On 4th of January 1884 a group of middle class socialists met to found the Fabian Society. They named their society after the Roman general Quintus Fabius Maximus Verrucosus who defeated the Carthaginians by avoiding battle. Instead, he wore his enemy down with guerrilla tactics. Their first motif summed it up. A Tortoise and a Wolf in Sheep's clothing. They opposed the Communist Socialist program of revolution. Believing that Socialism could be achieved by a process of 'gradualism' and infiltration. At the right moment they were urged to 'strike hard' and achieve the Socialist dream. The dream included the abolition of private property. Universal happiness would be assured in a communistic society. Without private ownership there would be no friction. To ensure their perfect society remained perfect they also supported Eugenics, a program to 'breed' the right sort of people. Condemned by H. G. Wells as a "Middle Class Talking Shop" and by Lenin as "social-chauvinists", they nevertheless set the stage for the future of the Labour Party.
In 1917, husband and wife members Sidney and Beatrice Webb drafted Clause four of the New Labour Parties constitution. "To secure for the workers by hand or by brain the full fruits of their industry and the most equitable distribution thereof that may be possible upon the basis of the common ownership of the means of production, distribution and exchange, and the best obtainable system of popular administration and control of each industry or service." It was adopted in 1918.
In 1920 they published their book 'A Constitution for The Socialist Commonwealth Of Great Britain' They proposed, the abolition of the House of Lords and the division of parliament. A Political Parliament responsible for foreign affairs and defence. A 'Social Parliament' and its Executive to have control over the nation's economic and social activities. One of its tasks would be to "Expropriate without remorse individual owners from their lands, their house property, their factories and their enterprises, whenever this course seems to promote the general well-being". They went on to found the LSE. He was middle class enough to be delighted when made Baron Passfield.
The Labour Party 1945 Manifesto was based on the Webb's manifesto. Atlee's quasi Communist government did enormous damage to post war Britain. At a time when other nations were rebuilding, Britain was subjected to policies that laid the foundations for years of decline. Conservative governments failed to rectify the mistakes and later Socialist governments under Wilson and Callaghan compounded the problems.
Tony Blair was clever. As a Fabian he understood the real meaning of a Wolf in Sheep's clothing. He was a Socialist who realised that Socialism and Britain were not compatible. The tactics of Fabius were needed. It was not necessary to split parliament because the creation of a Supreme Court and the Law Lords removal from parliament achieved part of the plan. The other part, more subtle, was the infiltration of the Civil Service. From a respected institution, famed for it impartial service, it became a political tool in the hands of the left-wing. Jeremy Corbyn was either too honest or too dumb to realise that he did not need to be open about his Socialist intent. Not so Kier Starmer. He understands perfectly well that Fabian infiltration had brought the country to a tipping point. A point where whatever the people decided, socialism rules. Socialism is an anachronism. It has failed everywhere, but like the bubonic plague it persists. It persists because it gives power to those who despise democracy. Those like the early Fabians who demanded power without the trouble of a democratic mandate.
Starmer's government, like Atlee's is authoritarian, it is backed by a civil service that agrees with his socialist ideals. Tax and more tax while paying off supporters is the Socialist way. Sadly, it's a way not far removed from previous Conservative administrations. Net Zero fanaticism has doomed this country, perhaps most of the west to an unnecessary decline. We have natural resources that would ensure prosperity and well-being. They are ignored because of highly questionable pseudo science. It is not so long ago that we were warned to prepare for an Ice Age. That's now a joke. The damage Net Zero is already doing to industry and jobs is no joke, it can only get worse.
Unless unforeseen circumstances alter things, we are stuck with a hard left government for another four plus years. I have no doubt that they will meet the fate that Attlee met and be voted out. Except the gerrymandering set in place by Blair will remain. If the next government lacks the courage for a root and branch reform of public services we will be condemned to a Socialist-non future.
There are those who bravely campaign for the Conservative Party to be given another chance. Why? Since 1951 we have had two real Conservative governments. Margaret Thatcher was thrown out because she refused to join the Euro. Lis Truss, because she proposed Conservative solutions. Since Attlee, the Conservative Party with those two exceptions has tried to deal with Socialism by moving left.
The centre ground is a quagmire that has sucked the life out of Conservatism. The current leadership contest is a perfect example. The two real conservatives, Braverman and Patel got nowhere. The former because she knew it was a waste of time, the latter the first to be voted out. We are left with four politicians who are responsible for Comrade Starmer's government. From failure to control immigration, through reneging on the promise to scrap EU regulations to kowtowing to Net Zero fanatics they caused the problem. By adopting Socialist tax and spend policy as opposed to Conservative ones of low tax and liberty they have paved the way for our present authoritarian government. Why on earth does anyone believe they have changed? What is there in the history of any of them that gives the slightest hint that they are truly conservatives?
The Conservative Parliamentary Party is dominated by 'One Nation' wets. Central Office too. There is no point in saying that the party is the oldest and most successful in history. It is irrelevant. In politics as in business you are as good as your last deal, and by that measure the Conservative party should slip quietly into the night. What matters is not the future of a party destroyed from within by people who despise its values. All that matters is the future of our country and the welfare of its citizens.
To save our country we need a democratic revolution that sweeps away the current political parties and replaces them with ones that care about our nation and its people. Time is short. In the SPD and Reform we have the basis of our future. Rather than cling to the old or throw insults at 'insurgents' is it not time to be Fabian? Everyone who is passionate about the survival of our country as a free independent nation should join the insurgency. Help, nurture a new way that reflects true British values.
Starmer never stopped telling us all "My father was a tool maker" without adding that he was a business owner. Young Starmer had his Private school fees paid by the state. He grew up to be successful as a Barrister and a not very good DPP. He was a Trotskyist in his school days and has never lost his hatred of democracy and enterprise. Benjamin Disraeli, the son of Jewish Italian immigrants, started education at an Islington Dame School. After that, he was sent to a boarding school at Blackheath. He did not go to university, but aged sixteen became articled to a firm of Solicitors. A successful novelist and parliamentarian. He was a brilliant Chancellor and Prime Minister and noted for his belief in reform and trusting the people. Margaret Thatcher was brought up in the flat above her father's shop. She went to the local Primary School and passing the equivalent of the 11+ to Grammar school in Grantham. She worked hard and won a Scholarship to Somerville College Oxford. She was the most consequential Conservative of the post war period. She changed the face of Britain, rolled back Socialism and gave working people pride in their own achievements. Disraeli and Thatcher, both from circumstances as humble as Starmers, chose to pursue opportunity and work to give that to others. Starmer has chosen to use envy and spite to divide society and impose Socialism.
Either we find our way back to Disraeli/Thatcher's positivism or surrender to Socialism. The choice is stark. The answer cannot be fudged. I am a lifelong Conservative. I backed Mac, I was stabbed in the back by Heath, overjoyed by Maggie, stabbed in the back by Major and Cameron and Sunak ... and it's enough. No more! It is time for real change and next time a change that will save us from anymore Starmers or Sunaks.
