X Close

Can Roger Scruton save the European Right? A new conservative movement has found its lodestar

You see young people going around in Scruton T-shirts (Andy Hall/Getty Images)

You see young people going around in Scruton T-shirts (Andy Hall/Getty Images)




April 14, 2023   6 mins

A spectre is haunting Europe — the spectre of Sir Roger Scruton. Three years after his death, the professor’s philosophical ghost is still present, and is reaching echelons of influence that eluded him in his lifetime. For the first time, self-proclaimed Scruton acolytes have climbed to the top of European political parties — and governments — in Italy and in Sweden.

For while Scruton’s attachment to conservatism was deep, his philosophy was usually couched in terms few leaders of the political Right would use. It involved, he wrote in the introduction to A Political Philosophy, “the conservation of our shared resources — social, material, economic and spiritual — and resistance to social entropy in all its forms”. His conservatism was, above all, conservationist: constant care for institutions, customs, and family.

These beliefs necessitated a healthy distance from the most politically successful British-Conservative movement of his lifetime, Thatcherism, whose figurehead failed to conserve a great deal. Scruton welcomed her confrontation with relatively recent excrescences on the British body politic: overweening unions, a culture of decline-management, scorn for patriotism. And he initially hailed Thatcher’s coming as “a miracle”, celebrating her as “the greatest woman in British politics since Elizabeth I”. But his support never entailed full alignment, and he was wary of her free-market absolutism and her lack of interest in less tangible ideals, such as beauty.

Thatcherite conservatism, much less that of Scruton’s stamp, has been historically rare in the European continent, often dismissively referred to as “Anglo-Saxon”. And this was particularly true in Sweden and Italy. The Swedish Social Democrats governed for most of the post-war period, and their model of well-funded social protection and generous international development aid was largely accepted by the centre-Right. Italy was led into the Eighties by Christian Democrat coalitions, politically centrist in nature. And when their standing declined in the early Nineties, weakened by corruption allegations, they were succeeded by Forza Italia, a new party created and financed by the media oligarch Silvio Berlusconi, who promised business-like efficiency with little ideological change. But, in the form of Giorgia Meloni and the Sweden Democrats, both countries now have avowed Scrutonians at the heart of their governments.

Though dedicated to the English conservative tradition, Scruton had intervened in European politics within his lifetime. In 2006, he gave a speech at the invitation of the Vlaams Belang (Flemish Interest) party, a strongly anti-immigrant, Flemish nationalist and Eurosceptic group which at the time was Belgium’s largest party. He told the audience what they already believed — that immigration and the European Union would destroy Flanders — and tested out a neologism of his own, “oikophobia” (derived Greek for home) meaning a rejection both of the family, and one’s native culture. The oikophobe, he said, “repudiates national loyalties and defines his goals and ideals against the nation, promoting transnational institutions over national governments… defining his political vision in terms of cosmopolitan values that have been purified of all reference to the particular attachments of a real historical community”.

Though it gained little traction in 2006, this is the Scruton that Meloni and Matthias Karlsson, the leading intellectual of the Sweden Democrats, have adopted. In her autobiography, I am Giorgia, Meloni describes Scruton as the greatest influence on her party, indeed the most important guide to all European liberal-conservative forces. Citing him in several passages, she admits: “I’m quoting him too often, but it’s his own fault for writing so many interesting things.” From Scruton’s 2014 book, How to be a Conservative, the Italian prime minister highlights Scruton’s debt to Edmund Burke: society is a contract between the living, the dead and the unborn; a “civil association among neighbours” is superior to state intervention; “the most important thing a human being can do is to settle down, make a home and pass it on to one’s children”.

In this context, she engages with another Scruton coinage, “oikophilia”, love for, rather than revulsion from, the home. She admires, too, his formative perception that it is easier to destroy than to create — an insight he gained when he observed the 1968 protests from a hotel window in Paris. And she warmly endorses Scruton’s view that the EU is “a false union… utopian and potentially tyrannous… a community of nations today threatened by the suffocating grip of… a ‘Europeanist’ ideal which has come to be offered as the only possible choice”.

Meanwhile, Sweden, still touted as a social-democratic ideal, has been plagued over the last decade by a hefty rise in murders, itself driven by the drugs-trafficking and gang-feuding disproportionately practised by immigrant groups. The encouragement of mass immigration by both centre-Right and social democratic governments, followed by years denying the extent of the issue and the fear it engendered, gave the Sweden Democrats their breakthrough. Their leader from 2005, Jimmie Åkesson, is widely credited, alongside Karlsson, with transforming the party’s fortunes and purging its historic neo-Nazi presence. They have worked hard at establishing themselves as unthreatening and prescient, persistently calling out the pressures of mass immigration and drug gang violence which other parties ignored. And for much of the Swedish electorate, this sanitisation appears to have succeeded: at the September election, the Democrats gained enough support to form part of the government parliamentary coalition.

When I interviewed Karlsson in Stockholm earlier last month, he had no need, as Meloni has found in government, to soften his anti-European views. “We want to deeply reform the EU: we were against the Lisbon Treaty altogether… We want to have a union of sovereign states. We want to remove as much power as possible from the (EU) superstate.” He anticipates an impending fight on European law’s precedence over national law, and draws directly from the many objections to European law adumbrated in Scruton’s essay, “Newspeak and Eurospeak”.

Scruton writes that “the British react far more unfavourably than other Europeans to the great Euro-plan. They sense its encroachment, not merely on their legislative sovereignty, but on the very language with which law and politics are conducted.” And Karlsson says he mourns the loss of this perspective, and the UK itself, from European politics. “We lost our closest ally in my political family, in the shape of the Tory Party, and in general, with the UK leaving the European Union.” He adds, with obvious warmth: “Scruton has been my inspiration! I met him several times. He was a great influence on me when I was writing the party programme. We see very clearly the value of civil society, as he does. This has a very strong existence in my party. You see young people going around in Sir Roger Scruton T-shirts.”

Though his country has long been suffused with a social-democratic culture and morality, Karlsson believes that Swedish “conservatism is coming back. That’s partly what we are seeing with this new government. On cultural issues our approach is very close to what Sir Roger was thinking about.” And he argues that his party’s support is not only founded upon opposition to mass immigration, but a broader turn against the progressive cultural, sexual and anti-nationalist tendency which has permeated all European social democracies. “In the past,” he says “before the Sixties, even the Social Democrats were somewhat conservative. That was one of the keys to their success. They were able to build on a basis of social conservatism while also talking about social reform. They had the idea of the peoples’ home — Folkhem — and that we should be in solidarity with each other because we belong to each other.

“We got the worst of both worlds,” he explains. “We got radical progressive ideas on culture and civilisation and individualism, and on top of that, a big state. Many people didn’t understand why we had a society; we had nothing in common, just individuals. Very radical ideas competing against each other and nothing there to moderate it. If we look at the development of Swedish society it’s clear to me that what has been lacking is conservatism. Someone standing up and saying: ‘Wait! You sure you want to throw this away?’”

Yet for all Karlsson and Meloni’s attraction to the late philosopher, it will be hard to transform enthusiasm into political praxis. Philosophical conservatism has been a thick vein in British (Scruton might have said English) politics since at least Edmund Burke. To transplant Scrutonism to Italy or Sweden and give it political substance would require overcoming cultural as well as political and ideological heritages, including a backdrop of Catholicism. Meloni is winning establishment and popular plaudits for avoiding, so far, any challenge to the EU — a concession from someone who since adolescence had seen the Union as a threat to national independence. But this posture is necessary if Italy is to continue to receive the massive financial support which Brussels provides, terrified that the third-largest European economy may keel over. She can afford to relish Scruton as an iconoclast, not treat him as a model.

Sweden, which is not in the Euro and doesn’t have a long history of Euroscepticism, retains a large liberal leaning, from Left to Right. Mass immigration and violent crime have weakened it, but not enough to dispense with a socio-political hegemony which has given the state much of its global resonance. And Karlsson recognises that the Sweden Democrats’ base is largely working and lower-middle class, with half of their parliamentary representatives also from working-class backgrounds. They cannot afford to propose sudden transformations of Sweden’s civil society, such as a dramatic contraction of its large and generous public sector.

He cites a passage of Scruton’s: “Solon, when asked what is the best kind of government, replied: ‘for whom and at what time?’” (Solon was a pre-Socratic philosopher, who crafted many of Athenian’s democratic laws.) “Conservatism necessarily takes very different forms, depending on country and traditions,” Karlsson says. “I talked to [Scruton] about that as well. As Scandinavians we have a different experience from the Anglo-Saxon states.”

Nevertheless, Meloni is always scrupulous to describe her party, and government, as conservative. Karlsson has created a think tank, founded in 2021, named “Oikos”, in personal homage to Scruton. Both, it seems, need a political anchor beyond historical fascism, in countries where any but the mildest form of the centre-Right has been seen as a vehicle for resurrecting it. Both also believe that a popular wind may now be at their backs, one which bears the anger and frustration of citizens condemned to watch their living standards fall, their communities splinter, and their social values dissolve.

This is the social entropy which Scruton saw as conservatism’s task to defy, and it might — who knows? — make a welcome change, turning the New Right Swedes’ and Italians’ one-time success into a winning formula in the longer term. Achieving it, for raw and sometimes extreme politicians accustomed to protest and scorn, will be the hard part.


John Lloyd is a contributing editor to the Financial Times and is writing a book on the rise of the New Right in Europe.


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

82 Comments
Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Simon Blanchard
Simon Blanchard
1 year ago

Identifying (as I do) as leftish and pro-European, I followed the link in an article here the other day to RS’s “Why I became a conservative”. Rather soberingly, I found myself struggling to disagree with a single word. “Now what?” I thought… If only there was a political party that espoused these views. Because it certainly isn’t the organised crime group currently in office.

David Allison
David Allison
1 year ago

I concur. I’m a former member of Die Grünen who found “Why I became a conservative” fascinating, albeit ultimately unsatisfying.

Josh Allan
Josh Allan
1 year ago

Actual conservatism isn’t unique to either side of the spectrum (look at Paul Kingsnorth or Maurice Glasman, for example), but it’s sadly lacking on both at the moment.

Edward Seymour
Edward Seymour
1 year ago
Reply to  Josh Allan

I would add Mary Harrington and Mathew Crawford, both of this parish, to those two.

Edward Seymour
Edward Seymour
1 year ago
Reply to  Josh Allan

I would add Mary Harrington and Mathew Crawford, both of this parish, to those two.

Selwyn Jones
Selwyn Jones
1 year ago

Scruton hailed Mrs Thatcher because she undid the stranglehold of militant trades unionism and boosted economic performance. She was also a patriot and kept migration low. To this extent she understood the need for a nationalist as well as an economically liberal strand to successful conservative politics. Nationalism and Liberalism are alike in that they are based on an empirically justified vision of human nature, which both needs a home and desires liberty. As Scruton stated many times, these qualities share a root but can grow against each other – in general terms and in individual lives; but because the conflict inheres in nature it can be reconciled or balanced. Nevertheless, the nationalist side of the Thatcher prescription was gradually and relentlessly neutered; nor could it extend towards other elements of Conservative thought – Scruton’s “religious deficit”, for example or the need to guard academe against its current degraded condition of groupthink. Was this her fault? Well, she was only one person and she managed a party in historic intellectual decline, increasingly filled with Europhile placemen and narrow minded moneybags. Second, she frequently warned against the beginnings of these developments – the Single European Act, for example or Baker’s wretched curriculum. Alas, she could not prevail. And yes, where education was concerned she was culpably blind. Thus, in this neutered, meagre, watery condition, official Conservativism found itself confronting the rise of so-called “anti-racism” and all the other tendrils of third or fourth phase Marxism which threaten to asphyxiate our culture. And throughout this confrontation, it has shown itself to be baffled, frightened and exhausted. But this is the party’s fault, not hers.

Ben P
Ben P
1 year ago
Reply to  Selwyn Jones

A very interesting analysis and one with which I mostly agree (the Baker reforms aside).
I think geography plays a very important part in determining political outlook. Opinion formers and policy-makers live and work cheek-by-jowl in London (and in the nations’ capital cities around the world), insulated from wider public opinion, and the small ‘c’ conservative values which are the mainstay of the majority.
The result has been a widening gulf in outlook between those in charge and those they are supposed to serve. Penetrating that wall is challenging at the best of times; the fact that London is tucked away in the south-east corner of the country reinforces that sense of isolation. It couldn’t be further from the rest of the country if it tried.

