Latest from UKIP Daily

We must not repeat the errors of the past

Here’s a thought for you. Or perhaps all of us. UKIP Daily threads lately increasingly refer to the current UKIP mess in terms of a Tory/Labour divide – but I don’t think it is. And I think it’ll hurt the party more if this is not challenged and better understood because the UKIP I know currently reaches across the political divide. And we don’t want to loose that in a kind of latter-day rerun of the 1960s and 70s, or the re-emergence of clowns supporting the likes of red-Len McCluskey and co.

We don’t have a name for the political force driving that “Political Rape” agenda: George Soros, the manipulation of the MSM, rampant and very anti western, aggressive islamic immigration on a scale that sweeps away all before it, and the destruction of Trump’s chances at all costs – but, I think, in the UK and UKIP in particular, we are in danger of missing the point. We’ve all seen (or known) enough of the kind of post-war rejection of all that went before, that filled universities with angry young men, spawned the likes of David Frost, dragged down voices like Enoch Powell, united Heath and Wilson in their desire to join the EEC and loudly condemned all sensible discussions about immigration for the next 40 years as racism, and which has indoctrinated the Education system to this day, in the process.

But in the process of what? Globalisation? Clinton taking the Arab money and running, and WW 3 for the rest of us?

I think the real enemy here (and all the apologists that let it happen) is masquarading as what we still describe as Liberalism. Not the LibDem version. The generic, deeply entrenched, BBC/Westminster kind that has taken over here in these last 25 years or so, and took a significant chunk of the Tory party with it, as did Blair before to his Labour party. The kind that allowed the likes of Hamza and Chowdery to do their worst unchallenged, and their followers even more so, as in Rotherham etc.

It’s not liberalism in the sense of freeing things up. It’s the opposite of what the name suggests, an exremely intolerant political force that has gained considerable ground, here and in Europe, and apparently in the US as well. Liberalism, like multiculturalism: it’s another word that somehow suggests the opposite of what it means.

I speak as an old fashioned Conservative who was brought up in Birkenhead in the 60’s and saw first hand the chaos that was then described as socialism, which it isn’t any more. For me, moving to Essex in 75 was a huge shock, no chips on both shoulders, where they embraced Thatcher like the 2nd coming as she dragged parts of the UK out of what I much later recognised then as a directionless post-war basket cases. But she – and her huge scepticism of the EEC – was dragged down by what the Conservative party was becoming, with modernisers like Cameron – an arrogant, patrician, ignorant stooge, utterly contemptuous of the conservative mainstream when he became leader, and not the kind of Conservative that I recognised. Hence I joined UKIP in 2009. But cameron’s apparently convictionless presentation skills took in a lot of people,  as did Blair before him, on whom Cameron and co modelled themselves and described as the Master!

I suggest that what we in UKIP are looking at now is less about Tory and Old Labour, and more about a political brand which offers hope against the political tide described as Liberalism – a kind that has gone way beyond its original ex labour roots to something truly dangerous; a kind that stoops at nothing to drive an agenda of ‘Equality at all Costs’, that has infiltrated both major Parties, and to which Brexit has almost become a side-show next to what Merkel unleashed following the collapse of the North of the Sahara Arabian states which have unleashed ISIS and God knows what else, and behind which the US has been, for about the last 80 years, but that’s a thread for another day.

Currently, the May bug has a problem with her Westminster Party which is largely full of Remainers. Real labour people have a problem with a Party that doesn’t represent working people any more. I (and about 5m other SME’s) have a problem trying to keep my small business running against a background of rising costs and my employees have a problem with a benefit system that they mostly refuse to engage with – because they prefer to work and will not be driven out of work by an overgenerous welfare system – as they and I see it.

The hustings start on Monday, and we were thinking about questions to ask the candidates. We know some of these questions: leadership structure, style, accountability, transparency …

Perhaps a few questions about the candidates’  interpretation of post war political history and what UKIP stands for might add some depth?

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
About Alan Piper (5 Articles)
2015 PPC, and still on the approved list!

30 Comments on We must not repeat the errors of the past

  1. I prefer the even less tongue friendly “postmodernist-Marxism”, partly because it includes the two key roots of the belief and partly because, being an unknown phrase it doesn’t have a convenient excuse and may therefore provoke curiosity.

