When was the last time you heard a Tory leader say something like this?
We believe in ‘bio-diversity’ in ideas and cultures. In common with ecologists, we recognise that long-term strength springs only from a multiplicity of divergent and often conflicting influences, not from standardisation. We believe that rivers should meander, not be straightened by statute. In that sense, we are truly conservative.
We believe in freedoms, not rights. ‘Rights’ are afforded by a ruling class which, by presuming to grant them, presumes also to withdraw them. We spurn them, and maintain that freedom to do what we will, provided that we do no harm to others, is ours by right of birth alone. In that sense, we are truly liberal.
It follows, then, that we have many policies which, whilst they motivate our desire for Independence, are not directly related to that struggle. It follows that, so soon as we are free to do so, we will rescind those bans imposed upon us from without in recent years, trusting instead to the courtesy and responsibility of the British people. It follows that we will deregulate business, cease to interfere in family life and restore to the people the freedom to divert themselves as they will, subject only to the provisions of Common Law.
– Roger Knapman, UKIP Leader
Very interesting indeed!
He just got my vote.
Are they going to field candidates in Northern Ireland?
I’m actually tempted to vote for these guys, the horror. I might have to change my handle!
I live in a safe Labour seat anyway, so I could vote for these guys and not worry unduly about being unfaithful.
This should be UKIP’s next manifesto. I’m meeting my Tory MP next week so I’ve printed the piece and Perry’s post (and I’ll print any comments here too) so I can show him exactly why he won’t be getting my vote at the next election.
Very interesting — and very hopeful.
I know you don’t do Thanksgiving, but I seem to remember that you have some important holiday at this time, so enjoy it to the max, please. Best wishes to all my British cousins across the briney.
Pete_London, good man and good luck. That’s live blogging!
Yes the UKIP are well worth a vote. No worse than the other parties on immigration but significantly better on Europe, free trade, personal liberty etc. Their most well known spokesman (discounting the absurd Kilroy Silk) Nigel Farage is in favour of drug legalisation. Many UKIP candidates in the next election will also be staunch libertarians, as in previous elections.
These remarks of Knapman are very welcome. Compare this to the high comedy of Michael Howard’s interview with Paxman on Tuesday night. Its difficult to believe he could be a worse performer than IDS but such seems to be the case.
I just read the whole article and Mr Knapman talks a lot of sense. The dreaded s-word doesn’t crop up once, and he even talks about individuals and small government. If UKIP keep up this kind of talk I might actually have someone to vote for next election.
Possibly in common with several others here, I’ve been a reluctant Conservative voter (at best) since the Blessed St Margaret was knifed by the Tory Left, but two years ago I defected to the UKIP and I see no reason to go back. Indeed, now that they have corralled that self-aggrandising buffoon Kilroy Silk, I’m really quite comfortable with both them and their stance on a lot of issues.
But I’d missed that statement from Knapman and, reading it, am even happier.
I wish Pete_London good luck with his local Tory MP, but I won’t be holding out a lot of hope. The Conservative Party seems trapped like a rabbit in the headlights by media accusations of ‘extremism’ from adopting any but increasingly Statist/Leftist policies, so I really think the sooner we are rid of them and can start afresh, the better.
A popular, anti-government (in the broadest sense) movement spreading from the ground up is our best hope. The UKIP is the only choice on offer – and an increasingly interesting one.
It is most interesting. I had always assumed that the Tory party would assume the UKIP’s mantle and take over many of their policies and with them have a good chance of regaining power. When that happened the UKIP would quickly die which I believe was the original idea of that parties founders.
The trouble is I think I had overestimated the tory parties general level of intelligence and general desire to survive. It now looks as if the tory party has had its day and the UKIP with its younger and more commited membership is the replacement. Perhaps it will take another election or some other tipping point (a
well known tory MP could defect to the UKIP) for the change over to occur.
However all the above depends on Kilroy Silk not becoming leader. Do we have anyone active in the UKIP
on here ? If so what level of support does he actually have or is it all talk ?