Jeff Butcher
Jeff Butcher
1 year ago
Reply to  Selwyn Jones

An interesting comment that reminds me why I am a conservative who finds it almost impossible to vote for the Conservative Party. The nearest I can find here in the UK to a properly conservative party is probably the Social Democrats. The last election was a particularly execrable situation – either Corbyn, who seemed like a sort of demented, latter day Citizen Smith,
and Johnson, who you just knew really didn’t give a damn about the country or anybody in it. What an absolute shower!

Charles Stanhope
Charles Stanhope
1 year ago
Reply to  Selwyn Jones

Had she been NOT even the victim of “ regicide “, much of the damage including Baker’s deplorable ‘reforms’
may have been averted.
Thank you Hesseltine & Co.

Vyomesh Thanki
Vyomesh Thanki
1 year ago
Reply to  Selwyn Jones

It’s probably not correct to say Thatcher kept migration low. See quote below in an important article: ‘Why immigration policy since 1962 has such a poor record of achievement’ – https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandpolicy/talking-the-talk-immigration-policy-since-1962/

“It is not surprising, therefore, in view of the expectations that had been held before them in 1971, that the majority of the British public continued to believe the rate of immigration was too high or that there were too many immigrants in the country. Addressing this well of opinion, in 1978 Margaret Thatcher famously remarked that ‘people are rather afraid that this country might be rather swamped by people with a different culture’. According to the future Prime Minister, ‘we must hold out the clear prospect of an end to immigration’. But despite new legislation, Conservative governments during the 1980s and 1990s drifted ever further from realising this goal.”

Last edited 1 year ago by Vyomesh Thanki
Selwyn Jones
Selwyn Jones
1 year ago
Reply to  Vyomesh Thanki

Very true. I suppose we can now regard Thatcherite rates of migration as relatively low, given the self-destructive rates now so common. But, as I think I concede, thanks to the state of her party her patriotic instincts were not translated into action, and social policy followed its own trajectory across the board.
This must surely have something to do with the climate of elite opinion prevailing in the west since the end of the war, and as a result of the war. German camps were set up in the heart of Europe and discovered in all their horror; Soviet, Chinese and Cambodian camps were distant and never so fully exposed. Worse, Soviet butchers and murderers like Stalin and Beria were “on our side” in the war and consequently white-washed by allied propaganda.
There has hence been a massive tilt against nationalism in pubic consciousness with no corresponding tilt against the left. Yes, it was there during the Cold War, but always contested and now occluded.
After the war, there was an unhappy alignment of German with colonial forms of “occupation” and so on.
And finally, there is growing evidence of communist penetration and infiltration of western policy elites from the time of Churchill and Roosevelt, endlessly nudging “liberals” and weak socialists – even Churchill himself – towards the preferred hard left policy objective. One only has to consider the fates of China and Yugoslavia to realise how effective this infiltration was.
Wokery has deep, deep roots.

Michael McElwee
Michael McElwee
1 year ago
Reply to  Selwyn Jones

Outstanding comment. Do you think “woke” equates roughly with “ideology”? Must reality be up for grabs?

Selwyn Jones
Selwyn Jones
1 year ago

Many thanks – yes, woke is “ideology”, or rather the latest iteration of two ideologies moving forward together – western elitist progressivism, what Cowling would have called “public doctrine”, and actual Marxism. All “woke” amounts to is an attempt to combine the two, with the emphasis on the second. And it is both generational and hereditary – all those sons and daughters of the old progressive elite taking things “further”. The symbiosis of these ideologies is vividly on show in a number of salient instances – Lord Clark’s “Civilisation”, for example, which offers a number of genuflections to Marxism throughout the series, for all that he refers to its “moral and intellectual failure” at the end. And one must understand that remark in the context of the last programme, which seems to suggest that Marxism was, for a while at least, the next great stage of “civilisation”, and that we’re all rather lost without it. You can also see it in the silly attempts of characters like Ustinov and Bennett to soften the image of Bolshevism – that infamous whitewash, “An Englishman abroad” springs to mind; and it can also be found in the outpourings of Noel Annan who, in “Our Age”, refers to the four most original and penetrating thinkers of his day – Powell, Thatcher, Leavis and Waugh – as “heretics”. Indeed. “Woke” is advancing not because it is popular but because it is elite; and it is that elite which needs – at last – to be kicked out of power.

Michael McElwee
Michael McElwee
1 year ago
Reply to  Selwyn Jones

You make me think also of Dostoyevsky’s The Demons.

Last edited 1 year ago by Michael McElwee
Selwyn Jones
Selwyn Jones
1 year ago

Quite so – as in Stepan and Peter Verkhovensky – old liberal father and deranged revolutionary son – except that Stepan, when faced with what his son has become and represents, has a revulsion of feeling and restores himself to Orthodoxy. Yes, it is a wonderful novel and gets to the some of the same points Orwell made some eighty to ninety years later.

Last edited 1 year ago by Selwyn Jones
Selwyn Jones
Selwyn Jones
1 year ago

Quite so – as in Stepan and Peter Verkhovensky – old liberal father and deranged revolutionary son – except that Stepan, when faced with what his son has become and represents, has a revulsion of feeling and restores himself to Orthodoxy. Yes, it is a wonderful novel and gets to the some of the same points Orwell made some eighty to ninety years later.

Last edited 1 year ago by Selwyn Jones
Michael McElwee
Michael McElwee
1 year ago
Reply to  Selwyn Jones

You make me think also of Dostoyevsky’s The Demons.

Last edited 1 year ago by Michael McElwee
Selwyn Jones
Selwyn Jones
1 year ago

Many thanks – yes, woke is “ideology”, or rather the latest iteration of two ideologies moving forward together – western elitist progressivism, what Cowling would have called “public doctrine”, and actual Marxism. All “woke” amounts to is an attempt to combine the two, with the emphasis on the second. And it is both generational and hereditary – all those sons and daughters of the old progressive elite taking things “further”. The symbiosis of these ideologies is vividly on show in a number of salient instances – Lord Clark’s “Civilisation”, for example, which offers a number of genuflections to Marxism throughout the series, for all that he refers to its “moral and intellectual failure” at the end. And one must understand that remark in the context of the last programme, which seems to suggest that Marxism was, for a while at least, the next great stage of “civilisation”, and that we’re all rather lost without it. You can also see it in the silly attempts of characters like Ustinov and Bennett to soften the image of Bolshevism – that infamous whitewash, “An Englishman abroad” springs to mind; and it can also be found in the outpourings of Noel Annan who, in “Our Age”, refers to the four most original and penetrating thinkers of his day – Powell, Thatcher, Leavis and Waugh – as “heretics”. Indeed. “Woke” is advancing not because it is popular but because it is elite; and it is that elite which needs – at last – to be kicked out of power.

Michael McElwee
Michael McElwee
1 year ago
Reply to  Selwyn Jones

Outstanding comment. Do you think “woke” equates roughly with “ideology”? Must reality be up for grabs?

Selwyn Jones
Selwyn Jones
1 year ago
Reply to  Vyomesh Thanki

Very true. I suppose we can now regard Thatcherite rates of migration as relatively low, given the self-destructive rates now so common. But, as I think I concede, thanks to the state of her party her patriotic instincts were not translated into action, and social policy followed its own trajectory across the board.
This must surely have something to do with the climate of elite opinion prevailing in the west since the end of the war, and as a result of the war. German camps were set up in the heart of Europe and discovered in all their horror; Soviet, Chinese and Cambodian camps were distant and never so fully exposed. Worse, Soviet butchers and murderers like Stalin and Beria were “on our side” in the war and consequently white-washed by allied propaganda.
There has hence been a massive tilt against nationalism in pubic consciousness with no corresponding tilt against the left. Yes, it was there during the Cold War, but always contested and now occluded.
After the war, there was an unhappy alignment of German with colonial forms of “occupation” and so on.
And finally, there is growing evidence of communist penetration and infiltration of western policy elites from the time of Churchill and Roosevelt, endlessly nudging “liberals” and weak socialists – even Churchill himself – towards the preferred hard left policy objective. One only has to consider the fates of China and Yugoslavia to realise how effective this infiltration was.
Wokery has deep, deep roots.

Michael McElwee
Michael McElwee
1 year ago
Reply to  Selwyn Jones

Help us Americans understand Baker’s curriculum.

Selwyn Jones
Selwyn Jones
1 year ago

Baker, Mrs Thatcher’s Education Secretary, sought to control left slanted and anti-cultural state schools with a national curriculum, which forced them to address established subjects. Of course, as a centralising measure it was meat and drink to the civil service in Whitehall and easy pickings for the infiltrators of the left, who have since twisted it into yet another instrument of dominance and indoctrination. Mrs Thatcher warned at the time that it represented the de facto state takeover of schools and this has turned out to be the case. Together with state backed inspection agencies, this curriculum can now force all educational establishments, whether or not they are private, to “teach” all manner of things from which sensible parents would wish to shield their offspring. And all lessons now are expected to be seasoned with some reference to “equality” dogmas of one sort or another. The tendrils of creeping Marxism are growing bark and hardening into a cage.

Selwyn Jones
Selwyn Jones
1 year ago

Baker, Mrs Thatcher’s Education Secretary, sought to control left slanted and anti-cultural state schools with a national curriculum, which forced them to address established subjects. Of course, as a centralising measure it was meat and drink to the civil service in Whitehall and easy pickings for the infiltrators of the left, who have since twisted it into yet another instrument of dominance and indoctrination. Mrs Thatcher warned at the time that it represented the de facto state takeover of schools and this has turned out to be the case. Together with state backed inspection agencies, this curriculum can now force all educational establishments, whether or not they are private, to “teach” all manner of things from which sensible parents would wish to shield their offspring. And all lessons now are expected to be seasoned with some reference to “equality” dogmas of one sort or another. The tendrils of creeping Marxism are growing bark and hardening into a cage.

Ben P
Ben P
1 year ago
Reply to  Selwyn Jones

A very interesting analysis and one with which I mostly agree (the Baker reforms aside).
I think geography plays a very important part in determining political outlook. Opinion formers and policy-makers live and work cheek-by-jowl in London (and in the nations’ capital cities around the world), insulated from wider public opinion, and the small ‘c’ conservative values which are the mainstay of the majority.
The result has been a widening gulf in outlook between those in charge and those they are supposed to serve. Penetrating that wall is challenging at the best of times; the fact that London is tucked away in the south-east corner of the country reinforces that sense of isolation. It couldn’t be further from the rest of the country if it tried.

Jeff Butcher
Jeff Butcher
1 year ago
Reply to  Selwyn Jones

An interesting comment that reminds me why I am a conservative who finds it almost impossible to vote for the Conservative Party. The nearest I can find here in the UK to a properly conservative party is probably the Social Democrats. The last election was a particularly execrable situation – either Corbyn, who seemed like a sort of demented, latter day Citizen Smith,
and Johnson, who you just knew really didn’t give a damn about the country or anybody in it. What an absolute shower!

Charles Stanhope
Charles Stanhope
1 year ago
Reply to  Selwyn Jones

Had she been NOT even the victim of “ regicide “, much of the damage including Baker’s deplorable ‘reforms’
may have been averted.
Thank you Hesseltine & Co.

Vyomesh Thanki
Vyomesh Thanki
1 year ago
Reply to  Selwyn Jones

It’s probably not correct to say Thatcher kept migration low. See quote below in an important article: ‘Why immigration policy since 1962 has such a poor record of achievement’ – https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandpolicy/talking-the-talk-immigration-policy-since-1962/

“It is not surprising, therefore, in view of the expectations that had been held before them in 1971, that the majority of the British public continued to believe the rate of immigration was too high or that there were too many immigrants in the country. Addressing this well of opinion, in 1978 Margaret Thatcher famously remarked that ‘people are rather afraid that this country might be rather swamped by people with a different culture’. According to the future Prime Minister, ‘we must hold out the clear prospect of an end to immigration’. But despite new legislation, Conservative governments during the 1980s and 1990s drifted ever further from realising this goal.”

Last edited 1 year ago by Vyomesh Thanki
Michael McElwee
Michael McElwee
1 year ago
Reply to  Selwyn Jones

Help us Americans understand Baker’s curriculum.

Cathy Carron
Cathy Carron
1 year ago

Sounds like you need to re-align and re-label yourself?

Simon Blanchard
Simon Blanchard
1 year ago
Reply to  Cathy Carron

It’s a work in progress. Not too sure where it’s leading.

Simon Blanchard
Simon Blanchard
1 year ago
Reply to  Cathy Carron

It’s a work in progress. Not too sure where it’s leading.