    It is the key evil at the root of reluctance to speak of immigration and barbarity. It has also deeply damaged education and is the source of the bizarre imaginary genders.

    I wrote about the large numbers of people who would flock to a party that took a strong stand on this:

  2. Dee,

    I am afraid I am not as enthused about Raheem as you are, I don’t really like the language he uses (not discounting the bad language) but I can see how it might attract younger voters. I feel the way he speaks is quite immature really and shows his age and lack of experience.

    But there are also other things I am not too keen on his excessive fondness of drinking which is a bit too ‘blokey’ for me. I don’t doubt his has strong views on radical Islam and direct experience of it, but now is the time to get serious about all our policies and not just hinge on that one.

    I feel his behaviour towards politics is too journalistic and slogan orientated and does not really concentrate on the real issues. That is not to say that I don’t feel he has a future in UKIP doing something in communications at which he is very capable, but a leader at this present time he is not.

    He has made some terrible and in my opinion sexist comments, if you notice his most acerbic ones have all been against women, in areas where it is difficult to defend themselves. It is all very well saying he regrets it now and saying sorry but it is a bit late for that now, and as we know the media can and are having a field day with them.

    I also worry about his absolute love affair with Trump, he does not have a bad word to say about him and in fact he quotes Nigel’s views constantly almost to the point of being besotted with him as well. Are there no females in his life that he admires or has any respect for? He has not mentioned any so far. In many ways I admire Raheem for sticking his neck out but he has a lot of growing up to do, and stop behaving like some sort of student playing at politics, this is not a game and you cannot run a party on social media alone.

  3. 1. Creeping ISLAMIFICATION will succeed so long as we have Non-UKIP politicians who will accept bribes via their AGENTS to get more Muslim Councillors elected to approve more conversions to more mosques; we in London are having an increasing number of Councillors – mostly from one Party who can neither read nor write English who siphon funds into this Party via a top-floored bank in Birmingham: The Electoral Commission, The Police, and local authority chief officers look the other way.
    2. In order for us to effectively not “REPEAT ERRORS OF THE PAST”, we must identify and list all these plenty errors which the new leader will inherit; and, they are errors of commission and omission!
    3. This forum should be exploited to list our strengths and weaknesses for commensurate actions because branches are no good – proportion of effective sycophants too high; mindful of the fact that other parties will exploit it.
    4. Comments are invited.


    Please refrain from posting comments of a length approaching or even exceeding the standard length for articles published at UKIP Daily (750 -1000 words)!
    We appreciate your contributions in the comments very much indeed, and thus would be happy to publish your lengthy comments and reflections as articles, submitted in the usual way.
    Thank you very much,
    Viv Evans, Editor-in-Chief

  5. Here are two more topics that will hopefully be addressed by the candidates at the hustings, with an appropriate article here to describe the current situation 🙂 :

    Catastrophic, Man-made, Global Warming, aka Climate Change:
    Peter Lilly Calls On UK Government To Abandon Fatally Flawed Stern Review

    Scientific Integrity:
    How many scientific papers just aren’t true?

    • NorfolkSceptic, many scientific papers these days have to conform to the bias of the Universities. These are almost totally absorbed by the Climate Change scam as it is easy to fund any research that might bolster the myth whilst no university will even consider doing any form of research that might expose doubt about it. Research is now mercenary, taking money from the government or from corporate group willing to pay for the result they want.

      As for carbon reduction by just the UK, what a nonsense, especially as China has an ongoing program to build 800 coal fired power stations. Even Germany is refurbishing and building 11 coal and lignite power stations to take over from the closure of its nuclear generating stations.

      The problem for UKIP about Climate Change is that we don’t have a united policy on it. We include a wide range of political views and our core is the peoples army at odds with the elite. The same old fight that reoccurs in the UK every 300 years or so.

      On Climate change there is a whole generation brainwashed at school who in the majority believe it. Then amongst the rest of it, probably a third don’t believe it, a third do believe it, and a third don’t really know but are afraid if we make a lot of noise about it we will lose wider support.