1327
GCooper.
Ta very much. I’m not holding out too much hope, because I’ll be chatting with a politician. However the constituency is largely rural, filled with farmers, a couple of hunts small market towns. It is traditional Conservative country but UKIP has been building its vote there and his majority is just 2800. He should be sweating. BTW, to avoid any confusion; I recently moved a little way from London.
As Verity has mentioned elsewhere, we is the boss and these SOBs need to hear from us again.
I’m not very knowledgable about British politics, but the present situation with the Conservative party and the UKIP sounds a lot like the situation we had in Canada with the Progressive Conservatives and the Canadian Alliance (nee Reform) party.
In the beginning, the CA was regarded as a fringe party that only represented one region of the country (the west, and more specifically Alberta). The Tory strongholds in the east (Ontario and parts of the maritime provinces) simply did not regard them as a viable alternative. But the PCs never recovered from the loss of popularity they suffered after Brian Mulroney’s governments, despite dutifully towing the line on statism. Eventually, the two parties merged under the leader of the CA into the new Conservative party.
Those of you who like what the UKIP says but doubt their ability to crack into the Big Time — if anybody does — might be encouraged by the story of the CA in Canada.
Mind you, our Conservatives are still fairly statist.
More agreeable than interesting. What is interesting right now is the situation in Ukraine, and the lack of comment on it here on Samizdata.
Roger Knapman has always been a rather reasonable character. This sort of thinking does not surprise me in the slightest bit. Let us hope he can make this type of thing gets press rather than silliness surrounding that twit K-S.
UKIP need to concentrate on taking out L-Ds in the SouthWest in the next round. Because of hunting and fishing the LDs are very vulnerable there. They could take a few seats in the SW and then things would get rather interesting.
I’ve noticed an interesting tendency lately for some blog readers to think that blogs are newspapers with armies of reporters, whose job is to report on every major world event. They’re not. They’re groups of individuals commenting on anything that happens to catch their eye, and, unlike newspapers, they cost their proprietors more money than their readers. There are millions of blogs, some of which are covering the situation in the Ukraine (Harry’s Place is doing a fine job, and Samizdata links to it). If you want to read about the Ukraine, go read about it. If you want to write about the Ukraine, start your own blog and write away. But why on Earth would you feel that you have any right to tell Samizdata bloggers how they should spend their time and money?
“But why on Earth would you feel that you have any right to tell Samizdata bloggers how they should spend their time and money?”
Er, excuse me, I don’t believe I did any such thing. I merely expressed my surprise that Ukraine has not been commented on at Samizdata, that’s all. I have in fact been reading about the Ukraine for the past week or so on other blogs for your information. It just so happens I find the commentry here at Samizdata to be really very good from time to time and would probably be interested in the opinions of its’ regular contributors (and commentors) on the subject should they get around to expressing them.
Ukraine really isn’t too interesting as revolutions go. I mean, the “good guy” is pro EU, fer crissake.
Something of a digression but this somewhat amusing article contains this quote:
“The higher education marketplace has changed massively in the last year and we cannot just carry on doing the same things we have always done.”
“higher education marketplace” sounds good.
” those bans imposed upon us from without in recent years” sounds an awfully lot like a reference to the EU.
1.The blogs timed o356pm as well as 0438pm thro 0729 pm, seem to be awfully like a planned digression from topic, to steer people away from UKIP onto anything else. But I’m sure that is not possible, is it?
2.People seem to be thinking that there is time for UKIP to replace the Tories and then win an election in their own right (otherwise, why bother?). But is there time? if Labour win next time, then we become an integral constituent of the EC with no way out. So there is no time for UKIP. Perhaps their best bet is surely to influence Tory officials to adopt some of their policies, win the referendum, and then proceed to re-free Britain.
1.The blogs timed o356pm as well as 0438pm thro 0729 pm, seem to be awfully like a planned digression from topic, to steer people away from UKIP onto anything else. But I’m sure that is not possible, is it?
