I fear the rise of National Conservatism

Rees Mogg's paternal grandfather rebuilt this house. I don't think William Rees Mogg's money was "new money".

That’s the difference between old and new money.

Have a look at what grandad did though.

He was a dairy man and driver. So Moggs carefully cultivated image is not built on years of leadership and “natural ruling”

Rees Mogg's father was editor of the Times, High Sheriff of Somerset and was made a life peer. The family could afford a nanny. Jacob Rees Mogg was educated at Westminster, Eton and Oxford, so he's hardly one of the plebs.

growstuff

Edmund Burke was profoundly anti-democratic. He did not believe that the "common man" had the ability to make decisions. In the 18th century, most people didn't have a vote and politics was essentially a debating society for the upper classes.

I have sometimes thought of Rees Mogg as Burke's ghost and am not surprised that he's in the middle of this movement.

Yes that is exactly what crossed my mind. Mogg of course did not originate from the ruling classes, but lo and behold Burke allowed that some deserving individuals (men if course) could rise. This helped explain Burke’s position.

So I take it that Mogg has risen.

No coincidence that All things Bright and beautiful was written and taken up with enthusiasm by the church a few years after Burkes treaty.

“The rich man in his castle
The poor man at his gate
God made them high or lowly
And ordered their estate”

This in essence is what Mogg and his ilk believe.

Edmund Burke was profoundly anti-democratic. He did not believe that the "common man" had the ability to make decisions. In the 18th century, most people didn't have a vote and politics was essentially a debating society for the upper classes.

I have sometimes thought of Rees Mogg as Burke's ghost and am not surprised that he's in the middle of this movement.

Anniel

I am not complacent at all. But I am not scared of this group. I regard the British people of having a lot of common sense. They see through the politicians and this is not 1930s Europe. I appreciate that Grans have differing political instincts but having learned about the upcoming meeting I think we will watch carefully what happens. I am sure you believe in Free Speech. I certainly do and have said I am a member of the Free Speech Union. So let third group talk and judge on the basis of what is said.

The people in 1930s Germany weren't so very different from people today.

Actually, no, I don't believe in free speech without limits. I do not believe that anybody has the right to be offensive and/or inflammatory.

Where do you get this anti-WEF propaganda from?

Do you even know what the WEF does?

nationalconservatism.org/national-conservatism-a-statement-of-principles

Thanks for posting the link. I have read the declaration which is biased towards addressing the even more extreme threats to freedom, truth and American life than those here. But where America leads, we follow and we can see WEF fuelled, globalist, ‘you will own nothing and you will be happy’ driven authoritarianism is already threatening our freedoms in the UK.

It’s good to see some organised pushback against anti democratic extremists. And, after all, if these principles outlined in the statement are unpopular no one will accept, support or ultimately vote for them.

Interestingly, under the principles of the statement, everyone gets a vote and a say in their own governance. Not so according to globalist, elitist, imperialist, supra national authoritarians. WEF and others want to tell us what to own, think and do.

I am not complacent at all. But I am not scared of this group. I regard the British people of having a lot of common sense. They see through the politicians and this is not 1930s Europe. I appreciate that Grans have differing political instincts but having learned about the upcoming meeting I think we will watch carefully what happens. I am sure you believe in Free Speech. I certainly do and have said I am a member of the Free Speech Union. So let third group talk and judge on the basis of what is said.

Annie1 I sincerely hope your complacency and willingness to avoid the bigger picture is justified.

Just to add that the reason Burkes ideas were so attractive to the Tories is because they were always the party that had been identified with the system of hierarchical power in the U.K. in the form of constitutional monarchy in particular, and the French Revolution scared them s…tl…s so Burke with his comforting philosophy that put them at the apex of the social contract inevitably attracted their support, and continues to do so.

