From the replies you give, I don’t see the Reform response as particularly brutal or as that much of an attack-they are simply dismissing criticisms from you that they don’t agree with. You have to understand that this is in the context of more than 40 years of betrayal from your party. I’m a former Conservative voter and frankly detest the party now. You have been so globalist, so weak, squandered so many years in government doing nothing at all to save the country or offer an alternative to globalist and progressive positions. You refer to this betrayal yourself. Therefore it’s hardly surprising if Reform are rather sharp with criticisms coming from a Tory source. That said, the points you raise seem quite sensible other than the idea that a party that is blunt towards critics is unfit to govern. The people want considerably more bluntness against globalism, mass immigration, wokeness and yes against a Toryism that has consistently betrayed conservstive values and the British people. Perhaps you as well as Reform should be less thin skinned and seek alliance if the points you raise are accurate? You will have to swallow your pride too. As for Musk, Britain needs him. We have a cultural Marxist government in place that hates the British people. Every ally is needed in that context.
Reform branches are banned from inviting Ben Habib as a speaker, a humiliation that played a part in causing him to resign from the party.
The leopard has not changed his spots (well known to those of us who were in UKIP) and Reform has the characteristics of a cult. It's members respond very aggressively to comments critiquing Reform's lack of coherent policies in various below the line comments on substacks and elsewhere. The leader is idolised and can do no wrong. This is not healthy. Habib saw that and paid the price for questioning the cult leader.
Reform are riding high in the polls and benefit from being neither Labour nor Conservative, both of which have failed at government, Labour spectacularly so, so far. Immigration is one of the three top issues, probably the #1 issue and on this they’ve committed to leaving the ECHR and repealing the Human Rights Act. Why should they go the whole hog and declare mass deportations now with 4.5 years to go until the next GE or with a full set of policies now that they have to defend? Surely the beauty of Opposition is twofold? Firstly to pick apart those of the party is government and expose them for the sham they are. Secondly to develop your own as the global and political landscape and subsequently the Overton Window shifts to the right. My final question here is “If not Reform and Farage then who?”
Zia Yusuf's stated that it's Reform's intention to put "the policy meat on the bone" (https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/nigel-farage-reform-uk-election-b2605214.html). But there's little sign of policy meat thus far. Part of the explanation might be that Reform has limited resources and that, whilst policy meat is a priority, other things have been more pressing - namely setting up branches nationwide, and nominating and vetting candidates for next year's local elections. But I think another part of the explanation is that, currently, policy development is - to put it kindly - perhaps not Reform's greatest strength.
Reform has done a lot of things well. It won more seats than the Greens, who've been in the business much longer. The Lib-Dems have also been in business much longer but, nevertheless, Reform won considerably more votes. Reform has shown a willingness to learn from the Lib-Dems' ground game and has rapidly set up branches around the country. And from what I see, initial meetings are well attended.
Reform's gathered a large number of members very quickly and uses social media well. The party's climbing in the opinion polls and winning some by-elections. Rupert Lowe is garnering considerable praise for his work as an MP and, despite my reservations about Yusuf's appointment, he is, in my view, proving himself to be a good media performer. Clearly, Farage is an accomplished media performer and his connection with Trump and Musk is certainly doing him no harm.
Of course, the obvious retort is that without developed, joined-up policy all of the above is a mere house of cards. Built on sand. I agree. I suspect that given Reform's five MPs are learning the ropes, they have limited time to engage in policy development. But more importantly, and without wishing to be too unkind, I'm not sure that, in most cases, they have the intellectual capabilities for that particular task.
I don't doubt that Yusuf and others in the party recognize the importance of policy development. And given that so many outside the party are flagging it up, they can hardly ignore the issue. So perhaps what's needed is to bring in more wonkish, backroom types who live (for) and breathe policy research and development. There are clearly plenty of very able people outside of the Westminster bubble. As I say, I think Reform does a lot of things well but they need to recognize where they're weak and act accordingly. If Yusuf has the organizational skills he's reputed to have, then this should be entirely possible.
I guess one might respond that Farage is so disinterested in developing (and sticking!) to policy that he will hamper any serious attempt to put red meat on the policy bone. But I suspect Farage harbours ambitions not only to be in No 10 but to not look a complete fool if and when he gets there. And so, on some level, he must surely recognize the importance of well-thought-out policy, including how to deal with the "institutional leftism" (to use Cates's term) of the civil service.
