It’s clear that the wet Tory establishment is not keen on Jacob Rees-Mogg. On the surface that appears to be because he holds robust views that are at odds with theirs: he’s an actual Conservative, and they are, of course, anything but. But I wonder if there’s a deeper fear there as well: do they worry that if Rees-Mogg becomes leader then the party will slip out of their grasp in the way that Labour was taken over by hard-left, Momentum commies?
|
|||||
|
We are developing the social individualist meta-context for the future. From the very serious to the extremely frivolous... lets see what is on the mind of the Samizdata people. Samizdata, derived from Samizdat /n. - a system of clandestine publication of banned literature in the USSR [Russ.,= self-publishing house] Authors
Arts, Tech & CultureCivil LibertiesCommentary
EconomicsSamizdatistas |
Samizdata quote of the dayMarch 9th, 2018 |
 49 comments to Samizdata quote of the day |
Who Are We?The Samizdata people are a bunch of sinister and heavily armed globalist illuminati who seek to infect the entire world with the values of personal liberty and several property. Amongst our many crimes is a sense of humour and the intermittent use of British spelling. We are also a varied group made up of social individualists, classical liberals, whigs, libertarians, extropians, futurists, ‘Porcupines’, Karl Popper fetishists, recovering neo-conservatives, crazed Ayn Rand worshipers, over-caffeinated Virginia Postrel devotees, witty Frédéric Bastiat wannabes, cypherpunks, minarchists, kritarchists and wild-eyed anarcho-capitalists from Britain, North America, Australia and Europe. CategoriesArchivesFeed This PageLink Icons   |
|||
All content on this website (including text, photographs, audio files, and any other original works), unless otherwise noted, is licensed under a Creative Commons License. |
|||||
Yes. Next question.
(Though how effective JRM would be as the Conservative leader is a different question. Being ideologically correct is nice but he also needs to demonstrate a competency for practical politics which he has not yet had the opportunity to do to the best of my limited knowledge)
There is not more that the Conservative Party bureaucracy hate more than a Conservative – Jacob Rees-Mogg is a Conservative, so they hate him. Remember who the bureaucracy are – they are people who wanted to be “hip” and “with it” at university, but did not become socialists because they did not have the guts to totally break with their wealthy background (although many socialists have no problem not giving away their wealth – they just ignore the contradiction between their beliefs and their life).
Someone who clearly does not care if he looks “hip” and “with it”, does not pretend to care about pop “music” and does not mimic the beliefs of the teachers and university lecturers (not that the party bureaucracy mimic these beliefs very well) inspires the hated of the party bureaucracy – the people who have reduced Conservative Party membership from a million people under Margaret Thatcher to 70 thousand in the “Social Justice”, “Politically Correct”, “Progressive” present.
The Progressive party bureaucracy has reduced party membership by over 90% (if this were a military unit we would be disbanded as having taken catastrophic losses) – time for something new, for the Conservative Party to be openly Conservative.
Scraping the bottom of the barrel with this QOTD.
😆
>Though how effective JRM would be as the Conservative leader is a different question. Being ideologically correct is nice but he also needs to demonstrate a competency for practical politics which he has not yet had the opportunity to do to the best of my limited knowledge
True, but the main thing a leader needs is a backbone. JRM appears to have one, without trying to be a tough guy type. The practical politics also seems to be in operation with his handling of the old grey dishrag in charge of the Tories. He’s clearly very opposed to her, but he’s still appearing to stay loyal.
Still, he may be a terrible leader, it’s true, but then I don’t have much confidence in any of them.
Anything is possible but I find it hard to imagine he could be worse than May in any way at all.
This, I reckon. The new feudalism is ascendant everywhere and it will take spine to stand against it. JRM is, of course, imperfect, as are we all but, if he has the backbone to stand against a resurgence of serfdom, he might be a good bet. We made a similar wager on this side of the pond, recently and it seems to have worked out pretty well so far.
On the vaguely related matter of progressivism being the new feudalism, I remarked to SWMBO that this is one reason that we moved to Texas. We have our guns. We shoot our guns, so that we become good at it. We talk about our guns, so that we share knowledge and experience. And, if they try to turn us into serfs: for example by tearing up the constitution, we will kill them with our guns.
