Reform’s ascent isn’t happenstance; it’s reckoning. Lib Dems dally, Greens posture, Your Party pricks, but Farage’s fortress stands. Starmer’s Midas-in-reverse transmutes promise to peril; Reform reclaims the realm. By-elections were harbingers; polls, the proclamation. Britain beckons sovereignty’s return. The unstoppable? It’s here: enjoy, embark.
|
|||||
|
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
Economics |
Samizdata quote of the day – Reform’s Unyielding SurgeSeptember 12th, 2025 |
 24 comments to Samizdata quote of the day – Reform’s Unyielding SurgeLeave a Reply |
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. |
|||||
It’s not “Your Party”, it’s “Jezbollah”
I call ‘Your Party’ the Yookay party
There’s many a slip twixt cup and lip……there’s 4 years to the next election (I don’t buy the ‘there’ll have to be an election before then’ predictions, turkeys don’t vote for Christmas, Labour MPs facing annihilation will do whatever is necessary to keep their snouts in the trough as long as they possibly can) and a lot of things can happen before then. Look how Poilievre was nailed on to win the Canadian election earlier this year and then suddenly he didn’t. Events dear boy, events.
Reform are going to have to be incredibly disciplined if they are to sustain their poll lead for 4 years straight and then deliver it in a GE. Its not impossible – Labour did it for 5 years between 1992 and 1997. They lost the 1992 GE and within 3 months were outpolling the Tories, and maintained that lead right up to the 1997 election. But Labour had the entire media pretty much on their side, rooting for them against the hated Tories, Reform, not so much…….everyone in the MSM (and State apparatus) will be gunning for them for the next 4 years. If they manage to survive through that lot it will be a modern day miracle.
Ignorant question: What is Reform’s role in, or position on, tomorrow’s rally?
We desperately need a clean-out, but I have a nagging feeling that if Farage is the answer, then we are asking the wrong question.
Suffragium per litteras delendum est.
…enjoy, embark, fasten seat belts, no – really fasten seat belts…
But if Reform stumble through happenstance, or the mulish resistance of the Establishment, who is there left to vote for? The diehard 20% support for Labour, perhaps the same for the Conservatives, and patchy local support for other parties?
It would be an election of the unconvincing when we actually need some political focus to see us through the breakdown of the old Elite.
The Lib Dems are doing well in some parts of the country (although not in my town or county) – even though the Lib Dems stand for nothing.
Kemi Badennoch has tried to distance herself, and the Conservative Party, from the terrible weakness in office – but the question “if you opposed what was done, on mass immigration and so on, why did you not resign from the government?” is a very difficult one. The bitter truth is that officials and “experts” ruled – the elected government did NOT rule.
As for Mr Farage – to win a General Election from five Members of Parliament is a very difficult climb – it may be that Reform ends up the largest party in the House of Commons, but with the other parties uniting against it. This is what happened in Austria to the Freedom Party.
Even with a majority in the House of Commons it would be very difficult (very difficult indeed) to reverse course before this country collapses.
Remember the next General Election in the United Kingdom will not be till 2029 – the country will be in a truly awful condition by then.
Farming is being destroyed, manufacturing is collapsing, and the Credit Bubble “City” is doomed to fail.
As for ethnic conflict – a multi racial society CAN WORK, see the example of FLORIDA (a State of tens of millions of people – it is not a small place), but only where common principles (beliefs) unite the various ethnic groups.
Sadly no such common principles (beliefs) unite the various population groups in Britain – and the conflict is going to be particularly bad in England (due to demography).
Is Mr Farage “the real deal”? He says he is – others, such as Rupert Lowe, Ben Habib, and Carl Benjamin (“Sargon”) say he is not.
The honest answer is “we do not know” – Mr Farage might turn out to be a good Prime Minister, or he might not. There has only been one good Prime Minister in my life time – Margaret Thatcher (Liz Truss was betrayed, never given a real chance).
But the situation that Mr Farage might inherit in 2029 will be much worse, vastly worse, than the situation that Margaret Thatcher inherited in 1979.
Jacob Rees-Mogg and others stress that there must be an electoral pact between the Conservatives and Reform Party – in order to prevent a split vote, but Mr Farage is resistant to that – pointing out that he had such a pact with Prime Minister Alexander “Boris” Johnson, but was then betrayed – in terms of policy on mass immigration and so on.
Even if there is a election pact – the fact remains that Britain in 2029 will be in a truly dreadful condition, there may well be hunger (yes – hunger) and widespread fighting in the streets.
Britain does not have massive amounts of farm land in relation to its population, or vast amounts of raw materials in relation to its population.
Britain depends on efficiency – and is now, increasingly, inefficient, wildly so – and it is getting much worse.