I think Cates was right to point out that Reform's responses to her reasonable questions were pretty thin skinned. On the other hand, I can see why Reform might be reluctant to answer to a Tory, given the Conservative's 14 years of incompetence and betrayal. But, then again, given Cates's remarks that "I’m well known to be sympathetic to Reform", "I offer this challenge to Reform as a critical friend" and "I’m an admirer of Nigel Farage", perhaps she's no longer a member of the Conservative Party. If she is, her remarks would seem somewhat odd and (verging on) disloyal. So I think it would help if Cates were to clarify her position.
I don't think that one should reasonably expect Reform to have a developed policy platform in place by now. (And the Martyr makes an interesting point about the possible disadvantages of having a policy platform in place too soon.) But in the next six months I'd at least like to see evidence of Reform putting the people and processes in place to begin the task of serious policy formation.
Good points. I think measure of Reform should be to bring someone like Miriam Cates into the fold. She’s be a great asset as a thinker, activist and in due course MP. Reform needs people like this to generate ideas, maybe not concrete policies (yet). There must be a few bright thinkers for be co-opted into a Reform think-tank. At least to provide some ballast to what could otherwise be a shallow and personality lead movement, full of sound and fury but signifying nothing.
Oh!! I thought she would - could - be a good asset for Reform. It needs a few good converts from both legacy parties. Reform needs some intellectual groundwork and someone like Cates would be useful there.
Cates posted an X thread a month before the General Election which she began by stating: "I will not be joining the Reform Party". (https://x.com/miriam_cates/status/1800064098593366438). She sounded pretty unequivocal. But don't know if she might be rethinking her position?
She would say that. Reform could attract a lot of defectors from both main parties if it got its act together. Or maybe it’s enough to travel light, and be a British MAGA that has a populist vibe of positive aspirations and general critique of everyone else?
I would like to know why two Reform MPs (out of 5), including Rupert Lowe, didn't bother to vote in the IHT for farms vote in Parliament. That's their job. To vote. That's what they are elected to do. If you can't make it in person, you can vote by proxy. What is the point in Rupert ranting on Twitter all day if he doesn't bother to vote on big issues in Parliament? And what's the point of Reform if two out of five (including Rupert again) are going to vote for sinister deep state agendas like assisted suicide. Anyone with a pea for a brain can see where that is headed after the last five years of medical malfeasance around the whole "covid" debacle.
Was thinking about your comments about Reform not having a solid policy platform and realised that things are so dire, that just not having dreadful policies will allow the country to start to recover. Just not imposing some of the awful UN Agenda 2030 driven policies, would lead to a massive improvement in the economy and people's personal circumstances. Maybe that's the best we get at this point. Assuming they are not all talk and no action. And assuming our Govts and PMs are not controlled by the global oligarchs behind UN Agenda 2030 - which they are ofcourse.
What a depressingly tin-eared response from the Reform leadership. As a Reform party member, I think Miriam Cates is one of the very few Tory MPs from the last parliament that I would welcome into the party. So why the hissy fit to reasonable questions that many of us in the party are already asking?
I'm planning to attend one of the regional conferences in January that Reform are hosting round the country. I'm hoping I will get a better measure then of what exactly is going on inside the wider party.
As we seem to be dependent on 'vibes', as Pete comments, to understand where Reform are, let me share a 'vibe' I'm picking up. I hope that I'm wrong. Please someone convince me that I am!
I'm wondering whether Nigel is the next Boris. Charismatic speaker and campaigner. Indolent when it comes to policy and details. Able to establish a momentum and give hope to many that 'it' (Brexit, immigration, you name it) will all be sorted out when he's in power. When he does attain power, we discover that he flounders all over the place because half-baked policies and humorous asides are no substitute for thinking deeply about complex issues. Disillusion follows among his supporters who turn on him because he's p*ssed away a golden opportunity to re-calibrate our political direction. That's Boris by the way ;) Will this be Nigel's fate too? As I said, please convince me I'm mistaken.
I’m not sure we’ve seen the man who will lead Reform into the next election yet. I’m more concerned about Nige as a future PM as he’s very thin-skinned and light on detail. Trump lite and less crazy but he must tap into border emergencies and deportations inc rolling back quangos etc. I’m going to raise some of this detail at our next Reform constituency meeting in Newport.
I have the same concern. Nigel is a brilliant campaigner, orator and can sell. He enjoys the adulation. Can he deliver on policies when in Government? There requires to be a lot of groundwork done on legislation prior to the next election so Reform is ready for Government from day 1. I understand where Nigel is coming from to appeal to a wide audience. He doesn't want Reform to appear far right or left wing. Reform is supposed to be neither Tory or Labour. This is the appeal, opposed to the current two party system that is responsible for the managed decline of the UK over decades.