Desmond Wolf
Desmond Wolf
1 year ago

Liberalism, conservatism and socialism need not be incompatible. See Polish philosopher Leszek Kolakowski’s short essay How to be a Conservative-Liberal-Socialist:
https://www.unz.com/print/Encounter-1978oct-00046

Anne-Elisabeth Moutet
Anne-Elisabeth Moutet
1 year ago
Reply to  Desmond Wolf

A great essay!

Kathy Bushell
Kathy Bushell
1 year ago
Reply to  Desmond Wolf

Thanks for the link

Anne-Elisabeth Moutet
Anne-Elisabeth Moutet
1 year ago
Reply to  Desmond Wolf

A great essay!

Kathy Bushell
Kathy Bushell
1 year ago
Reply to  Desmond Wolf

Thanks for the link

Steve Jolly
Steve Jolly
1 year ago

The problem is that to a significant extent, neoliberalism infiltrated all major political parties in the 90’s and 00’s, leaving little differentiation other than on a few hot button issues. It takes time for a backlash against the status quo to crystallize into coherent policies and either infiltrate old political parties and/or form new ones. In America, the Republican party is evolving towards being a true opposition but we still have a long way to go. From my reading, the UK seems far behind in that regard, though in other respects the UK is a forerunner as usual, having already took the first necessary, difficult, and painful steps by voting for Brexit and then finally getting it done.

Simon Blanchard
Simon Blanchard
1 year ago
Reply to  Steve Jolly

Hard to disagree with any of that except on Brexit. I personally and in business, benefited enormously from EU membership, so feel very robbed.

Steve Jolly
Steve Jolly
1 year ago

With all due respect, you and others were profiting off the loss of sovereignty shared by all of your countrymen whether they profited or not. Even if it could be proven that every UK citizen enjoyed tangible economic benefits from membership, there are other concerns that people might weight as just as important as economic benefit. You may disagree, but you were not robbed. If you were, then consider that those who voted for Brexit might also have felt just as robbed in ways other than economics before the vote. I personally think trading sovereignty and national autonomy for raw profit is short-sighted and reflective of the decadence and greed that infects so many of our world’s present civilizations. I don’t blame you personally of course. We have to live in the world as it is, not as we wish it were, so there’s nothing wrong with taking advantage of whatever conditions are present. Still, it seems petty to hold a personal grudge against your countrymen for doing the same thing you were doing, that is acting (in this case voting) based on what they felt was in their best interest and/or the country’s. I have to admit I like referendums. They are not practical for most things, but where they can be practically applied, they represent the purest expression of the popular will that any process can produce.

Steve Jolly
Steve Jolly
1 year ago

With all due respect, you and others were profiting off the loss of sovereignty shared by all of your countrymen whether they profited or not. Even if it could be proven that every UK citizen enjoyed tangible economic benefits from membership, there are other concerns that people might weight as just as important as economic benefit. You may disagree, but you were not robbed. If you were, then consider that those who voted for Brexit might also have felt just as robbed in ways other than economics before the vote. I personally think trading sovereignty and national autonomy for raw profit is short-sighted and reflective of the decadence and greed that infects so many of our world’s present civilizations. I don’t blame you personally of course. We have to live in the world as it is, not as we wish it were, so there’s nothing wrong with taking advantage of whatever conditions are present. Still, it seems petty to hold a personal grudge against your countrymen for doing the same thing you were doing, that is acting (in this case voting) based on what they felt was in their best interest and/or the country’s. I have to admit I like referendums. They are not practical for most things, but where they can be practically applied, they represent the purest expression of the popular will that any process can produce.

Simon Blanchard
Simon Blanchard
1 year ago
Reply to  Steve Jolly

Hard to disagree with any of that except on Brexit. I personally and in business, benefited enormously from EU membership, so feel very robbed.

Kathy Bushell
Kathy Bushell
1 year ago

S.D.P.

Simon Blanchard
Simon Blanchard
1 year ago
Reply to  Kathy Bushell

This is why we need PR.

Simon Blanchard
Simon Blanchard
1 year ago
Reply to  Kathy Bushell

This is why we need PR.

David Allison
David Allison
1 year ago

I concur. I’m a former member of Die Grünen who found “Why I became a conservative” fascinating, albeit ultimately unsatisfying.

Josh Allan
Josh Allan
1 year ago

Actual conservatism isn’t unique to either side of the spectrum (look at Paul Kingsnorth or Maurice Glasman, for example), but it’s sadly lacking on both at the moment.

Selwyn Jones
Selwyn Jones
1 year ago

Scruton hailed Mrs Thatcher because she undid the stranglehold of militant trades unionism and boosted economic performance. She was also a patriot and kept migration low. To this extent she understood the need for a nationalist as well as an economically liberal strand to successful conservative politics. Nationalism and Liberalism are alike in that they are based on an empirically justified vision of human nature, which both needs a home and desires liberty. As Scruton stated many times, these qualities share a root but can grow against each other – in general terms and in individual lives; but because the conflict inheres in nature it can be reconciled or balanced. Nevertheless, the nationalist side of the Thatcher prescription was gradually and relentlessly neutered; nor could it extend towards other elements of Conservative thought – Scruton’s “religious deficit”, for example or the need to guard academe against its current degraded condition of groupthink. Was this her fault? Well, she was only one person and she managed a party in historic intellectual decline, increasingly filled with Europhile placemen and narrow minded moneybags. Second, she frequently warned against the beginnings of these developments – the Single European Act, for example or Baker’s wretched curriculum. Alas, she could not prevail. And yes, where education was concerned she was culpably blind. Thus, in this neutered, meagre, watery condition, official Conservativism found itself confronting the rise of so-called “anti-racism” and all the other tendrils of third or fourth phase Marxism which threaten to asphyxiate our culture. And throughout this confrontation, it has shown itself to be baffled, frightened and exhausted. But this is the party’s fault, not hers.

Cathy Carron
Cathy Carron
1 year ago

Sounds like you need to re-align and re-label yourself?

Desmond Wolf
Desmond Wolf
1 year ago

Liberalism, conservatism and socialism need not be incompatible. See Polish philosopher Leszek Kolakowski’s short essay How to be a Conservative-Liberal-Socialist:
https://www.unz.com/print/Encounter-1978oct-00046

Steve Jolly
Steve Jolly
1 year ago

The problem is that to a significant extent, neoliberalism infiltrated all major political parties in the 90’s and 00’s, leaving little differentiation other than on a few hot button issues. It takes time for a backlash against the status quo to crystallize into coherent policies and either infiltrate old political parties and/or form new ones. In America, the Republican party is evolving towards being a true opposition but we still have a long way to go. From my reading, the UK seems far behind in that regard, though in other respects the UK is a forerunner as usual, having already took the first necessary, difficult, and painful steps by voting for Brexit and then finally getting it done.

Kathy Bushell
Kathy Bushell
1 year ago

S.D.P.

Simon Blanchard
Simon Blanchard
1 year ago

Identifying (as I do) as leftish and pro-European, I followed the link in an article here the other day to RS’s “Why I became a conservative”. Rather soberingly, I found myself struggling to disagree with a single word. “Now what?” I thought… If only there was a political party that espoused these views. Because it certainly isn’t the organised crime group currently in office.

AC Harper
AC Harper
1 year ago

I am reminded of Jordan Peterson’s advice to first sort yourself out, then sort out the rest of the world.
Apply that philosophy at a national level and the world of politics would be very different. Chasing all the fashionable distractions elsewhere means that you end up achieving nothing abroad and hate your unaddressed problems at home.
Although some will disagree, leaving the EU was very much a step towards sorting ourselves out first and rejecting bureaucratic involvement in the rest of the EU. It’s a shame that we have not yet made more of it, but changing the basis of government (with the current MPs mostly resisting change) is always going to take time. And that is the worked example for the Swedes and Italians… ‘conservative’ change must take time, otherwise it is merely another distraction.

Cathy Carron
Cathy Carron
1 year ago
Reply to  AC Harper

BRAVO! The same could be said of the USA. Our politicians have our citizens (and our taxpayer money) running around the world ‘saving democracy’ and ‘nation building’ whilst national cohesiveness is in tatters. Shame on them.

Jeff Butcher
Jeff Butcher
1 year ago
Reply to  Cathy Carron

But why is national cohesiveness in tatters? I can’t help feeling it’s an organic process that resists attempts to ‘fix’ it because it can’t be fixed.
As a person from Kent, I am struck by how culturally different Northern England for instance is whenever I visit it; much more ‘Norse’, with a different kind of people and language and demeanour and culture.
There was a time I think when the Protestant faith and the myth of Empire was enough to hold these various parts of Britain together. Now no equivalent myths remain to bind the body politic, except the primacy of Parliament in England as a guarantor of the people’s liberty, which I think goes some way to explaining Brexit – people could never imagine a replacement for the Commons and the almost spiritual place it has in the national imagination.
The same I think goes for the United States – the declaration and constitution have the same mythical power, but the sense the US had of divine providence, that Mayflower Protestantism that gave the nation its identity, is I think in decline and there remains nought to replace it.

Charles Stanhope
Charles Stanhope
1 year ago
Reply to  Jeff Butcher

What about the Monarchy?

Jeff Butcher
Jeff Butcher
1 year ago

Good point – but for how long?

Charles Stanhope
Charles Stanhope
1 year ago
Reply to  Jeff Butcher

Not possible to say until after the Coronation.

Charles Stanhope
Charles Stanhope
1 year ago
Reply to  Jeff Butcher

Not possible to say until after the Coronation.

Jeff Butcher
Jeff Butcher
1 year ago

Good point – but for how long?

Cathy Carron
Cathy Carron
1 year ago
Reply to  Jeff Butcher

Our politicians (USA) missed or better yet, neglected the ‘nationalism’ boat when they jumped onto the ‘globalism’ vote without really considering nor preparing for deindustrialization and the deleterious it wrought. Moreover, they continue to ignore the ‘rusty’ Midwest. Add that, to open borders (more workers putting downward pressure on wages), the opioid epidemic, etc. etc. It has resulted in an ugly mix of benign neglect. This past week, Bill Clinton was apologizing for urging the Ukraine to give back their nuclear weapons to Russia – YET he’s never apologized for HIS trade deals that cut the knees off of Middle Class America. For sure, he and Hillary scooped up their ‘fair share’ of lucre and largesse. Folks got it – hence Trump.

Last edited 1 year ago by Cathy Carron
Alan Osband
Alan Osband
1 year ago
Reply to  Jeff Butcher

Really ? So the influence of Vikings ,1100 years ago, is what makes the North of England appear so alien to a visitor from Kent ?
So more recent migrants are doing a better job of integrating , or did you just not notice them because you expected them to seem ‘alien’ .

Charles Stanhope
Charles Stanhope
1 year ago
Reply to  Jeff Butcher

What about the Monarchy?

Cathy Carron
Cathy Carron
1 year ago
Reply to  Jeff Butcher

Our politicians (USA) missed or better yet, neglected the ‘nationalism’ boat when they jumped onto the ‘globalism’ vote without really considering nor preparing for deindustrialization and the deleterious it wrought. Moreover, they continue to ignore the ‘rusty’ Midwest. Add that, to open borders (more workers putting downward pressure on wages), the opioid epidemic, etc. etc. It has resulted in an ugly mix of benign neglect. This past week, Bill Clinton was apologizing for urging the Ukraine to give back their nuclear weapons to Russia – YET he’s never apologized for HIS trade deals that cut the knees off of Middle Class America. For sure, he and Hillary scooped up their ‘fair share’ of lucre and largesse. Folks got it – hence Trump.

Last edited 1 year ago by Cathy Carron
Alan Osband
Alan Osband
1 year ago
Reply to  Jeff Butcher

Really ? So the influence of Vikings ,1100 years ago, is what makes the North of England appear so alien to a visitor from Kent ?
So more recent migrants are doing a better job of integrating , or did you just not notice them because you expected them to seem ‘alien’ .

Jeff Butcher
Jeff Butcher
1 year ago
Reply to  Cathy Carron

But why is national cohesiveness in tatters? I can’t help feeling it’s an organic process that resists attempts to ‘fix’ it because it can’t be fixed.
As a person from Kent, I am struck by how culturally different Northern England for instance is whenever I visit it; much more ‘Norse’, with a different kind of people and language and demeanour and culture.
There was a time I think when the Protestant faith and the myth of Empire was enough to hold these various parts of Britain together. Now no equivalent myths remain to bind the body politic, except the primacy of Parliament in England as a guarantor of the people’s liberty, which I think goes some way to explaining Brexit – people could never imagine a replacement for the Commons and the almost spiritual place it has in the national imagination.
The same I think goes for the United States – the declaration and constitution have the same mythical power, but the sense the US had of divine providence, that Mayflower Protestantism that gave the nation its identity, is I think in decline and there remains nought to replace it.

