A lesson from Great Britain regarding 'reform' and 'working from the inside'

[Mattsa]

They are the kind of 'libertarian free marketeers' that Republicans like Paul Ryan are. While i have met some that want to remove themselves out of europe for the right reason the majority i have come across are xenophobic littler englanders who hate johnny foreigner. They advocate govt job creation and investment, a 25 yr plan on building new nuclear power stations (which is fine if its not tax payer funded). Massive investment in prisons, strict border control, strict law and order policy, Increase spending on military by 40%, Increase spending on the National Health Service, Increase spending on public education, they believe public transportation is a public right and will increase spending by 3 billion a year, Platform 15 of their policies 'Restoring Britishness' Ban people from wearing certain clothes that they dont like. Schools must teach things that are congruent with British values as defined by the state. All can be found here in their manifesto. http://www.ukip.org/media/pdf/UKIPmanifesto1304a.pdf

They sound pretty fascist to me mate. Of course not in the british mindset of fascism being folk jackbooting down the street with outstretched arms and charlie chaplin mustache. Fascist in the same economic way that Romney and Obama are.

I'm another Brit Ron Paul supporter, so I'll chip in my thoughts here.

UKIP are the best of a rotten bunch..........but nothing to get very excited about.

Nigel Farage is entertaining to watch when he is poking fun at Von Rompuy and Barosso in the Strasbourg parliament but UKIP will not ever become a credible opposition to the status quo.

Just as in the USA, the political system is a duopoly. The British establisment created the Liberal Democratic Party, a third main political party, in an attempt to create the illusion of greater choice. The reality however, is that a vote for the LDP or UKIP just splits the vote and allows one of the two main political parties back into power.

The Liberal democrats have lost all their credibility and their leader, Nick Clegg is now reviled by a large number of Liberal Democrat voters, most of whom will vote for the Labour Party in the next general election.

Conservative voters are abandoning their party and voting for UKIP. This will also strengthen Labour's chances of winning the next general election.

The political system is totally rigged. Votes don't translate into seats in parliament.

Back to UKIP.....

The one good thing about UKIP is their passionate dislike of the EU. However, they are not a libertarian party. Farage is an ex-city banker. UKIP are perceived to be a "single issue" party........anti EU, and very little else.

At best, they might get a few MPs elected to parliament. They will not win a general election unless there is an overwhelming change in the voting habits and probably a change to proportional representation rather than "first past the post" voting system.

 

[Crotale]

UKIP is closer to fascist than anything libertarian. Sure they put a nicer face on it and are less crude than the British National Party but when it comes down to it they act like a bunch of country club racists. No offense to the original poster as the options in Britain are very thin on the ground.

I wouldn't go as far as saying UKIP is fascist, they certainly are the best of a horrible bunch. But that's just like saying Romney isn't as bad as Obama or vice versa. UKIP, despite their best efforts to pretend otherwise, are not a libertarian party. They want closed borders, state schools, war on drugs, fiat money, protectionism, nationalised healthcare and much more including a large amount of anti-muslim rhetoric from a sizeable amount UKIP members.

Options in Britain are indeed very thin on the ground, which is why I put so much energy into the Ron Paul R3VOLUTION in the hope that with Ron Paul as president his literature, stature and message would blow across the pond and kick start libertarianism in this country.

Although, thanks to UKIP, the tag 'libertarian' in the UK laughably connotes 'Thatcherite'. I use the term voluntarists, hopefully the social conservatives won't hijack that term as well.

It's strange how the philosophy of liberty has been known under different labels over the years.

 

[Crotale]

The vast majority of UKIP members are opposed to non-interventionism as well. That, their opposition to the gold standard, authoritarianism on civil liberties and desire for completely closed borders is what put me off when I was trying to decide if they were libertarian enough for me to join and work from the inside.

