writer of the same website who evidently prefers something else (probably a reheated Blairism).

Last edited 1 year ago by Matt M
Jonathan Keats
Jonathan Keats
1 year ago

The big problem has been the failure since labour left to unwind years of intransigent deep cover socialists and their sloth culture in local authorities , the nhs and civil service. Most Young people , black and white alike, are appalled at the woke and gender based social engineering/doctrine embedded in the public sector and pushed hard by the private sector
Sue they understand discrimination and ask aren’t our laws enough – this teaching is like the thought police , its divisive creating environments where discipline and standards are not upheld for fear of ruining careers with a race or homophobic/mysoginist stigma forever on your cv. Constructive cultures of positive boding banter are destroyed rather than nudged back – if you were “out of order” you were warned with a quiet word rather frogged match to HR or into the courts
Failure on illegal immigration, failure on waste in the nhs and civil service, corruption in Government, waste on defnece procurment, failure to push proper apprenticehsips and technical qualification, failure to address the massive pension differential in the public sector where 30% of salary (20%) from the tax man is paid into a pension v 3-5% in the private sector (ÂŁ2.3 trillion unfunded liability coming out of taxes going forward)
The private sector are tax slaves to the public sector (front liners like nurses drs, soldiers gchq etc are not my target here but the non job bureaucrats in LA and civil service and nhs)

Kemi and Suella get it the rest are cowards

JJ Lynn
JJ Lynn
1 year ago
Reply to  Jonathan Keats

‘private sector are tax slaves’. LOL. Please read the theory of money to understand how silly that statement is.

polidori redux
polidori redux
1 year ago
Reply to  JJ Lynn

Your laughter is getting hysterical.

rupert carnegie
rupert carnegie
1 year ago

My guess is that the illiberal and intolerant attitudes of both the woke and these young right wing radicals should be seen as symptomatic of the underlying problem: the mentality of generation Z whose psychology appears to be very different to previous generations probably because they spent their teenage years being battered by social media.
A priority should be the reform of social media but the main hope must be that the next generation rebel against the intolerant certainties of Gen Z (whether woke or this lot) and return society to sanity. If one is an optimist, one can note that McCarthyism – which also relied on intimidation and intolerance – collapsed quite fast in 1954. If one is a realist, however, …

Billy Bob
Billy Bob
1 year ago

Most youngsters I know are fairly centrist. However due to social media and lazy journalists who use Twitter as their main source of Information they tend to get drowned out by the simpletons at the extremes

Cathy Carron
Cathy Carron
1 year ago
Reply to  Billy Bob

Or they just get on with life and ignore the lot…

Billy Bob
Billy Bob
1 year ago
Reply to  Cathy Carron

That too

John Sullivan
John Sullivan
1 year ago

“these young right wing radicals”.

Yes, they must be the problem (sarcasm, for the avoidance of doubt).

0 0
0 0
1 year ago

I must of been mistaken when I signed up to this newsletter. Each article is worse than the last.
This would be right at home at the Guardian.
luckily there is an intelligent crowd commenting. Along with a heap of morons or brigade 77 types.
But I can’t imagine spending too much more time reading such tripe as this article.

Martin Terrell
Martin Terrell
1 year ago
Reply to  0 0

The comments are quite good though!

JJ Lynn
JJ Lynn
1 year ago
Reply to  0 0

‘Arrgh, another article that doesn’t pander to my, rather simple, biases!!’. Picking your IQ as the forum name is quite neat.
🙂

polidori redux
polidori redux
1 year ago
Reply to  JJ Lynn

Oh do stop impugning other peoples’s intelligence for God’s sake. It is not productive. If you think that they are wrong, then explain exactly why they are wrong. if you don’t you are merely creating the impressionn that they are, indeed, right.
Glad to help.

Martin Layfield
Martin Layfield
1 year ago

It’s heartening that the young ones weren’t taken in by the yesterday’s liberalism that the likes Hannan and Baker still peddle. A little depressing some seem to bank their hopes on America. I think the British will have to look to their own devices…

Robert Leigh
Robert Leigh
1 year ago

It seems the author has chosen to describe Nigel Farage’s followers as being of low intelligence, amongst other lacking virtues. Nigel Farage and Darren Grimes are popular presenters on the very successful GB News, simply because they voice common sense and listen to and respect opposing arguments. This article is not the usual calibre of “UnHerd”, it’s more like “The Herd”.

