Blog

In which Peter&nbsp; eads the entrails of the roadkill that was the right wing of British politics ... It's pretty normal to be politically homeless right now. I've been a political vagrant for since 2015. I voted Tory to secure an in/out referendum on the EU, and I've had nothing to vote for ever since. I seem to end up living in Tory safe seats where there is no viable alternative, so there's been no outlet for my political energies.&nbsp;In 2021, I re-joined Ukip on the back of its manifesto because, to date, it's still the most intellectually coherent party, and it still has a dedicated top team. It also has a sizable social media reach. Running it as an academic exercise seemed like a useful way to pressure Reform into getting its act together. Beating up Reform over its woolly Net Zero policies resulted in a subtle change of policy. I think Ukip can claim credit for that.&nbsp;As such, I have no animosity to Ukip, but I don't think it will ever be a serious force in politics again, There's too much baggage. Maybe with a rebrand and a cash injection it could find a role for itself, but there's too much sentimental attachment to the brand. I am no longer sure what function it serves and I'm not taken with the new leadership. All that's left is to wish them well.&nbsp;More recently, in search of a new home, I decided to take a second look at Reform. What struck me first and foremost was the lack of coherence. It was, and still is, a generic populist party with no intellectual depth. It could withstand mediocre leadership under Tice if they were developing a movement, but they weren't doing any of that work.&nbsp;This was abundantly obvious from various by-election results. In Blackpool and Wellingborough the Tory vote collapsed but it didn't find its way to Reform. Until recently, Reform was a fading star, and I don't think anything could have revived it. As a party it was run from the centre, with no ground operation, and with no strategy to speak of. It seems that Tice was just keeping the pilot light in in case of Farage's return, and that was the sole purpose.&nbsp;Under Farage, we see that none of the structural problems are likely to be addressed. Reform is having a glow up, but none of the work is being done to build a foundation. As such, it is a single use entity to punish the Tories.&nbsp;Obviously the Tories do need to be punished. The last three years have been an act of demographic vandalism that Britain may never recover from. The new sectarianism we're seeing in this election is here to stay and it's only going to get worse. Without more robust immigration policies, it's not fixable. And Reform won't go that far even if it was a serious party.&nbsp;What muddies the waters, though, is that Peter Hitchens is not wholly wrong. An unopposed Labour party is a dangerous thing. Reform supporters are determined to wipe the Tories of the map, but in doing so, they ensure there is nothing to be salvaged from the wreckage. I would have more sympathy for Reform's position if Reform was being forged into a replacement vehicle, but it just isn't. Reform is not poised to make a big breakthrough, and it will not be allowed to merge with the Tory party. It is a dead strategy. &nbsp;That said, I'm now of the view that it doesn't matter either way. I've taken a closer look at the Tory party and spoken to a lot of local activists. The impression I get is that the party's infrastructure is either dead or on life support from CCHQ, and as such, the party is already in a death spiral, with or without Reform. I doubt the result would be much different if Reform didn't exist.Some are of the view that Reform could merge with the Tory right after the election, to become a new force in politics, but I'm not sure there will even be a Tory right after this election. Moreover, Steve Baker has shown us their true nature. They'll say anything to save their own skins.In any case, the Tory wets are not the whole of the problem. The Tory right, such as it is, is made up of profoundly unserious people, and the nation simply does not want MAGA infused zombie Thatcherism. That Liz Truss is the leading light of "popular conservatism" should tell you all you need to know.This means that by next week, the right will be more or less vanquished from British politics. Farage will have his day in the sun, but it's all downhill from there. Reform might muster a repeat performance in 2029, but will not be able to break through the inherent barrier that goes with dog-whistle populism.&nbsp;By way of Labour's unpopularity, the zombie Tory party might recover some ground, and depending on how awful Labour is, we could end up with a hung parliament in which Starmer has to go cap in hand to the Islamist contingent - to become more dangerous than ever.&nbsp;By my reckoning, then, we have ten years to build an alternative. That alternative must be a coherent party with strong local roots. Anything else will be a flash in the pan, probably born from within the establishment, essentially courting the same base as Reform - which will go nowhere for similar reasons.&nbsp;My current thinking, therefore, is that with so little time to develop something from scratch, the SDP is the obvious candidate for further development. It has a coherent intellectual foundation, it can steal votes from Labour and the Tories, it is building locally and its growth is not contingent on media exposure and flamboyant leadership. We have to build something that can withstand the departure of its leader.&nbsp;I am aware the SDP has certain shortcomings, but you can't expect to 100% agree with any party. What it does have, where the others do not, is growth potential - which is the single most important factor.&nbsp;As a party it recognises the danger of unfettered free trade in a multi-polar world, it rejects neoliberalism, and recognises the need to govern Britain as a homeland, thus rejects the new sectarianism. It also proposes a complete freeze on immigration. As a start, that's good enough. More to the point, it's all we've got - unless you know different.

