Yes, it is broken

Anthony

To draw attention to this is to draw attention to the failures of the gliberalistas, that's why it's stamped on from a great height.

Rob

"It is the left that is largely responsible for this destruction and despair."

Actually it was during Thatcher's reign that the first great precipitation of family breakdown occurred:

"The innermost contradiction of the free market is that it works to weaken the traditional social institutions on which it has depended in the past - the family is a key example. Births outside marriage more than doubled during the 1980s. One parent families increased from 12 per cent in 1979 to 21 per cent in 1992. By 1991 there was one divorce for every two marriages in Britain - the highest divorce rate of any EU country and comparable only with that in the United States."
John Gray, False Dawn.

Vision Aforethought

New Labour are in a fish bowl with one way glass. They cannot see out, and are by their station, unable to see in. If one is unable to comprehend the nature of ones situation, one cannot hope to resolve it. This is a similar scenario to the alcoholic or drug addict who is either in denial or simply fails to understand the seriousness of their position, and so makes no attempt to seek counseling.

With no genuine role models in society any more (Supernanny?, Ross?!?), the only way out of this mess is a revolution lead by someone with the oratory skills of Mr. Obama and the common sense values of HM The Queen. But as we're all about to be chipped, pinned, scanned, threatened, fined and persecuted into submission, it is going to be very hard. I confess in all sincerity, I am absolutely terrified. Not sure about other readers, but I have never felt that way before, except during the cold war when in the late 1970s and early 1980s highly effective (possibly justified) propaganda had me believe that we were at a constant risk of nuclear attack.

All said, I never believed I would be frightened of my government and their foot soldiers who treat the middle classes with more contempt than they do pirates.

Nigel

Very true Melanie. My generation and our utopian dreams and all too textbook social engineering have a lot to put right. It pains me but IDS has done a huge service.

hadrian

What utter rubbish to blame moral breakdown on Thatcher as the major engine of decadence! This runs far far deeper than the Tory Eighties but stretches right back to the Sixties, itself the emerging flower of decades of attacks on Biblical Truth. The sad thing is our social degradation now provides the perfect excuse to Islamic fanatics for attacking our culture as reports of the failed Exeter cafe bomber's suicide note reveals. Whilst Christians do and should share the revulsion at the worst aspects of our national immorality and squalid behaviour the response is in striking contrast to Islam self righteousness that would just hit out and destroy. Christians are called to rescue, restore, rehabilitate and that involves longsuffering, forebearance, earnestly desiring to see saved through the message of change and hope. Where the tidings of grace and forgiveness are lost, self righteous fanaticism would destroy us all.

david skinner

The etchings and painting of William Hogarth portray an age in many respects like our own . It was not saved by policies, strategies or committees but by individuals like Charles and John Wesley who were prepared to expose themselves to public ridicule, physical hardship, danger and a frugal life for the sake of the Gospel of Jesus Christ.
Where is such a man for our times?

Frank P

The boomer generation is now the busted generation, It was inevitable and only Gordon Brown would suggest otherwise. Unfortunately they, and he, have taken down the rest of us and in all likelihood a few generations to come.

VA

" ... the only way out of this mess is a revolution lead by someone with the oratory skills of Mr. Obama and the common sense values of HM The Queen."

Your definitions of 'oratory skills' and 'common sense' must be unique if your examples are anything to go by.

And I say that as a despiser of the first, who who not an orator but a 24 carat bullshitter; and as a loyal subject of the second, who has the supreme gift of regal detachment and a deep sense of duty, but probably no common sense at all - if she had, she would have abdicated long ago, having been betrayed by almost every government during her reign in one way or another.

Tas Walker

Broken England as depicted by Hogarth was transformed by the Whitefield/Wesley revival preaching of the 1700's.