If they were just anti-liberty on one issue then I would have joined and tried to help influence into a liberty-friendly party, but the huge cocktail of authoritarianism is just too much. I mean supporting the NHS for crying out loud! How can a party profess to be libertarian advocate government monopoly over such a crucial service. The main draw of UKIP is their euroscepticism, but that is completely overwhelmed by the drawbacks. Why replace big government abroad with big government at home?

 

[Mattsa]

And also, UKIP are a statist party, comprised of BNP in Blazers, old school Thatcherites and Hannan type conservatives. They are only marginally better than the Conservative Party.

Furthermore, UKIP did have a little success recently, but they generally fluctuate at around 6% so you saying 8-10% is an exaggeration.

I agree that UKIP is a statist party. They all are!

The state is omnipotent in the UK, has been for centuries.

Libertarianism would cause chaos in the UK because virtually all British citizens are hopelessly institutionalised by the state. The people wouldn't be able to cope with living in a free society.

 

[Crotale]

I agree that UKIP is a statist party. They all are!

The state is omnipotent in the UK, has been for centuries.

Libertarianism would cause chaos in the UK because virtually all British citizens are hopelessly institutionalised by the state. The people wouldn't be able to cope with living in a free society.

I fear you are right, when the shit hits the fan it's gonna be bad over here. The fact that I know personally pretty much the entire libertarian community over here says a lot.

But still, drinking age is 18 here but 21 in America.

 

[Demigod]

I think that you should be going for regional seats and influence trough a new political party ( completely independent from any other ).

Taking the GOP is impossible as you have seen they will either sue you,make new rules to take you our or just start a new parallel organisation which they will sponsor ( as you have seen in Nevada ).

Concentrating in a few states both with manpower and money would be much more productive.If you manage to start winning positions like governors or congressman than the people would be able to see how good you are at running things.If the states you control (it doesn't even mater if it is one ) are doing good you can bet your ass that you will start getting powerful across the country pretty fast.

 

[Mattsa]

I fear you are right, when the shit hits the fan it's gonna be bad over here. The fact that I know personally pretty much the entire libertarian community over here says a lot.

But still, drinking age is 18 here but 21 in America.

I am always amused that you can be fined for crossing the road in the USA!

Even the British state hasn't gone as far as issuing fines for jaywalking!

 

[Mattsa]

I think that you should be going for regional seats and influence trough a new political party ( completely independent from any other ).

Taking the GOP is impossible as you have seen they will either sue you,make new rules to take you our or just start a new parallel organisation which they will sponsor ( as you have seen in Nevada ).

As I see it a big part of the Republican voters mentality is to defeat democrats.If you can assert your self as the party that can beat democrats ( for example in New Hampshire ) the people will switch p.p.To hope that you can change the GOP from the inside for me is totally impossible.

Concentrating in a few states both with manpower and money would be much more productive.If you manage to start winning positions like governors or congressman than the people would be able to see how good you are at running things.If the states you control (it doesn't even mater if it is one ) are doing good you can bet your ass that you will start getting powerful across the country pretty fast.

Impossible. It'll never happen.

I'll tell you what's going to happen. The UK will be a totalitarian state within 20 years, irrspective of whether we stay in the EU.

America is heading in the same direction. So is Europe. So is everywhere.

I don't believe there will be a political solution anymore.

You folks have one ace in your hand...... You still have the right to bear arms.

 

[Demigod]

I am always amused that you can be fined for crossing the road in the USA!

Even the British state hasn't gone as far as issuing fines for jaywalking!

Most of Europe has them as well and the tickets are actually very severe.

The police don't usually give them unless there is a gap in the budget that needs to be closed or they were instructed to earn their paycheck.It is just another law that was put in place only if more money are ever to be needed,

 

[Demigod]

Impossible. It'll never happen.

I'll tell you what's going to happen. The UK will be a totalitarian state within 20 years, irrspective of whether we stay in the EU.

America is heading in the same direction. So is Europe. So is everywhere.

I don't believe there will be a political solution anymore.

You folks have one ace in your hand...... You still have the right to bear arms.

