Prime Minister Farage?

Cartoon by Inkgall

Boris Johnson’s chances of being elected Tory leaded received a dramatic boost with the publication of an opinion poll in the Telegraph showing that under his leadership, the Conservative Party would storm to victory at the next election. The figures are stunning. No-one else comes near Boris in appealing to the wider electorate. Whether they trust him or not, like him or not, any Tory MP who wants to stay in politics – i.e. keep their cushy job at Westminster – must now seriously consider backing Boris.

But if Johnson is crowned king, where does that leave Nigel Farage? And where does it leave all those patriots, North and South, Right and Left, middle class and working class, who voted for the Brexit Party in the European election because they want to reclaim their country from those who would sacrifice it on the altar of multi-culture, diversity and inclusion? True, Labour internationalists and Conservative globalists support open borders and mass immigration for different reasons: the former in the name of inclusion and social justice, the latter in the name of free trade, cheap labour and maximising profits. But the effect is the same: the destruction of our settled communities, our centuries-old traditions and ways of life, our sense of belonging.

So, where does Boris stand?

When he was Mayor of London, Boris was enthusiastic in his praise of its diversity, its multiculturalism. Of course, this came with the job – he could never have survived as Mayor otherwise. Privately, he may have agreed with John Cleese that London is no longer an English city – who knows. But whatever he believed, he presided over London’s demographic transformation. His well-known admiration for Churchill, on whom he has written a fine book, seems to speak of his innate patriotism. His love of the classics seems to speak of a deep-seated attachment to Western civilization. But then he has advocated Turkey joining the EU – the first formal step to the creation of Eurasia. Was this just a bit of bluster, an understandable show of loyalty to his great-grandfather, who was Turkish? We cannot be sure. His main professed argument for supporting Brexit is that Britain can thrive as a global trading nation. But on borders and immigration, on the nation, on the English people (which I seem to recall was a favourite expression of Churchill’s) he is silent – just as all other modern-day Conservative politicians are silent.

Let us suppose, for the sake of argument, that Boris is a patriot who, in his heart, regrets the passing of England and all that it stands for. The question is whether he will continue playing the game, as he did when Mayor of London – condemning patriots as ‘populists’, trading the survival of our nation for power and privilege; or whether he will make a stand. But if he is to make a stand, he will have to reclaim the Conservative Party first, and the heart and soul of the Conservative Party has long been lost. The prospect, then, is that under Boris, England will be finished off just as London was finished off, with Boris presiding over it all like a grinning Cheshire cat. 

Where does this leave Nigel Farage? Farage has played the game as expertly as Boris. He has cleverly managed, by and large, to avoid the smears ‘racist’, ‘extremist’ and ‘Islamophobe’ by appealing to the ethnic minorities for support, by emphasising the global trading benefits of Brexit, by distancing himself from the likes of Tommy Robinson and Marine Le Pen. But, unlike Johnson, we know what Farage really thinks about mass immigration, about cultural and demographic change, about the existence of ‘parallel communities’, about English patriotism. And, of course, it is these concerns, the concerns that the silent majority dare not voice, that really underlie the Brexit phenomenon. Farage must know this. He must know that the Brexit vote was not a cry for global capitalism, for flogging off our national assets, not even especially a call for international free trade, whatever its merits.

There is good reason to believe that the old Right-Left political fault lines are crumbling fast, as Roger Eatwell and Matthew Goodwin have demonstrated in their compelling book National Populism: The Revolt against Liberal Democracy. There is only one political divide now. On the one side are the global liberals, the new-age cosmopolitans, the social justice warriors, the identity-mongers; on the other side are those whose loyalties and affections still lie with their country, their nation, their homeland.   

It is a risky game, but if Farage can roll back on the dogma of free markets and global trade, if he can get across that he will put our national interest first, our steel workers, our communities, our freedoms, our way of life, then he can win, or at least threaten to win, the votes of millions of former Conservative and Labour voters – the votes of the silent majority, of all those who are proud to call themselves patriots. One way or another, England may yet be saved.

Subscribe To Quarterly Traditional Print Magazine (delivered to your door)

Subscribe To Quarterly Digital Edition

Liked this Blog ? Why not post it to a friend ?

14 Comments on Prime Minister Farage?

  1. I don’t see Farage rolling back free market dogma – I’d put him to the right of the IEA on that.
    This is a subtle analysis but I can’t help wondering if the voters are won by something much more limited and simple. Tories have presented and ruled in the past as pragmatists attached to no particular ideology (not even ‘England’) other than a handful of basic values (compassion, justice, public safety) that are more or less universal and unremarkable in the west. Yet we see and hear the most outrageous things going unpunished and even supported n a daily basis. The intimidation of Birmingham schoolteachers – no arrests, no fines for non attendance, then that ‘comedienne’ threatening an acid attack and walking free.
    Too depressing to carry on with the list.

  2. Alistair, a very interesting article, we must hope that Nigel Farage can succeed.
    The crypto-establishment is agin him and agin the British majority.
    The new UK establishment is really just an annexe of the progressive technocracy of the EU, hence their horror at the referendum result.
    The new establishment is also widespread, the BBC, Civil Service, and Academia are obvious members, but the trade union leadership belongs to it also. Note Mick Whelan (leader of ASLEF, who represent train drivers), that there are too many white, male train drivers (he wants “fewer people who look like me”), Who was this message for, surely not for the train driving union membership who pay his (undoubtedly large) salary, and to whom he should owe his allegiance.
    Was he just signalling to the members of the new establishment that he also belongs, and when he is finishes his job as leader of ASLEF, maybe they might have a well paid sinecure on some diversity forum for him?
    His attitude is shared by all members of the establishment they care not for those who vote for them, or those whose taxes fund their well padded lifestyles, they care not where their duty should lie, or that our Kingdom has a history, traditions and beliefs that are worth considering and keeping true to.