When will people learn - it's one big Uniparty. There is no tangible difference between any of them. We have socialism on steroids and have had it for years and years
Farage is an ex-banker and reports directly to his masters in the City of London. Starmer is part of the communist superstate that is the EU and Davos. That's where his allegiances lie, as was the same for Sunak, Johnson, May, Cameron, Blair, Brown etc
We're drowning in debt, have a bloated state and now have to pay for mass immigration on steroids. Our energy policy is a mess. If being green is so important, then why isn't the Green Party in charge? Now, we are faced with an energy policy (wind and solar) that not only relies on the weather but relies on China to manufacture it. Similarly, the EU, having annexed Russian Gas, now has to rely on US LNG which is more expensive. It's a total disaster zone. Being green is great - until it hits you in the pocket. Then it's not so great
We need the financial system to break first and break badly. Only then will we get real change
Westminster is a cesspit. A total bunch of gutter rats.
Thank you Ben, very well put and I totally agree. The financial system will break (maybe even that is an intentional undisclosed policy) but as always its will be us, the poor disadvantaged, despised majority that will suffer most, it won’t be the elites.
While both Reform and the Tories pride themselves on having no policies, we have no functional Opposition in Parliament, as a government in waiting. Presumably Reform would give the voting public the same dusty answers as they have given Ms Cates, and so would the Tories. Some thinking would not come amiss, e.g. what would mass deportations actually involve?
Only problem being I have watched Cates on GB news and she is a lefty Tory. Likes working from home, Doesn't want a Southport national enquiry and is very much into promoting the conservatives as she is one. She has a loud annoying voice and I think she is very much of the old one nation lot with a spattering of possibly pretend right ideas. She also wants to control X and stop children accessing phones internet etc. Not my cup of tea.
She's entirely correct and to further illustrate how vacuous Reform are one of their local councillors denounced her, accusing her of being too obsessed with abstract ideas whereas he claimed all that matters is votes and polling numbers. I challenged this councillor on this and he said "who cares about philosophy, we have millions of votes. Votes is all that matters." It's just a party of protest and its supporters have become arseholes online because they've chosen to dumb down and be thin skinned. Absolutely hopeless. I'm now at the point that all the parties of the Right are severely broken.
Pete wrote: "Nothing much has changed in twenty years. It remains a cult of personality " He is spot on. Farage does not want a party founded on an intellectual basis, just a promotional platform for himself.
I’m going to a local constituency Reform meeting tonight. Not sure I really want to as I wonder what is the point? I’ve been a Reform member for 18 months now and in that time I’ve had probably no more than half a dozen email communications from them. Most of them inviting me to a piss up to praise the Reform leadership in all its magnificence, and PAY for the Privilege. The latest being a junket in Leeds where apparently we will be:
“thrilled to welcome Lee Anderson MP as our special guest, who will share his insights, discuss Reform UK's vision for Britain's future, and engage with attendees throughout the evening”
plus “This event isn't just about politics it's a night to remember! Enjoy a gourmet buffet, live entertainment, and the opportunity to connect with fellow members in an elegant setting. We will also be welcoming special guests throughout the evening, making this an unmissable event” It will cost you £50 for the privilege. Sounds like a champagne sipping adulation of Lee Anderson to me.
I still have no idea what the foundations of Reform are, what it is, and where it wants to be, other than a Nigel Farage led Conservative Party 2.0.
The dismissal of Ben Habib, Howard Cox, and Rupert Lowe is akin to removing the foundations of your house using 50 kilos of TNT, standing back and admiring your work, patting yourself on your back, then wondering why the whole thing then collapses to the ground.
I have to correct one small point: We have not been subject to a liberal hegemony; the correct term would be illiberal hegemony. It still amazes me that after 2 decades plus of political conceptions, regressive frameworks, policies, and legislation that have been enacted in the last twenty years, these are still filed under liberalism. We are now and have been for some time in a post-liberal paradigm. with this comes anti-democratic values and illiberal regressivism in the form of DEI, CRT, Gender ideology, queer theory, antiracism white racism, and anti-white programming via decolonisation discourses.