Milton Gibbon
Milton Gibbon
1 year ago
Reply to  AC Harper

While I agree with Peterson theoretically in practice the specialisation of a political “class”, straight out of the university conveyer belt and into politics, means that by the time they have “got themselves together” at, say, 30+ years these well adjusted sorts are already low down on the rungs of political life. Witness the recent article asking for people to take up a political foundation scholarship. While not overtly youth focussed it required high interest in political theory – not something that people who haven’t been university educated or have spent their careers working a real job can normally manage. We need more people who have established themselves to come forward for political office.

Cathy Carron
Cathy Carron
1 year ago
Reply to  AC Harper

BRAVO! The same could be said of the USA. Our politicians have our citizens (and our taxpayer money) running around the world ‘saving democracy’ and ‘nation building’ whilst national cohesiveness is in tatters. Shame on them.

Milton Gibbon
Milton Gibbon
1 year ago
Reply to  AC Harper

While I agree with Peterson theoretically in practice the specialisation of a political “class”, straight out of the university conveyer belt and into politics, means that by the time they have “got themselves together” at, say, 30+ years these well adjusted sorts are already low down on the rungs of political life. Witness the recent article asking for people to take up a political foundation scholarship. While not overtly youth focussed it required high interest in political theory – not something that people who haven’t been university educated or have spent their careers working a real job can normally manage. We need more people who have established themselves to come forward for political office.

AC Harper
AC Harper
1 year ago

I am reminded of Jordan Peterson’s advice to first sort yourself out, then sort out the rest of the world.
Apply that philosophy at a national level and the world of politics would be very different. Chasing all the fashionable distractions elsewhere means that you end up achieving nothing abroad and hate your unaddressed problems at home.
Although some will disagree, leaving the EU was very much a step towards sorting ourselves out first and rejecting bureaucratic involvement in the rest of the EU. It’s a shame that we have not yet made more of it, but changing the basis of government (with the current MPs mostly resisting change) is always going to take time. And that is the worked example for the Swedes and Italians… ‘conservative’ change must take time, otherwise it is merely another distraction.

Josh Allan
Josh Allan
1 year ago

The only real criticism I have of Scruton is that there was only one of him. In a culture saturated by social media sophists with the intellectual breadth of a teaspoon, Scruton seemed to belong to another age, and was more or less alone in articulating the feelings and values of ordinary human beings, even if it necessitated coining new terms (e.g. oikophilia). For all the richness of the English language, we seem to lack the argot for political nuances. In the article Karlsson mentions Folkhem, which puts me in mind of the German Heimat, another of Scruton’s favourites. And in a recent Marshall Matters episode Eva Vlaardingerbroek discusses ‘—cultuur’ (I forget exactly what it’s called, but it’s the the Dutch tradition of political compromising.) If only such an idea existed in the Anglophone world.
‘You see young people going around in Sir Roger Scruton T-shirts.’ If only the young in this country understood the value of conservatism (and I say that as a Gen-Zer). I despair for the future – a despair which truly set in on the day Scruton passed away.

Julian Farrows
Julian Farrows
1 year ago
Reply to  Josh Allan

I think it’s the Dutch ‘polder model’ you’re referring to.

Josh Allan
Josh Allan
1 year ago
Reply to  Julian Farrows

That’s the one, thanks

Josh Allan
Josh Allan
1 year ago
Reply to  Julian Farrows

That’s the one, thanks

Julian Farrows
Julian Farrows
1 year ago
Reply to  Josh Allan

I think it’s the Dutch ‘polder model’ you’re referring to.

Josh Allan
Josh Allan
1 year ago

The only real criticism I have of Scruton is that there was only one of him. In a culture saturated by social media sophists with the intellectual breadth of a teaspoon, Scruton seemed to belong to another age, and was more or less alone in articulating the feelings and values of ordinary human beings, even if it necessitated coining new terms (e.g. oikophilia). For all the richness of the English language, we seem to lack the argot for political nuances. In the article Karlsson mentions Folkhem, which puts me in mind of the German Heimat, another of Scruton’s favourites. And in a recent Marshall Matters episode Eva Vlaardingerbroek discusses ‘—cultuur’ (I forget exactly what it’s called, but it’s the the Dutch tradition of political compromising.) If only such an idea existed in the Anglophone world.
‘You see young people going around in Sir Roger Scruton T-shirts.’ If only the young in this country understood the value of conservatism (and I say that as a Gen-Zer). I despair for the future – a despair which truly set in on the day Scruton passed away.

Jeremy Bray
Jeremy Bray
1 year ago

If Meloni is such a fan of Scruton then I am a fan of Meloni. We need a Conservative Party that is indeed conservative and not afraid to be misrepresented as heir to that ex-Labour minister Sir Oswald Mosley and his National Socialist movement. Conservatives are in no way allied with such perverted leftist parties however much they may be mischaracterised for malevolent rhetorical purposes.

Jeremy Bray
Jeremy Bray
1 year ago

If Meloni is such a fan of Scruton then I am a fan of Meloni. We need a Conservative Party that is indeed conservative and not afraid to be misrepresented as heir to that ex-Labour minister Sir Oswald Mosley and his National Socialist movement. Conservatives are in no way allied with such perverted leftist parties however much they may be mischaracterised for malevolent rhetorical purposes.

Stephen Quilley
Stephen Quilley
1 year ago

Great essay. However I didn’t understand this:’ To transplant Scrutonism to Italy or Sweden and give it political substance would require overcoming cultural as well as political and ideological heritages, including a backdrop of Catholicism’. The most practical elaboration of Scruton s ideas would surely amount to a form of distributism – subsidiarity, as described by Chesterton and Belloc. The only reason Scruton wasn’t catholic was his Englishness. As well as chesterbelloc the other Englishmen who articulated more or less the same skepticism of modernity and oikophilia and love if the vernacular were cs Lewis, Tolkien …and also Christopher Alexander . They provide together a pattern language for the shire. Tolkien and Alexander were were catholic , and Lewis as good as. And then there is Paul Kingsnorth – now Romanian orthodox in Ireland. I was lucky enough to participate in a symposium ‘how should we build’ with Scruton and Alexander – just the three of us in St. Paul’s cathedral. I knew nothing. Meeting a man I had been trained to hate changed my life. 10 years later I’m a catholic, homeschooler and have found expression for my oikophilia

Last edited 1 year ago by Stephen Quilley
Richard Pearse
Richard Pearse
1 year ago

I think the article’s (and Scruton’s) idea about transplanting English conservatism to Sweden, is that England has a long history (extending to before the Norman invasion to some extent ) of self-Government.

Scruton made a similar comment during his final lectures (here in Brasil – I had the privilege of seeing him talk in Porto Alegre, six months before he passed away). The major news magazine “Veja” (“Look”) interviewed him and asked about Bolsonaro and politics brasileiro, to which he responded – England has a history (and emergent culture) of self-government, unlike Brazil that had an King, then Emperor until 1888, and suffered a military takeover (to quash communism) from 1962 to 1988).

While there is a budding conservative movement including among public intellectuals (Luis Felipe Pondé and Eduardo Wolf) the average Brazilian’s desire is to work for the government So that they can’t get fired (alas). There’s a good example of Catholicism and former slave-owning Português plantations from which a culture emerged different from England’s!

Stephen Quilley
Stephen Quilley
1 year ago
Reply to  Richard Pearse

Yes I think that’s right and fair comment. But all of Europe has a history of peasant small holding – and in many ways greater continuity in that respect than England where enclosure destroyed the medieval peasantry…. So they context is different, but there are possible foundations there also. On either side of the channel (or indeed the Atlantic), I can’t see any successful conservative movement without a revival of covenantal family-based Christianity. England and the rest of the UK is seriously screwed unless people go back to Church. The future without Christianity is transhumanism – and we haven’t seen anything yet.

Richard Pearse
Richard Pearse
1 year ago

Stephen: you might be interested in Alan Macfarlane’s book “The Origins of English Individualism” in which he takes great pains to explain that ONLY England never had a so-called “peasant culture” (a technical anthropology term) where the Patrone who was chief of the farm establishment could be deposed and replaced by other family member’s – there was no individual right to the property.

However, in England (who knows why) – as far back as records go (11th Century in some cases) individuals had the right to leave property to whomever they liked.

FYI – in Brazil, my (brasileira) wife can’t believe that Americans can leave fortunes to their cat. Here, if you own real property, your children and a few others each gets an equal share, no matter what your will says (wills are much different in Brazil as a consequence).

Charles Hedges
Charles Hedges
1 year ago
Reply to  Richard Pearse

If one listens to Starkeys Monarchy Episode 1 he explains much. Basically the Anglo Saxons do not have divine Rigth of Kings, compose laws based upon The Bible and tradition plus have an egalitarian socity with far less serfdom and slavery . William bans the sale of people basically stopping slavery. Apart from 1066 to 1100 , the Normans adopt many of the AS laws which are incorpoarted in the Charter of Liberties of 1100 and Magna Carta of 1215 which results in the model Parliament of 1295. From 1182, each household has to posses spear which basically recreates the AS Fyrd and from 1272 every man has to practice the longbow.
Te creation of a reliable currency by AS and the sale of wool means even serfs can aquire money. The middle class comprising those who own a few acres and the merchants provides a means whereby even serfs can over generations rise into a property owning class. There is an upward social mobility and hence sense of responsibility for running affiars which exists In England which is largely absent in Continental Europe except for Northern Italian cities and perhaps Bruges, in The Middle Ages.

Richard Pearse
Richard Pearse
1 year ago
Reply to  Charles Hedges

Excellent comment! I’ll look for the episode

Richard Pearse
Richard Pearse
1 year ago
Reply to  Charles Hedges

Excellent comment! I’ll look for the episode

Charles Hedges
Charles Hedges
1 year ago
Reply to  Richard Pearse

If one listens to Starkeys Monarchy Episode 1 he explains much. Basically the Anglo Saxons do not have divine Rigth of Kings, compose laws based upon The Bible and tradition plus have an egalitarian socity with far less serfdom and slavery . William bans the sale of people basically stopping slavery. Apart from 1066 to 1100 , the Normans adopt many of the AS laws which are incorpoarted in the Charter of Liberties of 1100 and Magna Carta of 1215 which results in the model Parliament of 1295. From 1182, each household has to posses spear which basically recreates the AS Fyrd and from 1272 every man has to practice the longbow.
Te creation of a reliable currency by AS and the sale of wool means even serfs can aquire money. The middle class comprising those who own a few acres and the merchants provides a means whereby even serfs can over generations rise into a property owning class. There is an upward social mobility and hence sense of responsibility for running affiars which exists In England which is largely absent in Continental Europe except for Northern Italian cities and perhaps Bruges, in The Middle Ages.

Richard Pearse
Richard Pearse
1 year ago

Stephen: you might be interested in Alan Macfarlane’s book “The Origins of English Individualism” in which he takes great pains to explain that ONLY England never had a so-called “peasant culture” (a technical anthropology term) where the Patrone who was chief of the farm establishment could be deposed and replaced by other family member’s – there was no individual right to the property.

However, in England (who knows why) – as far back as records go (11th Century in some cases) individuals had the right to leave property to whomever they liked.

FYI – in Brazil, my (brasileira) wife can’t believe that Americans can leave fortunes to their cat. Here, if you own real property, your children and a few others each gets an equal share, no matter what your will says (wills are much different in Brazil as a consequence).

Stephen Quilley
Stephen Quilley
1 year ago
Reply to  Richard Pearse

Yes I think that’s right and fair comment. But all of Europe has a history of peasant small holding – and in many ways greater continuity in that respect than England where enclosure destroyed the medieval peasantry…. So they context is different, but there are possible foundations there also. On either side of the channel (or indeed the Atlantic), I can’t see any successful conservative movement without a revival of covenantal family-based Christianity. England and the rest of the UK is seriously screwed unless people go back to Church. The future without Christianity is transhumanism – and we haven’t seen anything yet.

Richard Pearse
Richard Pearse
1 year ago

I think the article’s (and Scruton’s) idea about transplanting English conservatism to Sweden, is that England has a long history (extending to before the Norman invasion to some extent ) of self-Government.

Scruton made a similar comment during his final lectures (here in Brasil – I had the privilege of seeing him talk in Porto Alegre, six months before he passed away). The major news magazine “Veja” (“Look”) interviewed him and asked about Bolsonaro and politics brasileiro, to which he responded – England has a history (and emergent culture) of self-government, unlike Brazil that had an King, then Emperor until 1888, and suffered a military takeover (to quash communism) from 1962 to 1988).