Well it is now nearly 8 pm here anf i read every post. I have serious family problems i am dealing with today so have not read this thread and its assumptions. Personally Marrs podcast is full of assumptions and naturally is opinionated. I wrote to Iain Dale and asked him to take a look at the podcast. I alerted my Oxbridge son to read it for his intellectual opinion. I am an Anglican church member and do beileve in God. I am an original feminist who believes in womens rights. I may be a Conservative by party and by instinct but i do not find this group chilling but intend to follow what happens at their meeting. Happy Catholic Wife sums up traditional British values and i would think her views are those of a fair majority of British people regardless of which party you vote for. Rishi would not be offended as many Hindus also fit in with those values. I am surprised that GSM agrees with most of the left leaning posters here. I regard this hullabsloo as a storm in a teacup. And as those of you living in Scotland calling out Nationalism amuses me no end. I thought the SNP was a nationalist party. I voted Brexit ofcourse on grounds of Sovereinty. Our legsl system is very different to that of other member states and i could not agree to being bound by policies that were made by other EU states. The reason we have not succeeded is because of uncaring politicians like Boris who cared only for himself. I do think it is valuable to take an interest in what this group has to say. But to be so scared is to me a gross exaggeration. Calm down Sir Keir Starmer will be next PM and things can only get bettet. In Scotland we will wait and see. The treasurer did not know the Scottish Nationalist Party owned a £100,000 motor home.Dear me i am very interested in this turn of events which was recorded in every national newspaper! This is not sub judice! It is fact.

I’m late to this thread, so I apologise if I’m repeating anyone’s post as I haven’t read everything - only the first 4 pages.

My understanding from what I can glean is that national conservatism bases its philosophy on Edmund Burke and his social contract, which was written as a reaction to revolution in France and the enlightenment.

Put very simply, Burke rejected ideas of the enlightenment, and it’s principle argument that society was based on reason, science and individualism, but instead argued that society was based on a social contract with past, present and future generations and on the belief in what he called “the natural order” so basically a country survived best when recognising this natural order based on religious values of family, strong morals, nature, and gradualism - being constrained by our ancestors with the ruling class in possession of this knowledge therefore, were the only class fit and knowledgable enough to rule. The ruling classes were the class with property entitled as a result of long/historical use. Neither the middle or working classes have this natural ability to rule.

Burke believed in social change but believed it should be guided by the ruling class. He was not a democrat.

Of course conservatism has moved on and developed since the 18th century, but you can certainly detect the underlying Burke principles in their thinking.

Excellent post, happycatholicwife1!

I'm afraid I find the view of those declaring themselves Nationalists laughable, or rather, it would be if such a view were not so very, very dangerous.

Nationalism gives a simplified, fanatical and ambiguous description of how and why it would make our country great ( a phrase first used by Nazi-friendly Americans in the 1930s). Sadly some politicians very close to home have jumped on the same bandwagon and swept the gullible up as they did so.

The idea that a group of politicians is once again waving this same flag, and holding a conference to promote their views feels to me like the saddest point I have witness in our political history.

chrissy08

I’m awake so don’t need to copy & paste. If you aren’t aware of who is pulling the strings please research Agenda 30.

Why do conspiracy theorists always tell people to research? Is it because they think others are daft enough to believe the first dodgy website Google throws up?

volver3

Why does anyone believe this rubbish?

Has it always been like this, just with the Internet making it more obvious?

I don't think human nature has changed that much. I believe some people have always been like this.

No happycatholicfamily, Hitler wan't just a crazy man.

The rise of Nazism and the holocaust happened because people allow themselves to be led.

The distinguished historian Ian Kershaw "the road to Auschwitz was built by hate, but paved with indifference." The holocaust was motivated by a hatred of others in a context where the majority of German public opinion was indifferent.

That was meant for Chrissy but it works for happyCatholicwife too

Why does anyone believe this rubbish?

Has it always been like this, just with the Internet making it more obvious?

