Army Rumour Service

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Laurence Fox - Political ambitions

This thread has thrown up at perhaps the expense of @UKRaider Original post topic, perhaps a deeper question, about the political landscape and or political system today.

Perhaps I should start a new thread I thought but rather this thread as do so many others branch into something that is not the original line of posts.

I have asked and mentioned this question, in threads of my own and in threads of this nature of others.

What is the role of Government.

That is to say in simplistic but fundamental term where is and where should be the split between collectivism and individualism. How I see this pertains to 'Laurence Fox - Political ambitions', is there has been several differing opinions about Laurence Fox's motivations also the likelihood of success for any political party personality in our current political system.

So firstly I will address 'Laurence Fox - Political ambitions'. Without talking extensively or having a personal relationship with the man, we can all only surmise his honesty for ourselves, without doubt he had extensive coverage in the main stream media as a 'heretic' to the PC orthodoxy, that is what has lead to his extensive coverage, in the alternative media and importantly in the 'Long Form' and at times free wheeling discussion format. Of note this is a format that has largely disappeared in the mainstream media.

Those of us who, have to some degree or another abandoned the mainstream media, for the Alt media, for reasons that have been fulsomely covered in many other threads. Perhaps see 'Laurence Fox - Political ambitions' more as a call for many of the voting public to engage more fully and take more responsibility with our individual vote, than as a call for 'VOTE For ME'. Which was the point of my first post in this thread.



Thus the whys and wherefores, the success or failures of 'Laurence Fox - Political ambitions' is perhaps more than can he form a party that can join the political system, too effect change rather for me it's that and other posters have also pointed to this perhaps he can be a focus for those who consider that politics is not there primary interest or sport and to some degree or another liked things as they where a few years or a few decades ago, but feel voiceless for what ever reason good or bad.

Politics across the decades have always had some 'political disrupters' actions be counted, the most successful of these though do not intend or are not there to burn the system down, rather to take a step back and consider fundamental principles.

We know already that there is a minority of 'political 'disrupters', some on the right, but factually and predominantly on the left, who do very much want to burn the system down. There belief is that it is flawed in principle concepts and results. In both cases they never acknowledge that there is such a thing as to much government and too much regulation of both the collective or individual.

Which leads me time and time again to that question and considered to some degree in this thread;

What is the role of Government. And in considering that how should the people be represented which is a question many of us I believe , think is a fundamental question of this year, and perhaps the decade, although there is a fair chance of the 'Apocalyptic Zombie Meteor Alien Virus invasion' idiocracy striking down all before it well before 2021 let alone 2029.

Note I have no doubt, that more than one of us have invested in a spare jar of coffee just in case, it's never to early to prepare. :razz: So.

How should the people be represented. Firstly we have to allow the assumption that the majority think that the political system we have at this time is a bit fcuked., but that we as a whole think the systematic principles are good its just a bit 'NAAFI' at this time.

There are of course many many, reasons for this, let us look at one, and agree that differing political parties of differing idealogical cores, is a decent thing and we want to keep it as a core of choosing where about any particular group stands in the grand scheme. Once we accept that we can then choose which group rules.

Once again here 'lies the rub' If political parties all head towards the centre to gain power, idealogical cores tend to become at best a little blurred at worst a big tent that accommodates all but is riven with the sounds of those who can screech loudest, getting all the attention while everyone else is ignored.

Which is to a degree where we are now. There is a reason that there is a lack of 'Independent' candidates who manage to enter politics and more so succeed. Firstly the single issue label and secondly that 'Independent' candidates do not make it onto the governments benches.

However I maintain that perhaps there is space for perhaps more 'Independent' politicians to make a difference, without making the present party system parliamentary process turn into some 'behind closed doors horse-trading collation' for that read 'idealogical core values thrown under the bus' which rightly or wrong proportional representation does bring.

Perhaps a new thread is required but I see a lot of crossover in the questions and thoughts being posted re: 'Laurence Fox - Political ambitions'.
Order or Chaos ? if you want true democracy, then your moving towards chaos and if you want any democracy, then you need some measure of populism/independence, to apply leverage to party machines who are unwilling to change things, if its against their inner party attitudes which are not generally subject to public oversight.