Which neatly explains the left’s long standing attempts to disarm everybody. As if anybody here didn’t already know that.
People often confuse feudalism with serfdom – one can have serfdom without feudalism (for example the Roman Empire after Diocletian tied peasants to the soil) and one can have “feudalism” (feudal law) without serfdom – for example the island of Sark was under feudal law till only a few years ago, and was better off when it was under feudal law.
As John Dundas pointed out in his work on feudal law and modern law (way back in 1710) whilst in theory there is no private property in land under feudal law there is in practice MORE (not less) protection for private property (including in land) under feudal law than there is under Roman law or modern (statute) law. For example, ruler or rulers under feudal law can take land or other property unless someone has been convicted of a crime, not to build a road or other such. Indeed even if someone has been convicted of a crime taking land is very difficult under feudal law – basically the crime has to be treason and the process is not automatic even then.
As for the “contract feudalism” that the left talk about – if they mean “contract serfdom” then they should say so, and if they do say so they prove they have no idea what the word “serfdom” means. Serfdom does NOT mean “I get less pay or have worse conditions than I would like”, it means “I am not allowed to leave”.
As for Jacob Rees-Mogg’s county of Somerset – Somerset was not known for serfdom and nor was it known for communal farming, Somerset was mostly marsh land drained from the 17th century onwards. What ignorant Progressives (as if there was any such thing as a non ignorant Progressive) call “rivers” in Somerset are actually drainage ditches – and if the land is not well managed and maintained by the cooperation of private owners (not the obscene Soviet “Environment Agency” set up by the Labour Party and kept by Mr Cameron and Mrs May) it naturally returns to marsh.
Still the marshes were useful for King Alfred and others to hide out from the Social Justice looters known as “Vikings” whilst preparing their country attack. Perhaps a lesson for Jacob.
Jacob Rees-Mogg
Maybe it’s an English thing, but he has a posh-y weird name. Combine that with his wealth, and he’s the old guy with the tophat on the Monopoly card. Corbyn would have a field day campaigning against him, especially with the young. I’m saying nothing of how good he’d be, just that his marketing optics don’t favor his election. May would stand a better chance of beating Corbyn.
(ETA: Yes, I realize we elected Trump.)
>Maybe it’s an English thing, but he has a posh-y weird name. Combine that with his wealth, and he’s the old guy with the tophat on the Monopoly card. Corbyn would have a field day campaigning against him, especially with the young. I’m saying nothing of how good he’d be, just that his marketing optics don’t favor his election. May would stand a better chance of beating Corbyn.
His poshness is supposedly one of the main problems with him. But then Cameron and Osborne were also posh Eton/Oxbridge types, and everyone thought that would scupper them, but it didn’t. JRM is more old-fashioned than them, it’s true, but then they were much more boorish, with all the Bullingdon Club stuff in their background which he definitely does not have. Then again, they were more socially liberal and groovy than him. That’s his main problem. But it’s also one of his main selling-points.
I’m not sure the young (apart from the Momentum types, who are never voting Tory anyway) are really so repelled by Rees-Mogg being the Monopoly guy. I think that means less to them than it does older generations, because they haven’t grown up being ruled by that sort of guy — those types disappeared from public life quite a few years ago.
On the contrary, anyone who is put off by that would not vote for any Tory.
May’s big problem is she is not by any reasonable definition a conservative. And her dismal showing against an overt Marxist last time shows that is actually a bit of a problem when trying to get conservatives to vote Conservative. Moggie is the real deal, and so palpably decent that he sells well with people who are ‘natural conservatives’ (many of whom are working class & have nothing in common with the Islington lefties personified by Corbyn).
The leftist fuckwits at the core of ZaNu still have a thing about top hats. Orwell mentions it in the thirties and it is still there. Their group memory –to use a vile collectivist term–reaches back to the 1930s. Likely the scum that trained and indoctrinated todays (now much older) trainers and indoctrinators of leftist evil were young in the 30s and the Top Hat was a potent symbol to them. Not so much to todays young leftscum –who likely never heard of the Jarrow March or the Tolpuddle Martyrs and wouldn’t give a middle class shite if they had.
That the left hate JRM is sure. Because they FEAR him as PM. Silly pictures of him in a top hat are just that –a very silly attempt at appealing to a passing age of leftist seniles like Corbog.
