Majorityrights Central > Category: British Politics

“Leadership elections are intended to expose the ideas of rival candidates - thus making it possible for the party to decide the direction in which it wants to be led.  The Tory party is being denied that opportunity.  That is, I suspect, because none of the leadership candidates has the faintest idea about what Conservatism now stands for.  Meanwhile their supporters are engaged in no more than a doomed search for a “winner” who does not exist.”

Roy Hattersley, his tap dripping less bile than usual in today’s Guardian.

To which, no doubt, spirited Tories will counter that “if a week is a long time in politics four years is a hell of a lot longer.”  Or perhaps “oppositions don’t win elections, governments lose ‘em.”  That is the self-calming fatalism which passes for electoral wisdom on the right today.

READ MORE...

Today’s Guardian carries a piece by a QC practising at the highly activist Matrix chambers.  He is a British Sikh named Rabinder Singh, and he is affecting the pain of rejection because someone on his train journey to work yesterday got up and walked away from him:-

... you were already sitting there in the seat opposite. Your eyes were closed. You must have been tired. Then you opened your eyes and you saw me. You got up and moved to the next carriage. Perhaps you wanted some privacy or did not want to disturb me with a mobile phone call. Or perhaps you were afraid of me ...

The rest of the piece is the usual plaint of how the immigrant is so badly misunderstood, and very weak it is.  Singh tells us he lives among white people.  He eats Italian food as well as Indian.  He is not a religious fanatic.  He has been “formed” by Shakespeare, John Locke, Tom Paine (Tom Paine!  Bloody hell, no wonder he’s one of the Matrix culture warriors).  He is British ... British through and through ... British, I tell you!

Well, he’s waving around an already devalued currency - and the more he does it, the cheaper it will get.  Britishness has plainly had its day.  It was rejected by the Scots and Wesh long, long ago.  I know Mr Paisley still clings to it - all those bowler hats, black umbrellas and Union Jacks.  But the English have it in their power, if they so wish, to respond to the assimilationist thrust by falling back upon their true national identity.  They may dispense with this worthless notion of Britishness and reject the new assimilationism and Mr Singh with it.

READ MORE...

David Davis, the front-runner and bookies’ favourite to succeed Michael Howard as leader of the Conservative Party, has declared himself a liberal where it matters in “modern” Britain.

Now, I’m no longer a member of Mr Davis’ Party.  Well, obviously they wouldn’t want me!  So, I don’t have any kind of say in electing Howard’s successor.  If I did, sadly, I would probably vote for Davis.  But golly, I would like him to understand at least something about the philosophy of his own Party and of the opposition, as well as something – anything - about the land and the people he would lead.

So, I’ve written a quick draft letter to the man.  You never know, he might have a mental impasse, a fast-forward, while dutifully googling for Minority Rights, and wind up here.  Hi there … read on.

READ MORE...

We want to give teenagers more of a say about what services are provided for them using government money

… Ms Beverley Hughes, the disgraced former UK Immigration Minister and current Children’s Minister, proving once again that socialists cannot comprehend whose money they are wasting.

This time she is shovelling £55 million from gainfully employed folks like ... well, like me really, into the pockets of “deprived” young people.  Never mind whether a woman guilty of misleading the British public on national television is appropriate to such a position of trust, I don’t want her to blow one penny of my money to the four winds in this way:-

READ MORE...

Today that pixie-faced, shallow actor - a man of moderate intellect and faultless political instinct - will make a speech setting out his and his government’s position, one week and two days on from the London attacks.  It will concentrate, I think, in three areas: security, community action and “big politics”.

The police response thusfar has been quite amazing.  Scotland Yard and MI5 have barged through the investigation at a pace I, for one, have never witnessed in a major investigation.  Equally impressive, the world’s press has been apprised of every new lead, every breakthrough with remarkable and commendable speed.  That, I suppose, has more to do with the nature of a case in which the prime suspects are not going to face trial.  But it has allowed the public focus to shift very early on in the course of events to the wider issues of Islamic fundamentalism and multiculturalism.  That positively encourages a holistic, political approach to be taken.  It is pretty clear that Blair’s will be characteristically opportunistic and two-fold:-

READ MORE...

Should British conservatives continue to give their allegiance to the British Conservative Party? Peter Hitchens has decided the answer is no. In a recent Spectator column, Hitchens deplores the failure of the Conservative Party to stand up to the “progressive consensus.”

Hitchens believes that the Conservative Party has been rendered ineffective, in part, by the existence of “contradictory wings”. He writes,

“The Tories’ position is hopeless. No man living could conceivably unify the party’s contradictory wings. Europhile or Eurosceptic, pro- or anti-marriage, market enthusiast or moralist – each of these quarrels is fundamental and cannot be settled by compromise. To refuse to resolve them is to ask to be dragged, by events beyond our control, into places we never decided to go.”

READ MORE...

Today the Monarch read out probably the densest but by no means most radical Queen’s Speech for years.  The programme stretches to forty-five bills and a host of somewhat predictably worthy international intentions.

The government will now feel entitled to make a great song and dance about New Labour vigour in a third term while Her Majesty’s Loyal Opposition tries to find something, amid all its leadership woes, to which it really objects.

Here are a few objectionable high-lights that might possibly help:-

READ MORE...

There is no law which says that families must weaken, crime must increase, and societies must decay.

David Willetts, timely as ever, having his four-penneth in the Sunday Times about the future of Conservatism.

But is he right?  Of course not.  The “law”, in this case, is advanced liberalism.  And that absolutely decrees that families must weaken, crime must increase and societies must indeed decay.

Willetts cranks out a quote about old Dizzy and lovingly romanticises Compassionate Conservatism.  But he doesn’t use either of his fabled brains to really look through the surface ripples and down into the silent depths of our political history.  I suppose he has no need of such rigour.  His purpose does not justify the effort, and we do not get it:-

A country with too many broken lives and fragmented families is going to depend on public services more. As well as a strong economy, we need a strong society. How do we disentangle the catastrophic mixture of poor social housing, rigid school catchment areas and long term welfare dependency which disfigure Britain?

READ MORE...