Some form of proportional representation and elections to the Lords seems the fastest way to introduce a bit of representation for ALL, whilst retaining a working parliament based on the solid principles of FPP.
 

NSP

LE
I do like the cut of Fox's jib.
View attachment 507940
Trouble is, there's enough shouty wokers out there that'll pick that up and run it as a narrative to damage Fox.

Some of them may even realise that it is a movie still and Fox is merely acting a part.

Not that that will stop 'em, mind.
 
The Left has been very good at getting 'right-wing' declared illegal under law*, as well as setting out to dominate the media.

Up-thread, I posted as an example a Douglas Murray link in which he talked about the lack of equanimity within the BBC over Charles Moore.

I view Momentum as every bit as dangerous as some of the nastier far-Right groups. Certainly, many of its members are prepared to go to the same lengths, or further, than some on the Right - whilst claiming to be fearful of a 'Right-wing backlash'.

The difference is that Momentum's chief, and others, gets airtime on our national media and elsewhere in a way that such as the BNP wouldn't. Even such as the Referendum Party were branded as being Far Right - an absurd assertion, however the MSM were complicit in this.

Indeed, the MSM and many of our organs of state have complicit, or at the least overly sympathetic, to some of the Left's assertions.

If this brings us some balance then, again, I'm all for it. The usual people will squeal but that's okay, frankly.



*Not necessarily my words. Watch this:
Insightful and exactly the direction of travel.... The law and courts is all about balance and it doesn't really deliver truth or justice and the balance has tipped far too much towards woke values been the only acceptable values and anything else is deemed right wing and only tolerated on a don't ask, don't tell basis of conviction.

i.e. Fox had the temerity to be asked and answer a question with a conservative attitude.
 

Cold_Collation

LE
Book Reviewer
Order or Chaos ? if you want true democracy, then your moving towards chaos and if you want any democracy, then you need some measure of populism/independence, to apply leverage to party machines who are unwilling to change things, if its against their inner party attitudes which are not generally subject to public oversight.

Some form of proportional representation and elections to the Lords seems the fastest way to introduce a bit of representation for ALL, whilst retaining a working parliament based on the solid principles of FPP.
If you think PR will sort it, I fear that you're wrong.

PR gives everyone a view but it's also the quickest way to get nothing done, or see anything meaningful diluted to meaningless rubbish, because absolutely everyone's view has to be taken into account.

FPTP might have its issues but it also has its strengths.

The elephant in the room is getting people to engage again with politics, rather than be apathetic.
 
Order or Chaos ? if you want true democracy, then your moving towards chaos and if you want any democracy, then you need some measure of populism/independence, to apply leverage to party machines who are unwilling to change things, if its against their inner party attitudes which are not generally subject to public oversight.

Some form of proportional representation and elections to the Lords seems the fastest way to introduce a bit of representation for ALL, whilst retaining a working parliament based on the solid principles of FPP.

I am not discussing the difference between or a choice between 'Order or Chaos', rather that 'Laurence Fox - Political ambitions', perhaps are uncovering more fundamental questions about the how and the who.

Nor was I proposing major upheaval rather, that 'Laurence Fox' is spurring in differing quarthers more re-engagement by the voting public which is better than less engagement, regardless of his 'Political ambitions' individual successes or failures.

Politics writ large has for several decades now, and I think we can agree drifted, from overseeing the governance of the nation state and society to one of winning 'a term in office'.
 
I am not discussing the difference between or a choice between 'Order or Chaos', rather that 'Laurence Fox - Political ambitions', perhaps are uncovering more fundamental questions about the how and the who.

Nor was I proposing major upheaval rather, that 'Laurence Fox' is spurring in differing quarthers more re-engagement by the voting public which is better than less engagement, regardless of his 'Political ambitions' individual successes or failures.

Politics writ large has for several decades now, and I think we can agree drifted, from overseeing the governance of the nation state and society to one of winning 'a term in office'.
Thats just it, the House of commons is about Power and a House of Lords with very limitd power, but elected by PR would at least introduce more of those independent voices you were calling for and I have no problem with the far left/right in politics, as its representation which keeps democracy grounded in truth i.e. if you don't want those people, the mainstream better adjust.
 