I don't I live in Europe,well the Balkans actually.

The only ace in my hand is that we are batshit crazy and you never know what will happen in a year.

Here everyone is ideologically confused I have even once met a communist who talked to me how we should get the government out of the economy because they joined forces with the big business and that the National Bank is actually making us all poorer by printing money.Now he was a socialist on most of the social issues .But when he talked about the economy I just stood there thinking how the hell did he joined the communist party.

My father is in the socialist-democrat party and he is for cutting taxes,regulations having a smaller government and getting out of the UN.And of course eliminating the national bank ( but I think this is because he hates all banks )

 

[nobody's_hero]

I previously mentioned that what we are trying to do with the GOP 'takeover' is akin to trying to infiltrate one of the ruling parties in Britain at the time of the colonial period, in hopes that we could get better conditions for the colonists.

Seems overly optimistic to think that it will work, but lets see what happens at convention.

 

[Liberty74]

Thank you for pointing out the obvious to me that I have been trying to explain to everyone on RPF for almost a year now.

Hopefully, many will read and wake up to reality that fighting "within" one of the two parties is a failed strategy specifically for the top spot at the national level. The two party criminal system is the problem because they are bought and paid for by the exact same people. It's why nothing ever changes. The system is set up that why by the elites on purpose and with purpose.

I wish those in England very much luck but the system has "got you" already. The people are stuck for the most part in bringing about change unless there is a full on revolution. Here in America our Independent candidate Perot was polling around 30% back in 1992. He was statistically tied with Clinton and Bush. Perot dropped out and claimed the Bush team threatened his daughter's wedding. If true, that is the two party system at work. Perot did jump back into the race but lost much of his support and ended up with 19% of the vote.

Other example of the system at work to keep it as is...

I remember last year when listening to Rush a caller calling in to his show complaining how there isn't a difference between the two parties and how a third party should rise up. In this case, the caller wanted that party to be called the "Tea Party." Rush went bat shit about how that is a very bad idea blah blah blah. Listen folks, Rush talks a good talk but that man is there to "control" the opposition side i.e. the right. He's there to keep people locked in the system or the false left right paradigm this country is mentally stuck in. We all know that the Republicans have swallowed and co-opted the tea party movement. The sad part is is that many in the tea party movement don't even know they have been co-opted. I see that potentially happening with the liberty movement. Heck, it's starting to happen now where Mitt has come out in favor of the FED and against Bernanke. The GOP wants to establish a stupid "commission" on the Gold Standard that will go no where just like in the early 80s. Those commissions are just another paid job for the crooks that got us into the mess we are currently in. Did the recent debt commission solve anything? NOPE!

Ron Paul was polling 18% in a 3-way earlier this year. Would he win? If the people woke up out of their brainwashed trances. Winning would be up to Ron Paul and us to spread the message of liberty and freedom (all inclusive message) and how the two party system is the problem. People believe that because 65% of voters want another option. But as long as the two party system exists, the voters will remain sheep like stuck in the false right left paradigm, the false liberal conservative paradigm and the false Dem Rep paradigm. Have you ever noticed that the two parties are polar opposites on practically ever issues? How can that be? Seriously? Think about it...

The bottom line is that the system needs to be "shocked" by a very viable third party candidate. Who's willing to step up to the plate?

 

[jointhefightforfreedom]

Hello,

I've been following the recent events and even i'm shocked, but I see the debate of whether to stick with the GOP or leave them is dividing Ron Paul supporters so I thought i'd share a similar situation we have over in the United Kingdom with our Conservative Party.

Basically, the party is just like the GOP and has been for years - it completely ignores the voters, ignores the party supporters and is run by a closed group who have control and influence with all of the media networks and newspapers (again, just like the GOP). Now, in recent years since the election of David Cameron as party leader (who rubs Conservative supporters faces in the mud even more so than ever before) there's been a split forming with many deserting the party and joining the newly arisen UKIP (UK Independence Party).