From the replies you give, I don’t see the Reform response as particularly brutal or as that much of an attack-they are simply dismissing criticisms from you that they don’t agree with. You have to understand that this is in the context of more than 40 years of betrayal from your party. I’m a former Conservative voter and frankly detest the party now. You have been so globalist, so weak, squandered so many years in government doing nothing at all to save the country or offer an alternative to globalist and progressive positions. You refer to this betrayal yourself. Therefore it’s hardly surprising if Reform are rather sharp with criticisms coming from a Tory source. That said, the points you raise seem quite sensible other than the idea that a party that is blunt towards critics is unfit to govern. The people want considerably more bluntness against globalism, mass immigration, wokeness and yes against a Toryism that has consistently betrayed conservstive values and the British people. Perhaps you as well as Reform should be less thin skinned and seek alliance if the points you raise are accurate? You will have to swallow your pride too. As for Musk, Britain needs him. We have a cultural Marxist government in place that hates the British people. Every ally is needed in that context.
Ps comments addressed to Miriam of course.
Reform branches are banned from inviting Ben Habib as a speaker, a humiliation that played a part in causing him to resign from the party.
The leopard has not changed his spots (well known to those of us who were in UKIP) and Reform has the characteristics of a cult. It's members respond very aggressively to comments critiquing Reform's lack of coherent policies in various below the line comments on substacks and elsewhere. The leader is idolised and can do no wrong. This is not healthy. Habib saw that and paid the price for questioning the cult leader.
Haha! The party that stands for free speech bans Ben from speaking at the branches. Just about says it all really.
Reform are riding high in the polls and benefit from being neither Labour nor Conservative, both of which have failed at government, Labour spectacularly so, so far. Immigration is one of the three top issues, probably the #1 issue and on this they’ve committed to leaving the ECHR and repealing the Human Rights Act. Why should they go the whole hog and declare mass deportations now with 4.5 years to go until the next GE or with a full set of policies now that they have to defend? Surely the beauty of Opposition is twofold? Firstly to pick apart those of the party is government and expose them for the sham they are. Secondly to develop your own as the global and political landscape and subsequently the Overton Window shifts to the right. My final question here is “If not Reform and Farage then who?”
Zia Yusuf's stated that it's Reform's intention to put "the policy meat on the bone" (https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/nigel-farage-reform-uk-election-b2605214.html). But there's little sign of policy meat thus far. Part of the explanation might be that Reform has limited resources and that, whilst policy meat is a priority, other things have been more pressing - namely setting up branches nationwide, and nominating and vetting candidates for next year's local elections. But I think another part of the explanation is that, currently, policy development is - to put it kindly - perhaps not Reform's greatest strength.
Reform has done a lot of things well. It won more seats than the Greens, who've been in the business much longer. The Lib-Dems have also been in business much longer but, nevertheless, Reform won considerably more votes. Reform has shown a willingness to learn from the Lib-Dems' ground game and has rapidly set up branches around the country. And from what I see, initial meetings are well attended.
Reform's gathered a large number of members very quickly and uses social media well. The party's climbing in the opinion polls and winning some by-elections. Rupert Lowe is garnering considerable praise for his work as an MP and, despite my reservations about Yusuf's appointment, he is, in my view, proving himself to be a good media performer. Clearly, Farage is an accomplished media performer and his connection with Trump and Musk is certainly doing him no harm.
Of course, the obvious retort is that without developed, joined-up policy all of the above is a mere house of cards. Built on sand. I agree. I suspect that given Reform's five MPs are learning the ropes, they have limited time to engage in policy development. But more importantly, and without wishing to be too unkind, I'm not sure that, in most cases, they have the intellectual capabilities for that particular task.
I don't doubt that Yusuf and others in the party recognize the importance of policy development. And given that so many outside the party are flagging it up, they can hardly ignore the issue. So perhaps what's needed is to bring in more wonkish, backroom types who live (for) and breathe policy research and development. There are clearly plenty of very able people outside of the Westminster bubble. As I say, I think Reform does a lot of things well but they need to recognize where they're weak and act accordingly. If Yusuf has the organizational skills he's reputed to have, then this should be entirely possible.
I guess one might respond that Farage is so disinterested in developing (and sticking!) to policy that he will hamper any serious attempt to put red meat on the policy bone. But I suspect Farage harbours ambitions not only to be in No 10 but to not look a complete fool if and when he gets there. And so, on some level, he must surely recognize the importance of well-thought-out policy, including how to deal with the "institutional leftism" (to use Cates's term) of the civil service.
