top of page
  • Writer's picture738

Conservatives and Tories (III)

When Labour voters move off a council estate into a modest suburb they become Conservative voters. Oh, that’s because they’re property-owners now—they’re doing alright, it makes sense to vote to preserve…But no, it’s not that.


As noted, about half the working-class electorate votes for the Conservatives—these are two sorts, the “awkwards” and the “patriots”.


The awkward ones are very individualist (difficult, disagreeable) people who just want to get on and do the best for their family—these are people, like the father and mother of an opera singer I once knew, who would cross a picket line at a factory where the pickets would kick the mother in the stomach even though she was heavily pregnant.


As you can tell by the fact their daughter became an opera singer, they improved their situation against what the trade union wanted—but these were obviously very difficult people who just wouldn’t bow to pressure. It’s the same situation as the film The Angry Silence (1960) where one man continues to go to work at a factory against union pressure—which amounts to a brick through the window and, in the end, the ultimate human sanction refusal to speak to him.


Similarly, I knew a rugby star whose single mother worked as a black cab driver to pay for him to go to a very expensive public school that specialised in sport, so that he could develop his talent—everything was put into the boy’s development, even while they still lived in a council house.


The other sort are people like the old lady in her two-room post-war bungalow who keeps a little shrine to the queen and buys all the “royal specials” from the magazine racks in Asda. Perhaps her grandson is a corporal in a regiment, perhaps the local regiment, “the Warwickshires”—and he sends “nan” little postcards from…wherever he’s been stationed this year (his photo, in uniform, is on the mantelpiece over the electric fire). These people like the security that comes about from a clear hierarchy—like the traditions, like the teddy bear dressed as a Buckingham Palace guardsman, like “our Kate” (“our lads”).


“Class” is not a real determinant factor—you only think that because we’ve had over a century of socialism; and, further, Marxist explanations like “Oliver Cromwell was against King Charles because Cromwell was a small land-owner and belonged to the rising bourgeois class” are in all university and school textbooks.


Before class, the divide was religion—which is why it’s said that the Labour Party owes more to Methodism than Marxism. It was the chapel and the fanatical Methodist belief (people fainting, having hysterics) that represented the left in the 19th century, whereas the Tories were for the Anglican Church—traditions and rituals, not unseemly raving and ranting at open-air events (“the Church of England is the Conservative Party at prayer”).


And it’s still about religion, about belief—it’s just the belief shifted from non-Conformism to socialism. This is why the Labour voter who moves from estate to modest suburb switches to the Conservatives—the Labour estate is a tribal block, and tribalism is primitive.


The left is composed from neurotic, narcissistic, and agreeable people—feminised people, people who want to live a collective hallucination that provides them with comfort, with the security blanket of belief. It’s a simple world of good/bad, saved/sinners, proletariat/bourgeois—and if you contradict them they have hysterics and think you’re “total evil”, that being a narcissistic rage that occurs when the bubble is burst (like a teenager).


So if a person like that happens to better their situation then they’ll go with the flow in the new environment—“everyone round here seems Conservative, that’s what I’ll be”. It’s more a clash between believers and people who deal with reality than anything else. The Conservatives have, since 1830, lived by the dictum that the government should carry on in a stable way—so they also believe in concessions. Behind the Conservatives lies the “real party”, the Tories, who are for king, tradition, and blood (not beliefs but tangible things).


Parties like UKIP represent “the Tories”—they’re people who are just for king, blood, and tradition without compromise. They constitute a ginger group that can sometimes force the Conservative Party to do Tory things—by, for example, pressuring them in vulnerable constituencies at the time of the coalition government in order to get a vote on Brexit. UKIP is not so much a party as an extension of the Conservatives that represents what Tories think (it’s anti-fragile, there’s always a party “like” UKIP or which is, in effect, UKIP floating around under another name).


The difference between “UKIP” and nationalist parties can be summed up in the words “Godfrey Bloom”. He’s an archetype for UKIP—he sounds like some minor Shakespearean character (“tush Sir Godfrey be about his mead above us as we speak, he claims old dickens will take him for the way he carries on with his wenches.”). You know, it’s eccentric: it’s the little boats at Dunkirk, it’s the army surplus store in a rundown seaside town, it’s the herringbone tie—it’s Godfrey Bloom.


It’s about tradition. The difference with nationalists is that they ditch the tradition. They’re just about “king and country”—or, rather, “leader and blood”—they’re not so worried about quaint traditions (if anything, they want to bring in some new-old traditions—like Maypole dancing). These groups are about renaissance—rebirth, palingenesis. That may well require a new king—clear out the degenerate old royals.


They see the world more as England was in her most vital age, 1000–1400, where barons ride about the land whacking people over the head, perhaps vying to take the throne. So the “quaint” and “Edwardian” UKIP doesn’t appeal—it’s more realistic, in the final analysis, because tradition fades into belief (the lost days of Victoria, “by gawd, makes yer heart swell doesn’t it?”—but that’s also a belief, a form of nostalgia, whereas Maypoles are reality).








Recent Posts

See All

Dream (VII)

I walk up a steep mountain path, very rocky, and eventually I come to the top—at the top I see two trees filled with blossoms, perhaps cherry blossoms, and the blossoms fall to the ground. I think, “C

Runic power

Yesterday, I posted the Gar rune to X as a video—surrounded by a playing card triangle. The video I uploaded spontaneously changed to the unedited version—and, even now, it refuses to play properly (o

Gods and men

There was once a man who was Odin—just like, in more recent times, there were men called Jesus, Muhammad, and Buddha. The latter three, being better known to us, are clearly men—they face the dilemmas


Post: Blog2_Post
bottom of page