Hector — ” the old grey dishrag ”
I like that.
bobby b, JRM’s rise to prominence recently is actually in part down to his popularity with young Tories. He seems to be a bit of an icon for some of them.
Not hard to see why, he is an actual Old School gent rather than a Bullingdon cad, and manages to be both fearless & polite when thugs try to shout him down.
AlexB, in the USA, saying “the Republicans” still leaves you in the dark about whether you refer to true conservatives (such as Ted Cruz), or the middle-of-the-road almost-conservatives (such as Jeb Bush.)
So I’m just wondering if the term “Tory” now calls out one of several divisions of “the right”, or if it still signifies all types.
If it means the true conservatives, I can see how he would attract them much as Trump attracted ours, for similar reasons but completely different characteristics (if that makes any sense.) He would be the anti-Christ to progressives, in a traditional British way as opposed to Trump’s brasher American way.
If “Tory” means “conservative-lite”, those are the ones that I suspect might be most horrified at presenting a candidate that would feed so many socialist memes. They would have all of the ghastly top-hat connotations in mind even before the progressives thought of them, because they really really want the progs to like them. True conservatives just don’t care anymore.
I am second generation immigrant brown voter and I may even join- yes even join – the Conservative party if JRM is ever elected leader!
His poshness, top hat, accent is a middle finger to the fake, lying virtue signallers, poverty-porn addicts, naive gov interventionists in all the political parties. Any one who gets lefties so wound up gets my vote.
Im even thinking of setting up a BME JRM fan club just to rub in the lefties’ faces the fact that omg coloured people actually aren’t labour following sheep and can actually be pro free markets, anti EU, real conservatives…in other words we have a much better grasp of reality than they do.
The anguish he’d bring to the left brigade would make me immensely happy.
Corbyn is fairly posh – not an aristocrat but grew up in a country pile and has a brother called Piers. Despite his privileged background he couldn’t manage more than two Es at A-level, and couldn’t hack it at North London Poly. He’s the upper class twit, not the sharp-witted JRM>
THIS!
That’s why I went from: ‘Who da fuk is this Moggie geezer?”
To: ‘Oh hell YEAH! A bloke who walks TOWARDS the guys trying to shut him down!’
Katy Hibbert (March 10, 2018 at 3:44 pm), hits a nail on the head. When campaigning, you need not to say just, “Corbyn’s thick – he got two Es”. You need to say, “Corbyn came from a posh background, went to a grammar school and still got two Es! That means he’s thick. If you’re looking for the one who will finally make socialism work the way it didn’t in Venezuela and Zimbabwe, Corbyn is so not that man.”
“He got two Es” makes him sound like one of the common people. Pointing out that he’s from a posh home, went to a grammar school and got two Es has the right optics. Tell your audience that many who experience a Labour-style (or natz-style) comprehensive education may leave with two Es and still go on to achieve in their life (imply your audience is full of such salt-of-the-earth types). But to be born posh, go to a grammar school and still get two Es – that says something.
Paul Marks (March 10, 2018 at 7:59 am), I feel your analogy between vikings and socialists will strike the uninitiated as coming somewhat from a distance. I suppose the joke about being half-way to Robin Hood (they steal from the rich – but haven’t gotten round to giving any of it to the poor yet) often fits both, but the vikings were much less given to pretending otherwise. 🙂
The analogies with the national socialists are certainly strong, but perhaps most obvious in the way the latter imitated the viking quality of being “stern to inflict and stubborn to endure”.
>So I’m just wondering if the term “Tory” now calls out one of several divisions of “the right”, or if it still signifies all types.
It signifies both. There’s no real term in the UK that refers to ‘true conservatives’, rather than centrist ones. (No real widely-used term, that is.)
James Earl Carter was speaking to some British ‘Lords’ about the time of the 2016 Republican primaries and he was asked about the front-runners and said ‘Ted Cruz is not malleable’, (by inference Trump and the rest were), and I would say that the same could be said of JRM as of Cruz.
The top hat thing is interesting because it made me think of Charles Bradlaugh, Britain’s first openly atheist MP. Bradlaugh was a pretty tireless campaigner on behalf of those at the very bottom of the heap, and he also wore a top hat.