2.People seem to be thinking that there is time for UKIP to replace the Tories and then win an election in their own right (otherwise, why bother?). But is there time? if Labour win next time, then we become an integral constituent of the EC with no way out. So there is no time for UKIP. Perhaps their best bet is surely to influence Tory officials to adopt some of their policies, win the referendum, and then proceed to re-free Britain.
2.People seem to be thinking that there is time for UKIP to replace the Tories and then win an election in their own right (otherwise, why bother?). But is there time? if Labour win next time, then we become an integral constituent of the EC with no way out. So there is no time for UKIP. Perhaps their best bet is surely to influence Tory officials to adopt some of their policies, win the referendum, and then proceed to re-free Britain.
Peter Melia:
1. You’re paranoid, topics drift without need of any ill intent.
2. There will never be a better time. Tories would do almost all the same shit that Labour would, that’s their proven track record and their avowed intent. Besides, a result that would be quite achievable for the next election, would be: a minority Tory government that has to enter a coalition with UKIP to hold onto power.
But would the result really be any distancing from the EU? Would not a pro-status-quo coalition with the Lib Dems be a less desirable but more realistic scenario? For sure a fair number of Tory (and Labour for that matter) MPs aren’t over keen on the EU, but how many would have the courage of their convictions? And would they be enough?
I think a Tory-UKIP coalition is unlikely. I wouldn’t expect it to get a majority in parliament since probably you would see sufficient pro-EU Tories voting against. Likely there would be a Tory-LD coalition and a second election fairly soon thereafter.
Barring something unexpected, it seems likely Labour will win outright again anyway.
EG
If the Tories quit bashing UKIP and let em’ get on with it, I think UKIP might be less likely to stand against any Tory MP. UKIP can either hurt the Tories and perpetuate the status quo or hurt the Lib-Dems and improve it. Time will tell which happens…
Dear Britain,
You kicked the West in the ass 25 years ago. Please do so again.
– Josh
Pete_London, it’s a *great* idea to show your MP these comments alongside the piece from the Roger Knapman. The Tory party are in a right mess, they seem to think that they are not liable to the forces that make parties extinct. My response to that would be say that to the Whigs, Liberals and SDP. It used to be that if you hated the Tories you would vote Labour and vice versa. This is no longer the case, and the UKIP party is making so many great points to people like me, who can’t stand the Socialist swine in Westminster, despises the EU and wants the same sort of freedom and liberty the US has (and we had), that looking at the anemic, ‘me-too’ Tories is a non-starter.
The Killroy-Silk debacle will not stop the increasingly juggernaughtlike progression of UKIP – that interview where KS was sitting next to the UKIP bankroller who crushed him as he sat there was incredible.
I still think that there is a chance for the Tories to bring it together, for instance – take notice of the UKIP policies that appeal and inspire people (P_L – get your MP to read those three paras from Knapman – they are *great*) and dump the stuff that is a mirror image of the bloody Labour party. If between UKIP and the Tories they target the LibDems (surely the most spineless party ever created on this soil) they could clean up.
We want our freedoms back (stand up to the EU), we want our country back (mass immigration *is* an issue, and to bring it up is *not* racist), we don’t want a nanny state (70%! against) and we are *not*, repeat *not* Europeans.
I really hope it goes well Pete, but I can’t see the Tories pulling it off in time…can you imagine Howard saying something like Knapman has? Nor me.
Mike and Squander Two: Alright, alright. It’s OK. Mike – thanks for expressing your interest and feedback. Squander Two – thanks for your valiant defence. Peace people. 🙂
The editors have been very busy indeed and although I have Views on Ukraine, I don’t feel they are sufficiently formulated to vent them on Samizdata.net. Just yet. I wish the country best of luck, but what with them being next to Russia, I wouldn’t hold my breath.
/off topic comment.
I agree with Perry that these words by a UKIP leader are most interesting. However, in my opinion, a far more interesting question is:
But does he read Samizdata.net?!
Mwuahahaha!