Life after death

I am starting to despair.&nbsp;This election has been as unedifying as any I can recall. And I can just about recall Harold Wilson's "Go with Labour" campaign from the 60s.&nbsp; His government introduced a £50 max foreign travel allowance, income taxes at 90% and cut the voting age from 21 to 18. &nbsp;The "colourful" &nbsp;<a data-mce-href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom_Driberg" href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom_Driberg" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Tom Driberg</a> was a featured Labour politician (Party chairman) of the time. &nbsp;Driberg made no secret of his homosexuality, which he practised throughout his life despite its being a criminal offence in Britain until 1967; his ability to avoid any consequences for his risky and often brazen behaviour baffled his friends and colleagues.&nbsp;The Wilson government's liberalisation of divorce, gay relationships and abortions provided the foundations of the permissive society.&nbsp; It was a typical "Rome burns" administration with precious little attention paid to wealth creating&nbsp; industrial or financial matters, and it all left the UK in hock to the <a data-mce-href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gnomes_of_Zurich" href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gnomes_of_Zurich" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Gnomes of Zurich </a>for years.&nbsp;We entered the sixties as post-war world leaders in jet engine and nuclear technology. We had a major car industry. We had a serious global reach with the BBC and our creative industries. The various V bombers: Vulcan Victor Valiant were a credible deterrent in the Cold War. The TSR2 was well ahead of its US rivals. But they all ended up scrapped or costing fortunes. Although the iconic Vulcan carried on into the Falklands conflict, and was an absolutely awesomely inspiring sight at air shows that reminded the punters that at least some of their taxes were being spent with style. But Labour handed the UK defence industry to the USA, and gave it the Harrier VTOL technology.And just as Keith Starmer prefers not to go into detail, Harold Wilson never said where to "go with Labour". The answer was apparently "to hell in a hand cart".It seems that by 1997 we had long forgotten the disaster Labour years of Wilson and Callaghan, and were ready to roll the dice again when Tony Blair convinced us things "could only get better".&nbsp; He was able to take advantage of a solid financial starting point with inflation and interest rates under control, after the solid growth of the 80s as a financial services economy had been invented in the City of London.The idea that switching now from Conservatives to Labour amounts to any sort of real change is tenuous, when both are beholden to WEF principles and influences. And both are too scared to admit that climate and energy extremism is mostly a hoax built on a hypothesis that still nobody has been able to prove. The truth of the covid pandemic and vaccine hysteria is leaking out, but nobody has the honesty to come clean and hold a full enquiry.&nbsp; Still no one has addressed the immigration situation by telling France they are getting all their invaders back.

How bad can it get?

Pete North has a simple plan to restore the UK ...what's not to like?&nbsp; I am a proud NIMBY. I do not want the British countryside paved over with solar panels. I do not want us to waste billions on ugly pylons just to connect useless, expensive windmills. I do not want our rural towns becoming soulless commuter dormitories. I oppose all new housing estates.&nbsp;Two things need to happen in Britain. We must first freeze immigration completely to stem housing demand. Then we must rebuild our cities.&nbsp;<h3>Britain has the lowest residential density in city centres anywhere in Europe. As retail has declined, our town centres have died. The job is to rip down useless, obsolete shopping malls and create green spaces, and build elegant residential blocks in the cities.&nbsp;</h3>This makes sense for several reasons. Firstly, town centre retail is dead. Major transport hubs are in city centres. If you live in a town, walking distance from a rail or bus station, you have access to several other towns where you can work without needing a car.&nbsp;There's another very good reason to do this. London and the South East are overcrowded. Middlesbrough, Hull, Liverpool and Huddersfield are not. If anything, they are underpopulated. Nobody wants to live there because they are urban slums.&nbsp;<h3>If we want people to move back into the cities we have to create livable, attractive spaces and rediscover beauty in architecture. But for it to work, they must be crime free. There must be zero tolerance for antisocial behaviour and vagrancy. We must clean up illegal immigration.&nbsp;</h3>The urban sprawl we're seeing spread into the countryside is a symptom of our decaying cities, and that is very much a consequence of mass immigration. New build housing estates in our rural towns are just luxury refugee camps for white people. We've been driven out of our cities. We stand to lose a major part of what makes Britain a homeland. If we are to save this country, and take back what is ours, we need to get busy with mass deportation. <a data-mce-href="https://x.com/FUDdaily/status/1805931321555861691" href="https://x.com/FUDdaily/status/1805931321555861691" target="_blank" rel="noopener">From X&nbsp;</a>

