Something some of you may be aware of, and others may be interested in, are the recent developments of the British Conservative party.

A bit of background:

After being in charge for the better part of the 80s and 90s, the Tories lost to a resurgent Labour party, who reinvented themselves under Tony Blair as "New Labour", effectively moving the party from the far left, to sort of centre-left.

Now after almost 9 years out of power, and a string of unsuccessful (and curiously, all baldheaded) leaders, all trying in one way or another mimick the success of the US Republicans by moving further and further to the right, the Tories have elected a youngish leader who seems to be doing the unthinkable: move the party to the left.

If it keeps moving in this direction, 2 things will happen. First, the Tories and Labour will be virtually identical in policy (at least to begin with), and second, the Lib Dems will be driven out of meanstream politics. A third thing which might happen, is that once Blair is out of the picture, Labour might try to move back to the left.

I think observers from countries like the US, Canada and Australia should pay close attention to what's happening in Britain. Whether it succeeds, or bombs, there will be lessons to learn.

Anyways... here's Bagehot's view:

______________________________________________

Cameron's way

Jan 19th 2006
From The Economist print edition

The Conservative leader has set a new direction for his party. Will it follow him?



A COUPLE of weeks ago, David Cameron and his wife, Samantha, were conveniently spotted going into a cinema showing “Brokeback Mountain” on the first day of its release.

The new Tory leader's choice of film, a Western that depicts a homosexual relationship both graphically and sympathetically, gave useful reinforcement to everything he is trying to do with his party. Gay-rights campaigners, who until recently would have shunned the Conservatives, have been quick to salute Mr Cameron. A website called pinknews.co.uk gushed: “David Cameron is the leader of the future. Young gay professionals are the perfect group of people to support the Conservatives.”

It is now just over six weeks since Mr Cameron was elected leader by a two-to-one majority and his initial strategy has become clear. He has three interlocking aims. The first is to deal quickly and decisively with what the party chairman, Francis Maude, calls the Tories' brand problem. During the last election, the party discovered that once a policy was identified with the Conservatives, it automatically became unpopular with voters even if they had approved of it before its attribution.

The second is to establish a clear sense of direction that will inform detailed work on policy. The third, according to Oliver Letwin, who is in charge of the policy review, is to “buy the right” later on to have radical ideas taken seriously. That can only be done by changing perceptions of the party's motives—above all, the belief that Tories are mean-spirited and selfish.

Without anything as significant symbolically as Labour's pro-nationalisation Clause Four to scrap, Mr Cameron has chosen to move on multiple fronts. Some of the things he has done smack of gimmickry, such as recruiting the poverty campaigner Bob Geldof and the green activist Zac Goldsmith as policy advisers (he even tried to enlist one prominent Labour backbencher). But the series of speeches he has made since becoming leader have been deadly serious in their intent.

Portrayed in much of the press as a rejection of long-held Tory principles and policies, the speeches have earned Mr Cameron glowing praise from liberal newspapers and ill-tempered suspicion from their right-wing counterparts—exactly what he had hoped for. But what makes them so clever is the impact they have had without Mr Cameron saying anything extraordinary.

It is true that the Tory leader has explicitly ruled out any return to the 11-plus selection exam or the creation of new grammar schools. It is also true that he has committed himself to maintaining the existing tax-funded financing for the health service. But in 18 years of Tory government before 1997 not a single new grammar school was opened, nor did even Margaret Thatcher challenge the funding principles of the NHS.

Yet some Tory commentators and think-tank intellectuals have condemned Mr Cameron for abandoning sacred Conservative values, which is some indication of how far the party had drifted from mainstream political opinion. There are arguments both for academic selection and insurance-based health systems, but there is little evidence that British voters are interested in hearing them—least of all from the Tories.

The break that Mr Cameron's speeches mark is with the years of Tory failure rather than the years of Tory success. They do not rule out, as some critics have claimed, applying a market-based approach to the provision of public services or reinvigorating the supply-side of the economy. What they do demonstrate is that in politics how you say things is as important as what you say.

Already, Mr Cameron's attempt to find a different language is yielding results. The most recent opinion poll (conducted by ICM) gives the Tories a 39% share of the vote and a four-point lead over Labour—according to ICM's data, the best position the Tories have held since sterling fell out of Europe's currency systemin 1992. A Populus poll last week found that Mr Cameron had already gone a long way towards neutralising the Tories' negative brand image. In some instances, knowing that a statement came from him actually increased people's support for it.

The shock of the new

It was against that promising background that Mr Cameron held on January 17th the first private meeting of Tory MPs since the beginning of his campaign to re-position the party. Anyone hoping for rebellious rumblings will have been disappointed. Apart from one slightly barbed question about the extent to which the supposedly consultative policy commission had been pre-empted by the leader's speeches, there was near-euphoria. Even those on the hard right who are uncomfortable with the direction Mr Cameron has plotted for the party are reluctant to challenge the mood of optimism he has generated.

Whether that will survive the outcome of Mr Letwin's policy review in 18 months' time is another matter. Tony Blair, for one, thinks that Mr Cameron will either be dragged further to the right than he intends or face real difficulties with his party. Unlike Labour's left wing, the Tory right, Mr Blair argues, does not in its heart of hearts know that its ideas are vote-losers. He promises that Labour's attack, when it comes, will be based on Mr Cameron's actions rather than on his soothing words.