Arnold Dallimore's account of the times in his 2 volume 'George Whitefield' is breathtaking. See this quote on p. 160 of vol 2:

"It was necessary that a race of heroic men should arise, who would dare to confront the wildest and most brutal men, and tell them the meaning of sin ... The incessant assaults of the mob on the Methodist preachers showed they had reached the masses. With superb courage, rarely, if ever, equalled on the battlefield, the Methodist preachers went again and again, to the places from which they had been driven by violence, until their persistence wore down the antagonism of their assailants. Then, out of the once furious crowd, men and women were gathered whose hearts the Lord had touched.'

There is a political aspect to the breakdown we are witnessing, but politics can only do so much in the face of a culture that likes it to be broken. Ultimately, it is a grassroots spiritual problem that can only be solved by grassroots spiritual action.

We must begin with the truth which is to be found in the Word of God. And that begins with the eternal creator God, and the fact that He created us in His image in six-days about 6,000 years ago, contrary to the widespread, unsubstantiated, cultural myth that we evolved by natural processes over millions of years. The origins issue is at the heart of the breaking and broken culture of the West.

George Steiner

I don’t know how much mechanical repairs you fellows have undertaken, or for that matter has Ms. Phillips. But when a piece of equipment is broken the proper way to repair is to replace it with a new piece of equipment.

Outrage is not going to do it fellows. Nothing was ever repaired by mere outrage.

Steve

The solution involves discouraging this type of underclass from having more children, not encouraging it. At present the welfare system is obviously geared to encouraging it. What makes the socialists want to do this? It cannot be that they simply want more labour voters. It must be some deeper instinct that fits in with their way of thinking.

One idea would be to remove children for adoption if a single mother and her family cannot afford to support her child. I know of a lovely girl who managed to stay with foster parents and I was so relieved that the social services did not return her to her family which seems to be their preferred policy. Once the child has been removed, these single mothers would have to visit a unit regularly to check that they are taking a contraceptive pill. If they refuse, they will have to be sterilised (perhaps reversibly, eg via storing eggs). Why is this controversial when you consider the alternative scenario in which we are all suffering from now?
Another advantage is that they would get a medical checkup each month which would reduce levels of certain diseases.

EC

Not just Britain but the whole of the 'western' world is in much the same sorry condition. The vultures are already circling overhead. Some would say that they are already in charge!

Tancred

Well, Melanie, they use exactly the same tactics against the BNP.

Lies, smears and denunciation.

Typical Marxist tactics.

You may not agree with the BNP Melanie but why will Labour not have the debate?

Because they will be exposed for the evil people they are.

Thats why.

Virtually all of this Society's ills can be placed at their door.

Mass immigration, violent crime, multiculturalism, Islamic terrorism, the destruction of the family and christian values, the rise of single motherhood and benefit dependency, drug dependency, the spread of Aids and TB, people trafficking and forced prostitution, politicisation of the police, education and public servants.

The list can go on.

A few days ago David Aaronovich, in the Times, said the BNP can never be respectable (despite the stolen "List" showing that they are).

For your information here's an extract from his Wikipedia listing:-

"Aaronovitch is the son of the late economist, Communist and anti-American comic book campaigner[1], Sam Aaronovitch.

While at Manchester, he was a member of the 1975 University Challenge team that lost in the first round after answering most questions with the name of a revolutionary ("Trotsky", "Lenin", "Karl Marx" or "Che Guevara").
He was initially a Eurocommunist and active in the Young Communist League (YCL), where he met Peter Mandelson, then also a member. He was also active in the National Union of Students (NUS) where he got to know the president at the time, Charles Clarke, who later became Home Secretary. Aaronovitch himself was president of the NUS from 1980 to 1982. He then identified with the Broad Left". - no doubt to provide a cover for his extreme communist activities.

A simple internet search will uncover the Communist backgrounds of most leading Labour politicians and many other public figures.

Far from being frightened by the BNP the British public should be frightened by the secretive Communist takeover of Government, public services and the media.

Geoff M

Rob (Nov 22nd 7.06pm) places the blame for our broken sociey at Thatchers door.

Thats rich.

She inherited a society that was already broken. Remember the winter of discontent? She was voted in because of the mess Labour had made. Remember the IMF bailout? We've come full circle.