There is no foundation under the Credit Bubble economy – no limit on how far it can fall.
I’m getting inundated with emails demanding “We must stop The BBC from giving airtime to Reform!!111!!!!”
How morally bankrupt do you have to be to demand that your political opponents, who have the support of 30%+ of the population, simply be wiped from the airwaves?
We desperately need a clean-out, but I have a nagging feeling that if Farage is the answer, then we are asking the wrong question.
Suffragium per litteras delendum est.
An *absolute* prerequisite for Reform to succeed is the utter destruction of the Tory Party, so the last thing Farage should do it throw them a lifeline.
If you’re talking about the Tommy Robinson rally, there may be Reform supporters at it but TR and Farage don’t like one another, and as I’ve mentioned previously there are sound grounds for Farage to avoid direct involvement with TR.
As for Reform and Tories, while I think Reform shouldn’t necessarily block having ex-Tories as members per se, it should use some wise discretion. Welcoming Nadine Dorries into Reform, only for her to then advocate some kind of alliance with Boris Johnson, wasn’t a smart move.
“But the situation that Mr Farage might inherit in 2029 will be much worse, vastly worse, than the situation that Margaret Thatcher inherited in 1979.”
I think that this is a massive issue. Thatcher was very unpopular with the hard of thinking because of the action that had to be taken to sort the mess out. What will the unemployment numbers be if 90% of government funded jobs have to be axed because there is no money left and we can’t borrow any more?
Farage is a politician and must work inside and with what is termed “The Deep State” plus other politicians (including within his own party).
Therefore, although I am prepared to give a small amount of credence to his pronouncements, I strongly suspect that, once in office, he will be stymied by everyone and everything within and without of the system. Plus, the House of Lords has been stuffed with left wing characters so they too can block any meaningful change.
And, just as he declares that he is “The Real Deal” recall that Tony Blair said that “I think I’m a pretty straight sort of guy”. How did that work out? Answers on the back of a postcard to the usual address.
With the best will in the world, I am convinced that despite all the rhetoric, nothing will change and it will be more of the same.
Plus, the House of Lords has been stuffed with left wing characters so they too can block any meaningful change.
Only for a year.
FWIW here’s my simple strategy for Nige.
Pass a Repeals Bill through the HoC immediately repealing pretty much every Act that has been passed since 1997 (leave out a few obvious one like the Brexit one.) HoL vetoes, pass it again through the HoC a year later, and use the Parliament Act to put it into law.
It may be objected, and indeed it will be objected, that some of those Acts contain vital stuff that if repealed will cause babies to shrivel and die, dragons to roam the land and so on.
But that’s OK, because there’s a whole year to identify the dragons, if they’re real. And then you can pass a few more Acts reinstating those bits of what you’ve repealed which are actually useful. But this time you don’t have to wait a year before they take effect, because the HoL won’t block them. And if they do, you can point to the HoL and say – “not my fault, they’re blocking things. Looks like we’d better reform them.”
btw there isn’t any general constitutional principle that only the Labour Party is allowed to reform the Lords. Other governments can do it too, so long as they’re willing to wait a year.
Perry – it depends what you mean by destroying “the Tory Party” – if you mean the often closet Lib Dems in Westminster (those people who nodded along in Oxbridge when then the professors taught them the doctrines of Hobbes-Hume-Bentham and-so-on) then you have a point.
But if you mean the Conservative Party in-the-country, the ordinary people, then you are talking about the destruction of what is left of England.
Stonyground – Margaret Thatcher had little power at first and that almost led to total disaster.
From 1979 to 1983 there was no real reform – indeed things got much WORSE.
James Prior (Employment Secretary) refused to get rid of the, government granted, Trade Union powers – even in the face of a world recession, so UNEMPLOYMENT exploded. It did not have to – it was the refusal to remove the powers that government-had-granted unions that made unemployment explode – see W.H. Hutt “The Strike Threat System” for the terrible effects of Acts of Parliament that go back a very long way.
And Chancellor Howe did not “cut” overall taxes and spending (as the media dishonestly claimed) – he greatly INCREASED overall taxes (for example almost doubling sales tax – “VAT” and so on) and vastly INCREASED government spending – accepting the utterly insane government sector pay deals of the outgoing Labour government.
This massive increase in government spending and taxation, and the failure to deregulate the Labour Market meant that the recession in Britain from 1979 to 1982 was much worse than in other nations – it did not have to be worse, it was made to be worse by James Prior and Sir Geoffrey Howe.
It was only when Margaret Thatcher was strong enough to replace James Prior and Chancellor Howe, replace them with Norman Tebbit and Nigel Lawson, that things started to improve.