A few years ago, UKIP would only poll 2% or 3% in the national polls yet now it's on 8% and 10% (unprecedented in our political system which is dominated by two large parties) and defections by both voters, activists and leading figures themselves happen weekly now. Indeed, it's now widely accepted that the Conservative Party, which hasn't won an election since 1992, cannot win an election ever again unless it wins back UKIP voters - something I cannot see happening.

So whats our aim over here in Great Britain? we're aiming to destroy the Conservative Party by depriving it of wins so that it folds and UKIP or some other new party can replace it. We tried 'reforming it from the inside' but it was impossible, as (and see the similarity here) the Conservative Party started centralising candidate selection where the leadership would overrule the candidates the party members voted for and replaced them with candidates loyal to the leadership - meaning any hopes of 'reform' are virtually impossible.

I always thought the American system of political parties was much more decentralised so that you actually had a chance of taking over the party, but after seeing the events of the past few months and days, I can't say that so surely anymore. Either way, it's up to you as you'll know best but i'm simply sharing the similar experience we're having here in Great Britain. Here's an article on what i'm talking about; http://conservativehome.blogs.com/p...d-without-a-ukip-deal-warns-danhannanmep.html

Essentially, they won't listen as long as they can win - if you prevent them from winning by taking away votes, they'll have to listen eventually or they'll simply implode as a party. Something to think about.

Thoughts?

Spot on Mate!
+rep
We have to make the gop loose to loose power until we have the numbers to replace them!
we need to take our 20% along with Tea Party, occupy Groups and independents and form a new party now !!

The American Liberty Party!

Addition to that:
After Ross Perot Ran and took 30% of the vote The GOP and Dems made a Deal to Structure campaign laws, voting laws etc.. in every state so that no other party could compete against there 2 party system.

We need to pay attention to history in order to change the future.

 

[No1butPaul]

I agree with the this sentiment very much. If RP and his campaign weren't going to win it, why not sink the ship? Why not let RP's last stand be against the GOP that has done nothing? Why not let RP use campaign funds to attack Mitt Romney one-on-one, with hard hitting tv ads...and now, why not be running ads showing supporters being jailed, attacked, lied to/about, and everything else BY Republican leaders?

I don't know. Getting behind Mitt though? Seriously? He will say anything to get elected, and has no consistent record to run on (other than inconsistency).

Ron wouldn't do that because of Rand. We need to start thinking for ourselves. The GOP is a dinosaur and with Romney in control of it, it is also now criminal.

 

[Tudo]

It'll never happen. Never happened in the history of the world and it's not going to happen now. If you're not willing to fight for it you're not going to get it. It's as simple and as difficult as that.

 

[-:Undertaker:-]

They are the kind of 'libertarian free marketeers' that Republicans like Paul Ryan are. While i have met some that want to remove themselves out of europe for the right reason the majority i have come across are xenophobic littler englanders who hate johnny foreigner. They advocate govt job creation and investment, a 25 yr plan on building new nuclear power stations (which is fine if its not tax payer funded). Massive investment in prisons, strict border control, strict law and order policy, Increase spending on military by 40%, Increase spending on the National Health Service, Increase spending on public education, they believe public transportation is a public right and will increase spending by 3 billion a year, Platform 15 of their policies 'Restoring Britishness' Ban people from wearing certain clothes that they dont like. Schools must teach things that are congruent with British values as defined by the state. All can be found here in their manifesto. http://www.ukip.org/media/pdf/UKIPmanifesto1304a.pdf

They sound pretty fascist to me mate. Of course not in the british mindset of fascism being folk jackbooting down the street with outstretched arms and charlie chaplin mustache. Fascist in the same economic way that Romney and Obama are.

This is complete nonsense, indeed the party has pledged to cut funding in most of those areas. It is true, that in some of those areas they've promised to increase funding - i'm not happy about it either, but thats what you have to do when you are managing a political party which is a semi-coalition between the old Labour left, the conservative base and libertarians.