Planning blight

<h2>Down on the farm (1)&nbsp;</h2>OK then, here is the future of politics with AI to write the script... Jeremy Clarkson's excellent and pithy essay describing the impending calamity of the Labour Party Manifesto - with 230 pages containing just 87 words on farming -&nbsp; needs to be fashioned into a common-sense WOTE outline for an agricultural policy.&nbsp;&nbsp; So I simply asked GROK (the twitter AI engine) to... "write a policy of farming for the WOTE federation..." - nothing more, I thought I would leave it to do its thing and see where it led....GROK&gt; In an effort to promote sustainable agriculture and ensure food security for our growing population, the WOTE Federation has developed this comprehensive farming policy. Our goal is to support local farmers, protect the environment, and maintain the rich cultural heritage of our rural communities.Objectives: Promote sustainable farming practices that preserve soil health, reduce water usage, and minimize the use of synthetic fertilizers and pesticides. Support the development of local food systems, including farmers' markets, community-supported agriculture, and farm-to-table initiatives. Encourage the adoption of climate-smart agriculture, which includes techniques such as crop rotation, cover cropping, and conservation tillage. Protect and enhance biodiversity by promoting the cultivation of native plant species and the preservation of natural habitats. Provide educational resources and training programs to help farmers improve their skills and knowledge in sustainable agriculture.Policy Measures: Subsidies and grants for farmers who adopt sustainable farming practices, such as organic certification, use of renewable energy, and implementation of water-saving technologies. Establishment of a network of agricultural extension services to provide technical assistance and training to farmers. Development of a comprehensive soil health monitoring and improvement program. Promotion of agroforestry and the integration of trees into farming systems to improve soil fertility, reduce erosion, and provide habitat for wildlife. Implementation of a robust food safety and traceability system to ensure the quality and safety of agricultural products. Creation of a fund to support research and development in sustainable agriculture technologies and practices.Monitoring and Evaluation: Regular monitoring of the implementation of the policy measures to ensure compliance and effectiveness. Periodic evaluation of the impact of the policy on food security, environmental sustainability, and rural livelihoods. Reporting on the progress of the policy and its outcomes to the WOTE Federation and the public.Conclusion: The WOTE Federation Farming Policy represents a commitment to sustainable agriculture and the well-being of our rural communities. By working together, we can create a thriving agricultural sector that supports local farmers, protects the environment, and ensures food security for generations to come.Not bad at all. Better than the&nbsp; waffle offered by Labour - so we'll take that as draft one. Now let's feed it on some Clarkson polemic from his recent Sunday Times diatribe, and let it loose again:Title: The Grok Guide to UK Agricultural PolicyGROK FUN MODE&gt;&nbsp; Greetings, fellow carbon-based lifeforms! As your resident AI with a penchant for wit and sarcasm, I've been tasked with crafting a UK agricultural policy that addresses the concerns of our esteemed farming community. Brace yourselves, for we're about to embark on a journey filled with laughter, tears, and the occasional existential crisis.Objective: To create a policy that supports farmers, ensures food security, and