In 877 A.D. King Charles the Bald of France made a formal declaration that he had no legal power to violate the fundamental laws – for example that he had no right to take LAND from one family and give it to another family.
The Estates General did not exist in 877 A.D. – so where in the mental universe of Sir Francis Bacon, his follower Thomas Hobbes, or the FAKE authority on the law, Sir William Blackstone, did the law come from?
In 1100 King Henry the First made a similar formal declaration (on oath) in England – implicitly rejecting how his father (William the First) had governed.
There was no Parliament in 1100 – so what as meant by King Henry formally swearing not to violate the laws, it was clear that “the laws” did NOT mean his whims – otherwise the oath would have been pointless. The oath was about declaring that the King was under the law – that law was NOT his whims.
In 1215 we have Magna Carta – but no “Parliament”.
Bracton writes extensively on English law – how it is NOT the arbitrary whims of the judges, but it is derived logically from principles of justice – again there was no “Parliament” when Bracton was writing, or sitting on the judicial bench.
Show me someone who says that the fundamental laws (principles of justice) come from Parliament – and you have shown me someone who is ignorant of the historical facts.
And show me someone who says that Parliament is a great defender of the fundamental liberties of the human subject (free will moral agents – human beings) and you have shown me someone who is wrong, flat wrong.
Labour have an unassailable majority to do whatever they like until 2029 largely because over 6.8 million still voted for the conservatives despite the incompetence, disasters and betrayals of the previous 13 years.
Yes, the party needs to be utterly destroyed to protect the rest of us from it being allowed to happen again.
I’m sorry Paul but the conservative party in the country you refer to were those voters.
What Lee Moore said.
Reform can repeal Acts and no one can stop them. What they can’t do is replace Acts they don’t like with newer versions because they’ll be tied down in interminable debates over what they propose. So bypass the Blob and just repeal laws and don’t replace them. Give the power to the people to do stuff, unencumbered by the State. The courts cannot rule on laws that do not exist, neither can the police or Civil Service attempt to enforce them. And when there’s nothing for vast swathes of the public sector to do, cut their funding.
John – one could just as easily say it was the Reform voters who produced the vast Socialist majority in the House of Commons.
In Kettering the Conservative Member of Parliament voted the way that Mr Farage would wish on almost every matter – not to please Mr Farage, but because he was a strong Conservative. Yet the Reform Party still put up a candidate against him – and, thus, handed the seat to the Socialists.
But this is water under the bridge now – if, and it is a big “if”, this country makes it to the General Election in 2029 there must be an electoral pact. Talking of one party “destroying” the other is not good – it just helps the Socialists (and the Greens).
However….. Mr Farage has a point, he was betrayed in the last (unofficial) electoral pact) – Mr Alexander “Boris” Johnson promised XYZ and then did not deliver – indeed he governed FROM-THE-LEFT – on mass immigration and everything else. He could have resisted the officials and “experts” (yes difficult – but possible), but he choose not to.
Mr Johnson, and others, had Free Will – he (and others) could have chosen to do other than he did, and he did not.
This is clearly unacceptable behaviour – and I am not going to pretend it was acceptable.
Only on Friday evening I was reminded of something that Jeremy Hunt did (as a Secretary of State) – the officials and “experts” demanded that he extend benefits to people who claimed mental health problems – “right wingers” begged Mr Hunt NOT to do this, knowing it would open the flood gates to vastly more welfare claims, but Mr Hunt just gave in and rubber stamped the change.
It was a terrible decision, he was warned against it, but he rubber stamped it anyway.
To be honest, from over here on our side of the pond it does not look like there is any chance of forming a government there that has either legitimacy [not purely statutory but rather in the hearts and minds of the people] or the welfare of britain at its core. And since as has been discussed here for quite a while, current policies are unsustainable; the society and the economy are fairly sure to collapse. Realizing that this is not the venue for a detailed discussion of such, but I do wonder if there are those discussing what to do after the organic waste impacts the rotating airfoil?
Subotai Bahadur
Subotal Bahadur – if one judges by the media (GB News wasting time talking about “Andy” Burnham, and the BBC breathlessly telling us of the latest wonderful actions of King Charles III) then you are correct – there is no hope at all.
However, most people no longer trust the media – so we shall have to see.
I would like to correct an error I made in my first comment.
I wrote that the Liberal Democrats (“Lib Dems”) stood for “nothing” – but it is now clear from the comments of the leader of the Liberal Democratic Party, Sir Ed Davey, accusing Israel of “genocide” and siding with the accursed “United Nations” – that the Liberal Democratic party does not stand for “nothing” – it, by the words of its own leader, stands for EVIL.