B Emery
B Emery
1 year ago

Poor nigel farage always takes a battering, he must be doing something right. Could claim to be spawn of farage myself, absolutely loved watching him wipe the floor with everyone in European Parliament as a young person. It was a real shame he never made it to Westminster, would have been so entertaining. I voted brexit having watched farage and characters like rees mogg, because I believe in control of our own democracy and borders, I think massive buerocracy/ government attracts massive corruption and lack of accountability. I also think the free trade low tax model was the only real new radical plan for our economy, until I hear of a better idea I still believe this. However the flip side is multi national and corporate interests have become too powerful, so somehow we need to balance that. Not sure the author is correct that young conservatives are all this inward looking, these kids will have friends of all nationalities from school, have travelled more than any other generation, and they like the tech and goods global trade has to offer, also think most kids in this country know to treat the American elites and politics with considerable caution whichever side they profess to be on, or I hope they do. So I doubt they are ‘stripping the American right wing for parts’ as avidly as is made out. My brothers 22, he can tell you every conspiracy relating to 9/11, blood for oil Iraq and Afghanistan opium wars as he sees them, 2008 crash, all about black flag missions, shadow banks, the military industrial complex, big pharma, Bill Gates, CBDCs, throw in crazy bilderberg, bohemian grove conspiracy, Bush and Clinton scandals and shenanagins, CIA ‘war on terror’, American elite funding of organisations designed to cause division like blm and just stop oil. If anything the two of us feel American elites/politics/ foreign policy is actually the cause of much of the crazyness in the world not the the solution. He would not look to American right wing politics for the solution, pretty sure on that. Sorry all you Americans it’s not personal, your just governed most of the time by corporate interests and maintaining hegemony, and your governments not great at doing it right.
This line from the article: ‘Do not expect them to sculpt a future of fair dealing, pragmatism, patience, moderation or high intelligence.’ think this is very unfair it’s not a meeting of the KkK, they’re young Conservatives, so rounded up probably from quite nice normal families, kids from business backgrounds and kids that hate Big government and corrupt politics. Kids that have chosen Mr farage as a hero, this man believes in democracy and grammar schools, free trade, he’s about as sensible and middle England as you can get, think the authors put quite a spin on this and I don’t like it, very strange article to be honest. Plus any older person dealing with a young person’s perspective, will probably get exasperated at some point, you should see my dad and brother argue about politics 🙂 and who wants to Jeremy *unt? I’d rather be farage.

CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago
Reply to  B Emery

Good Miss Emery, but you need to tighten up on your syntax, spelling etc, otherwise you will appear to be a state educated moron will you not?

B Emery
B Emery
1 year ago

Mr Stanhope, I see you’ve got that high horse out the stable again, on my next comment I will attach a disclaimer just for you: This comment has been written in haste, from the heart. Corrections of syntax and spelling are welcome from those for whom my desecration of the English language is just a step too far.
Or mayB I wil make xtra shore my speling and sintax r orful just to anoi u 🙂

Last edited 1 year ago by B Emery
CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago
Reply to  B Emery

Bravo!

Richard Abbot
Richard Abbot
1 year ago

All this is entirely predictable AND welcome.
Leftism is a cancer, one of the most evil and anti-life ideologies to ever stalk this planet.
Read Leftism by Erik von Kuehnelt-Leddihn if you are in any doubt.

Rob J
Rob J
1 year ago

No one reading below the line on UnHerd needs telling that “Anger is growing on the fringes of conservatism”!

Dominic A
Dominic A
1 year ago
Reply to  Rob J

…then they might want to reflect on the fact that conservatives have been in charge for 12 years – without resorting to, ‘but they weren’t proper conservatives’. This is a childish thought of those who have yet to reckon with living in the real world. The seeds of their failures were apparent to many at the time – but were ignored in favour of wishful/emotional thinking. Akin to the acting out of a gambler or addict. Hence the steady decline of the UK; the failures of Brexit too achieve it’s goals (beyond the abstract, ‘we left the EU, hooray’); the failures of the May, Johnson and Truss governments; harsher than average economic downturn; deepening failures of the NHS etc etc etc. It also explains the escalation of rage, and a clear failure to sober up, take responsibility, learn, and adapt.