Our country was ruled by overbearing and violent Unions who cared nothing for their members - just Marxist political power. All through the 80's the marxist tentacles spread through Local Government, the Media, the BBC, NGO's, thinktanks and education.

Our nationalised industries were a joke. Our car and manufacturing industries were mostly destroyed.

In the 70's I trained as a commercial student at the Longbridge factory where my father worked as a machinist. I saw what was going on. The intimidation and bullying of ordinary union members, the pilfering of funds, the interminable strikes that impoverished the neigbourhood and destroyed family life and hopes.

I later worked in Birmingham City Council where NALGO got up to the the same tricks - vandalising employees cars, threatening them, taking their photos and "making little lists" of those who just wanted to get on with the work they were paid to do. The Labour councillors doing dodgy deals and the electoral frauds.

Labour policies have infantilised a section of the public - their voters. Bribed with benefits, or public sector jobs if they say the "right things" at interview and on their CV's - jobs which are nearly always advertised in left wing newspapers.

I could go on. I could talk about the rise of one parent households, children with no decent homelife, multiculturalism, mass immigration, crime, drugs, Islamist terrorism - but you have made a better job of that Melanie.

Thatcher held back the tide for a while and created a richer society - but Labour has gorged upon that prosperity for the past 11 years and driven people to levels of indebtedness never before seen and now we, and our children, will be paying the price.

Verity

I have absolutely no respect for the Queen. Perhaps she doesn't really understand her role as our protector, or perhaps she is too dependent on the lefty poof "advisors" by whom she is surrounded, but she should have intervened years ago. She should have sacked Tony Blair who was a mass destructor of her kingdom. Yes, the Sixties was when the rot began to gnaw away at the underpinnings, but it was Blair who gave the gnawing worms megavits to destroy our independent House of Lords, our Constitution, our disciplined way of life and most of our underpinnings.

She should have sacked him. And I doubt that it even crossed her lightweight mind.

Barackobama

Conservatives fall for idea that there is a "conspiracy" of "the left" which doesn't exist.
Tbe problem is not ideology, left-wing or otherwise. It is the almost complete absence of it. Functionalism has replaced ideas. Quasi science, whether it's an MBA for those wanting to work in an investment bank or a PhD in sociology for those who want to change the world, has replaced intelligent thought.
The majority of "leftists" are unthinking libertarians who believe that the individual should be allowed total freedom up to an arbitrary point where their behaviour becomes so disruptive that bureaucratic intervention is triggered.
Libertarianism, the intellectual poison of our times, masquerades as enlightened liberalism but is in fact misanthropic selfishness that encourages the growth of government power. ("I should be allowed to do what I want. The state is there to stop other people preventing me.") And like practically everything in British life, it is an American import.
Conservatives, in contrast, should recognise the ambiguity of human existence: people can be both good and bad and there is not much that government can do to change it.
They should, however, welcome intervention to protect society from the negative consequences of human behaviour, something libertarians oppose.
A good conservative campaign with majority appeal might be action to ensure that young people reach maturity free from addictions, STDs and unwanted pregnancies. If parents are unwilling or unable to make that happen, society has the right to act in self-defence.
There is a particular need for more protection for vulnerable girls. The American idea of encouraging the sexes to mix freely is damaging many young women and society's long-term cohesion.
More women reaching 21 free of the triple evils mentioned above would be good for everyone.

Louise

Steve, I really don't believe that limiting the rights of people to have children or discouraging them from doing so is the answer. Yes, the underclass are a major problem, but this moral vacuum runs very deep into the middle and upper classes, it is, in my belief, a reflection of a society that has only faith is science and reason and does not accept that emotion or instinct are an acceptable form of modicum. Indeed, those who make the laws are as culpable as those who break them, for example the horrendous demeaning of human life shown in the embryology bill where the Labs votes out a child's need to have a father in IVF treatment to massive public opposition. As Shakespeare puts it so eloquently, 'the world must be peopled', and children are the saving grace of so many people who forget what life is about.

david skinner

Hadrian, Rob was right to criticise the hypocrisy of Margaret Thatcher, but not only do I agree with you 100% that it stretched back to the sixties, but the sixties were only a final flowering of humanistic philosophy that started with Aquinas in the 13th century, which in turn came from Greek Philosophy and so on back to Adam. There is nothing new under the sun.