Even in a Ron Paul administration things like this would happen because Ron Paul cannot be the party, a party will always have compromises on slight issues. I'm not one for compromise (hence why I despise the Conservative Party and love Ron Paul) but there's a difference between being practical and logical and being a sellout - UKIP is a good enough balance for me, and, unlike the GOP or Tory Party, UKIP is open to being influenced as its a members driven party.

I don't know what's "racist" about things like border security and promoting British culture. The UK has a lot of problems from open borders and extreme multiculturalism. It's pretty crazy reading news stories about how people can seemingly never do anything wrong there as long as they can say their culture says it's ok. Sure, someone could take it to an extreme the other way, but I've always just looked at the UKIP's intent as basically "if you want to live in Britain, then be British." Sort of like in America: "are you a hyphenated American, or are you an American?"

Indeed, as far as i'm aware Ron Paul supports tough border controls as well - anybody who doesn't lives in an internationalist dream world.

Though I do have trouble with any country or political party that thinks royalty is a good idea. I mean, wtf is that. Are the princes and knights going to roll some 20-sided dice and go fight some dragons or something?

Actually we respect our constitution just like you wish to respect yours. The Royal Family aren't elected, but don't exercise any meaningful power meaning they are the guardians of the constitution. As is stressed time and time again in this battle, liberty is what counts and not democracy - the British Monarchy fits completely in with libertarian principles and it angers me quite a lot when American libertarians somehow claim that Britain is ruled by princes when it's simply not.

Obama or HM Queen Elizabeth II who has approval ratings of 80%+ and is non-political ... I know who i'd have any day.

And also, UKIP are a statist party, comprised of BNP in Blazers, old school Thatcherites and Hannan type conservatives. They are only marginally better than the Conservative Party.

Furthermore, UKIP did have a little success recently, but they generally fluctuate at around 6% so you saying 8-10% is an exaggeration.

Nothing of note, simply slurs - some of you in this movement come across just as bad as the socialists do.

As for the polls, no it's actually 8% the average apart from a few recent polls this month - clutching at straws there mate.

I would go as far as saying UKIP is fascist, they certainly are the best of a horrible bunch. But that's just like saying Romney isn't as bad as Obama or vice versa. UKIP, despite their best efforts to pretend otherwise, are not a libertarian party. They want closed borders, state schools, war on drugs, fiat money, protectionism, nationalised healthcare and much more including a large amount of anti-muslim rhetoric from a sizeable amount UKIP members.

Options in Britain are indeed very thin on the ground, which is why I put so much energy into the Ron Paul R3VOLUTION in the hope that with Ron Paul as president his literature, stature and message would blow across the pond and kick start libertarianism in this country.

Although, thanks to UKIP, the tag 'libertarian' in the UK laughably connotes 'Thatcherite'. I use the term voluntarists, hopefully the social conservatives won't hijack that term as well.

It's strange how the philosophy of liberty has been known under different labels over the years.

- Ron Paul wants closed borders.

- UKIP do supports state schools correct, but prefer a much more independent system of education.

- Concerning the war on drugs, UKIP actually would look into decriminalisation as Farage has commented on in the past.

- Concerning the monetary system, actually the party is being driven towards a gold standard as shown by comments by Godfrey Bloom and Nigel Farage in the past year. As i've stated before, whilst the party isn't perfect it can at least by influenced and is open to change.

- On healthcare, yes thats true and its disappointing. However, the NHS is so ingrained into the British psye that is will take years of slow debate to even begin to overturn this strange love of state healthcare.

- Protectionism? complete nonsense, have you not heard Farage rally against EU protectionism?

 

[-:Undertaker:-]

I wish those in England very much luck but the system has "got you" already.

Thank you, and yes it's very hard - seen by comments to this thread on UKIP. A great deal of people both in the US and Great Britain itself don't understand that the United Kingdom is much more 'gone' than the US is, therefore we face an even bigger battle in terms of libertarianism for winning peoples hearts and minds. As described before, the NHS is actually loved for some strange reason so for the moment we have to accommodate ourselves to it (but our aim would be to introduce an opt-out of the NHS like Ron Paul suggested).