If you think PR will sort it, I fear that you're wrong.

PR gives everyone a view but it's also the quickest way to get nothing done, or see anything meaningful diluted to meaningless rubbish, because absolutely everyone's view has to be taken into account.

FPTP might have its issues but it also has its strengths.

The elephant in the room is getting people to engage again with politics, rather than be apathetic.
I agree, its not for the first chamber, but it gave UKIP the leverage to start winding the conservatives up and we got the only democratic change in my lifetime via the referendum, so i see some appeal.
 
The one thing Fox has going for him that no other party seems able to tap into effectively is Broad Appeal.

Like many people, I’m comfortable in stating that any number of people I know that are labelled as special interest groups by those with a personal interest in doing the labelling are actually not remotely interested and are in fact only interested so far as to be increasingly irritated by those who seek to speak on their behalf. Usually without bothering to find out what the truth of their subjects‘ assumed opinion is.

Fox is charismatic, lucid and measured. He’s not seeking to throw wogs out any more than he’s seeking to see whites jailed for being white. Ditto sexuality, religion, race, skin colour and just about every other section of the rights industry’s daily output of utter bollocks.

In short, he appeals to a cross section of society in its truest sense. IMHO he should ditch the Reclaim tag in favour of calling his party The Common Sense Party.
 
However worthwhile some of what he says might be, I'm just about fed up to my gills with pontificating Old Etonians.
Who else has the independence to go against the grain and anyone ordinary, would have his character and background ripped to pieces by the media and not have that independent wealth to fall back on.
 
Thats just it, the House of commons is about Power and a House of Lords with very limitd power, but elected by PR would at least introduce more of those independent voices you were calling for and I have no problem with the far left/right in politics, as its representation which keeps democracy grounded in truth i.e. if you don't want those people, the mainstream better adjust.

Yes your right that the House of Commons is about power. I rather think that the it is not so much the end result of politics as practised today that needs questioning but rather, one of not just who rules but how much rule is on the collective rather than the individual.

I suggest that some in this thread are perhaps looking at a posh boy thespian, 'Laurence Fox' as a political animal wanting to get in the game. Rather than as a possible catalyst for wider society, too rather consider 'what is the job and responsibility of Government, and perhaps that is a fundamental that needs to looked at and figure out.

It's a long overdue question, and to some degree from what I have watched and listened to 'Laurence Fox's' musings. Something he is talking about, is not in the burn it down and start again but rather we as individuals should think about what is the "job and responsibility of Government", equally as much as we think about 'Manifesto Politics' come election time.

Personally I think we all to some degree or another and for a multitude of reason both good and bad society does expect to much of government and its ability to solve and fix everything, by legislative measures.

We do need the system we have today too work. While it is imperfect, it's also reasonable and functions to provide fair and legal governance. It is not the system that is fundamentally at fault rather the calibre of those in the political class within that are weak and rubbish, which is the problem.

However we have got the calibre of political class we perhaps deserve, because over the years society writ large has to some degree abdicated its responsibility to engage politically. If 'Laurence Fox' doing something politically raises debate and some thinking outside of the chattering classes, I see that as a win.

Despite being a 'posh boy thespian,' while that will be used against him by his opponents, what he says is I believe resonating with many across the varying social classes, and that he is not screeching or trying to blame everyone for everything is also resonating across the varying social classes. He has yet to claim he has the answer also, rather that it's time to at least put one foot forward and talk about it.

That is enough for me to express and interest in giving some support towards that. It is important to understand also that there are many voices of note but with less of a wider and broader mainstream audience. That they have been saying much the same and for much longer, 'Laurence Fox' has without design somewhat sparked interest and engagement amongst the less politicly engaged and sometimes silenced wider society.

edit diction
 
Last edited:

Wordsmith

LE
Book Reviewer
There have been a limited number of chances for a political party to break the mould and all have failed.

The Social Democratic Party was a split off from Labour in 1981 that thought Labour was too left wing. They failed to make much of an impact and eventually merged with the then Liberal party to form the Liberal Democrats we know and love today. Who are not exactly making an impact themselves.

