Monday, September 10, 2007

Where are you going to my pretty Socialist ?

The question of how the Conservative Party copes with change is an interesting one but as we are not foolish enough to want stagnation we have to accept that Conservativism is a more subtle doctrine than simply conserving . It is only by special pleading a “ Doctrine “ at all but I see its heart as valuing tradition , fearing anarchy, recognising the capital of a system This sounds a little unexciting and in some ways it is . It does have its romantic side though in that its ascribes to traditional human needs valuing humanity, nationhood , family love and a fierce loyalty as expressed by real people ; “ Fallen “ but capable of great good. It is sceptical of itself and always looking for proportion and balance with a dose of pragmatism in the mix .
. Conservatism is more like Indian Hindu culture in that it is an unbroken evolution of primitivism into extreme sophistication operating simultaneously at many levels , hard to reduce to dogma . Socialism derived form Marxism is more like the modern Islam with its set answer for everything .

Such thoughts skit across my mind like the shadows of geese on the lake , as I make chums on the Compass site You may judge the warm cordial empathy that we feel for each other by this latest merry quip,“How do we deal with these exploiters of human compassion .. shoot the fucking lot of them ! “ Moi ?

Seeing them chuck around reasons to reintroduce income redistribution I see a looming and difficult problem for the left. While they love to go on about carers and “relative poverty”, with each step forward capitalism delivers the “ State of Emergency” gets less urgent . Poverty now needs only one holiday , not only one lung Inequality is only acquired by comparison to the extreme wealth of the highest earners . People are getting richer and for the left this is like the tide going down to reveal the bedrock of their beliefs

It was far easier to see in the deputy leadership contest than anything Brown says ( well duh he`s lying ) This was Ruth Listers opening remarks in the current post “A simultaneously heartening and dispiriting feature of the Deputy Leadership campaign was the emergence of inequality as a critical issue”….. They are like all activists calling for a return to the true path but what was it ….do we remember?

Marxism had a mystical reconciliation of the familial and tribal loyalties it cut. It posited a love of all men for the other when money would disappear and all would become god like . In other words private property was an evil of itself . State custody of property was a good in itself both efficiently and morally . In their hearts this what many of the left still believe and that is why redistribution keeps returning. Never before has it been so denuded of other motives though.

The Ages Of The Lefty

1Saying to the starving …”There is a dream in which all together we will have plenty.”

2 Saying to the exploited “You are being treated like cattle by by evil capitalists. Join or brotherhood and find strength”

3 Saying to someone with a car and a semi…look we`d like to take your money away because we feel the Council will use its better and anyway it will only make you greedy and nasty

This why they desperately fear laughter and this is why they hate Boris Jonson so poisonously . He is saying “ Look they have no doctrinal clothes !” and for them that is a very serious matter indeed.

8 comments:

Anonymous said...

Marx definition of poverty was a little house next to a big house.

So, when a senior local NHS manager crept very sheepishly out his, top of the range, mercedes after parking next to me at the municipal dump the other day, I felt very poor indeed. And I felt even more poverty stricken when I thought of his flexi-time, Mickey Mouse job and golden pension pot and perks.

It reminded me of a news item which asked members of the public how much they thought political and public service fat cats earn. None of those interviewed had a clue, most estimates were a couple of hundred thousand down.

It's time Conservatives exposed these socialist fat cats - and what their idea of justice really means.

Auntie Flo'

Newmania said...

Flo thats a corruscating comment and much appreciated

Anonymous said...

I don't get it, n. Why don't we expose the hypocrisy of these nulab fat cats when they claim the high moral ground of social justice and carp on about Cameron's wealth?

We should be at the filthy rich vein of their greedy jugulars, yet, we sit in embarassed silence. Nulab must view that silence as Christmas every day.

Is it because we fear that, in any trade of fat cat insults, we would come off worse because Cameron and a few other Conservatives are wealthier than most nulabs?

Well let me tell Conservatives a secret, that cat's out of the bag.

I want to see Cameron et al take the moral high ground from under nulab's feet, by exposing nulab greed, by refusing to draw any more annual salary rises and by cutting their expenses to the quick. Cameron has said he will set up a committee to examine the need to cut MPs pay. Let's see him cut Conservative MP's pay NOW.

Auntie Flo'

Ed said...

Reintroduce income redistribution?

N where have you been? I am the poor one because I cannot afford the flatscreens and Sky TV which my neighbours have, even though I probably have the best "job" in the building.

Work that out.

Newmania said...

I have been to the Compass site Ed its on my blog roll and Ken Livingsyones favourite think tank ,. Its actually very interesting to see the sort of things they say and that concern them

Newmania said...

Flo I `m sorry but i don`t agree I think we should have fewer but better paid and more p[restigieous MPs who are curently just socioai workers who do a bit of panto . I would like tho see the top jobs rewarded commensuately with their importance . Why shoudthe head of the BBC get opaid six times as much as the PM.

Its ridiculous as if they were ina high profile church. I am not a fabn of this puritanical misery

Anonymous said...

newmania, it didn't take a fat cat salary to attract Maggie Thatcher, did it?

I was no fan of hers as you know, however, among the many reasons I greatly admired Maggie despite detesting her divisive policies and her arrogance was her honesty, her conviction and her refusal to dig her snout into the public purse.

She gave her all for the country too, unlike current politicians who's numero uno concern is to sustain their gravy train.

And you're right to cmpare the head of the BBC's salary - that should be cut too.

Auntie FLo'

Ed said...

I think MPs should do it because they want to not because it's good pay. Pay them a salary to afford them a comfortable existence say £40,000 but not enough for them to build up massive property empires on the back of the taxpayer.

Then we would see who really wanted to "make a difference".

Blog Archive