Politics: scanning the horizon
RICHARD NORTH
There’s plenty of things to write about at the moment but focusing on anything other than the political shambles into which this country is descending seems rather like writing about the breakfast menu on the Titanic after the order to abandon ship had been given.
There again, it would be a happy piece of escapism to write about anything except domestic politics and leave the hacks and blue-tick commentators to obsess about two-tier Keir and one tear Rachel.
There will be no stopping those who want to dwell on the detail, but if we take the events of the last few days as indicative of a Labour government in the throes of terminal decay, then it is all the more important to stay with the bigger picture, scanning the horizon to see what is coming next.
Some – there are always some – might ask what is the point of so doing, and in a way that is a valid point. Very few of us are in a position to influence events in any major way, and there are plenty of keyboard warriors around who are making their views known, without any need for this particular writer to add to the verbal tsunami.
Why I continue is a question I keep asking myself, increasingly so with Mrs TT bedridden for the last six months and the sheer drudgery of writing into the wee small hours takes it toll, leaving me to stagger into bed as the sun is coming up and it is already light enough to see without the room lights.
But if we are to be responsible citizens, and we are able, it is our duty to keep ourselves informed, not least because when one comes to vote – if that is even a worthwhile ritual any more – we should be making an informed choice, even if those around us are not so doing. This is a matter of self-respect.
For the last 20 years, the daily discipline of blogging has been my way of keeping myself informed and without that, it would be easy to drift into a routine where all I would need to do is occasionally reinforce my [many] prejudices in between domestic chores and other tasks.
That notwithstanding, even the limited power of this blog and its influence on others, and the growing reach is social media, is not to be discounted. Even the least of us in some small way can confound my pessimism and somehow exercise a turning moment which can actually effect real change.
This is certainly the case with my son Pete, who is doing his best to influence and shape the movements which would seek to replace the old order when it finally collapses – which may or may not be too far into the future – and in particular the kaleidoscope of fragmented groups forming up on the Right.
As it stands, the placeholder is and will remain for some time the Reform UK party, Farage’s plaything which at the moment is his platform and his route to higher office – if he actually wants to go any further.
For my part, I’ve ceased to regard this as a serious party. It might become one in the future but no serious analyst has any illusions about its ability to form a coherent government. If in the event that it ever secured a majority of MPs in the House, it would be an absolute and speedy disaster, possibly rivalling Truss for the brevity of its regime.
That leads us to look with rather more care than is perhaps warranted at possible alternatives – outside the “uniparty” framework which, realistically, means the Conservatives or nothing. Although one cannot rule out the possibility of another coalition government, it looks unlikely at this stage of the electoral cycle, and I’m not sure many people want to repeat the Cameron-Clegg experience.
The latest entrants to this crowded field are Rupert Lowe’s “Restore Britain” and Ben Habib’s Advance UK. Oddly, Lowe, the politician – although he says he isn’t one – is setting his organisation up as a movement, while Habib, who really isn’t one, wants to set up a party and says he will register his creation with the electoral commission when he has 30,000 members.
A less-weary, younger me might have been in there, snapping at their heels, critiquing their work, but right now it would be a duplication of effort, as Pete is already there, giving them the once over.
As one might expect, he’s not very complimentary, but even then he’s less critical of Habib than I might have been. Personalities aside, his new party-to-be is redolent of the failed Veritas Party set up in 2005 by Kilroy-Silk after he had been stuffed by Farage.
If someone like Kilroy-Silk, with his political background and showbiz connections couldn’t make it work, the chances of a media nonentity that is Habib are as close to nil as makes no difference. In any case, those of us blooded by the early days of Ukip will know that establishing a new political party is a long, hard slog. Without that foundation, Farage’s Reform UK would be nowhere.
Basically I think Habib is wasting time and money. He is in competition with rump-Ukip, the micro-party of Homeland, and the English Democrats (into which Veritas folded), and is vastly overshadowed by Reform. His party will be able to build a social media presence but, in the real world, it will get nowhere.
