I moderate all comments on this blog. Not because I intend censor anyone particularly, but because I have legal responsibility for it, and like to know what is going up on it. I also have standards, as outlined in the sidebar. One thing that I don't encourage as comments irrelevant to the subject at hand - they're confusing, and nobody really reads them.
Yesterday, I got this;
Procedure By Which conservatives Could Control Parliament
If UKIP is Lucky, UKIP could get, perhaps, get five to ten seats in Parliament. Do not forget, the public still regards UKIP as a one issue party. To gain control of Parliament UKIP and (and friends) should form a new conservative party with a platform that is close to that of the existing Conservative party, omitting, of course, policies that are objectionable to conservatives. The purpose would be to make a bed that would be easy for conservatives to slide into, including the eighty percent of the Conservatives who left Conservative associations. UKIP and the conservatives should then form a political association in each parliamentary district. UKIP could merge with the new party, thus getting rid of the one issue problem.
Every one who would have worked to form the new, conservative, party should be prevented from joining the new party for a period of time to prevent the impression that UKIP controls it.
The two or three conservative parties should hold a primary election to determine who runs as the Parliamentary candidate, with the losers to help the winner. The cost of forming new associations can be raised by local contributors. It is suggested that the new conservative associations and the political party be controlled by the lowest level of conservatives, such as teachers, small businessmen, solicitors, professionals etc. If the above procedure can not be completed in time to get candidates elected to Parliament, the new party must wait until after the election and hold a petition demanding that the elected MP resign. Note: an MP represents every person in his district, not just members and supporters of his party. When the petition reaches fifty percent of those who voted in the prior election, the conservatives will be morally justified in demanding their MP"s resignation. Then the new party could run their candidates in the following by elections.
To select a candidate, a local association should advertise for applicants or the position of candidate for Parliament, then select the best applicant by using rigorous tests, including, most importantly, psychological evaluation. psychological evaluation is an absolute necessity as the psychological evaluation is the only way to tell who is honest and who is a con-artist; members of the public cannot. Testing could be required of the association officers, committee members and delegates, etc.
The platform, selected by new party associations, should be some what vague in order to facilitate integration the platforms of the new associations into one platform. It is suggested that self forming cliques of those who are honest and trust worthy be formed; then form self forming cliques of those who have political skills and capabilities, within the first described clique.
The corruption in Ukip is a cause for concern. Information about the corruption may bee seen on the following websites:
ukip-vs-eukip.com
unfashionista.com
eureferendum.com
John Newell
I've tidied it a bit to make it a little easier on the eye but, otherwise, this is as it was posted. I've not accepted it against the original piece you linked it to, as it has absolutely nothing to do with the subject matter, but have decided to bring it to a wider audience anyway.
It seems that Mr Newell is quite keen on this idea, posting it in other places too. I only problem is that, how can I put this, Mr Newell, I don't care. I'm not a conservative in any sense other than fiscal, and don't see much credibility in your proposal.
But thank you for playing, and for providing more evidence that UKIP supporters are, to put it politely, not necessarily on the same playing field as the rest of us.
It's no neil craig, though, is it?
ReplyDeleteRichard,
ReplyDeleteIndeed, he may be slightly eccentric but he is at least courteous...
Just looking through my spam folder and found I had one as well. Not going to comment on it because it feels somewhat cruel to point out all the flaws in an idea he's probably worked very hard on.
ReplyDeleteNick,
ReplyDeleteHe is, if nothing else, persistent. I do wonder, however, if he might be better off submitting it to people who might be, how should I put it, sympathetic...