DaisyAnne, found the podcast interesting. However, I didn't find it terribly revealing. Politics is a dirty business on any side. I will say that, as a person on the right, a conservative, I
don't find anything in common emotionally, intellectually, etc with any of the ideas which are called right wing. Friends who agree with me do not think in terms of discriminating against certain people. I personally don't see anything wrong with nationalism. I don't see anything wrong with loving and supporting your country above others. But, then, I don't think of Hitler and think of nationalism. Hitler was crazy, and he focused on a crazy idea. He just chose a nationalistic viewpoint so as to be able to spew his poison. To me, people like that should be called fruit cakes. Hitler would have been horrible whatever position he decided to promote. I will say that, although the speaker did not SEE these kind of rabid beliefs and tactics on the left, he must be speaking of British politics. He brought up America, and, believe me, there is an excess of cult like beliefs and behavior on the left in the US. If you don't believe everything about transgender issues that is put before you, you could be surrounded by a group of people and beaten to a pulp. This goes on in excesses on either side, but there is very little in the news about right-wing people behaving this way . There is far more about the left following people, challenging people, trying to ruin their lives if they don't agree. The concept of classic liberalism that used to hold sway in our country has all but been extinguished in favor of woke left ideological liberalism, which is not at all what liberalism is about. And, actually, the Italian politician did not say she was proud to be white. She said she was not ashamed. There's a difference in the implications of those statements. It might seem trivial, but I argue that it is very substantial, however subtle it might be. We're just way, way tired of being abused and excluded and castigated for being normal people, going about our normal business. In America, you're some kind of neanderthal if you don't agree with the extreme positions on the left. I've lived long enough to see the US go through many changes. It's almost unrecognizable as the country it once was. That's not a good thing.

I’m awake so don’t need to copy & paste. If you aren’t aware of who is pulling the strings please research Agenda 30.

ronib

I thought the onerous conditions contained in the Treaty of Versailles imposed on Germany contributed to its economic collapse which in turn facilitated massive inflation and extreme poverty. This helped Hitler gain power.
Probably other factors too.

My reading of Biden is that some states in the USA have moved to anti abortion legislation and that Biden’s religious position has enabled this. I am unsure how accurate this is? Point is that funding for GB news and The Edmund Burke Foundation does seem to originate from the USA.

I find it hard to recognise Trump as a Christian.

German hyperinflation occurred in 1923. It was brought under control within a year or so. Some people actually benefited massively from it.

Hitler tried to take control at the the time, but failed miserably and there wasn't much support for the Nazis.

There was certainly grumbling about the terms of the Versailles Treaty. German pride had been dented and some people claimed that Jews within the government and army had been responsible for the German surrender.

Nevertheless, Germany prospered throughout the 1920s, despite some opposition to the new democracy, but when the Chancellor (Stresemann) died in 1929, there was a power vacuum. PR mean that there were a number of different political parties, but none had a majority.

Like all other developed countries, Germany suffered in the Great Depression in the early 1930s. By this time it had a fragile democracy and economy and nobody was in obvious charge.

The Nazis had been working in the background on their propaganda. People didn't really take Hitler seriously and he was given power as a means of shutting him up.

The Nazis' weren't stupid. Their great plan was intended to address the grievances of diverse groups of people. People were taken in and didn't consider the wider consequences. All they were bothered about was themselves. All sorts of groups were depicted as scapegoats, the biggest group being, of course, Jews. Ironically, France was probably more anti-semitic during the 19th and first years of the 20th century, but the Nazis knew how to wind people up.

The Nazis' policies were a strange mix of socialism, nationalism, racism and state control (fascism). The details were designed to appeal to as many groups as possible. "Family values" were promoted. The language used was deliberately inflammatory.

Sorry, I didn't mean to write an essay - in fact, I could write more. It wasn't simply about defeat in WW1, although the Nazis played up the idea of wounded pride and promised revenge. It wasn't just about the economy either. Other countries suffered just as much as Germany. It was a combination of circumstances and a flawed constitution which allowed Hitler to take absolute control.

In the UK, we've already seen our democracy undermined and attempts to act without parliament. We have a weak economy and a weak government with an opposition which doesn't inspire confidence in many. We have a Home Secretary who uses inflammatory language to stoke up fear and people losing confidence in public services.

Conditions are ripe for people to accept an alternative, but it's not obvious where that alternative is coming from. I don't think I have ever known so much division and lack of direction. There's a cartoon somewhere about somebody telling the king not to worry about the peasants with their pitchforks - all he has to do is get the peasants to turn on each other and that's what seems to be happening in the UK.

chrissy08

Germanshepherdsmum

I have no idea what you’re trying to say Chrissy. Sorry but I just don’t understand.

The politicians from whichever party are towing the same line. They do the bidding of the World Economic Forum.

Care to give some examples? Apart from copy and paste from some conspiracy site.

Do you even know what the WEF does?