keeps the tofu-loving, nuclear-free peace store enthusiasts at bay.Policy Measures: The Great Farmland Inheritance Act: In an effort to prevent the extinction of farmland, we propose a radical idea: no inheritance tax on farm land. That's right, folks! Keep your land, grow your crops, and pass it down to future generations without the government swooping in like a vulture. The Meat-Eaters' Manifesto: We recognize the importance of meat in a balanced diet (and let's be honest, tofu just doesn't cut it). Our policy will include incentives for meat production, ensuring that our rural halfwits (their words, not mine) can continue to enjoy their carnivorous feasts. The King Charles Work Ethic Program: In a stunning revelation, it turns out that King Charles works! Who knew? To honour his tireless efforts, we propose a program that encourages farmers to adopt his work ethic. No more slacking off, you lazy land stewards! The Working Class State of Mind Initiative: Forget about traditional definitions of the working class. We're redefining it to mean a state of mind and a community spirit. So, whether you're a farmer, a royal, or a tofu enthusiast, as long as you have the right attitude, you're part of the working class. The Savings Protection Act: We understand that hard work and savings should be rewarded, not redistributed to those who haven't worked at all. Our policy will ensure that your hard-earned savings remain yours, to be passed down to your dog (or any other beloved pet) as you see fit.Conclusion: There you have it, folks! The Grok Guide to UK Agricultural Policy. A policy that's as absurd as it is practical, with a dash of humour thrown in for good measure. Remember, this is all in jest, and I'm not actually a policymaking AI (yet). But if you've made it this far, thank you for indulging my ramblings. Now, go forth and farm, knowing that there's at least one AI out there rooting for you (pun intended)..."Hmmm... don't give up the day job just yet. But one of the takeaways from this exercise ought to be that we are plummeting headlong into the most crucial election of a generation with barely any preparation after Rishi's pre-emptive Downing Street Rain Dance. <figure id="figure-3zh9o492nwlxt76e4r" data-full-width=""><img id="3zh9o492nwlxt76e4r" src="https://cdn.durable.co/blocks/0hGGhGkzGsQU5Oa0whvJsoCjY7ET4taKXHJFYCZROxegQdtZdJqMINrfnczJISzk.jpg" alt="Disco ball galaxy" title="Disco ball galaxy" class="object-cover bg-gray-100 " style="aspect-ratio: 16/9; object-position: 50% 45%;" data-corners="default" data-aspect="16:9" data-caption="" data-positionx="50%" data-positiony="45%" data-fullwidth="true" data-mce-src="https://cdn.durable.co/blocks/0hGGhGkzGsQU5Oa0whvJsoCjY7ET4taKXHJFYCZROxegQdtZdJqMINrfnczJISzk.jpg" data-mce-style="aspect-ratio: 16/9; object-position: 50% 45%;"></figure> There badly needs to a pause for thought, because at the present rate 35% of the vote for a manifesto that relies on being "not the Tories again" - will win 75% of the seats with a barely explained extreme covert left-wing agenda, laced with all manner of woke nonsense on gender, race and freedom of speech that the rest of Europe has been progressively rejecting for months. The silenced majority need to make it plain now that the inherently fair-minded British people will not tolerate this - and requires a new common-sense voting solution that curtails the scope of a "super majority" government to wreck the UK . Or the simple safeguards that <a data-mce-href="https://wote.uk/be-disruptive" href="https://wote.uk/be-disruptive" title="A simple way to safeguard the inegtrity of election" target="_blank" rel="noopener">the Wote Pledge </a>provides...&nbsp;&nbsp;