Frank P, mighty warrior, yes Obama is really the Obamination and the Queen now demurely gives assent to the most godless laws that during her coronation oath she, promised to fight. Would that she was like queen Esther who risked her neck for the Jewish nation.

Tas Walker and Louise , say it again.

Conservative Cabbie

Steve

Forced adoption and sterilisation? Have you been reading Mein Kampf recently?

I agree that children born to unwed mothers are one of the root causes of our social disintegration, but I would favour education and tax incentives rather than than the eugenics you propose. Leave that to Hitler and the progressives.

Conservative Cabbie

"...the only way out of this mess is a revolution lead by someone with the oratory skills of Mr. Obama and the common sense values of HM The Queen"

What we need is genuine conservative representation in this country to at the very least present a choice to the public. The Cameron Tories are hugging the centre so tightly, they make Obama look like a rightist.

Conservative Cabbie

Barackobama

Interesting comment that you made, although I'm going to have to respectfully disagree with some of your assertions.

1. Leftists are a million miles away from being libertarians, they are utopians. They try to forge a perfect society by infringing the rights of normal people whose actions are seen as being detrimental to that perfection. Just look at the attacks on freedom perpetrated by Labour. Smokers, drivers, people who wish to be self-employed, enjoyers of the countryside, hunters amongst many others have all been attacked by the Brown/Blair Junta.

2. I agree to a degree that the left are post-idealogical. However, I disagree that their actions are shaped by functionalism. Their values are shaped by academia, primarily the social sciences. Functionalists would never want to remake society in the way that the modern liberals do.

BTW I was strongly against your namesake (or is it really you?) before the election. I have to say that I am guardedly impressed with his performance during transition so far. Very early days though. Try telling gun owners in America that he and his 'leftist' Democratic friends are libertarians.

Your arguements about conservatism are interesting though it would depend on your definition of "action". I think action should involve education and incentives rather than mandates. Totally agree with you on the ambiguity of human existence though.

THX1138

Iraq is a broken society we're just a bit dog eared.

Can you imagine you living in Mel's Daily Wail perfect society. Yuck- I'll stick with what we go thanks all the same.

Look on the bright side Jonathan Ross is back in January to cheer us all up with his cheeky charm & witty asides.

Sam Armstrong

Rob, I disagree with your John Gray quote.

The Thatcher government referred to themselves as 'The Family Party'. Thanks to free market policies I am due a nice inheritance from my Dad's family run business which expanded greatly during the 1980s. The free market gave families wealth, which is being passed on as inheritance and preventing social breakdown because those who inherit will never be a burden on society.

Yes divorce increased during the 1980's. But the 1980's weren't all about free markets. There was a lot of radical left-wing stuff going on, particularly in the first half of that decade, and some councils (Liverpool anyone?) were definitely not interested in any form of Conservatism.

The breakdown you refer to was the result of the acceleration of the Gramsci-inspired media domination by the left which force fed us cultural Marxism via an onslaught of gritty left wing propaganda such as Brookside, EastEnders etc etc etc....

Frank P

Verity

Aren’t you being a bit hard on HM QEII? I am not sure just when her powers to intervene were usurped; but obviously long before she came to the throne. Perhaps if any Constitutionalists among us read this, they could explain what actual power she had to curtail the Prime Ministers who have ceded much of her sovereignty to Continental Europe, or to ‘international’ law; or how she could have brought them to heel when their arrogant disloyalty was displayed; or indeed what she could have done during her reign when any of her PMs have acted against the UK’s interests in any constitutional manner.

I fear that it is ‘we the people’ who had the power to curtail them - through the ballot box – something we have thrice failed to do with this treacherous administration. We may well grant them another five years to undermine the UK if the straws in the wind are anything to go by, so we can hardly blame the Queen. It’s our own fault.