Alex Tickell
Alex Tickell
1 year ago
Reply to  Dominic A

Its main goal was to stop the arrival here of many hundred thousand immigrants unregulated in any degree. This practice has been stopped by the UK leaving the EU.
We can in principle now chose who comes to live and work here; the fact that the government do not have the balls to implement that principle, is no reflection on “Brexit”

James Kirk
James Kirk
1 year ago

Tweed blazer, vaping, smoking, Trump, spare right wing parts, poor Steve Baker. Is this BBC Question time?

Martin Terrell
Martin Terrell
1 year ago

Not sure what the point of this article is. Some conservative types are angry. Should they not be? Is there nothing for them to be angry about? Our wise, efficient and moderate political classes know what is best for us, and run the country with great skill. The compassionate left is angry to a limited extent, because it cares – for equity, the climate and needs to challenge real oppression, especially by white middle class males. So when the tumbril comes for Will Lloyd, he will politely thank the driver and the executioner.

Kat L
Kat L
1 year ago

Well after the midterm disaster here yesterday, America is not the direction they should be looking toward. We are pretty much done for.

Jonathan Castro
Jonathan Castro
1 year ago

The whole LibLabCon needs clearing out.
Is that radical enough?
https://kickthemout.uk

CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago

Or as the ‘blessed’ Oliver Cromwell put it so perfectly when dismissing Parliament in April, 1653:

It is high time for me to put an end to your sitting in this place,

which you have dishonored by your contempt of all virtue, and defiled by your practice of every vice.

Ye are a factious crew, and enemies to all good government.

Ye are a pack of mercenary wretches, and would like Esau sell your country for a mess of pottage, and like Judas betray your God for a few pieces of money.

Is there a single virtue now remaining amongst you? Is there one vice you do not possess?

Ye have no more religion than my horse. Gold is your God. Which of you have not bartered your conscience for bribes? Is there a man amongst you that has the least care for the good of the Commonwealth?

Ye sordid prostitutes have you not defiled this sacred place, and turned the Lord’s temple into a den of thieves, by your immoral principles and wicked practices?

Ye are grown intolerably odious to the whole nation. You were deputed here by the people to get grievances redressed, are yourselves become the greatest grievance.

Your country therefore calls upon me to cleanse this Augean stable, by putting a final period to your iniquitous proceedings in this House; and which by God’s help, and the strength he has given me, I am now come to do.

I command ye therefore, upon the peril of your lives, to depart immediately out of this place.

Go, get you out! Make haste! Ye venal slaves be gone! So! Take away that shining bauble there, and lock up the doors.

IN THE NAME OF GOD GO!

James Kirk
James Kirk
1 year ago

Only half the story. He was god obsessed puritan who divided the people and set them against each other in pointless civil wars. Like the money lenders in the temple, they soon returned.

CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago
Reply to  James Kirk

I would have though Charles Stewart should take the blame for most, but not all of that.

Nicky Samengo-Turner
Nicky Samengo-Turner
1 year ago

Stuart?!!

Philip Anderson
Philip Anderson
1 year ago

Interesting that nobody in the comments section has commented on this, which seems to be actual concerning data rather than mere opinion:
61% of 18-34s in the UK “support running the UK with a strong leader who doesn’t have to bother with parliament/elections”
For 35-54s, the figure is 49%, only those over the age of 55 still seem to have much faith in democracy.

Michael Saxon
Michael Saxon
1 year ago

This article was a long-winded vehicle for unsupported self-justifying bias. I’m getting a little tired of this sort of tripe on Unherd. We would be better served by a journalist who would take a serious look at the so called ‘new conservatism’ which as far as I can see smacks mostly of old-world classical liberalism. These young guys have every reason to be concerned about the state of things, including digital currencies and the ruling class’ failure to pursue a true Brexit agenda.

Katy Hibbert
Katy Hibbert
1 year ago

Ambient British culture — whether it is Ru Paul’s Drag Race or footballers taking the knee — bristles with personalities and causes that unsettle them. They see “wokeness” as a virus, infecting every aspect of British culture.

So they’ve got a brain. Unlike this “writer”, who is a brain-dead leftard.

Jonathan Story
Jonathan Story
1 year ago

Why should a conservative future get nasty? What we see now is some very nasty wokery, for instance: lawyers and criminals running illegal immigration; failure to deal with gang rapes. The Hunt types seem to consider it a problem to deal with these phenomena. What is nasty is allowing such things to continue.