While there is a budding conservative movement including among public intellectuals (Luis Felipe Pondé and Eduardo Wolf) the average Brazilian’s desire is to work for the government So that they can’t get fired (alas). There’s a good example of Catholicism and former slave-owning Português plantations from which a culture emerged different from England’s!

Stephen Quilley
Stephen Quilley
1 year ago

Great essay. However I didn’t understand this:’ To transplant Scrutonism to Italy or Sweden and give it political substance would require overcoming cultural as well as political and ideological heritages, including a backdrop of Catholicism’. The most practical elaboration of Scruton s ideas would surely amount to a form of distributism – subsidiarity, as described by Chesterton and Belloc. The only reason Scruton wasn’t catholic was his Englishness. As well as chesterbelloc the other Englishmen who articulated more or less the same skepticism of modernity and oikophilia and love if the vernacular were cs Lewis, Tolkien …and also Christopher Alexander . They provide together a pattern language for the shire. Tolkien and Alexander were were catholic , and Lewis as good as. And then there is Paul Kingsnorth – now Romanian orthodox in Ireland. I was lucky enough to participate in a symposium ‘how should we build’ with Scruton and Alexander – just the three of us in St. Paul’s cathedral. I knew nothing. Meeting a man I had been trained to hate changed my life. 10 years later I’m a catholic, homeschooler and have found expression for my oikophilia

Last edited 1 year ago by Stephen Quilley
Nicky Samengo-Turner
Nicky Samengo-Turner
1 year ago

The landslide majority is there for the taking… for a Party that will stand up and have the courage to reject the Islamo/ LGBT/Global warming agenda , and its media support.

Linda Hutchinson
Linda Hutchinson
1 year ago

But wasn’t there an opinion poll recently that indicated that the majority in the UK are in favour of tackling climate change and many even thinking that the plans don’t go far enough? If this is the case then perhaps your party which rejects the “Islamo/ LGBT/Global warming agenda” wouldn’t be as successful as you think it would be.

Desmond Wolf
Desmond Wolf
1 year ago

And what would the policies of that party be? Aren’t you happy with a ruling party that thinks the country is run by the wokerati, blames our economic problems on refugees and child sex abuse on Pakistanis?

Josh Allan
Josh Allan
1 year ago
Reply to  Desmond Wolf

Do you genuinely think those things aren’t true?

Desmond Wolf
Desmond Wolf
1 year ago
Reply to  Josh Allan

Do you genuinely think that they are? The Tories run the country, poverty is primarily driven by the housing crisis (and the failure of our government to stand up to landed interests) and most child sex abuse is done by white men, as the ministry of justice’s own report has shown. Interested to hear your alternative explanations of these problems..

Charles Hedges
Charles Hedges
1 year ago
Reply to  Desmond Wolf

What is your opinion of the lady’s comments?
Why did the Labour Party ignore the labour MP Anne Cryer?
I Am a Grooming Gang Survivor: My Story – YouTube

Desmond Wolf
Desmond Wolf
1 year ago
Reply to  Charles Hedges

A terrible story. See all my comments below for why it still wouldn’t have me voting Tory any time soon. Triggernometry is also a right-wing ecochamber which though sometimes offering thoughtful conversations, seems totally blind to the economic dimension of our decline. All anger is on the ‘liberal’ elite and none on the ‘wealthy’ elite, who also have much to answer for.

Charles Hedges
Charles Hedges
1 year ago
Reply to  Desmond Wolf

If you want to assess our economic decline I suggest yoiu look at all the talented people who moved or worked overseas post 1945; an education run by left wing middle class arts graduates which is incapable or producing the craftsmen, technicians, applied scientists and engineers in the numbers needed to move the whole of British manufacturing from low and medium technology into advanced high value manufacturing. In addition up to the late 1970s 70% of trade union members were un and semi skilled and resisted the upgrading in skills and education required to enter advanced manufacturing. As well there was massive over manning of un and semi skilled labour. Many of out top Mining Engineers saw there was no future in British Coal Mining and moved overseas.
Polytechnics stopped evening school where craftsmen could study for Chartership of the Engineering Institutions and U of London External Degrees yet developed arts degrees but only for day time study. R J Mitchell, Camm, Chadwick, B Wallis and de Havilland, probably the greatest aeronautical engineers of 20th century went to night school . The cessation of night school was also the cessation of upward social mobility, as craftsmen could not afford to take three years off work to obtain a degree.
The development of transistors, integrated circuits, silicon chips and desk top computers greatly reduced employment. A technician/ draftsmen who learnt to use a computer for CAD in the early 1980s was called a scab. By the end of the decade he was an architect.
A simple question what was the impact of the 6 Day War and the various strikes on industry?

Desmond Wolf
Desmond Wolf
1 year ago
Reply to  Charles Hedges

Interesting you think that the expansion of university education was a cause and not a consequence of deindustrialisation. I’m all in favour of expanding technical education and have argued the same elsewhere on here for adult education. But this would need to be accompanied by a development of our industrial base (so these graduates actually have well-paid jobs to go into afterwards), which, as far as I can tell, the Tories have done more to erode than Labour (thinking of Thatcher and this current lot). Labour (under Corbyn at least) had plans for reindustrialisation (Green New Deal etc) whereas the Tories have shown that any interest they have in relation to this is merely rhetorical.
It also doesn’t seem intuitive that strong unions stifle industrial development. We have the strictest trade union laws in Europe (after Russia) and it doesn’t seem to have done us much good, especially compared to Germany (where as you probably know, company boards are required to include trade union representatives).
Wasn’t aware of any link between the 6 Day War and industrial strikes – maybe you can explain?

Charles Hedges
Charles Hedges
1 year ago
Reply to  Desmond Wolf

The 6 Day War closed the Suez canal which had limited ship size to about 50K T. Ships had to go around The Cape and so size increased to up to 500K T in about 10 years. The Coal Mines were worked out in most cases by mid 1960s as far as economic production went. Japan had devloped transistor radios by lare 1960s. Japan learnt how to build 500K T ships quickly and without snags. When one buys a ship what is crucial is pay back time on money borrowed. Large oil tankers helped to develop bulk cargo ships carrying coal, grain and metals ores. Containers were developed in mid 1960s which could filled in factory and loaded on dockside then ship. The increase in size of ships reduced numbers of crews and as merchany ships do not need such skilled sailors as the RN , British officers were kept and many of British sailors were replaced by foreigners. The strikes by miners, dockers, shipyard workers, steel workers increased costs and production time so production went to Japanese shipyards and steel works. An object such as tractor kept be left on the dockside during a strike, even a car ; electric goods cannot. By early 1980s cost of British coal £42/T while World price was £32/T and 75 % of underground ( not open cast ) coal mines were uneconomic.
What developed the Industrial Revolution was reducing cost of carriage , first canals; reduced cost of coal by up to 75%, pottery and then railways.
Low value products such as primary minerals and agriculture need to be moved by railway to port and then into 100K T plus ships if they are to be moved economically. The container ships bring Chinese goods to the UK are now up to 250KT. The maximum dredge depth is about 25m so this limits max draught of ships to about 23.5m or about 500K T .
The devlopment of the transistor, integrated circuit, silicon chip , computers from the mid 1960s removed the need for much un and semi skilled workers. The need for dockers, miners, steel workers, factory workers, ship builders who were un and semi skilled were greatly reduced. The massive open cast mines overseas producing coal, iron ore, copper ore, bauxite, limestone for cement can all be operated by a few men controlling massive excavators, trains and ships.
A Swiss watch of value £5K weighs 0.1kg. So 1Kg is worth £500,000 and people will wait to buy top watches. This means cost of land, energy, materials even labour are not that important. As value of goods per kilo decrease, cost of land, labour, energy, materials , cost and time to produce and transport to the customer become more important.
Switzerland Germany has moved into advanced high high value manufacturing because it has sufficiently large highly skilled workforce ; not one dominated by un and semi skilled people.

Charles Hedges
Charles Hedges
1 year ago
Reply to  Desmond Wolf

The 6 Day War closed the Suez canal which had limited ship size to about 50K T. Ships had to go around The Cape and so size increased to up to 500K T in about 10 years. The Coal Mines were worked out in most cases by mid 1960s as far as economic production went. Japan had devloped transistor radios by lare 1960s. Japan learnt how to build 500K T ships quickly and without snags. When one buys a ship what is crucial is pay back time on money borrowed. Large oil tankers helped to develop bulk cargo ships carrying coal, grain and metals ores. Containers were developed in mid 1960s which could filled in factory and loaded on dockside then ship. The increase in size of ships reduced numbers of crews and as merchany ships do not need such skilled sailors as the RN , British officers were kept and many of British sailors were replaced by foreigners. The strikes by miners, dockers, shipyard workers, steel workers increased costs and production time so production went to Japanese shipyards and steel works. An object such as tractor kept be left on the dockside during a strike, even a car ; electric goods cannot. By early 1980s cost of British coal £42/T while World price was £32/T and 75 % of underground ( not open cast ) coal mines were uneconomic.
What developed the Industrial Revolution was reducing cost of carriage , first canals; reduced cost of coal by up to 75%, pottery and then railways.
Low value products such as primary minerals and agriculture need to be moved by railway to port and then into 100K T plus ships if they are to be moved economically. The container ships bring Chinese goods to the UK are now up to 250KT. The maximum dredge depth is about 25m so this limits max draught of ships to about 23.5m or about 500K T .
The devlopment of the transistor, integrated circuit, silicon chip , computers from the mid 1960s removed the need for much un and semi skilled workers. The need for dockers, miners, steel workers, factory workers, ship builders who were un and semi skilled were greatly reduced. The massive open cast mines overseas producing coal, iron ore, copper ore, bauxite, limestone for cement can all be operated by a few men controlling massive excavators, trains and ships.
A Swiss watch of value £5K weighs 0.1kg. So 1Kg is worth £500,000 and people will wait to buy top watches. This means cost of land, energy, materials even labour are not that important. As value of goods per kilo decrease, cost of land, labour, energy, materials , cost and time to produce and transport to the customer become more important.
Switzerland Germany has moved into advanced high high value manufacturing because it has sufficiently large highly skilled workforce ; not one dominated by un and semi skilled people.

Desmond Wolf
Desmond Wolf
1 year ago
Reply to  Charles Hedges

Interesting you think that the expansion of university education was a cause and not a consequence of deindustrialisation. I’m all in favour of expanding technical education and have argued the same elsewhere on here for adult education. But this would need to be accompanied by a development of our industrial base (so these graduates actually have well-paid jobs to go into afterwards), which, as far as I can tell, the Tories have done more to erode than Labour (thinking of Thatcher and this current lot). Labour (under Corbyn at least) had plans for reindustrialisation (Green New Deal etc) whereas the Tories have shown that any interest they have in relation to this is merely rhetorical.
It also doesn’t seem intuitive that strong unions stifle industrial development. We have the strictest trade union laws in Europe (after Russia) and it doesn’t seem to have done us much good, especially compared to Germany (where as you probably know, company boards are required to include trade union representatives).
Wasn’t aware of any link between the 6 Day War and industrial strikes – maybe you can explain?

Charles Hedges
Charles Hedges
1 year ago
Reply to  Desmond Wolf

If you want to assess our economic decline I suggest yoiu look at all the talented people who moved or worked overseas post 1945; an education run by left wing middle class arts graduates which is incapable or producing the craftsmen, technicians, applied scientists and engineers in the numbers needed to move the whole of British manufacturing from low and medium technology into advanced high value manufacturing. In addition up to the late 1970s 70% of trade union members were un and semi skilled and resisted the upgrading in skills and education required to enter advanced manufacturing. As well there was massive over manning of un and semi skilled labour. Many of out top Mining Engineers saw there was no future in British Coal Mining and moved overseas.
Polytechnics stopped evening school where craftsmen could study for Chartership of the Engineering Institutions and U of London External Degrees yet developed arts degrees but only for day time study. R J Mitchell, Camm, Chadwick, B Wallis and de Havilland, probably the greatest aeronautical engineers of 20th century went to night school . The cessation of night school was also the cessation of upward social mobility, as craftsmen could not afford to take three years off work to obtain a degree.
The development of transistors, integrated circuits, silicon chips and desk top computers greatly reduced employment. A technician/ draftsmen who learnt to use a computer for CAD in the early 1980s was called a scab. By the end of the decade he was an architect.
A simple question what was the impact of the 6 Day War and the various strikes on industry?