If you’re implying that without power to ultimately restrain a rogue Parliament, the Monarch is fast becoming an expensive and useless appendage of a State that is vulnerable to republicanism, then you may be right. But that is greatly to be regretted. Moreover it may already be too late to reverse the process; it seems likely that Eurabia will, after we have suffered a short era under the EUSSR, roll over us like a juggernaut if we continue to vote for the heirs and successors of NuLab. And like you, I feel that the Tories under their current leadership are hardly a better alternative, though at the moment – they are the only viable one.

Nah … lay off Lizzie, Verity; she’s the one symbol of continuity that gives comfort to old fathers of my generation, even though the edifice behind the façade is beginning to look increasingly shaky.

Verity

Frank P - Thanks for a well ordered and readable post, as always.

I feel the Queen should never have had her attention diverted by the Commonwealth. In fact, the Commonwealth - as far as I can see - is pointless, excepting for our blood cousins and India. She should have been concentrating on Britain. None of the Commonwealth needed a foreign head of state anyway. That they did, was a ridiculous concept.

Point number two, although I appreciate what you say, I believe there are many times she could have intervened in a rogue, third world government like Blair's and Brown's premiership, but she feared that, after destroying the Constitution, our civil society and the independence of the HoL, the monarchy was next for the chop and chose to save her own and her family's privileged position over saving Britain.

As an aside, the Tories have to dump vapid, Europhile, self-centred David Cameron and get a real fighter into the role. Are there any women on the front bench who might do? The reason I ask is, the last three have been men and there is now an air of failure about Tory men as candidates for that position, although that is a grossly unfair perception about William Hague and IDS - especially Hague. But in politics, perceptions and pragmatism are all.

A woman would carry with her enough of the aura of Margaret Thatcher to concentrate people's minds at the start, and to give her a chance. Dave is an ambulatory disaster and must be replaced. But I can't think of any woman with the oomph. In fact, I can't think of any Tory women MPs at all ... barring the laughable Teresa May.

david skinner

Frank, though the Queen has no power or authority to which we can appeal ( I have tried it) she still has influence; she still has a tongue in her head. I am convinced that if she suddenly departed from her set Christmas message and declared that fifth columnist and Stonewall have declared a state of war on British families, she would get one hell of a response. Just look at the reaction that the BBC received over the Jonathan Ross and Russell Brand case.

The only continuity that I can see is the slow slide down the Gadarene slope without anyone being any the wiser. The public need to be awakened and aroused from this deadly continuity

Pete

I only wish the Labour government was 'left wing' - it just isn't. It has no ideology whatsoever beyond the simple underlying driver of wishing to get re-elected. I find it astonishing that any of you believe that Blair was a quasi-Marxist; or that Obama is some kind of socialist.

If Britain is broken, it's broken at the edges, the areas inhabited by what the left used to call the lumpen proletariat. The uneducated, the unemployed. No one has a clue what to do about the estates in which these people live. And no one's had a clue what to do about them since the end of the factory system.

Because in times gone by, these people all worked there - and however horrible this might have been, it imposed a brutal discipline on the places.

No, of course, you can't bring factories back - but no one knows how to fill that gap.

It's pointless blaming right or left for this, it doesn't get us anywhere. And it's certainly pointless blaming a 'decade' (the '60s is the usual culprit). I am sitting here reading a speech by a Grammar School HeadMaster in 1948 slamming the 'sheer idleness and sloppiness' of the young, their 'lack of moral fibre', their 'unruliness'. Some people apparently believe this was a Golden Age but there never was a Golden Age.

What we need to do is to sort out what to do about those families that are increasingly detached from our society - those who just get drunk, get high, beat people up, knife people and cause mayhem in our town centres at weekends.

How do you stop these people from producing a disproportionate number of children who enter this world with no hope from Day 1?

How do you re-engineer neighbourhoods in these localities when these localities no longer have any vocational nerve centres?