When Magic Grandpa took over Labour - under the aegis of Momentum - moderate Labour MP's could have left on-masse, formed Labour Lite, watched Magic Grandpa's Labour lurch to the left and - over 2 GE's replaced it. They bottled it despite much talk of doing so.

UKIP/The Brexit Party came close to breaking the mould, with significant gains at local and European elections, but their greatest strength and greatest weakness was Farage. Greatest strength because he connected with a major part of the anti-EU segment of the electorate that thought no one spoke for them; greatest weakness being that he always wanted to run UKIP/TBP as a one man band and would countenance no other major figures in the party.

Lawrence Fox - no matter how intentioned - will struggle to gain traction. Because now Labour have moved (marginally) back to the centre under Starmer and the Tories are delivering Brexit - so there is no obvious political vacuum to fill. And without a political vacuum, any new party will struggle to make progress.

Wordsmith
 

Cold_Collation

LE
Book Reviewer
The one thing Fox has going for him that no other party seems able to tap into effectively is Broad Appeal.

Like many people, I’m comfortable in stating that any number of people I know that are labelled as special interest groups by those with a personal interest in doing the labelling are actually not remotely interested and are in fact only interested so far as to be increasingly irritated by those who seek to speak on their behalf. Usually without bothering to find out what the truth of their subjects‘ assumed opinion is.

Fox is charismatic, lucid and measured. He’s not seeking to throw wogs out any more than he’s seeking to see whites jailed for being white. Ditto sexuality, religion, race, skin colour and just about every other section of the rights industry’s daily output of utter bollocks.

In short, he appeals to a cross section of society in its truest sense. IMHO he should ditch the Reclaim tag in favour of calling his party The Common Sense Party.
Shorten that: he's advocating true equality, in the sense that no-one is superior to anyone else.
 
There have been a limited number of chances for a political party to break the mould and all have failed.

The Social Democratic Party was a split off from Labour in 1981 that thought Labour was too left wing. They failed to make much of an impact and eventually merged with the then Liberal party to form the Liberal Democrats we know and love today. Who are not exactly making an impact themselves.

When Magic Grandpa took over Labour - under the aegis of Momentum - moderate Labour MP's could have left on-masse, formed Labour Lite, watched Magic Grandpa's Labour lurch to the left and - over 2 GE's replaced it. They bottled it despite much talk of doing so.

UKIP/The Brexit Party came close to breaking the mould, with significant gains at local and European elections, but their greatest strength and greatest weakness was Farage. Greatest strength because he connected with a major part of the anti-EU segment of the electorate that thought no one spoke for them; greatest weakness being that he always wanted to run UKIP/TBP as a one man band and would countenance no other major figures in the party.

Lawrence Fox - no matter how intentioned - will struggle to gain traction. Because now Labour have moved (marginally) back to the centre under Starmer and the Tories are delivering Brexit - so there is no obvious political vacuum to fill. And without a political vacuum, any new party will struggle to make progress.

Wordsmith
Here's hoping that he can simply allow the majority not to be cast as the villains in their own country - if he can bring balance back to debates, the media and the Houses of Parliament, he'll have done a cracking job.
 
Has anyone considered that Lozza is an actor? Someone accustomed to adopting personas other than his own, convincingly, and playing a role. Is it at all possible that this is a very clever piece of performance art and all will be revealed in a BBC Arts special one wet and windy Monday night after the 10-o-clock news?

"Ta-daa, look what I did. Here are some of the unexpected characters that popped out of the woodwork while I was making this."
 

Yokel

LE
I hope that the new party or 'movement' or whatever it becomes has the good sense to link up with similar groups and campaigners against identity politics and Woke culture, the people who advocate true equality and robust debate. I am thinking of someone else who has advocated free speech.

I am thinking of Inaya Folarin Iman - the founder of The Equiano Project.
 
Last edited:
Some form of proportional representation and elections to the Lords seems the fastest way to introduce a bit of representation for ALL, whilst retaining a working parliament based on the solid principles of FPP.

Great.
Another tier of annoying career politicians in ill-fitting, off the peg suits.


Sent from my karzi while losing several pounds
 

New Posts

Latest Threads

Top