As for Lowe, he describes his organisation as a “policy platform”, effectively replacing Ben Habib’s GBPAC which he seems to have abandoned – without producing very much – in favour of setting up a political party.
Actually, I was understating Pete’s response. To say “not very complimentary” is too mild. “Caustic” might be a better description as he tears into both Habib and Lowe. Stressing that the crucial requirement is to build policy, he dismisses them with the observation that, “Habib doesn’t know how to think about policy and Lowe doesn’t either”. He continues:
There is every reason to believe their output will be more of the same “hang em and flog em” bullet point slop. A tweet yesterday from Lowe, describing his organisation, reveals something of the mindset. “Issue-based campaigning, ratified by the movement, to deliver real change both now, and in 2029”. In other words, like GBPAC, members will suggest things (like bring back the death penalty), and they’ll have a little vote on it – and if it passes, that’s what they’ll do because that’s all very democratic. They equate habitual voting rituals with democracy.
As such, he writes, “it is unlikely we will see detailed, thorough, realistic policy”, adding: “I don’t think they really know what policy is, or the utility of having it, and will settle for lightweight right-wing tropes. That’s all they know how to do. Three-dimensional thinking is beyond their abilities”.
There are many who would discount the need for detailed policies – Farage is amongst them – but to be successful a political party needs to do the work in the same way that concert pianists need to put in years of practice before they are proficient.
For sure, the public doesn’t want to know the detail, any more than they want to watch a concert pianist practice, but without the intellectual foundation, a party in office will quickly founder.
As to Lowe’s potential, Pete reminds us of Lowe’s condemnation of Reform in April when he said, “I simply cannot endorse a party that has put so frighteningly little thought into what it would actually do with power”.
Reform’s plan, if it can be said to have a plan, is to ride the protest wave, faced with two obscenely unpopular mainstream parties, but offer absolutely nothing constructive – chasing power for the sake of power. To “‘win”’ the game is their objective, and it is a game to them, particularly Farage.
Whether one wants to root for Lowe or Habib, though, Pete avers that neither of their organisation really satisfy their own criticisms of Reform. Reform’s essential problem, he says, is the institutional amateurism that runs through it like a stick of Blackpool rock.
This is less to do with organisational structure, and is more to do with who these people really are, and how they think. “Since Lowe and Habib are of that same slopulist mindset, there is zero chance of their endeavours producing different results”.
Depressingly, therefore, we are no further forward and unless one in prepared to invest – emotionally at least – in a Conservative renaissance, politically we have nowhere to go. And, with no destination in sight, there are those who would put us on a countdown to civil war.
In view of the increasing likelihood of that event, and the devastating effect any such development might have, I suppose it is beholden on all of us to do what we can to avert the apocalypse. At the very least, if we keep scanning the horizon, and explore other avenues, something might show up which might save us from disaster. Sadly, though, it doesn’t seem as if it is either Lowe or Habib, and it certainly isn’t Reform.
••••
The Liberty Beacon Project is now expanding at a near exponential rate, and for this we are grateful and excited! But we must also be practical. For 7 years we have not asked for any donations, and have built this project with our own funds as we grew. We are now experiencing ever increasing growing pains due to the large number of websites and projects we represent. So we have just installed donation buttons on our websites and ask that you consider this when you visit them. Nothing is too small. We thank you for all your support and your considerations … (TLB)
••••
Comment Policy: As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. This also applies to trolling, the use of more than one alias, or just intentional mischief. Enforcement of this policy is at the discretion of this websites administrators. Repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without prior warning.
••••
Disclaimer: TLB websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, health, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.
••••
Disclaimer: The information and opinions shared are for informational purposes only including, but not limited to, text, graphics, images and other material are not intended as medical advice or instruction. Nothing mentioned is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment.
Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of The Liberty Beacon Project.
Leave a Reply