The LDs vulnerable in the SW? Hardly – this is one of the traditional Lib/LD power bases. The last General Election saw the LD candidate reduce the long-serving Tory’s majority shrink to an all-time low of around 700, this in a very rural constituency filled with shooters, anglers and fox hunters. Actually I knew this LD person socially, and she personally didn’t give a damn about such things: priority was to get into Parliament at all costs, I think. Of course, her own background was public school, brothers in the Brigade of Guards etc, but her friends and supporters (met them at her parties, easy to tie in knots on personal liberty issues) were classic soggy do-gooders whose well meaning attitudes rested ultimately on a totalitarian level of social coercion… And they’re liars & hypocrites: say one thing, do another. When they achieved majorities on both Somerset and Devon CCs, they attempted powerfully anti-hunting measures. Anyway, the Tory’s latest newsletter contains dire warnings about the perils of voting UKIP ‘cos it will split the vote and let in the LDs. And here I think he could be right, which puts the libertarian minded in a quandary: I doubt very much if an incoming UKIP candidate could turn round the vote sufficiently to defeat either the long-standing Tory or the strong LD contenders, but would insteadsplit the anti-Socialist vote fatally. Last time round I didn’t vote, couldn’t hold my nose strongly enough to stomach any of them. Looks like it might be the same story next time.
1327, I’m a branch chairman (and probably going to stand in the next election) with UKIP.
I can assure you that RKS has very little support in the party outside a small number of agitators in the London region. What little support he did have quickly evapourated with his ill advised and ill timed leadership bid and attacks on the leadership.
Mark – Thanks for that good news and good luck at the next election.
1327
Tony H writes:
“The LDs vulnerable in the SW? Hardly – this is one of the traditional Lib/LD power bases.”
That was a very interesting post.
My personal view on the success of the LDs in the South West has always been that, as when people elsewhere vote LD, it is less because they endorse LD beliefs (such as they are) than that they wish to register a protest vote and, in the case of the rural SW, people are damned if they will vote Labour. I seriously doubt whether even ten per cent of those who vote LD have much of a clue what they are actually voting for. What matters is what they are voting against.
The reason for the success in a given geographical area is, I suspect, partly due to momentum. If voters believe a party stands a chance of getting in, they are more likely to vote for them. Success, thus, breeds success and all other things being equal (or unequal if we are talking about the massive and quite deliberate over-representation of LDs on BBC programmes and in the news) the more votes a protest party gets, the more chance it stands next time around.
By that reckoning, it could challenge the LDs, but it will have a hell of a job on its hands and one of its first tasks must be to educate people what voting LD actually means.
Best scenario:
Tories annihilated in upcoming election. UKIP do moderately well. Radical Tories unite with UKIP to form a new, genuine classical liberal party, which would become the party of government within 20 years at most. At the very least it would shift the terms of the debate, which is the most urgent thing needed at present.
Worst scenario:
Labour wins with similar majority. Brown becomes Prime Minister some and, like John Major, is universally despised. Labour loses subsequent election, and the dreadful, dismal Tories are back in power, which means at least 20 more years of Labour/Tories and no progress whatsoever.
Conclusion: vote UKIP!
Mike,
Sorry about that. Like I said, I have seen such comments cropping up from trolls on various political blogs of late, and erroneously thought yours was one of them. Oops.
Cheers.
jo
I have been a member of the Conservtive party since 1980 (and a supporter long before that), and I know many free market people in the party.
However, there seems to be a basic lack of seriousness at the top of the Conservative party.
It just does not make sense to denounce the Labour government for its wild spending and then to promise to increase pensions in line with any increase in average earnings and to abolish tuition fees.
Nor does it make sense to say one stands for the reduction of the power of the E.U. over the lives of people, and then demand that Conservative members of the European Parliament join the European People’s Party group (which supports E.U. power).
People can be too cynical about politics. It is not a good long term policy for a political party to promise everybody everything, when the promises conflict.
The Conservative party is vastly bigger than the U.K.I.P. and in my judgement the U.K.I.P. is not strong enough to replace the Conservative party, but the Tory party must sober up and get serious.