Desmond Wolf
Desmond Wolf
1 year ago
Reply to  Charles Hedges

A terrible story. See all my comments below for why it still wouldn’t have me voting Tory any time soon. Triggernometry is also a right-wing ecochamber which though sometimes offering thoughtful conversations, seems totally blind to the economic dimension of our decline. All anger is on the ‘liberal’ elite and none on the ‘wealthy’ elite, who also have much to answer for.

Simon Blanchard
Simon Blanchard
1 year ago
Reply to  Desmond Wolf

Poverty is driven by what Jeremy Corbyn neatly coined “the few” taking too large a slice of the cake. The housing crisis is only a product of that. And indeed (imo) everything wrong ultimately traces back to that as the root cause. We’re stuck with capitalism but it could be controlled (though never tamed). And come on, we’re only able to say “most child sex abuse is done by white men” because there are a greater number of white men.

Desmond Wolf
Desmond Wolf
1 year ago

Absolutely, the housing crisis is a product of that, but as the IEA, that bastion of social justice, has said: ‘the housing crisis has become the single most important driver of poverty in the UK… if a government managed to solve Britain’s housing crisis… it would kill a whole flock of birds with one stone.’ And as Scruton pointed out to Douglas Murray in this interview (23.35):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uu5T3sWAg0w&t=1491s
‘there is a solution and but it requires confrontation with vested interests like everything else and an awful lot of those vested interests connected to the conservative party it has to be said’ Of course Murray, a Spectator mouthpiece who cannot be seen confronting the interests that employ him, moved Scruton swiftly on!
As to whether CSA is done disproportionately by non-white men, I’ll charitably accept the assumption on the grounds that the evidence is murky (see below). But do you really think the political correctness of the police is a bigger cause of the low prosecution rate than the fact that the Tories have axed 21,000 officers under their rule?
https://fullfact.org/crime/what-do-we-know-about-ethnicity-people-involved-sexual-offences-against-children/

Desmond Wolf
Desmond Wolf
1 year ago

Just made a comment for both of you that took some time to research but which was immdiately taken down by the moderators. Hopefully once they’ve finished checking my Scruton, IEA and full fact quotes for inflammatory language you might get to see it..

Desmond Wolf
Desmond Wolf
1 year ago

Just made a comment for both of you that took some time to research but which was immdiately taken down by the moderators. Hopefully once they’ve finished checking my Scruton, IEA and full fact quotes for inflammatory language you might get to see it..

Desmond Wolf
Desmond Wolf
1 year ago

Absolutely, the housing crisis is a product of that, but as the IEA, that bastion of social justice, has said: ‘the housing crisis has become the single most important driver of poverty in the UK… if a government managed to solve Britain’s housing crisis… it would kill a whole flock of birds with one stone.’ And as Scruton pointed out to Douglas Murray in this interview (23.35):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uu5T3sWAg0w&t=1491s
‘there is a solution and but it requires confrontation with vested interests like everything else and an awful lot of those vested interests connected to the conservative party it has to be said’ Of course Murray, a Spectator mouthpiece who cannot be seen confronting the interests that employ him, moved Scruton swiftly on!
As to whether CSA is done disproportionately by non-white men, I’ll charitably accept the assumption on the grounds that the evidence is murky (see below). But do you really think the political correctness of the police is a bigger cause of the low prosecution rate than the fact that the Tories have axed 21,000 officers under their rule?
https://fullfact.org/crime/what-do-we-know-about-ethnicity-people-involved-sexual-offences-against-children/

Desmond Wolf
Desmond Wolf
1 year ago

Just made a comment for both of you that took some time to research but which was immdiately taken down by the moderators. Hopefully once they’ve finished checking my Scruton, IEA and full fact quotes for inflammatory language you might get to see it..

Desmond Wolf
Desmond Wolf
1 year ago

Just made a comment for both of you that took some time to research but which was immdiately taken down by the moderators. Hopefully once they’ve finished checking my Scruton, IEA and full fact quotes for inflammatory language you might get to see it..

Charles Hedges
Charles Hedges
1 year ago
Reply to  Desmond Wolf

What is your opinion of the lady’s comments?
Why did the Labour Party ignore the labour MP Anne Cryer?
I Am a Grooming Gang Survivor: My Story – YouTube

Simon Blanchard
Simon Blanchard
1 year ago
Reply to  Desmond Wolf

Poverty is driven by what Jeremy Corbyn neatly coined “the few” taking too large a slice of the cake. The housing crisis is only a product of that. And indeed (imo) everything wrong ultimately traces back to that as the root cause. We’re stuck with capitalism but it could be controlled (though never tamed). And come on, we’re only able to say “most child sex abuse is done by white men” because there are a greater number of white men.

Desmond Wolf
Desmond Wolf
1 year ago
Reply to  Josh Allan

Do you genuinely think that they are? The Tories run the country, poverty is primarily driven by the housing crisis (and the failure of our government to stand up to landed interests) and most child sex abuse is done by white men, as the ministry of justice’s own report has shown. Interested to hear your alternative explanations of these problems..

Dougie Undersub
Dougie Undersub
1 year ago
Reply to  Desmond Wolf

We don’t have a ruling party. We have a ruling elite that is only nominally of its party and has disenfranchised and disenchanted the majority of party members. Not to mention the large number of ex-party members.
I can’t think of any leading figure in the Conservative Party who blames our economic problems on refugees. There are many who object to the cost of dealing with faux refugees but there are much more fundamental reasons for our poor economic performance. (Many ordinary people who vote for other parties object to the migrant bill too, which is one reason why Starmer isn’t the shoe-in you might think.)
Men of Pakistani heritage do indeed play a disproportionately large role in the sexual abuse of teenage girls. It’s only by conflating this type of CSA with the entirely different paedophilic type of CSA that the wokerati manage to convince themselves that there isn’t a race-related problem.

Desmond Wolf
Desmond Wolf
1 year ago

Lots of sensible points here that force me to refine but not refute my arguments.
1) A ruling elite only nominally of its party – what does this mean? That the Tories are no longer true conservatives? That they are not going far enough in ‘rejecting the Islamo/ LGBT/Global warming agenda’ as NST’s comment suggested? I suppose not, but given LH’s observations above, making those issues more central to their messaging will only serve to energise their base, not bring a wider part of the country together. Either way, my point still stands that the Tories (and their donors and lobbyists) run Britain at the level of policy and legislation.
2) I’ll take it on good faith that you’re right that no Tories are blaming economic problems on refugees (many of those targetted by ‘stop the boats’ do have a right to asylum, but its our lousy efforts in processing them that makes illegal the manner of their arrival, not their right to stay). But my point is really if the Tories are not blaming those problems on refugees, what are they blaming them on? It seems to me that they’ve raised the profile of their concerns over illegal arrivals and Pakistani sex grooming gangs because they have not got any answers on the economy (all proper solutions are barred by the interests to whom they owe their success) – so stop the boats is not used to explain these problems, but to distract from them it certainly does.
3) Fair point – again I’ll take that on trust. So it’s specifically teenage girls these groups target – terrible of course, and in need of addressing. But is that a bigger problem than say the fact that overal levels of all kinds of CSA have risen under the Tories and are committed most commonly by white men? Given the Tories track record on the whole issue, why should we expect them to be particularly adept at handling these Pakistani cases?

Charles Hedges
Charles Hedges
1 year ago
Reply to  Desmond Wolf

When considering an activity by a group the correct statistic is per capita. The murder rate throughout the World is quoted as per 100,000 people. How many rapes by 100,000 men of Pakistani ethnicity occur and how does this compare say to Hindu, those from West indies, West Africa or white men men? Also what are the political affiliations of the councillors and MPs where they live?
I suggest you listen to Matt Goodwin
Matt Goodwin: We’re in the Post Populist Era – YouTube
As Orwell pointed out the Intelligentsia since the mid 1930s has been composed of middle class leftwingers. Expansion of taxes and The State has primarily helped the left wing wing middle class white collar office workers and not blue collar manual workers and engineers.
Social housing was constructed to provide decent homes for honest hard working working class who fought in two world wars. Prior to late 1960s housing was allocated based upon people being married, honest and hard working ,after this is was based upon need; even if the need was because the person was feckless. One can have a welfare state which encourages responsibility which is what Keir Hardie and Beveridge wanted or one which undermines responsibility which began to occur after the late 1960s.
The massive expansion post late 1960s, in the arts degrees at polys( Corbyn being an example studying Trade Union Studies at North London Poly) and at universities such as Sussex, Kent, Essex, East Anglia, York, Goldsmiths College, together with expansion of NGOs, local government, Civil Service etc produces pleasant sinecures for labour voters of the middle class. Many of the failures of the Civil Service is because selection is based upon recruiting people who can write documents but not engineers and applied scientists who solve problems.
The lack of applied science and engineering at universities means Britain does not produce enough technically skilled people to move manufacturing entirely into advanced high value production. Germany and Switzerland manufacturing is almost entirely in advanced high value production which is why they are able to export so much.

Charles Hedges
Charles Hedges
1 year ago
Reply to  Desmond Wolf

When considering an activity by a group the correct statistic is per capita. The murder rate throughout the World is quoted as per 100,000 people. How many rapes by 100,000 men of Pakistani ethnicity occur and how does this compare say to Hindu, those from West indies, West Africa or white men men? Also what are the political affiliations of the councillors and MPs where they live?
I suggest you listen to Matt Goodwin
Matt Goodwin: We’re in the Post Populist Era – YouTube
As Orwell pointed out the Intelligentsia since the mid 1930s has been composed of middle class leftwingers. Expansion of taxes and The State has primarily helped the left wing wing middle class white collar office workers and not blue collar manual workers and engineers.
Social housing was constructed to provide decent homes for honest hard working working class who fought in two world wars. Prior to late 1960s housing was allocated based upon people being married, honest and hard working ,after this is was based upon need; even if the need was because the person was feckless. One can have a welfare state which encourages responsibility which is what Keir Hardie and Beveridge wanted or one which undermines responsibility which began to occur after the late 1960s.
The massive expansion post late 1960s, in the arts degrees at polys( Corbyn being an example studying Trade Union Studies at North London Poly) and at universities such as Sussex, Kent, Essex, East Anglia, York, Goldsmiths College, together with expansion of NGOs, local government, Civil Service etc produces pleasant sinecures for labour voters of the middle class. Many of the failures of the Civil Service is because selection is based upon recruiting people who can write documents but not engineers and applied scientists who solve problems.
The lack of applied science and engineering at universities means Britain does not produce enough technically skilled people to move manufacturing entirely into advanced high value production. Germany and Switzerland manufacturing is almost entirely in advanced high value production which is why they are able to export so much.

Michael McElwee
Michael McElwee
1 year ago

Have you seen “Spiritual Death of the West” by Nathan Pinkoski, in the May 2023 edition of First Things? He writes about Jean Raspail’s Le Camp des Saints, of which I had not heard before.

Desmond Wolf
Desmond Wolf
1 year ago

Lots of sensible points here that force me to refine but not refute my arguments.
1) A ruling elite only nominally of its party – what does this mean? That the Tories are no longer true conservatives? That they are not going far enough in ‘rejecting the Islamo/ LGBT/Global warming agenda’ as NST’s comment suggested? I suppose not, but given LH’s observations above, making those issues more central to their messaging will only serve to energise their base, not bring a wider part of the country together. Either way, my point still stands that the Tories (and their donors and lobbyists) run Britain at the level of policy and legislation.
2) I’ll take it on good faith that you’re right that no Tories are blaming economic problems on refugees (many of those targetted by ‘stop the boats’ do have a right to asylum, but its our lousy efforts in processing them that makes illegal the manner of their arrival, not their right to stay). But my point is really if the Tories are not blaming those problems on refugees, what are they blaming them on? It seems to me that they’ve raised the profile of their concerns over illegal arrivals and Pakistani sex grooming gangs because they have not got any answers on the economy (all proper solutions are barred by the interests to whom they owe their success) – so stop the boats is not used to explain these problems, but to distract from them it certainly does.
3) Fair point – again I’ll take that on trust. So it’s specifically teenage girls these groups target – terrible of course, and in need of addressing. But is that a bigger problem than say the fact that overal levels of all kinds of CSA have risen under the Tories and are committed most commonly by white men? Given the Tories track record on the whole issue, why should we expect them to be particularly adept at handling these Pakistani cases?

Michael McElwee
Michael McElwee
1 year ago

Have you seen “Spiritual Death of the West” by Nathan Pinkoski, in the May 2023 edition of First Things? He writes about Jean Raspail’s Le Camp des Saints, of which I had not heard before.