But that will come later. For now, the danger for Mr Cameron is that people expect too much of him. So far, the Tory advance has come at the expense of the self-destructing Liberal Democrats. Soon, he must show he can inflict lasting damage on the government. If he maintains his momentum, his party will allow him to take it wherever he wants. If he does not, the doubts could grow quite quickly.

Mr Cameron's strategy of popping up all over the place sounding terribly decent and looking as if he belongs in the 21st century is working a treat and he is carrying it off with elan. But when the shock wears off, will he know what to do next?

Can you imagine what would happen if Bush or Frist were seen going to Brokeback Mountain? The entire Southern Baptist Convention would collectively spontaneously combust.

Right. So this is the big question:

Are British values so different from American values that the countries' politics need to be dragged in opposite directions in order to be electable?

Something tells me that's not the case. Or otherwise, I get the impression that the idea that "America is very conservative" is a bunch of crap. How much of this is rebranding and selling your ideas with a clean and simple message?

I'll comment on this when I'm a tad more sober. I hate the Conservative party

From Private Eye:

THAT RADIO ONE DAVID CAMERON INTERVIEW IN FULL:

DJ: Hullo and welcome to the studio the leader of the Conservative Party, the Right Honourable David Cameron MP.

Cameron: Cool! Wicked! Minging!

DJ: Mr. Cameron can we talk about your education policies - is it true that you favour streaming and setting rather than selection?

Cameron: Scissor Sisters! Coldplay! Kaiser Chiefs!

DJ: Yes but what about grammar schools - surely this is a betrayal of traditional Tory values?

Cameron: Girls Aloud. The Blonde One. Cor! Eh?

DJ: I gather you have also confirmed your support for the NHS in its current form?

Cameron: Little Britain! Catherine Tate! Ricky Gervais!

DJ: On a lighter note, I suppose I have to ask you about pop.

Cameron: Yes absolutely I was a member at Eton along with Boris Johnson and Ollie Nitwit and Charlie Moore. Bloody good fun! You could wear these spiffing waistcoats with your top hat and tails doncha know?

(The interview that to be terminated at this point when a number of advisors put a sack over Mr. Cameron's head and bundled him into a waiting van)

From Google:



"Fell off my chair laughing"

British and American values are essentially the same. I like to think that values in the west are fairly homogenous.

However, there are different lifestyle conditions that make the situations different, and therefore people's interests will be different, leading them to vote accordingly.

In a broad sense, Britian's political mind is a consequence of her location and history. Pretty much everything about being British has been stolen somewhere down the line, we/they were the greatest pirates of all - countries, language, culture, royalty, you name it. But she has always been strong and proud. Interspersed with this is the stiff, stolen history and traditions, and so forth. There has always been a slight left lean to Britain, especially in Parliament, even though there are, of course, rather right-wing figures there. But right-wing policies are always seen as safe, and it's easy to get voted in with them, or at least it was until recently, when Thatcher proved that far-right policies were going insane. Ever since, the Tories have become more and more of a laughing stock, despite having a strong core support in stuffy old Middle England, and with New Labour's rebranding, it was suddenly young professionals, teachers and doctors, who would traditionally have voted Lib Dem or Tory, who were making up the Labour votes instead of trade unionists and socialists.

Conservatism has noticed the swing is adjusting accordingly. When compared with Britain, I honestly believe that America is a fair bit more right-wing. The dominance of staunch Christian values in many parts of the country is to blame, I think, or rather their perversion. Someone posted a link here or at another site I sometims frequent, talking about what Christianity's key message was. I was raised in a fairly Christian household, and I think that key message is "Love your neighbour", or the 11th Commandment "Be excellent to each other". America seems to think, according to this report, that the message is "God helps those who help themselves". This is where your difference of circumstance comes in: New Labour would be similar to the Democrats, bearing in mind that they're not really seen as left here anymore, but the Tories would be nowhere near as far right anymore, indeed the far right are a laughing stock - the 'Tory Factor' that was illustrated above goes to show you that.

Put simply, I think that if Americans were exposed to British culture more they'd be a lot less right-wing, and vice versa, I suppose.

From the BBC:



http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4642486.stm


So, the whole world's going to hell then. If the Tories get elected in the UK, I'm leaving.

I'm hoping they can hang Parliament and force a Liberal-Conservative coalition. They'll be able to get some good work done with a bunch of the Lib Dems in power.

I'm more worried about the Conservatives and the peace process though... Tories or Lib Dems, they really have to tread carefully when dealing with politics over here. Tories might be a bit too anti-nationalist, and the Liberals might be a bit too anti-unionist.

If Labour can get the Assembly back with ALL parties then I think they'll always be remembered for the good they did for Norn Iron. Appointing a secretary of state for Northern Ireland AND Wales combined aint a good step though

Every day I'm amazed this place exists. Dragging the DUP into talks will be difficult, but they do represent the largest block of voters, and a government will need to include them. I think a new government will allow them some face-saving and then we can have progress.

There HAS to be progress soon. I just wish the more moderate parties had a bigger share of the vote. The last general election was so depressing