  6. A good article that sets out the correct points and issues that need to be grasped and carried forward for UKIP. UKIP needs to get its act together and strike whilst the iron is hot because it won’t stay hot for long. And with the chance of an early general election UKIP could be caught fighting with itself, like Labour, and have its pants round its ankles, when this boat sails in.

  7. Panmelia, you have been firm in your views on Raheem, but what if he is the only leader who will challenge the creeping Islamification? And to be fair to the others, it will be more difficult for those intent on this agenda to label Raheem in the same way as they would Paul or Suzanne – although they will use other means and drag up every bit of dirt they can. The media et al are terrified of people like Raheem when they depart from the narrative so carefully nurtured.

  8. Liberal according to the Compact Oxford English Dictionary means; adj 1, willing to respect and accept behaviour or opinions different from one’s own. (Now that couldn’t really be much further from the stance of Tim Farron of the Liberal Party.) There are 6 other definitions all that boil down to ‘easy going’ and the opposite of the present use.

    As far as politics is concerned our use of the word libertarian is just right, meaning;- a person who believes that the state should intervene only minimally in the lives of its citizens. (This of course is the polar opposite of socialism, communism, modern conservatism, and most decidedly the European Union project.)

    • Liberal means Freedom.

      ‘Libertarianism’ is a fringe political ideology that originated in the U.S.A., involving a philosophically extreme antagonism to government in all forms, and a belief in essentially the law of the jungle, where a man is his own government. The Libertarian ideal man would be as depicted in the 1972 cinema film ‘Jeremiah Johnson’. This political culture is more at home in a frontier society, which to an extend North America still is, than a mature one such as England, and any attempt to transplant it across the ocean will be an “epic fail” (to use another term from our colonials over in North America) I suspect.

  9. I think you have to grasp that politics is about perception, we know we’re not toxic, many do not, they just read newspaper headlines. I have been shouted at, spat at and a colleague even had a hole shot in his house window ( the police were not very interested, it was some sort of air weapon we think), to be fair there was little they could do anyway and both he and I have police service, we are not scared of much).
    That my friend is how some perceive us and they are not all extreme left wing either.

    That poster for example was true, it happened, it’s photograph… but it still did us huge damage.
    Raheem has baggage from stupid posts on social media which will be repeated in the media endlessly, a good spokesman maybe but not a leader.

    • Paul, I do understand that politics is about perception, and the poster did us harm, I agree. However, no-one but Nigel defended it, they all backed away. I can understand why, the timing was dreadful and it was difficult to support. Raheem will deal with his baggage, as he has already on social media – I would suggest the media will set out to destroy him anyway, as they did Nigel, because he is such a threat to the current agenda. I do believe there needs to be policies, which should have been in place all along, to stop Radical Islam, it’s further encroachment, and roll back the tide. Raheem is willing to do this, and defend these policies, and frankly, he is better placed to do so than a lot of others, for obvious reasons. He has many other policies that are less controversial, but ones I like the sound of.
      I know that we need to get to Parliament, but ignoring the burning issues of the day will not get us there. Someone with a policy agenda such as Raheem’s just might.
      It appears to me that Raheem wants to take forward Nigel’s legacy, – not being controversial for the sake of it, but because it is in the interests of the country we all love.
      A final plus is that the young people he attracts will be a counter-balance to the young on the left, something that has been missing for far too long.

  10. What you’re calling ‘Liberalism’ is really Cultural Marxism. The Americans use this misnomer endemically in their political discourse, we shouldn’t make the same mistake.

    UKIP will fail if it become a reactionary Tory Party in exile, anyone who wants to reform the Tories into “traditional Consevatives”, I feel should take that particular cause into the Tory Party and fight it there & not use UKIP as a proxy for it.

    • Cultural Marxism doesn’t exactly roll off the tongue, does it? While liberalism is often quoted in the Westminster context, without being defined. Therefore a recognisable starting point for raising the antithesis.

      Whatever you call it, the present pc intolerant creed has all but consumed the parliamentary Tory Party amongst others and I see no merit in trying to flog a dead horse there when the alternative is to find common ground across the political divide and build on that. It’s seems to work locally. Why not everywhere?