Will Will
Will Will
1 year ago

I have seen Darren Grimes on the telly but have not seen the author of this piece on the TV, but have seen Freddie. I am somewhat cheered if there are some young people out there of a conservative disposition. I am reminded of student politics in the 80s (which most of us avoided) and find this piece quite funny.

Last edited 1 year ago by Will Will
Rohan Achnay
Rohan Achnay
1 year ago

National Conservatism or the New Right is the nearest we have to a rightwing version of political ecology.

Political ecology is the study of the relationships between political, economic and social factors with environmental issues and changes. This includes human orientated population ecology which is a sub-field of ecology that deals with the dynamics of species populations and how these populations interact with the environment, such as birth and death rates, and by immigration and emigration.

The main difference between leftwing and rightwing political ecology is that the former is generally global in its scope with an emphasis on a global community and technocratic governance and the latter is generally national in its scope with an emphasis on a national community and democratic governance.

This highlights why cultural concerns are so important to the New Right, including balkanised multiculturalism and onshoring foreign cultures. Economic and ecological concerns also predominate in terms of sustainability, resilience, sufficiency and reliance, in order to address survival anxieties, which is why the ideal of Britain as a liberal global trading powerhouse does not particularly resonate with National Conservatives in general.

In this respect, what the New Right needs to better define and articulate itself is the structure of political ecology with sub-fields such as population ecology to address domain concerns such as social stability and integration via cultural institutions.

Ultimately, the national economy works like an ecosystem with energy and material throughput being determined by the rate, route and efficiency of energy transfers. Hence the survival anxiety concerns about Net Zero and curbing population growth, with the latter demanding an increase in import dependencies and therefore increased vulnerability to negative global supply shocks. Hence an emphasis on reshoring essential goods and services, protection for domestic farming, a fair distribution of wealth (or distributism) and a willingness to support and fight for national defence, especially within the context of an uncertain global future.

All this requires cultural cohesion and a strong national identity in which to foster an interdependent and interconnected sense of community which in evolutionary biological terms is the equivalent of increasing the fitness of the tribe.

Paul Hammans
Paul Hammans
1 year ago

“…not for what he says about free trade but for the way he says it.”

Uh-huh. It was only a tirade against demagogues after all, then. I’d hoped for better than so many words that just amounted to, “populists are bad, m’kay.”

Last edited 1 year ago by Paul Hammans
Nick O'Connor
Nick O'Connor
1 year ago

The problem with the current pragmatism, fair dealing and moderation is that it involved paying lip service to some views without actually doing anything to make them happen. If those views are mainstream (incomes should increase in real terms; young people in work should be able to afford a mortgage; we should be able to control our borders) then politics may get nastier until things are changed to allow them to become reality.

Luckily it’s very simple to make the necessary changes. Unfortunately, those changes are currently very unpopular. Particularly with the sort of person who likes to talk about pragmatism, fair dealing and moderation.

Samuel Turner
Samuel Turner
1 year ago

Great article here from Will.
I used to be a member of UKIP in Chichester, and I campaigned for the Brexit Party in Southampton back in 2019. So I used to be and still am a fan of Nigel Farage. Since then my views have changed somewhat. I’ve become more liberal and less Peter Hitchens. I’m currently 22 and reckon that I fall into the same demographic as the “boys” written about in this article.
Even as a libertarian I can see that more economic liberalism is not the answer to Britain’s problems. For the Right to completely give up on liberty, however, would also be a huge mistake. I’m sure Farage knows this, and he should try harder to convey this to his fan club.
I know that a lot of people might disagree with me here, but embracing white identity politics and protectionism is not the answer and will only make things 100 times worse. What we need is more strategic long-term thinking from government, and a willingness to defend our freedom and culture from the woke mob. Economically far more action is needed on housing, infrastructure, and R&D to increase productivity and spur innovation. Improving people’s lives should be more important than appeasing the bond markets. Culturally, the government needs to get on with securing our borders, taking us out of the ECHR, and protecting our free-speech. The SDP is probably the best party to do this, but I don’t think they’ll get anywhere near government without PR. In fact, without PR, I think people will just become more and more dissatisfied with politics until they reject democracy altogether.
I call my position social libertarianism because it combines the economic tenets of social democracy with a strong belief in liberty. It might not appeal to everyone, but I think that it would be a good starting point in the fight against elite orthodoxy, which is firmly opposed to national sovereignty, workers’ solidarity, and individual liberty.