Me? What I see is a possible repeat of history. May is very like Heath, JRM very like Thatcher. Corbyn is Wilson multiplied by Callaghan squared. The situation post Britex, with the negotiating expertise of Ms. May being comparable to the negotiating expertise of Philippe Pétain, will be comparable to Britain in the 1970s. Perhaps there has to be a Corbyn first to make sure you Brits get it good and hard before you reach the bottom of the barrel. But you have the hope of a JRM who might actually be able to pull you out of the mess.
I think the similarities are quite striking. Perhaps if you can get JRM in before then he can do to the EU what Thatcher did to the EEC. I doubt it though. The incompetence of your leaders, and frankly the fact that they don’t have their heart in it, they don’t have a vision of a post Brexit Britain, they have an almost passive aggressive view of the leavers, means you are all going to get well and truly screwed.
Nonetheless, it seems Brexit is still a good choice. The only question is: do you want the benefits immediately or do you want to piss around in squalor first for twenty years before you see the benefits?
Number 2 seems to be the order of the day.
bobby b makes an interesting remark:
When fighting Frankfurt Marxists, the best strategy seems to be to fit their stereotypes, and JRM fits the British “”right””wing stereotype in the same way that Trump fits the American “””right”””wing stereotype.
(I think that JRM would benefit from some weight lifting, though, both in gaining a more impressive physical presence and in being able to be politically active for longer.)
See also Teejsaj:
Although i’d like to point out that a top hat used to be the mark of a punk: the 1st man who wore one in public got arrested for creating a stampede in which a boy got a broken arm.
About a month ago, I actually joined the Conservative party. It costs £25 and after 3 months, you are eligible to vote in leadership elections.
I’ve never been a member of a political party before, but as soon as I first saw Rees Mogg, I knew that something special had arrived. An actual Conservative, intelligent and disarmingly polite. He’s quick thinking and I detect a steel core despite his appearance. Even his Catholicism he worked to his advantage as he demonstrated he actually had principles when he spoke of his views on abortion.
We don’t know the future, but it’s not impossible that it all may get too much for the FFC before too long. So, my point is to join the Conservatives now, not later, and help him get there.
(I get messages from the local party saying they’d like to meet me or trying to get me to campaign for them. But, hopefully I can ignore them without jeopardising my membership. I’m not campaigning for a blue socialist party as it is at the moment)
WRT the Vikings: Niall gets close to the truth. The Vikings were extreme individualists. The reason they raided, is that they believed in their own property rights, not in other people’s property rights; especially when they had no evidence that those other people believed in Viking property rights.
BTW Robin Hood did not steal from “the rich” to give to “the poor”:
he stole from tax collectors to give back to taxpayers.
>Hector — ” the old grey dishrag ”
>I like that.
Well, you take a guy with maybe a good turn of phrase, maybe he has a funny novel out, maybe it’s worth buying that novel? Just a thought.
Teejsaj (March 10, 2018 at 3:20 pm), very well put.
You and Andrew (March 10, 2018 at 9:25 pm) might well have come across this group:
https://readyformogg.org/
The sooner the Conservative party in its current form is destroyed, the sooner we might get a true Conservative party.
Corbyn will win against May and hopefully Rees Mogg will become the new Tory leader…
Corbyn will cause huge damage….but it will be worth it.
No–if Corbog gets in -that’s it for the UK.
He will bring in 5 million+ bought and paid for migrants to ensure he can’t be voted out. And –if by a miracle–he was , he won’t go. The groundwork for ignoring votes has already been done. He would have to be removed by armed force. He and his Marxist crew won’t go any other way.
The hard core of leftscum have been dreaming for 150 years of a chance such as Grandpa Death provides. They are hard core scum and evildoers not some even less competent version of New Labour.
Don’t think with old labels. This shower-of-shite must be defeated or that is it for all of us.
Nah. Moggmentum FTW!
Good point, I will definitely consider it. However, considering how many useless wet Tories MPs there are, I’m pretty sure all kinds of trickery would be used to prevent JRM from being one of the last two candidates in any leadership contest.
