Skip to main content
I Want Labour to Be This...

But then again, I have very rarely voted for anyone who won, and Noel Skelton died a long time ago. More over at the David Lindsay blog;

The Lanchester Declaration

1. Our common position is one of absolute commitment to the Welfare State, workers’ rights, trade unionism, the co-operative movement and wider mutualism, consumer protection, strong communities, conservation rather than environmentalism, fair taxation, full employment, public ownership, proper local government, and a powerful Parliament.

2. That is fully compatible with a no less absolute commitment to any, all or none of the monarchy, the organic Constitution, national sovereignty, civil liberties, the Union, the Commonwealth, the countryside, traditional structures and methods of education, traditional moral and social values, economic patriotism, balanced migration, a realist foreign policy, an unhysterical approach to climate change, and a base of real property for every household to resist both over-mighty commercial interests and an over-mighty State.

3. Our common position as set out in 1 above requires a truly national party. In the service of that common position, a truly national party would respect and take account of all of the commitments set out in 2 above, though without requiring any of them.

4. A truly national party would be profoundly sensitive to the interests, insights and aspirations of agriculture and manufacturing, small and medium-sized businesses, each and all of the English ceremonial counties, each and all of the Scottish lieutenancy areas, each and all of the Welsh preserved counties, each and all of the traditional Northern Irish counties, each and all of the London Boroughs, and each and all of the Metropolitan Boroughs.

5. A truly national party would be profoundly sensitive to the interests, insights and aspirations of the countryside, local government, the trade unions, mutual enterprises, voluntary organisations, and social and cultural conservatives.

6. A truly national party would be profoundly sensitive to the interests, insights and aspirations of people who cherished ties throughout the world, most especially within these Islands and the Commonwealth, but also to the Arab world and Iran, the Slavic and Confucian worlds, Latin America, and elsewhere, in principle including any country on earth, and ideally including all of them.

7. None of the above would be to the exclusion of the interests, insights and aspirations of financial services, the presently favoured parts of the country, the towns and cities, social and cultural liberals, or those who cherished ties to Continental Europe, the United States of America, and the State of Israel. But it would exclude any new Cold War against Russia, China, Iran, or anywhere else.

8. A truly national party would always give priority in international affairs to the ties within the Commonwealth and within these Islands, and could have no truck with any idea of the American Republic coercively imposing utopianism. It would reject that idea’s rewritten Marxism in which the bourgeoisie is the victorious class, because it would reject all class-based politics in favour of what Aneurin Bevan called “a platform broad enough for all to stand upon”.

9. A truly national party would fight every seat as if it were a knife-edge marginal.

10. A truly national party as a vehicle for our common position would draw deeply on a heritage variously trade unionist, co-operative and mutual, Radical Liberal, Tory populist, Christian Socialist, Social Catholic and Distributist, and so on. Integral to that heritage is a valiant history of opposition to all of Stalinism, Maoism, the Trotskyist distinction without a difference, Nazism, Fascism, and the Far Right regimes in Southern Africa, Latin America and elsewhere. Those who have never recanted their former Stalinism, Maoism or Trotskyism, or their former support for those Far Right regimes, admitting that that stance had been wrong at the time, can have no part in a truly national party.

Comments

David Lindsay said…
Exciting times.
8:46 pm
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Statism in the United States of America The picture is of course of Thomas Jefferson. When out of the presidency, he defended states' rights in the name of freedom; when in it, he sent the USS enterprise to crush North African pirates and Muslim slavers, abandoned black revolutionaries like Toussaint L'Ouverture, attempted to subvert Judges, and bought Louisiana, stretching from Quebec to the Gulf of Mexico, from Napoleon without asking Congress. It used to be difficult to use European terms in the USA. 'The State' could of course mean the local sovereign entities which are far more than mere administrative units, but which also have histories and aspirations as political units that Europeans, especially from big countries, never quite understand. 'The Federal government' was a phrase apt to be mistaken. Its public face, the presidency, was often confused with the Congress, whose semi-permanent and semi-dynastic political class, with their media support structur...
16 comments
Read more

What really happened to JFK and America in Dallas?

 I realised some time ago that my students do not understand references to the events of November 1963 in Dallas anymore. So I have been using a break to compile a briefing book on the events, the use of commissions and enquiries to pursue particular narratives, and the embedding of the JFK assassination in American culture. This is the first chapter. It is a very long read. All mistakes are my own.  Before the Assassination Lee Harvey Oswald was a US Marine and radar operator at the Atsugi naval base, carrying an elevated clearance. He was also learning Russian and loudly proclaiming his Marxist-Leninist sympathies. These were not investigated or treated as a security risk. [1] Whilst at Atsugi, Oswald probably became one of a number of American marines in a programme to identify moles within the security establishment. This required him to cut his Marine service short by suggesting that he had to look after a sick mother, and also that he wished to seek higher education ...
Post a Comment
Read more

AI and I write about Boolean Logic and conspiracies

 AI and I have been trying to make sense of what I think about the emerging political and legal landscape online. I'd thought of this as a lecture series building on somewhat vague ideas I had about what AI is, where it comes from, and how to use it for the purposes of merging Catholic thought with Georgism to escape liberalism. All quite soupy stuff. Here is one of our efforts. The Devil’s Boolean: How Modernity Turned Us Into Conspiracy Machines Modern democracies rest on a paradox. They promise freedom, rational control, and technological progress—yet deliver burnout, conspiracy, and deepening distrust. Tools meant to liberate us—social media, artificial intelligence, the market—now trap us in a relentless binary logic: success or failure, visibility or obscurity, control or collapse. That binary—what might be called a Boolean logic of the self —runs deeper than technology. It comes out of a Protestant-inflected culture that prizes achievement as a moral duty. As philosopher...
Post a Comment
Read more