      • Cultural Marxism is a clever & accurate description & carries the weight of intellectual/philosophical & political truth in it as to who these people are and what their intentions are. ‘Political Correctness’ is a facile mealy-mouthed term & merely disguises the extreme nature of their very dangerous radical agenda. ‘Liberalism’ as a description for who they are is wholly inaccurate, they’re not Liberal in any way, Classical or Neo, & they are quite happy to be called that as it makes them sound well-intentioned and moderate (which they most certainly are not) and puts people off their guard as to what their game is, & you play into their hands when you use their control terminology like this, which they are clever manipulators of in the revolutionary propagandistic tradition. Control language & you control ideas, etc.

        The point you make about joining UKIP because the Tory Pary wasn’t Tory enough is interesting, as I’m not a Tory, & how you and I can exist in the same political space that is UKIP is a question that it must now address as it transitions into a domestic political entity post-eu.

  11. Dear Alan Piper,

    What an excellent article.

    Policy is critical. Good honest admin is highly desirable.

    I hope the leader will adopt, as we did in 1993, policies which are right but considered unspeakable in polite society. Let’s remember that from 1993 to about 2005 it was considered non-U to criticise the EU.

    We need lots of radical, but correct, policies to justify the time and money we contribute to the cause. I particularly want clear policy on CO2, transport, energy, banning cruelty to animals, and preservation of our traditions and laws. The 2015 manifesto is a good start, but I want more.

    Let’s hope the new leader will eliminate the problems that this forum has identified.

    A leader who comes across as (and is) nice, honest, humorous, interesting, a good chooser of words, polite in expression, but steely centred on policy. And, of course, a stayer.

    I don’t think I am dreaming too much. We have two top-notch candidates.


    • Regarding Global warming, I want to see the evidence that CO2 causes warming.
      Also the evidence that the World climate has warmed even 0.1 degree in the last 20 years.

      I don’t want to see computer generated histograms or pictures of glaciers calving, or polar bears on pieces of ice. I want the scientific evidence.
      I have seen evidence to the contrary, both historic and recent proving no effect by CO2.
      Also how come the increase in CO2 as measured at Mauna Loa has steadily increased by about 3ppm per annum since 1950, when supposedly it is driven by exhausts from motor cars and burning fossil fuels for energy. The CO2 increase is almost a perfect straight line. There is no way industry and car use has been such a straight line increase in usage.

  12. What is coming out of the media at the moment is rather frightening. Immigrants demanding designer clothes, houses and goodness knows what else. We have got to change out benefits system, if you don’t put in you don’t take out. We must get out of this mad house called the EU, it is destroying everything we hold dear. I am rising 70 and I despair for the indigenous children and grandchildren of my once loved country

  13. there are two mega forces at work in England as in most of Europe
    Marxist Internationalism versus Populist Nationalism.
    On the one hand the political and media and big business elite with the academic brainwashing of two generations versus the people.
    That is why the forgotten backwater towns like Burnley are nationalist but the prosperous places like Aylesbury tend towards internationalism.
    This is a colossal fight and will be played out for the rest of my life.
    The people will win.

    • CK I hope you are right, however, I think we only have a short time to achieve turnaround. I don’t believe that it is by accident that all those places in the North and the Midlands are the ones increasingly being filled with ‘useful’ potential voters.
      People think that the Aylesburys are avoiding this because they’re rich and posh. I would suggest that the Globalists think their work there is done, and that is the main reason why things are as they are.
      UKIP must be the party that is willing to confront what is happening. We will never appeal to the Aylesbury voter, and at present the others have no-one to vote for.
      That is why I am so worried about those that want to ‘detoxify’ UKIP. If we don’t speak out about how we are going to tackle the takeover that is happening all over the country, people will not vote UKIP, they just won’t vote. Confronting Sharia Law is not ‘toxic’ it is essential.
      However, UKIP also seems to be overlooking another crucial part of Brexit, no-one is talking about the urgent need to take back control of not just our towns and cities by tackling Sharia Law, but taking control of our fishing waters, so that large parts of the whole country can begin to rebuild that industry again. That’s where another large swathe of potential voters are waiting for someone to vote for.
      We must be brave and unafraid. If UKIP becomes Tory-lite or silent about the attempted Islamification of large swathes of the country, UKIP will not be doing its job. And I cannot see how the people will win if that happens.