I'm not for compromise in the slightest, hence why I want to destroy the Conservative Party and would like to see the unreformable GOP fold as well. But in getting there and securing a platform for libertarianism, UKIP is the best method of doing so - yet you have some people here who are simply "NO NO NO FASCISTS FASCISTS" just because the UKIP party (which is a coalition remember, not one person like Ron Paul is) has to compromise in terms of policy just to be heard in the first place.

If I didn't think UKIP was open to policy changes and pushing a libertarian agenda, then I wouldn't bother with it. It is the same with the GOP, if it were open to being reformed then it'd be worth fighting inside it, although that is my point - sadly that looks to be not true by recent events.

I mean, look at what UKIP have achieved by working outside of the Conservative Party (which didn't work) - we're at around 8% in the national polls which is unknown in our two party system and we're now being taken seriously that if our demands aren't met then the Conservative Party will never win another election again .... and we're getting closer and closer to our goals - the Conservative Party hasn't won an election in over 20 years now, and if it loses the next election (highly highly highly likely) then it's most likely going to split. Indeed if a split does occur, UKIP itself could take the spot - just as the grassroots Labour Party replaced the Liberal Party back in the early 1900s when people said it would never happen.

We've achieved small gains, and it's going to continue because we've let it be known that we're not going to go away or play along.

 

[WesSeid]

The one good thing about UKIP is their passionate dislike of the EU. However, they are not a libertarian party. Farage is an ex-city banker. UKIP are perceived to be a "single issue" party........anti EU, and very little else.

Maybe UKIP is a "single issue, anti EU" party, or maybe not, but if they are, it's important to understand how many issues that "single issue EU" has its tentacles attached to. The EU pushes for open borders, for extreme multiculturalism, for more taxes, for more EU centralized power... every other Parliament video of Stuart Agnew is him saying how the EU has taken over UK fisheries and farming laws, etc. Even IF the UKIP is a "single issue" party, the EU is a big issue.

Actually we respect our constitution just like you wish to respect yours. The Royal Family aren't elected, but don't exercise any meaningful power meaning they are the guardians of the constitution. As is stressed time and time again in this battle, liberty is what counts and not democracy - the British Monarchy fits completely in with libertarian principles and it angers me quite a lot when American libertarians somehow claim that Britain is ruled by princes when it's simply not.

I know Britain isn't ruled by princes and queens. But that also goes with my point.

"The Royal Family don't have any meaningful power..." that's even worse! How do they "guard the constitution" if they don't have any meaningful power? I mean, I guess they are considered "good-will ambassadors" or similar more than anything, but they're still "royalty," and having unelected "royalty" in the year 2012 is pretty weird.

 

[sailingaway]

Maybe UKIP is a "single issue, anti EU" party, or maybe not, but if they are, it's important to understand how many issues that "single issue EU" has its tentacles attached to. The EU pushes for open borders, for extreme multiculturalism, for more taxes, for more EU centralized power... every other Parliament video of Stuart Agnew is him saying how the EU has taken over UK fisheries and farming laws, etc. Even IF the UKIP is a "single issue" party, the EU is a big issue.



I know Britain isn't ruled by princes and queens. But that also goes with my point.

"The Royal Family don't have any meaningful power..." that's even worse! How do they "guard the constitution" if they don't have any meaningful power? I mean, I guess they are considered "good-will ambassadors" or similar more than anything, but they're still "royalty," and having unelected "royalty" in the year 2012 is pretty weird.

why is their royalty any of our business? don't we believe in each country being sovereign and able to run their affairs their own way?

 

[WesSeid]

why is their royalty any of our business? don't we believe in each country being sovereign and able to run their affairs their own way?

I didn't say we should invade them and change it.

I guess the UKIP and EU aren't any of our business either, so we all should stop talking about them.