Whichever candidate wins the UKIP leadership election, their comments at hustings and in YouTube videos suggest the fundamental flaw will not be realised, but overlooked, and thus UKIP will continue to decline.
While UKIP may perhaps have issues with internal structure, and appealing to members for input on policy is a good idea, such change will only make a party more in tune with its own members, who likely already vote for it, an echo chamber, and not those outside who ignore it. Experts will be needed to research the public perceptions, to find which issues they need, but then again, such can be a party that blows with the wind, to appeal to the feeling of the moment flip-flopping on policy. We could discuss other matters, such as that it should focus on council level, targeting local issues people feel passionate about. However, all of this is for nothing if the most important thing is ignored.
Rather, what UKIP most urgently needs, if it is to survive, is a clear ideology that it believes in and stands by resolutely. No amount of whining about the mainstream media, or conspiracy theories, will change this. A call to quit the EU is not an ideology, in fact, such a desire can be driven by various ideologies, hence Brexiteers were from, as well as UKIP, also Labour Leave, who are socialists, and the Conservatives who are home to capitalists, and also vile corporatists. If UKIP is to ever go anywhere, it needs to stand for not one issue, but an ideology. Islamism is a problem, very clearly mentioned in the UKIP manifesto last election, though Nuttall looked terrified to discuss it. However, while frank discussion of these serious issues may win the Rotherham seat, I doubt such would have won Stoke. UKIP lost because no one knew what Nuttall was for, especially as he openly told people to vote for the Conservatives to achieve Brexit.
The major issue, the main concern of the working class vote in the North, in Wales, exactly where UKIP strived to thrash Labour and to win, must be acknowledged: mines were shut, factories closed, shipyard workers sacked. British jobs were given to China and India, causing mass unemployment across Scotland, Wales and Northern England.
The scars still exist. In the Welsh valleys, about a third of young people have no jobs. There are suburbs in North England where the homes are empty. This is what people are concerned about; this is on what the Tories have failed to challenge Labour, but UKIP could do it were it awake. Enough whining by Labour on mine closures; too shallow. The slogan of UKIP should be “Buy British, hire British.” If it had done so, it may have taken Northern seats, because few who voted for communist Corbyn shared his sympathies for the IRA or the admiration of the decline of Venezuela. They were just not convinced May would do anything to help the poor.
Hate me if you want; call me names, but I’m sorry, I think it must be acknowledged, to succeed, that not one candidate addressed the real problem with employment levels. British jobs must be brought home. What surprised me about the London UKIP hustings is that when asked how to create jobs for young people, not one candidate mentions the real problem, the issue no other party tackles, that would give UKIP a purpose. As we achieve Brexit, in some form, probably not true, but sadly in name only, the natural progression as we “take back control” must be to ask, where is the patriotism with regards to British jobs? What of the loyalty to our greater family, the nation? Where is the economic protectionism?
With all due respect, all the candidates’ comments on economic policy are shallow – I’m not referring to one person in particular. Though I was surprised when one candidate, after talking of standing up for the working class, gave a boring textbook Tory response on cutting benefits; an empty soundbite chosen no doubt to appeal to the UKIP core.
UKIP London hustings:
When another candidate, John Rees-Evans, who I believe is a man of noble intentions, spoke at 28 minutes and 38 seconds into the hustings, he said that he and Etheridge have been asking “libertarian” think tank IEA for advice, and I know NEC members have to. This is what Etheridge means by “libertarian”. No doubt they mean well. I would call them Faragite. They no doubt are seeking experts’ input on how to take UKIP forward, humbly looking to those with economic knowledge, and I believe they genuinely want to do what is best for the people. However, all is not as it seems when it comes to the IEA, which decades ago may have been the bastion of Thatcherism, something it uses to lure in supporters, but I believe has since leaned towards anarchism.
On one side, there are claims by Etheridge that UKIP is being infiltrated by “fascists”; suggestions by MEPs that they will quit, taking the party’s EU funding, if Anne Marie Waters or Peter Whittle win, but for goodness sake, everyone should quit regardless if UKIP won’t wake up and embrace economic protectionism. Brexit was a nationalist vote, and UKIP must embrace libertarianism of a nationalist form, standing for the people, for our jobs, our culture, and our freedom, if it is to have any meaning. Reject globalism!
Many UKIP members are understandably very pleased to hear Anne Marie Waters courageously challenge things such as the horrendous failure of our governments to prosecute anyone for FGM, and certainly something needs to be done about this horrific form of child abuse, and also the INCREDIBLY slow police action in Rotherham, or with Charlene Downes’ case, and many others.
Meanwhile, there has been much press excitement about the involvement of Jack Buckby, ex-BNP, who now calls himself a paleo-libertarian, and the Eastern Daily Press even makes claim that her deputy, Stuart Agnew MEP, expressed concern – though, as the quote is edited into an inch of its life, I have absolutely no idea what Aggers actually said. What I know for sure is that Buckby called Nigel Farage a “coward”; an approach I see as unhelpful because it put Nigel fans off AMW’s challenge to Sharia law. Whatever one thinks of Nigel’s position on Islam, his hard work and COURAGE must be recognised.