      • Dear Dee,

        The party does have a toxic image. I know this from my friends, many of whom are pretty rich, pretty musical, and play bridge. They tend to think UKIP is untouchable, horrible.

        If we had to abandon our policies so as to be loved, I would never support that.

        The question is “can we detoxify the party without in any way cutting back on policy?”. My answer is “emphatically yes”. We did it in Runnymede in around 2005 with the phrase, repeated a million times, “we like people from other countries, we respect the work they do, but we cannot continue with an open door immigration policy”.

        If we could do it in Runnymede, then the whole party can do it. But it is not yet happening. Again and again our representatives (recently Lisa) get tangled up on Question Time because they fail to use the above wording.


        • Thanks, Toby. Our image is only toxic (sorry about your friends, but they are obviously related to mine!) in the minds of those that want it to be so. Like Trump, where there are many people who support him though not publically, they will vote for him. But have you noticed that more and more are becoming braver. That is why I beg UKIP voters to be brave and lead the way. Incidentally, it’s why I support Raheem.

        • Absolutely right Toby. We DO have a toxic image in some quarters and it must be removed. This can be done without compromising the principals I believe we all share. It’s as much about the way the message is put across as it’s contents.
          We simply don’t need “ranters”. In the referendum things degenerated into anything goes from remain and we had to retaliate in kind. That’s over now and we have to have calm, reasoned and accurate arguements to push forward the Brexit we need, not shouting matches. That requires a little bit of PC, a lot of diplomacy and complete public unity.

      • Agree. Anyone claiming to want to detoxify Ukip is accepting, and using, the leftist smear that Ukip is toxic in the first place. It isn’t. It’s simply right-leaning not left-leaning. But with all other parties sliding ever leftward, the continuously moving goalposts of political discourse, driven by that Left, have reached the point where any party or person not sharing their outlook is now deemed nasty, far-right, extremist or nationalist (used as a smear, not as meaning patriotic), or the latest – toxic, not for behaviour but merely for holding a counter-view. And with media collusion it avoids them ever having to argue their cases.

        • Absolutely agree Phil. I refuse to accept the toxic label and that’s why I won’t vote for Suzanne Evans, who has repeated that smear and endorsed it several times too often.
          We need to change our name slightly to UK INDEPENDENT Party, as another poster on a different page brilliantly suggested this week.

          Independent from what, apart from the EU asap? –
          From the style of other political parties in this country, their anti-British agenda, their corruption, their enslavement to the money of corporate business and unions. Independent from consensual cross-party politics, establishment groupthink, the leftard chattering-classes’ smug, self-righteous certainty that they are always the right-thinking elite minority and what the ordinary ‘uneducated’ masses want or vote for is automatically wrong. Independent from PC and multicultural dogma. Independent from religious views being held sacrosanct and exerting far more influence than they should in our democratic secular society that long ago separated Church from State and thereby freed its citizens from religious dictatorship.
          Why do we tolerate sharia law operating in our country and halal meat being sold in our shops? We need a leader who will challenge the creeping islamification of this country and firmly oppose any measures that try to put islam on an equal footing with our Christian heritage that is the bedrock of our history, laws, values and ethics.

          I googled Raheem Kassam earlier, curious as to his stance on islam. I don’t want him as leader, but he seems genuine in his anti-islam stance judging by the hatred and insults directed at him by islamists. On one page of abuse I found the following quote from Shaykh Muhammad al-Yaqoubi which tells you all you need to know about the political ideology of islam:
          “Political authority and religion are kin brothers, neither would stand but by its companion; because religion is the foundation of political power and its pillar, and political power is the guardian of religion; political power is not established without a foundation and religion cannot be implemented without authority.”
          This is why islam is incompatible with a true democratic secular society and has no place in it except as a private belief system practised in private.

        • Qui s’explique, s’accuse.

      • “Confronting Sharia Law is not ‘toxic’ it is essential.”
        Like this, you mean?

        Major push for UK mosques to make loud call to prayer THREE TIMES a day

        Three times a day, people will be be reminded of the ‘cultural advances’, with liberals equating it to ‘church bells’.

        • Yes! It is no good waiting. It will be too late, it may be too late already – but Raheem is willing to try, which is good enough for me.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published.