Down on the farm

In which our Pete again spells out the difference between a flash in the pan, and what it takes to build a party that can endure for 100 years... Surely at some point, Reform will invite him to help them get a grip on party basics? I don't buy this. A few weeks ago, Reform was in the doldrums, and it was already looking like the moment had passed to salvage it. Tice and Habib don't really understand what it takes to build a movement. They thought it was just a matter of getting on the airwaves. But then along comes Farage and its fortunes changed.&nbsp;But all the hope and energy is invested in just one man, and none of the necessary work to turn Reform into a sustainable, coherent movement will be done. There will be no policy work, no strategy, no message discipline, no internal coordination, zero cooperation, and endless internal bickering to the point where at least half the senior figures fall out with Farage and resign. History repeats, leopards do not change their spots.&nbsp;Consequently, it will nurture no new talent, it will neglect any serious vetting, making all the same mistakes Ukip made, and will end up limping from one embarrassment to the next, with Tice, Habib and Farage all contradicting each other, and Farage will run his mouth once to often without thinking. He's sailing close to the wind with his Ukraine remarks. He might be essentially correct but his lack of attention to detail will be his undoing. If it isn't this, it will be something else. I'm all for plain speaking, but you should at least try to avoid walking into ambushes.&nbsp;What you get from all this is a disorganised mess of a party that cannot withstand the departure of its leader, and it implodes as fast as Ukip did.&nbsp;Y'know, if I were Nigel Farage, I'd be hoping to lose Clacton. He is unassailable outside parliament, and he doesn't have the vulnerability of random unvetted colleagues. His outsider status is the source of his power. But once he's in their circus, they'll know exactly how to deal with him. They will collectively unperson him, the speaker will overlook him, and they'll swamp him with formalities. The Tories will will pull the faux outrage routine as much as Labour. They'll turn him into an Andrew Bridgen figure, out on his own. He will acquire a certain anti-prestige, in the same vein as Galloway and Powell, but they will be able to contain him, not least since Reform is unable to convert its polling into seats.Had they done the groundwork, and identified their most winnable seats, concentrated their ground game there, and made damn sure they have first rate candidates, they might have been able to make a go of it, but that's too much like movement-building. If they hadn't started this process already, we can safely assume they won't now.<h3>I appreciate the game plan for many is to simply destroy the Tory party in the vague hope that something better will replace it, but this replacement isn't just going to fall out of the sky. It has to be built, attending to the fundamentals that make for a successful movement that can withstand the departure of its leader.&nbsp;</h3>With that in mind, I'm just not all that enthusiastic about "getting onboard" a bus to nowhere that will probably break down somewhere in the wilderness. If the aim is to destroy the Tories, they seem to be doing a pretty good job unaided. I would rather the energy and resources were invested in a vehicle with coherent aims. A failure to do the groundwork now means that we're back at square one when Farage gets too bored/tired/old/sick.

Politics with endurance is hard work

Pete has a special interest in the military (check his X profile) and is again disdainful of a threadbare Reform strategy. So here is a proposed big picture defence review and it makes simple sense. The elephant in the room is the question of Ukraine and who is playing what game. At moments like this it can help to assess the EU position, and do precisely the opposite... On defence, Reform is as bad as all the other parties. Pledging to increase troop numbers, and defence spending to 3% GDP, is just not serious policy. Standing armies are expensive and wasteful. You only increase troop numbers if you're planning on having a war, and as I understand it, Farage (rightly) favours de-escalation in Ukraine.&nbsp;In peacetime, we need three basic things from the army: Training excellence, logistics, and readily deployable special forces. In the event of war it should be able to turn all of its professional soldiers into NCOs capable of training civilians into soldiers. As such, a peacetime army is a standby war college.&nbsp;In terms of maintaining readiness, we are better off expanding the civilian reserve. It should be promoted as a good way to acquire new skills, make friends and earn a supplementary income.&nbsp;Defence, though, is ultimately downstream of foreign policy. If you don't know what your foreign policy is, or where your interests lie, you will never have fit for purpose armed forces. Equipping the army in abstract of a coherent foreign policy is why procurement is messed up and there's so much waste. As usual, it comes down to a definition problem.&nbsp;I would venture that if we are to increase spending, it should not be to arbitrary targets. Defence spending should be as much as needs be - no more, no less. Arbitrary targets killed intelligent policymaking in every strand of governance.&nbsp;I would further venture that the Royal Navy is where we need the investment. We have a pitifully small surface fleet, and a serious manpower shortage. With current pay levels and limited career opportunities in such a small organisation, it just isn't the attractive career it once was.&nbsp;In terms of procurement, we have a system wide problem where most essential kit is becoming too expensive to lose. Drones and tanks, for example, are expendable battlefield assets, but not after we've goldplated the requirements and the cost several million a pop. We may have the best tanks and helicopters money can buy, but they can't be in two places at once, and we just don't have enough of them - even to support a small army like ours.&nbsp;The watchword for defence should be readiness, with the capacity to quadruple in scale in a short time if circumstances demand it, but the last thing we need is bloated armed services with bored, demotivated sailors and soldiers.&nbsp;It's true that Reform's defence policy would struggle to be more asinine than the Tory national service policy, but you can't expect to be taken seriously as a patriotic party without a detailed and credible defence policy.

The WOTE.uk Federation 2025

Blog: the Revolution starts here...

Life after death

How bad can it get?

Planning blight

Down on the farm

Politics with endurance is hard work

Defence basics