Martin Terrell
Martin Terrell
1 year ago
Reply to  Samuel Turner

Lots of good ideas, these are all healthy discussions to have on ‘the right’ – which can at least look for answers to the problems we face. The main thing is to find common ground and keep the centre ground in mind.

Iwan Hughes
Iwan Hughes
1 year ago

Steve Baker is now a Minister of State for Northern Ireland, assistant deputy undermanager for something or other, and has to mind his Ps and Qs these days.

Dominic A
Dominic A
1 year ago

A couple of factors are heavily implicated in the crisis of conservatism:

the over-supply of higher education; and the vastly widened gap between MPs salaries and those of a typical high profession.
This has resulted in legions of higher-educated people, who can’t get commensurate jobs or status, and lower educated people, who can no longer get the jobs their parents could expect (without that education), railing against the system. Moreover, the quality of MPs is at all time low – you pay peanuts, you get monkeys.

Last edited 1 year ago by Dominic A
Mr Mee
Mr Mee
1 year ago

In this article of great interest are the fears of people like John and to realise such fears are more common than one might expect.  
How irrelevant is the daily left-right knockabout politics focussed on Farages, Johnsons, Starmers. It distracts us all. It is like a drama or soap opera to keep our minds off what happens out of our sight.
Today’s international mega-rich of all types can, for less than what is to them, pocket change, influence invisibly to us, what is happening in this or any country.
Democracy is the easiest political system to manipulate.  The past hundred years shows how fragile European democracy is. For it to be healthy the electors need to know – to be knowledgeable about everything that is shaping the future – but they don’t know.
Bill Gates is reputed to be buying up as much farmland as he can. Is something expected to happen to food supplies of its own accord? Can what happens be manipulated, and if so, by whom and by what means?  What is the policy of any left, centre or right party to manipulation of any kind and in general, foreign or otherwise? What is it towards the endemic corruption many of us see daily in our national and local institutions?
The 1963 US President John F Kennedy’s assassination was the first time international visual media was used on a wide-scale to promote rapidly worldwide in visual imagery the idea of a lone assassin in the book depository despite its practical impossibility. In 50 years how much more sophisticated has manipulation become? Are there grand plans and strategies? Are long games being pursued to achieve specified aims? If so, are they co-ordinated? Is there a long game? Who is doing it? Where? How? How often? What about?
What do we know of Whitehall mandarins and what they do in their spare time, whom they meet, what they discuss and what influences them and their advice to their temporary political bosses who come and go? Should any of them be allowed to spend decades in the same jobs? 
We all need to know and we are not going to find out if we waste our time debating irrelevant front men and women of Westminster politics. They are toothless and relatively powerless non-leaders of declining western democracies.
“Yes, Minister” was not for nothing one of Margaret Thatcher’s favourite television programmes. It was a comedy sitcom about Whitehall mandarins manipulating ministers.
But as Guy Aston comments here yesterday “There is a dangerous gap opening up between the leaders and the led. ….. Weimar laughed at the National Socialists and their comical leader. We no longer laugh about them.”
We cannot laugh, cry or despair at the real “Yes, Minister” because we have no idea what happens out of our sight.
And no one can be bothered to find out or tell us.

David Barnett
David Barnett
1 year ago

Outside the metropolitan elitist bubble, most people know there is something fundamentally wrong with the stories we are told and the way we are governed. Farage taps into this
.
Better Farage’s libertarianism than a demagogue who will use the growing anger at “the system” to capture it with the lie that “right” people in charge will fix things.
.
The problem is, and always has been, the technocratic hubris of “in charge” via centralised authority.
.
The solution is libertarian humility. Dismantle the centralised machine and separate government from money, religion, education, healthcare, and charity.
.
The first of these, fiat money, is the cause of the growing wealth disparity between the privileged few with first access to new fiat money, and the plundered masses paid in the debased coin that percolates down to them via numerous subsequent market transactions.
.
In other words, what was labelled “free-market” was anything but. The fiat market-rigging must stop.

Last edited 1 year ago by David Barnett
David Forrester
David Forrester
1 year ago

It might be worthwhile following this article up with meeting the youth groups across the other political parties and see how attitudes across the political spectrum differ and have similarities. It would of been interesting to know the class/SEB for example of the crowd etc.
I also wonder if it should be theme tagged as “flyover country” some of the matters causing these attitudes are flyover to mainstream opinion. Anger and frustration at being ignored to and futures denied do seem to be a feature of current discourse from younger commentators.

Jim Denham