Josh Allan
Josh Allan
1 year ago
Reply to  Desmond Wolf

Do you genuinely think those things aren’t true?

Dougie Undersub
Dougie Undersub
1 year ago
Reply to  Desmond Wolf

We don’t have a ruling party. We have a ruling elite that is only nominally of its party and has disenfranchised and disenchanted the majority of party members. Not to mention the large number of ex-party members.
I can’t think of any leading figure in the Conservative Party who blames our economic problems on refugees. There are many who object to the cost of dealing with faux refugees but there are much more fundamental reasons for our poor economic performance. (Many ordinary people who vote for other parties object to the migrant bill too, which is one reason why Starmer isn’t the shoe-in you might think.)
Men of Pakistani heritage do indeed play a disproportionately large role in the sexual abuse of teenage girls. It’s only by conflating this type of CSA with the entirely different paedophilic type of CSA that the wokerati manage to convince themselves that there isn’t a race-related problem.

Linda Hutchinson
Linda Hutchinson
1 year ago

But wasn’t there an opinion poll recently that indicated that the majority in the UK are in favour of tackling climate change and many even thinking that the plans don’t go far enough? If this is the case then perhaps your party which rejects the “Islamo/ LGBT/Global warming agenda” wouldn’t be as successful as you think it would be.

Desmond Wolf
Desmond Wolf
1 year ago

And what would the policies of that party be? Aren’t you happy with a ruling party that thinks the country is run by the wokerati, blames our economic problems on refugees and child sex abuse on Pakistanis?

Nicky Samengo-Turner
Nicky Samengo-Turner
1 year ago

The landslide majority is there for the taking… for a Party that will stand up and have the courage to reject the Islamo/ LGBT/Global warming agenda , and its media support.

Andrew D
Andrew D
1 year ago

Have we ever had a conservative government? Will we ever? Governments get elected on the promise of change, never to keep things as they are, still less to go back to what they might have been. All that a conservative (big or small C) can hope for is a government which keeps out of one’s life and leaves one in peace to cultivate the things that really matter.

Andrew D
Andrew D
1 year ago

Have we ever had a conservative government? Will we ever? Governments get elected on the promise of change, never to keep things as they are, still less to go back to what they might have been. All that a conservative (big or small C) can hope for is a government which keeps out of one’s life and leaves one in peace to cultivate the things that really matter.

Ben Jones
Ben Jones
1 year ago

I’m getting one of those tee-shirts.

Ben Jones
Ben Jones
1 year ago

I’m getting one of those tee-shirts.

Steve Jolly
Steve Jolly
1 year ago

The backlash against globalism is necessarily global in nature. It has taken different forms in different countries, but it is hard to find a country that doesn’t have a growing conservative/populist movement that is threatening to overturn the old political alignments in some way, or already has. The problem of course is that the money and the power of the status quo are aligned almost universally on the other side. The people getting rich off globalism and truly committed to that ideal will fight for every inch of ground they are forced to cede as political movements slowly build up the grassroots structure and support they will need to fight their big money opponents. It’s going to be a long slog.

Steve Jolly
Steve Jolly
1 year ago

The backlash against globalism is necessarily global in nature. It has taken different forms in different countries, but it is hard to find a country that doesn’t have a growing conservative/populist movement that is threatening to overturn the old political alignments in some way, or already has. The problem of course is that the money and the power of the status quo are aligned almost universally on the other side. The people getting rich off globalism and truly committed to that ideal will fight for every inch of ground they are forced to cede as political movements slowly build up the grassroots structure and support they will need to fight their big money opponents. It’s going to be a long slog.

polidori redux
polidori redux
1 year ago

“Can Roger Scruton save the European Right?”Too late, too little.

CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago
Reply to  polidori redux

Precisely.

Selwyn Jones
Selwyn Jones
1 year ago
Reply to  polidori redux

I fear this may be true.

CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago
Reply to  polidori redux

Precisely.

Selwyn Jones
Selwyn Jones
1 year ago
Reply to  polidori redux

I fear this may be true.

polidori redux
polidori redux
1 year ago

“Can Roger Scruton save the European Right?”Too late, too little.

Ray Andrews
Ray Andrews
1 year ago

I need a guru. Scruton sounds like the guy.

Cathy Carron
Cathy Carron
1 year ago
Reply to  Ray Andrews

USA here – I have friends who traveled to the UK the summer just prior to Scruton’s death to sit at the feet of the master. Scruton used to hold seminars near his country home. I enjoyed listening to their experience. If only.

Cathy Carron
Cathy Carron
1 year ago
Reply to  Ray Andrews

USA here – I have friends who traveled to the UK the summer just prior to Scruton’s death to sit at the feet of the master. Scruton used to hold seminars near his country home. I enjoyed listening to their experience. If only.

Ray Andrews
Ray Andrews
1 year ago

I need a guru. Scruton sounds like the guy.

Charles Hedges
Charles Hedges
1 year ago

The British Conservatism was different to the continental variety because we avoided the extremes.
Britain is fortunate in avoiding extreme heat and cold and the conditions are good for growing cereals, raising animals for meat and producing hides and wool. We avoided he extreme feudalism where a very few owned the land and the rural serfs owned nothing. We had a middle class of landowners and merchants. The Normans adopted Anglo Saxon Laws such that by 1295 some 290 MPs represented the views of taxpayers and even those without the vote could make their opinions known through Moot Courts and hustings. “That which affects all must be consulted by all” Edward III.
The Kings judges travelled through the land and at quarter sessions the Kings Law was implemented, not that of the land owner and guilt was decided by a jury. The population was armed and the archers , who were all volunteers were the mainstay of the army from 1300 to about 1500. At Poitiers The Black Prince addresses the archers as fellow English men. Britain did not have a military aristocracy using mercenaries to impose their will on landless unarmed serfs. Britain avoided the extremesof the Feudal society where serfs were hardly better than slaves.
The Tudors and dissolution of the Monasteries further enlarged the Middle Class. By 1660s country dwellers owned some land and had acces to commons and increased their wealth by working for richer people. The production of wool enabled to earn money, even serfs in the Middle Ages. The Poor laws enforced by the Privy Council, paid for by rate payers and run by Justices of the Peace meant the poor of the parish were house, fed, clothed and given employment.
As GM Trevelyan said ” If the French aristocrats had played cricket with their tenants there woul have not been a revolution”. The Tory squire of the mid 16th to mid 19th century grew up with the villagers, boxed, played cricket, football,hunted, dined with them at the Harvest Supper and danced around the maypole with them( Arthur Bryant). In continental Europe the divide between landowning aristocrat and tenant was absolute. In Britain daughters of wealthy merchant married aristocrats sons which rarely occurred on the Continent. A massive reason for the support for Napoleon was the destruction of feudalism ( marriage of Figaro by Mozart) and aristocratic privileges.
The creation of the Industrial Revolution further increased the Middle Class and enriched the Non Conformists.
The creation of squalid slums during the Napoleonic War were recognised as such and people such as Lord Shaftesbury, Charles Wesley and Nonconformists. The founders of the Labour Party and wanted to improve the lives of the poor, not undertake revolution.
The consequence was that Britain did not undergo the violent class war of the Jaquerie Revolt of France, German Peasants War, French and Russian Revolutions and Civil war in Spain of 1931 to 1939. The landless poor of Spain as late as the 1920s were treated almost as if they were serfs.
As Orwell pointed out, social change occurred in Britain withfar fewer killings compred to the Continent
In WW1 and WW2 aristocrats put loyalty to country and died for it, above class. Orwell pointed out that in Continental Europe many wealthy put loyalty to their class before country and betrayed it to the Nazis, Laval being an example.
The Tory Party has survived because it respected robust tough practical honest hardworking people (hence yeoman being a compliment ) free speech, fair play and a sense of humour and not respected cruelty, cowardice and deviousness. However, respect for these qualities are considered a threat by many of todays leaders. What made Tories unique was that they did not employ foreign mercenaries or a Police Force to impose their will on the population. From the 16th century to the early 19th century there was no Police Force to protect the Tory Squire. In fact many Tories were against creating the Police as they were against a centralised goverment, whether King, politician or civil servant being able to enter one’s home and impose their will on people.

Charles Hedges
Charles Hedges
1 year ago

The British Conservatism was different to the continental variety because we avoided the extremes.
Britain is fortunate in avoiding extreme heat and cold and the conditions are good for growing cereals, raising animals for meat and producing hides and wool. We avoided he extreme feudalism where a very few owned the land and the rural serfs owned nothing. We had a middle class of landowners and merchants. The Normans adopted Anglo Saxon Laws such that by 1295 some 290 MPs represented the views of taxpayers and even those without the vote could make their opinions known through Moot Courts and hustings. “That which affects all must be consulted by all” Edward III.
The Kings judges travelled through the land and at quarter sessions the Kings Law was implemented, not that of the land owner and guilt was decided by a jury. The population was armed and the archers , who were all volunteers were the mainstay of the army from 1300 to about 1500. At Poitiers The Black Prince addresses the archers as fellow English men. Britain did not have a military aristocracy using mercenaries to impose their will on landless unarmed serfs. Britain avoided the extremesof the Feudal society where serfs were hardly better than slaves.
The Tudors and dissolution of the Monasteries further enlarged the Middle Class. By 1660s country dwellers owned some land and had acces to commons and increased their wealth by working for richer people. The production of wool enabled to earn money, even serfs in the Middle Ages. The Poor laws enforced by the Privy Council, paid for by rate payers and run by Justices of the Peace meant the poor of the parish were house, fed, clothed and given employment.
As GM Trevelyan said ” If the French aristocrats had played cricket with their tenants there woul have not been a revolution”. The Tory squire of the mid 16th to mid 19th century grew up with the villagers, boxed, played cricket, football,hunted, dined with them at the Harvest Supper and danced around the maypole with them( Arthur Bryant). In continental Europe the divide between landowning aristocrat and tenant was absolute. In Britain daughters of wealthy merchant married aristocrats sons which rarely occurred on the Continent. A massive reason for the support for Napoleon was the destruction of feudalism ( marriage of Figaro by Mozart) and aristocratic privileges.
The creation of the Industrial Revolution further increased the Middle Class and enriched the Non Conformists.
The creation of squalid slums during the Napoleonic War were recognised as such and people such as Lord Shaftesbury, Charles Wesley and Nonconformists. The founders of the Labour Party and wanted to improve the lives of the poor, not undertake revolution.
The consequence was that Britain did not undergo the violent class war of the Jaquerie Revolt of France, German Peasants War, French and Russian Revolutions and Civil war in Spain of 1931 to 1939. The landless poor of Spain as late as the 1920s were treated almost as if they were serfs.
As Orwell pointed out, social change occurred in Britain withfar fewer killings compred to the Continent
In WW1 and WW2 aristocrats put loyalty to country and died for it, above class. Orwell pointed out that in Continental Europe many wealthy put loyalty to their class before country and betrayed it to the Nazis, Laval being an example.
The Tory Party has survived because it respected robust tough practical honest hardworking people (hence yeoman being a compliment ) free speech, fair play and a sense of humour and not respected cruelty, cowardice and deviousness. However, respect for these qualities are considered a threat by many of todays leaders. What made Tories unique was that they did not employ foreign mercenaries or a Police Force to impose their will on the population. From the 16th century to the early 19th century there was no Police Force to protect the Tory Squire. In fact many Tories were against creating the Police as they were against a centralised goverment, whether King, politician or civil servant being able to enter one’s home and impose their will on people.

PETER THOM
PETER THOM
1 year ago

Can anyone tell me what the “left” and “right” actually stand for now and exactly what sort of society the Conservative, and Labour parties are trying to achieve (not just manifestos ahead of elections)? I have recently asked this of my Conservative MP who gave me a very woolly answer, and New Labour who gave me no answer at all!

Charles Stanhope
Charles Stanhope
1 year ago
Reply to  PETER THOM

One iota to the right and you are a fascist!
Anything else is perfectly OK.