I think Cates was right to point out that Reform's responses to her reasonable questions were pretty thin skinned. On the other hand, I can see why Reform might be reluctant to answer to a Tory, given the Conservative's 14 years of incompetence and betrayal. But, then again, given Cates's remarks that "I’m well known to be sympathetic to Reform", "I offer this challenge to Reform as a critical friend" and "I’m an admirer of Nigel Farage", perhaps she's no longer a member of the Conservative Party. If she is, her remarks would seem somewhat odd and (verging on) disloyal. So I think it would help if Cates were to clarify her position.
I don't think that one should reasonably expect Reform to have a developed policy platform in place by now. (And the Martyr makes an interesting point about the possible disadvantages of having a policy platform in place too soon.) But in the next six months I'd at least like to see evidence of Reform putting the people and processes in place to begin the task of serious policy formation.
Good points. I think measure of Reform should be to bring someone like Miriam Cates into the fold. She’s be a great asset as a thinker, activist and in due course MP. Reform needs people like this to generate ideas, maybe not concrete policies (yet). There must be a few bright thinkers for be co-opted into a Reform think-tank. At least to provide some ballast to what could otherwise be a shallow and personality lead movement, full of sound and fury but signifying nothing.
No !!
Oh!! I thought she would - could - be a good asset for Reform. It needs a few good converts from both legacy parties. Reform needs some intellectual groundwork and someone like Cates would be useful there.
Sorry she drives me nuts. Possibly its just a personal feeling. Not my type of person.
Best reply to anything.
Cates posted an X thread a month before the General Election which she began by stating: "I will not be joining the Reform Party". (https://x.com/miriam_cates/status/1800064098593366438). She sounded pretty unequivocal. But don't know if she might be rethinking her position?
She would say that. Reform could attract a lot of defectors from both main parties if it got its act together. Or maybe it’s enough to travel light, and be a British MAGA that has a populist vibe of positive aspirations and general critique of everyone else?
I would like to know why two Reform MPs (out of 5), including Rupert Lowe, didn't bother to vote in the IHT for farms vote in Parliament. That's their job. To vote. That's what they are elected to do. If you can't make it in person, you can vote by proxy. What is the point in Rupert ranting on Twitter all day if he doesn't bother to vote on big issues in Parliament? And what's the point of Reform if two out of five (including Rupert again) are going to vote for sinister deep state agendas like assisted suicide. Anyone with a pea for a brain can see where that is headed after the last five years of medical malfeasance around the whole "covid" debacle.
Was thinking about your comments about Reform not having a solid policy platform and realised that things are so dire, that just not having dreadful policies will allow the country to start to recover. Just not imposing some of the awful UN Agenda 2030 driven policies, would lead to a massive improvement in the economy and people's personal circumstances. Maybe that's the best we get at this point. Assuming they are not all talk and no action. And assuming our Govts and PMs are not controlled by the global oligarchs behind UN Agenda 2030 - which they are ofcourse.
What a depressingly tin-eared response from the Reform leadership. As a Reform party member, I think Miriam Cates is one of the very few Tory MPs from the last parliament that I would welcome into the party. So why the hissy fit to reasonable questions that many of us in the party are already asking?
I'm planning to attend one of the regional conferences in January that Reform are hosting round the country. I'm hoping I will get a better measure then of what exactly is going on inside the wider party.
As we seem to be dependent on 'vibes', as Pete comments, to understand where Reform are, let me share a 'vibe' I'm picking up. I hope that I'm wrong. Please someone convince me that I am!
I'm wondering whether Nigel is the next Boris. Charismatic speaker and campaigner. Indolent when it comes to policy and details. Able to establish a momentum and give hope to many that 'it' (Brexit, immigration, you name it) will all be sorted out when he's in power. When he does attain power, we discover that he flounders all over the place because half-baked policies and humorous asides are no substitute for thinking deeply about complex issues. Disillusion follows among his supporters who turn on him because he's p*ssed away a golden opportunity to re-calibrate our political direction. That's Boris by the way ;) Will this be Nigel's fate too? As I said, please convince me I'm mistaken.
I’m not sure we’ve seen the man who will lead Reform into the next election yet. I’m more concerned about Nige as a future PM as he’s very thin-skinned and light on detail. Trump lite and less crazy but he must tap into border emergencies and deportations inc rolling back quangos etc. I’m going to raise some of this detail at our next Reform constituency meeting in Newport.
I have the same concern. Nigel is a brilliant campaigner, orator and can sell. He enjoys the adulation. Can he deliver on policies when in Government? There requires to be a lot of groundwork done on legislation prior to the next election so Reform is ready for Government from day 1. I understand where Nigel is coming from to appeal to a wide audience. He doesn't want Reform to appear far right or left wing. Reform is supposed to be neither Tory or Labour. This is the appeal, opposed to the current two party system that is responsible for the managed decline of the UK over decades.