  3. Surely the vote for the Brexit Party was more of a protest against the perceived woolliness of the Conservative Party. Before Farage can achieve any political traction in the broader sense he will have to stand and succeed as an MP, and he will have to attract to his banner a number of current MPs who might conceivably form a cabinet. That will mean a considerable volte-face for any that do. It all seems highly improbable, and it looks as though we are going to be stuck with Boris who will have to placate the hard right at another election in order to get a working majority. Interesting times.

    By the way, I think all this worry about Corbyn getting his hands on the kevers of power is needless patching up a paper tiger.

    • TBP could easily elect Corbyn. Labour will have no problem assembling some popular policies and present credible alternatives to things about which there is widespread despair – trains and homes for a start – and their hatred of Jews/Israel guarantees substantial votes from Islamics and pro-Socialist/fascist regime leftists. What policies can we expect from Boris – tax cuts for the well off? That’ll pull in the votes – but not for us.

  4. I don’t care who leads the Conservative party because the Conservative party are not Conservative , in fact I have no idea what they are I don’t think they do either .
    So after many many years I’m off.
    It’s the Brexit party for me and that lets in magic grandpa that’s Mays fault for lying all the time she was prime minister.

  5. Fascinating and depressing. We speak of two sides, global and local, but only one side is really allowed to express itself. Off these threads, even in inter-personal conversation, we still fear; we still police ourselves to a tighter and tighter degree and the fanatics howl with ever greater strength. To offer an example: Many years ago I saw a fair production of an Ibsen classic at the Almeida theatre. All the actors were – naturally – white. It was a feature of the performance which “went without saying”. Now the play is on again at another theatre. Friends have recommended it, but I see from the publicity that despite the inescapably period location and setting of the piece, reflected in the costumes, one of the characters is played by an Afro-Caribbean actress. Were I to raise this as an objection among at least two thirds of my acquaintance, I should be opposed and perhaps censured. Among our cowed, conditioned public I would be attacked. If one were to offer one’s own account of such a play in the old, accurate style it would be soon be closed down. Yes, actors are actors; we “suspend disbelief” and so on. There are many impeccable arguments for rolling over and dying. But it remains a one-sided falsification of our culture and our history. Meanwhile, an ethnic European playing an African character would be mercilessly reprimanded and sacked. There is so much like this going on – the nasty conclusion of the broad policy behind mass migration in the late twentieth century – that one questions one’s commitment to continued existence. One’s world is being demonised and abolished.

    • Both right. Having a few black or brown faces in contemporary TV dramas is not the big issue. The defamation of English and European culture and history is a prelude to destruction. There are numerous examples of anachronistic casting – it is not mostly “non-racial” but “Orwellian”. For the African Face. take two weeks’ subscription to “The Guardian” and “Observer”. I write as someone whose most gifted school student was a Caribbean girl.

  6. So depressing, I thought that this organ was about conservatism, so I RSS’ed it.

    Reading through the first ten stories that my feed listed, it is clear that as in so much these days, it is in reality about the CONservative Party. As we all know, this shower is manned chiefly by globalist shills and has very little to do with conservatism.

    The Brexit Party is conservative, so it is attractive to conservatives of every ilk, including those millions that would never vote for the blues, and never voted at all until the Labour Party had campaigned on their behalf to enable their grandparents to do so.

    Both “legacy” parties have moved away from conservatism and towards globalism and are being punished for it.

    We conservatives will just have to put up with our new “populist” moniker.

    Vote Tory, get Labour.

    • The definition of Conservatism is contentious as I’m sure you know Stephen. there is little known of farage’s policies – though he’s quoted as being agin the NHS as a public service (I think). That would not be in the Conservative tradition of Burke, Adam Smith – or, for that matter even Hobbes, who stressed that people could not be ruled justly if deprived of the ‘contentments’ of life. It’s undeniable that the present HMG is not Conservative in any sense at all.
      On your separate point – absolutely agree that fascism and socialism are indistinguishable in practice and much the same in words. I’d included Islamism (as clerical rule) in the same nasty group. All claim to be for the weak and the poor but end up oppressing everyone, enriching themselves and delighting in sadistic depraved behaviour – though Iran and saud are off the scale for seizing and torturing young women. (I’ve sometimes wondered if the misogyny of Muslim regimes is for the same reasons as James I and his ‘witchphobia’- inability to express homosexuality and displacement of self-loathing onto females.

  7. Boris just loves Boris. No need to document this with fact after fact from recent articles in journals of varied standpoint.

    He has already expressed support for increased immigration and the giant eyesore destined to be built next to Parliament to remind the English people of our “racism” and to warn the “English” politicians to oppose it in “all its forms” (along with sexism &c).

    Two questions for the “internationalist” contenders: (1) British forces in Iran in due course? (2) De-industrialised Britain subservient to CO2-emitting Communist China – out of the Brussels frying-pan into Beijing fire?

    Better off with Blue Labour? See the latest “New Statesman”.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


*


This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.