On the other hand, I hope UKIP has not been infiltrated by another form of “libertarianism”, pushed by the IEA, and what I view as their almost Blairite associate, the ASI. There are all these conspiracy theories about Carswell being a plant to take over UKIP; however, the self-claimed libertarian was often at odds with the Tories, but somewhere he was often welcome was the IEA, where he was a regular speaker. This should give an insight into the kind of party the MEPs threatening to walk would create.
In my view, those in UKIP should surely forget about Carswell, and worry about the “libertarian” machine behind: the IEA. I would suggest that such organisations, under a banner of “liberty”, utilise persons, often none the wiser, to push cultural Marxism. For example, while one their top researchers, Christopher Snowdon, has expressed to me more than once some fantastic, sensible views on border control to me, which I respect him for, as a whole, the IEA support open borders, having none other than the very DEPUTY of the EU PRESIDENT as one of their main experts and writers, who wrote a book for them demanding for Brexit to not mean a reform to UK immigration laws. They flat out ignore the real reason people voted for Brexit.
The IEA have an absolutist approach to free trade THAT HAS COST THE NORTH OF ENGLAND AND WALES THEIR JOBS. Stop blaming Thatcher! She closed half as many mines as Labour did. The problem is the willingness by governments, red and blue, to give away British jobs. While free market, low state involvement in business, certainly works within our borders, and I welcome true capitalism, because it creates jobs, it is pure folly not to have a preference for British goods.
John Rees-Evans is very right to call for more apprenticeships, for support of the vocational route, rather than this insistence to send everyone to university; cultural Marxist madrasas where 80% of professors are in love with socialism and brainwash too many of the middle class with anti-British sentiment. However, the major issue regards employment is that we have given away our jobs to communist countries like China, which is now powerful and jostling with Japan, our NATO ally, over an island that no one even lives on. There, people are working in conditions so bad that they have to put nets around the roofs of factories to reduce the staff suicide level. Is this what it means to be British these days? For the liberal elite to rape the world, because we the British plebs are unwanted since we rose up in the days of Chartists in protest and achieved human rights?
A liberal elite that no longer wants us, and when we speak out, slaps us down with false allegations of “racism”? In my view, surely if anyone is “racist”, is it not those progressive hypocrites, sipping wine at “libertarian” thinktank events, that gloat over their cheaper phone, cheering for globalism, because “free markets my man”? As if the only other option, other than supporting horrific overseas conditions, and rising poverty in the North and Wales, is to jump in bed with Diane Abbott!
Not only have our governments failed to put our people first, but also the liberal elite have profited excessively by amoral abuse of those overseas, avoiding safety regulations, and paying insufficient wages. Meanwhile there are British people on the dole. Simply reducing immigration is not enough, but only the first step.
More than one high member of the IEA team (management and a professor) told me they didn’t want Trump to win, but back Gary Johnson, as being the needed breakthrough for freedom, as this shining beacon of what they stood for – this being the idiot who poked his tongue out like a lizard during an interview. Kate Andrews wrote in public, “If Trump wins, centre-right, free-market, small-state conservatives and libertarians alike are left without a political home.” What she means by “free market” is that the globalist abuse of Chinese workers will be hindered when Trump brings jobs back to the USA. However, when she works for a think tank staffed by relatives of bankers, what would one expect?
Other than for their very appreciated stance against the EU, the IEA are in my opinion rarely different to the LibDems, from which they recruited their leader. In fact, their call for Brexit was limited by a call for open borders, i.e. they don’t want a “hard” Brexit; a real Brexit. The IEA are besotted with hippies, and hence their main youth campaign is to demand not for jobs for the plebs in the Welsh valleys and the North of England, but for weed to be legalised so posh boys parties are cheaper. While I see no logic in throwing a lost, confused teenager in jail to find themselves then unwanted by employers, and heading into a life of crime, there is not systematic charging by the CPS of youth for solely cannabis possession alone, and further, I do not appreciate the use of the word “libertarianism” as a banner with which to push cultural decay of Western civilisation.
With advisors such as the IEA breathing over their shoulders, it is no shock that UKIP have failed to properly recognise the MASSIVE void in the political spectrum, that the UKIP leader Steve Crowther alluded to finally this week – Labour are Marxists, hard-left, while the Tories ever infiltrated by progressives, head more and more to the centre, even flirting with the centre left. Other than a fringe of the Tory party, such as Mogg relegated to the bank benches, Britain has no proper right-wing voice, i.e. where the hell is the British equivalent of Steve Bannon’s approach?
The only way for UKIP to have purpose is to stand up and challenge post-modernism, or it exists without purpose. Especially from the days of WW1 until now, with the men traumatised from the wars, distrustful of authority and their soft approach with their kids resulting in the emergence of the hippies, the structure of society has disappeared, with nothing put in its place. Excessive socialism, progressivism has crept in. The gap is wide open to a Trumpesque leader tailored to the British audience, but not one candidate is pushing this.
As the Conservatives stand in the centre, flirting ever more so with socialism, with “progressivism”, UKIP could have a purpose if it became a right-wing party that stood up for both the working and middle classes against the liberal elite. It needs to make a loud, clear call for call for family, faith/freedom (culture), and flag (patriotism).