When will people learn - it's one big Uniparty. There is no tangible difference between any of them. We have socialism on steroids and have had it for years and years
Farage is an ex-banker and reports directly to his masters in the City of London. Starmer is part of the communist superstate that is the EU and Davos. That's where his allegiances lie, as was the same for Sunak, Johnson, May, Cameron, Blair, Brown etc
We're drowning in debt, have a bloated state and now have to pay for mass immigration on steroids. Our energy policy is a mess. If being green is so important, then why isn't the Green Party in charge? Now, we are faced with an energy policy (wind and solar) that not only relies on the weather but relies on China to manufacture it. Similarly, the EU, having annexed Russian Gas, now has to rely on US LNG which is more expensive. It's a total disaster zone. Being green is great - until it hits you in the pocket. Then it's not so great
We need the financial system to break first and break badly. Only then will we get real change
Westminster is a cesspit. A total bunch of gutter rats.
Thank you Ben, very well put and I totally agree. The financial system will break (maybe even that is an intentional undisclosed policy) but as always its will be us, the poor disadvantaged, despised majority that will suffer most, it won’t be the elites.
Controlled demolition to usher in communism
While both Reform and the Tories pride themselves on having no policies, we have no functional Opposition in Parliament, as a government in waiting. Presumably Reform would give the voting public the same dusty answers as they have given Ms Cates, and so would the Tories. Some thinking would not come amiss, e.g. what would mass deportations actually involve?
Only problem being I have watched Cates on GB news and she is a lefty Tory. Likes working from home, Doesn't want a Southport national enquiry and is very much into promoting the conservatives as she is one. She has a loud annoying voice and I think she is very much of the old one nation lot with a spattering of possibly pretend right ideas. She also wants to control X and stop children accessing phones internet etc. Not my cup of tea.
She's entirely correct and to further illustrate how vacuous Reform are one of their local councillors denounced her, accusing her of being too obsessed with abstract ideas whereas he claimed all that matters is votes and polling numbers. I challenged this councillor on this and he said "who cares about philosophy, we have millions of votes. Votes is all that matters." It's just a party of protest and its supporters have become arseholes online because they've chosen to dumb down and be thin skinned. Absolutely hopeless. I'm now at the point that all the parties of the Right are severely broken.
Pete wrote: "Nothing much has changed in twenty years. It remains a cult of personality " He is spot on. Farage does not want a party founded on an intellectual basis, just a promotional platform for himself.
Cates has been lucky. They could have reported her to the police for being racist.
Yawn 🥱
I’m going to a local constituency Reform meeting tonight. Not sure I really want to as I wonder what is the point? I’ve been a Reform member for 18 months now and in that time I’ve had probably no more than half a dozen email communications from them. Most of them inviting me to a piss up to praise the Reform leadership in all its magnificence, and PAY for the Privilege. The latest being a junket in Leeds where apparently we will be:
“thrilled to welcome Lee Anderson MP as our special guest, who will share his insights, discuss Reform UK's vision for Britain's future, and engage with attendees throughout the evening”
plus “This event isn't just about politics it's a night to remember! Enjoy a gourmet buffet, live entertainment, and the opportunity to connect with fellow members in an elegant setting. We will also be welcoming special guests throughout the evening, making this an unmissable event” It will cost you £50 for the privilege. Sounds like a champagne sipping adulation of Lee Anderson to me.
I still have no idea what the foundations of Reform are, what it is, and where it wants to be, other than a Nigel Farage led Conservative Party 2.0.
The dismissal of Ben Habib, Howard Cox, and Rupert Lowe is akin to removing the foundations of your house using 50 kilos of TNT, standing back and admiring your work, patting yourself on your back, then wondering why the whole thing then collapses to the ground.
I have to correct one small point: We have not been subject to a liberal hegemony; the correct term would be illiberal hegemony. It still amazes me that after 2 decades plus of political conceptions, regressive frameworks, policies, and legislation that have been enacted in the last twenty years, these are still filed under liberalism. We are now and have been for some time in a post-liberal paradigm. with this comes anti-democratic values and illiberal regressivism in the form of DEI, CRT, Gender ideology, queer theory, antiracism white racism, and anti-white programming via decolonisation discourses.
Something tells me voices like yours will become more valuable as this attempt at self correction moves on…
Thank you Pete, you’re right to point it out.