Desmond Wolf
Desmond Wolf
1 year ago
Reply to  PETER THOM

Easy: the left believe that proper, dignified work (brought about through a program of reindustrialisation) should pay and be a real route out of poverty, whereas the right believe that wealth is a measurement of effort and so should be protected at all costs, even when it threatens democracy and obstructs the hard efforts of working families (e.g. the housing crisis). This is the battleline: it is between work and wealth, need vs demand, people vs profit.
The ruling class will throw everything they have at us to prevent us from overcoming this wastage of talent, fulfilment and fellow-feeling in the service of their needless enrichment: they’ll have us at each other’s throats over the definition of a woman, they’ll make us blame our economic problems on refugees, they’ll try to convince us that people who work for their money – doctors, teachers, nurses, ‘lefty’ lawyers etc – are the privileged class enemy; anything in short to keep our attention from the fact that they and their billionaire friends running most of the press may not actually have our best interests in mind as they try and prepare the ground for a Dubai-on-Thames where most of us will work poverty wages for foreign capital invited by a government which told us we were taking back control.
When Starmer takes over light brakes will be applied to that process (he cannot commit to the properly transformative program we need because look what happened to the other guy who tried to do that), but our death march towards a neo-Victorian and authoritarian hyper-capitalism presided over by a government freed from the constraints of human rights in a world where your great granchildren are struggling to survive whilst living in a tent outside an amazon warehouse while we are left unprotected from the worst effects of climate change and where the term ‘BBC’ now only means big black c**k to most people as the market is let loose on all broadcasting – that is the future against which it is the doomed but morally necessary duty of the leftist to resist.

Simon Blanchard
Simon Blanchard
1 year ago
Reply to  PETER THOM

Left and Right are redundant terms that only serve to divide us. You’ve only got to try and argue for things to be a hit fairer and you get called a Marxist. You only have to call for sensible levels of immigration and you’re a r@cist.

Charles Stanhope
Charles Stanhope
1 year ago
Reply to  PETER THOM

One iota to the right and you are a fascist!
Anything else is perfectly OK.

Desmond Wolf
Desmond Wolf
1 year ago
Reply to  PETER THOM

Easy: the left believe that proper, dignified work (brought about through a program of reindustrialisation) should pay and be a real route out of poverty, whereas the right believe that wealth is a measurement of effort and so should be protected at all costs, even when it threatens democracy and obstructs the hard efforts of working families (e.g. the housing crisis). This is the battleline: it is between work and wealth, need vs demand, people vs profit.
The ruling class will throw everything they have at us to prevent us from overcoming this wastage of talent, fulfilment and fellow-feeling in the service of their needless enrichment: they’ll have us at each other’s throats over the definition of a woman, they’ll make us blame our economic problems on refugees, they’ll try to convince us that people who work for their money – doctors, teachers, nurses, ‘lefty’ lawyers etc – are the privileged class enemy; anything in short to keep our attention from the fact that they and their billionaire friends running most of the press may not actually have our best interests in mind as they try and prepare the ground for a Dubai-on-Thames where most of us will work poverty wages for foreign capital invited by a government which told us we were taking back control.
When Starmer takes over light brakes will be applied to that process (he cannot commit to the properly transformative program we need because look what happened to the other guy who tried to do that), but our death march towards a neo-Victorian and authoritarian hyper-capitalism presided over by a government freed from the constraints of human rights in a world where your great granchildren are struggling to survive whilst living in a tent outside an amazon warehouse while we are left unprotected from the worst effects of climate change and where the term ‘BBC’ now only means big black c**k to most people as the market is let loose on all broadcasting – that is the future against which it is the doomed but morally necessary duty of the leftist to resist.

Simon Blanchard
Simon Blanchard
1 year ago
Reply to  PETER THOM

Left and Right are redundant terms that only serve to divide us. You’ve only got to try and argue for things to be a hit fairer and you get called a Marxist. You only have to call for sensible levels of immigration and you’re a r@cist.

PETER THOM
PETER THOM
1 year ago

Can anyone tell me what the “left” and “right” actually stand for now and exactly what sort of society the Conservative, and Labour parties are trying to achieve (not just manifestos ahead of elections)? I have recently asked this of my Conservative MP who gave me a very woolly answer, and New Labour who gave me no answer at all!

Allison Barrows
Allison Barrows
1 year ago

Fear of “resurrecting” fascism? It never died. It’s still wreaking its horrors on the world, and it’s called the “liberal” Left.

Desmond Wolf
Desmond Wolf
1 year ago

And what horrors are those compared to the horrors of actual fascism?

Desmond Wolf
Desmond Wolf
1 year ago

And what horrors are those compared to the horrors of actual fascism?

Allison Barrows
Allison Barrows
1 year ago

Fear of “resurrecting” fascism? It never died. It’s still wreaking its horrors on the world, and it’s called the “liberal” Left.

John Hicks
John Hicks
1 year ago

So enjoyable to discover others who are captivated by Scruton’s thoughts and writing, made more compelling by his own gratitude for the journey of his own life. Indeed, Gratitude for Life itself may be the one rewarding emotion unable to be experienced by other than Conservatives

John Hicks
John Hicks
1 year ago

So enjoyable to discover others who are captivated by Scruton’s thoughts and writing, made more compelling by his own gratitude for the journey of his own life. Indeed, Gratitude for Life itself may be the one rewarding emotion unable to be experienced by other than Conservatives

elizabeth shannon
elizabeth shannon
1 year ago

John Lloyd. What a pleasure it has been reading this excellent essay. This is why I read unherd. Many thanks.

elizabeth shannon
elizabeth shannon
1 year ago

John Lloyd. What a pleasure it has been reading this excellent essay. This is why I read unherd. Many thanks.

j watson
j watson
1 year ago

To be ‘conservative’ is not to necessarily be a neo-liberal when it comes to economics. Scruton a classic example. Yet the clash and contradictions between the two is arguably what has created such disappointment on the Right in recent years. It is a balance still not found and inherently difficult to find.
The Article also just prompted the thought what a loss the UK was/is to the ‘conservative’ cause within Europe and the EU. The opportunity to lead the EU in different directions and emphasis was there for the taking and would have been strongly supported by many similar movements in other EU countries. The UK would have been the standard bearer. And even those of us not on the Right could/can see the need for reform and would have rallied to that. But alas we walked away from the leadership opportunity and into long term diminished status.

j watson
j watson
1 year ago

To be ‘conservative’ is not to necessarily be a neo-liberal when it comes to economics. Scruton a classic example. Yet the clash and contradictions between the two is arguably what has created such disappointment on the Right in recent years. It is a balance still not found and inherently difficult to find.
The Article also just prompted the thought what a loss the UK was/is to the ‘conservative’ cause within Europe and the EU. The opportunity to lead the EU in different directions and emphasis was there for the taking and would have been strongly supported by many similar movements in other EU countries. The UK would have been the standard bearer. And even those of us not on the Right could/can see the need for reform and would have rallied to that. But alas we walked away from the leadership opportunity and into long term diminished status.

Charles Hedges
Charles Hedges
1 year ago

Scruton ignored certain aspects.
England, Wales and lowland Scotland are not areas of climatic extremes.The production of cereals, meat, fish and cheese plus wool produced a population with a much higher protein intake and therefore produced stronger people who could earn money. Even if a serf owned only one sheep they could earn money from selling wool.Anglo Saxon Law combined The Bible ameloriated the extremes of Feudal law imposed by the Normans.The re-introduction of Charter of Liberties, Magna Carta and creation of Parliament by 1295 AD meant the King could listen to the views of the tax payers from all over the country. A House of Commons of 290 MPs represented the views of 4 M people. Even if one could not vote, one could voice one’s opinion at hustings.Medieval England had a much higher proportion of the population as landowners, earners of money and tax payers than Europe and this increased post Dissolution of Monasteries which increased the proportion of those who had responsibilities foir running the nation. Once one owned more than about 40 acres one had the vote The Poor Laws, paid for by Parish Rate Payers provided homes, food, clothes and employment for the poor of the parish which prevented the extreme povery suffered by landless poor of The Continent.The squire grew up playing with the children of the village and joiuned in the boxing,football, May dances and cricket team so by the mid 18th century there was not this almost absolute divided between landless labourer and landowner that occurred in Europe.The rise of the Non Conformist and Industrial Revolution created what J Brownowski called our Social Revolution. A combination of Poor Laws, Non Conformism ( Quakers to Charles Wesley, Methodism, Baptists ), Tories like Shaftesbury, agriculture producing beef and beer ( food of the Navvy); founders of Labour Party such as Keir Hardie being Non Conformists meant extremes were not produced which led to French and Russian Revolutions and Spain from 1931 to 1939.Orwell pointed out that the aristocracy and Public School Men had a sense of duty to country above class. They were prepared to die for country. Orwell pointed out that part of the reason the collapse of France was that many wealthy in France were prepared to sell out their country to maintain their wealth, Laval, for example.When reading accounts by British Special Forces officers in France, Italy, Greece what they often find disgusting is how the wealthy and aristocrats are indifferent to suffering of the poor, have a blind hatred of the communists to such an extent they almost collaborate with the Nazis. In summary the ideal traditions of the British Tory and also Methodist founders of the Labour Party tradition is of honest tough practical well fed cheerful people with a sense of humour who believe in free speech, fair play, do not hold a grudge and dislike cruelty. Common sense says,if it works keep it, try to improve it and if faulty try to change it for something which works well. What works well looks good, be it a ship, bridge, car, plane or even people.
The tradition of two similar sized men men sorting out their difference with their fists but not kicking a man when he is down or stabbing someone in the back, is the spirit of a man born free, who is capable of standing on his two feet, supporting and defending himself and is not a servile person who seeks revenge on those who have hurt him which led to Jaquerie Revolt, German Peasants War, French and Russian Revolutions,Spain 1941 to 1939 and Greece. If one spends one’s life stooped in submission to a superior, one develops spite not a spine of steel. Orwell pointed out social change has occurred in British areas(including Empire) with far less killing than any other parts of the World.
For the above reason British Conservatism when it is true to it’s traditions is very different to the Continental variety.

Charles Hedges
Charles Hedges
1 year ago

Scruton ignored certain aspects.
England, Wales and lowland Scotland are not areas of climatic extremes.The production of cereals, meat, fish and cheese plus wool produced a population with a much higher protein intake and therefore produced stronger people who could earn money. Even if a serf owned only one sheep they could earn money from selling wool.Anglo Saxon Law combined The Bible ameloriated the extremes of Feudal law imposed by the Normans.The re-introduction of Charter of Liberties, Magna Carta and creation of Parliament by 1295 AD meant the King could listen to the views of the tax payers from all over the country. A House of Commons of 290 MPs represented the views of 4 M people. Even if one could not vote, one could voice one’s opinion at hustings.Medieval England had a much higher proportion of the population as landowners, earners of money and tax payers than Europe and this increased post Dissolution of Monasteries which increased the proportion of those who had responsibilities foir running the nation. Once one owned more than about 40 acres one had the vote The Poor Laws, paid for by Parish Rate Payers provided homes, food, clothes and employment for the poor of the parish which prevented the extreme povery suffered by landless poor of The Continent.The squire grew up playing with the children of the village and joiuned in the boxing,football, May dances and cricket team so by the mid 18th century there was not this almost absolute divided between landless labourer and landowner that occurred in Europe.The rise of the Non Conformist and Industrial Revolution created what J Brownowski called our Social Revolution. A combination of Poor Laws, Non Conformism ( Quakers to Charles Wesley, Methodism, Baptists ), Tories like Shaftesbury, agriculture producing beef and beer ( food of the Navvy); founders of Labour Party such as Keir Hardie being Non Conformists meant extremes were not produced which led to French and Russian Revolutions and Spain from 1931 to 1939.Orwell pointed out that the aristocracy and Public School Men had a sense of duty to country above class. They were prepared to die for country. Orwell pointed out that part of the reason the collapse of France was that many wealthy in France were prepared to sell out their country to maintain their wealth, Laval, for example.When reading accounts by British Special Forces officers in France, Italy, Greece what they often find disgusting is how the wealthy and aristocrats are indifferent to suffering of the poor, have a blind hatred of the communists to such an extent they almost collaborate with the Nazis. In summary the ideal traditions of the British Tory and also Methodist founders of the Labour Party tradition is of honest tough practical well fed cheerful people with a sense of humour who believe in free speech, fair play, do not hold a grudge and dislike cruelty. Common sense says,if it works keep it, try to improve it and if faulty try to change it for something which works well. What works well looks good, be it a ship, bridge, car, plane or even people.
The tradition of two similar sized men men sorting out their difference with their fists but not kicking a man when he is down or stabbing someone in the back, is the spirit of a man born free, who is capable of standing on his two feet, supporting and defending himself and is not a servile person who seeks revenge on those who have hurt him which led to Jaquerie Revolt, German Peasants War, French and Russian Revolutions,Spain 1941 to 1939 and Greece. If one spends one’s life stooped in submission to a superior, one develops spite not a spine of steel. Orwell pointed out social change has occurred in British areas(including Empire) with far less killing than any other parts of the World.
For the above reason British Conservatism when it is true to it’s traditions is very different to the Continental variety.