The Politics of UKIP

Lord Hylton

A long-standing friend of mine is standing for UKIP in a Yorkshire constituency at the coming general election.  He views current politics in 18th century terms as the country versus the court parties, with UKIP in the country role.

It seems to me that he and his fellow candidates will attract not only nationalist and populist votes and all who are dissatisfied with the coalition, but also the support of non-conformist chapel people, and in general the backing of the small people as against the millionaires and grandees.  The latter now includes the Labour party establishment and Trades Union officials.

How should the traditional parties respond to the new situation?  They should emphasise that there are many issues that could best be address on a pan-European scale, for example pollution, energy, migration from Africa and the Middle East, globalisation and sustainability.  Preserving peace in Europe remains the urgent priority as recent events in Ukraine, Bosnia and Kosovo all show.

They should make the case for the European Convention on Human Rights, which Britain helped to draft after the excesses of fascism and communism.  As for the European Arrest Warrant, with safeguards this could be to our advantage, since there are potentially more continental criminals in Britain than British criminals on the continent.  As to freedom of movement and residence, this too could play in our favour.  English is already the lingua franca of northern Europe, as it has long been in India and many parts of Africa and the Persian Gulf. 

There is much debate about the cost and benefits of our members of the EU. The parties should commission research and produce accurate figures for our net input and benefit gained, showing these perhaps on a per head basis.

We need more than a free trade area, but should seek less bureaucracy and better accountability.



6 comments for “The Politics of UKIP

  1. MilesJSD
    26/11/2014 at 3:20 pm

    No party, nor any truly Moral-&-Practical Establishment, worldwide, is dedicated to Longest-Term Sustainworthily Affordable and Cooperative Human development
    which needs since long ago to start including as its base Individual Human Development throughout the 75%-timeframed Lifeplace as distinct from the 25%-timeframed Workplace.
    All parties are living beyond our means;
    UKIP has the two big blindnesses of
    (1) being knee-jerk Reactionarily against faulty and corrupt governances –
    and indeed against many wasteful Lifeplace lifestyles
    [except its own variously In-Excess-Of-One-Human-Living-Each-from-the-Common-Purse-&-Environments demands –
    (2)except for their Nigel Farage “leader’s” egoistic and Australian-Pauline-Hansonist autocracism*
    {Pauline Hanson owned a Fish & Chip shop, and was said publicly to be a winning “beauty” who with some bright-brainy help from fair-weather friends succeeded in getting her new Political Party registered as a Business Company, with her as the unsackable President, CEO, and general sort of ‘Madame Pooh-Bah’}
    In short, then, our Human Race
    & this Earth-1’s Lifesupports upon which the whole future of Life and Humanity utterly depend,
    need both (i) a radically-reformed Conservational-Preservational Governance and
    (ii) Sustainworthily-Affordable Individual-Life-Practice.
    For the latter the individual could visit a list of “self-help” Sources from which to begin selecting all that any individual needs to either begin or further strengthen their own ‘private’ self-improvement NB for the 75% Lifeplace.
    As for the Field of Politics, they are all too protected,’ring-fenced’, too “fattened”;
    and as for the Farage blindman’s-bluff I say
    “You Kip, if that’s the best you can do;
    I’m going to follow ‘Wachet Auf’ – ‘Sleepers Awake !’ “

  2. Lord Blagger
    26/11/2014 at 3:28 pm

    The kick it into the grass option.

    There are 4 main types of migrants.

    1. Asylum claimants
    2. Economic migrants
    3. Spouses

    Asylum is a moral issue.

    Spouses likewise.

    Students there are two categories. Students coming to learn English and work. Not economical. They don’t even cover the cost of the NHS insurance. Students in higher education from numbers I’ve seen do.

    That leaves economic migrants.

    Some are net contributors, some aren’t. You spend (and cost us), 11,400 pounds a year per person. So introduce a simple test. If you want to come to the UK, you have to pay that, each year, in tax, per migrant. If you accrue a pension, then the number goes up by 6,300 pounds.

    No need for more civil servants. It uses the tax scheme to administer it. 2 civil servants once a year get the calculator out. Spending / population to get the threshold.

    On better accountability. Why don’t you resign? You are not accountable except to your patron.

  3. maude elwes
    27/11/2014 at 12:01 pm

    The biggest run to UKIP is all about immigration and the detrimental effects on our society and its cohesion. The lies of our government, both present and previous, makes them unelectable across the board to the majority of the citizens. And the pretence politicians put up about wanting to limit this fiasco, as they tell us they come in their droves from Europe, which is claimed they have no control over. Which we know is downright lies. The majority of immigrants to the UK come from ‘outside’ of Europe. The ones we are told they can regulate. This government, nor any other, is willing to tell the true story on the influx from the Commonwealth. Farage is likewise reluctant to tell the real story on this either but he has, at very least addressed the issue, even if only from the back door of Europe for fear of the old race card game played to shut the mouths of those who want to speak.