Actually, if that does happen, it may be a good thing – JRM can then just create a new right wing party 😎
I’m not much of a one for lauding politicians, but by God I love the Moggster. He is intelligent, witty, personable, and, above all, a man of honour and principle. He is sound on liberty, individual rights, property rights, and free markets. He is fearless in saying what he believes and is always, but always, unfailingly polite.
Were he to be Prime Minister he has the capability of being one of the true greats. My single worry, however, is that even were he to be PM he would not be allowed to succeed. The knives would be out for him constantly from his own party and, as Mr Drummond says in the linked article, ‘eventually the squishy MPs will kill off Rees-Mogg once he makes a mistake.’ It’s because of my respect and admiration for the man that I do not, indeed cannot, wish that for him.
Got to agree with Ecks, Corbyn getting in would be a disaster for the UK that wouldn’t be worth any lessons learned.
And there’s no guarantee that a wonderful strong new Conservative Party will arise from the debris.
Agree with Snorri about JRM needing to start doing weights, or anything to get physically tougher…or some serious set of bodyguards.I think he’s encountered some sort of physical intimidation already, but these antifa types are awful, cowardly thugs. Didn’t think UK politics could ever get violent, but not so sure now
Ecks,
Yes of course Corbyn would be a disaster…of the very sort that is needed to shake us out of believing people like May are acceptable because they are the least worst option.
And if it required force to get rid of him and re-introduce democracy….so be it.
Those who were around in the 70s may remember the Labour party seriously floating the idea of reserved seats in the Commons for the trade unions “because they represented twelve million people”.
Happily Thatcher won the next election…but we were close to eternal Left wing government. Had she not won there would have been major political violence..
It may be required in future….
Andrew:
“I’m not campaigning for a blue socialist party as it is at the moment.”
Would it be useful to let them know this? Or would it be better to lie low for the time being?
mickc–Socialism already has 150 million odd deaths on its hands. How many more before its enough?
Why do you assume –unless you are overseas–that you or yours would be amongst the survivors?
Thank goodness you still retain your natural right to own kitchen knives and scissors, then, eh?
Can you give a link or a hint as to where to look for more info on this, mickc?
Mr Ecks,
Because, strange to relate, the British don’t do mass murder whatever their politics. As Alan Clark said I’d rather be ruled by a British Socialist than a foreigner (haven’t checked the exact quote but that is the sense of it…..)
And happily enough actual Socialism doesn’t last very long in Britain; the culture is too individualist.
More insidious is Blairism/Cameronism/Mayism; much too slippery. Oh, forgot Majorism….
At least Corbyn, like Rees Mogg, has beliefs; and those can be countered. Past evidence suggests Thatcherism as a suitable cure……
Alisa,
Sorry, I cannot give a link; I must research it.
However, it is something I particularly remember. It was around the time of the Grunwick affair when the unions tried to stop people working as they wished because the unions had declared the Grunwick works to be a “closed shop”.
It was certainly an item on the Radio 4 news around then. My feeling that democracy was under threat was palpable.
It is forgotten just how dangerous to our democracy the 1970s really were. Sensible trade unionists such as Sid Weighell of the NUR were shouted down; even Dennis Healey, no friend of capitalism, was shouted down. The end result? Michael Foot.
None of this was countered by the Heathites; but it was by Thatcher….
That’s OK, mickc, it’s not as if I find it too hard to believe.
bobby b: “he has a posh-y weird name. Combine that with his wealth, and he’s the old guy with the tophat on the Monopoly card. Corbyn would have a field day campaigning against him”
Wrong. Much as, as discussed in comments Niall’s recent post, children hate being talked down to, it turns out working class people hate being talked down to by middle class people. They far prefer an honest posh person. I’d go so far as to say the middle classes (Guardian-reading, BBC-watching types) hate the rich and the poor equally: they see the rich as exploiters of a helpless, stupid poor.
In reality the poor think this is bollocks, want the interfering middle to bugger off, and don’t mind the rich. Rich and poor are mutually useful to each other and know it, and neither has any grudge against the other.
I’m being vague about my terms here: I think rich/poor/middle class/working class are not quite the right terms.
I’ve just found on YT this short interview from 1999 of JRM meeting Ali G. The Honourable Gentleman remains a gentleman.
Mr Ed, I saw it a while ago. There are very few politicians who could survive such an interview with dignity intact.