    We read recently that the millions who entered the UK from outside Europe costs this country £150 BILLION in the drain, whilst those from inside the EU were found to be assets to the tune of £20 BILLION in revenue. Of course, as they age, they too will add to the drain via their pensions, etc.. But nothing like those from the rest of the world. Yet still the ugly lies continue ad infinitum. And whilst this goes on, Farage and his group will grow beyond all expectation. As I wrote in another post, the British public cannot be convinced to commit cultural suicide without a very hard fight. We love our country as those flags of St George insist. Whether the trumped up Labour Islington set like it or not.

    However what is not being revealed is that David Cameron made a deal with the Indian government to accept thousands of immigrants from that country into the UK during this Parliament. Somehow this seems to have passed the media and not a peep was leaked. Why is that I wonder?

    Trying to kid people along that these incomers in their millions are not on welfare and not filling our schools and hospitals is absurd. We are not blind. We can see for ourselves when we line up in packed rooms with people unable to follow a word that is said.

    Add to this the absolute slur put in our newspapers and media referring to our rural schools as ‘hideously white’ because few, if any, ethnic people settle in their areas and ask yourself this, would these same newspaper and TV programmes spout to their readers and viewers that many hundreds of our inner city schools are hideously black or brown? No, I wonder why that is? When you bring yourselves to face facts rather than putting on the Blair type spin, you may get some change in the results. But don’t count on it because even if you turn the rhetoric around today nobody believes a word you say. It’s obvious there’s no intention to stop it or do anything about it either, whether we are inside or outside of Europe. Only a fool would or could believe otherwise.

    Of course the issues are wider and I could elaborate but lets put that one on the boil for now.

    The next election should be a humdinger.



  4. MilesJSD
    27/11/2014 at 6:33 pm

    I hasten to wish to publicly apologise for,
    in your later “Poppies” topic,
    assuming that ‘you’ as Lords of the Blog moderator
    had “suppressed” my above submission,

    when in point of fact I myself first inadvertently submitted “too much” and had to quickly ask Hansard to remove its tail-end jumbled notes (which now evidently they worked at and did);

    in addition, such delay might have been necessary to give time to check the possibly near- ‘ad hominem attacks’
    towards “all political parties”;
    UKIP in particular
    including by name its boss {I can not even in apologising consider such ‘commanders’ to be ‘leaders’)
    and thereunto a ‘similar’ Australian ‘ownership befuddlement’ caused by the new Registered-Business-Political-Party’s
    ‘truly competitive go-getter’, Ms Pauline Hanson;

    and there might well have been further time required to check the
    ‘safe veracity’,
    ‘not-for-profit’, and
    claims of the link
    vis a vis further current information a propos “The Politics of _ _ _ _” [Great Britain generally, maybe ‘constitutionally; not just by UKIP].
    I think (from experience) that yourself, Lord Hylton, are reasonably & mindfully ‘detached’ and ‘objective’, in allowing most if not all submissions through to the wider public’s eye.

  5. Daedalus
    08/12/2014 at 4:03 pm

    “A long-standing friend of mine is standing for UKIP in a Yorkshire constituency at the coming general election.” Did you say U KIPper?

    Should we shorten this to Kipper, anybody who votes for UKIP is a Kipper. Now this is evocative of fish and fishermen I wonder what they are catching in their nets: Christians perhaps. If so would a party name change to Christian Democrats be appropriate. Angie would be so pleased.

  6. maude elwes
    09/12/2014 at 4:11 pm

    @ Daedalus:

    And voting LibLabCon or Greens is not Kippishist? You would have to be a lunatic to vote for any one of these. The three have lied their way to office, GE after GE, and as soon as they are safe in, they sneer and spout, we never said that, or, we didn’t mean that, you misunderstood and have it all wrong.

    They’ve started with it before the off, so, anything is better than what we have, as, it may bring about some kind of rethink, and it can barely be worse than this. The starvation and deaths of 10,600 people a year.. Could Nigel really match that?

    And they tell us there’s more to come to the tune of what, £56 Billion. So, as the LibDems are spouting, the Tories must fess up to just exactly what the effects of their cuts to ever more benefits and jobs is going to do to our fellow citizens. As well as how much more they plan to give to those who have already fleeced us.

Comments are closed.