How do you deal with children who reach school at the age of 5 and have no understanding of the etiquette of learning? And can be identified on their first day at school as trouble makers?

Big, big questions with no answers anywhere.

Conservative Cabbie

Pete

Being left wing doesn't necessarily mean being a marxist or a socialst, they're so old hat. Modern liberals are also left wing and that's where Blair and Obama fit in. Having said that, I agree that Blair was relatively non-idealogical.

I think the solution to the problem you posit doesn't come from re-engineering society (the left's response to almost everything it seems), it's a question of responsibilities and moral values. People need to feel that they have a stake in society. When one is a part of something, the less one seeks to undermine it. Some possible solutions:

1. Encourage self-employment through taxation. If a person is self-employed, they have a vested interest in being successful and are more likely to act responsibly.

2. Teach philosophy at school. People no longer think for themselves, I believe that an enquiring mind is more likely to be a responsible one.

3. Be firmer in setting boundaries. Like children, people need to understand what is acceptable and unacceptable behaviour, no blurring of rules with cautions, discharges and suspended sentences. Adopt the three strikes principle.

4. Localise public services like health and education. This would encourage greater political involvement.

Just some broad brush ideas.

Verity

Pete, I’m not sure you’re correct about Brown et Cie not being leftoids. There are a lot of self-regarding old Trots from the Students Union still clinging to their ancient days of spliffs and glory. Tony Blair is one of them. Jack Straw is another. Although I agree that their driving force now is to get re-elected forever more and it may happen unless the Tories regain their sense of balance and drive instead of, a la David Cameron, imitating them.

You are right about the disaffected class once having had to work for a living. They are also the purchased class – their votes bought with endless benefits, free medical care, free accommodation, ciggies, beer, wall TVs, etc. Few of them have the faintest ambition for their children, who they don’t bother to discipline for being disruptive, and whose side they take against the teachers (not that I care as the teachers are mostly lefty scrotes anyway).

Pete asks: “How do you stop these people from producing a disproportionate number of children who enter this world with no hope from Day 1?” You make receipt of benefits and a free flat dependent on them having vasectomies or having their ovaries removed. At the same time, this would free up people in the abortion industry to be moved to another area of health care. (Also, the comm.)

In addition to what you say about jobs – that there aren’t any – then why are we importing tens of thousands of immigrants who adhere to a primitive, destructive religion? Why not fill the jobs with the British welfare classes by giving them warning of, a month, say, that their welfare payments will ending on such and such a date.

I also think the Left – and I disagree with you; I think they still lean to the left – pumped millions of immigrants into our tiny island and then favoured them over the native Brits to demoralize and destablise what had been a stable society and render the formally self-confident British easier to control. They don’t give a crap about Islam, which they imagine – and are they in for a very big surprise! – they are using as a tool.

Back to my King Charles’s head, once someone becomes, in effect, a ward of the state, they should not longer have the ability to vote themselves further money and privileges. The right has to be radical – as in disenfranchising the welfare sector and resigning from the EHRA – and they will find people will vote for them. People want the continuity of their lives back, and they will vote for it if someone has the nerve to offer it.

|

Herbert Thornton

This litany of the steady descent of Britain into barbarism of Britain is only one facet of the coming disaster. It seems to me that financial collapse may not be far away either.

Melanie's role as Cassandra may make her, very occasionally, just a little bit paranoid, but after reading this and other reports from Liverpool, some of which mention some people being arrested and detained and one of them very roughly handled by Liverpool police, and another, 70 years old, being denied his needed medication, together with a police invasion of the house of a 75-year old pensioner, I myself am beginning to hear the muffled sound of police truncheons -

http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/liverpool-news/local-news/2008/11/24/city-cops-arrest-12-over-bnp-racist-leaflets-100252-22325578/

Ronnie

David Skinner writes, 'though the Queen has no power or authority to which we can appeal ( I have tried it)...'

Are you saying that you have tried to be the Queen?

Those who appear to be advocating some kind of coup by the Queen seem to forget that we had a civil war which resulted in sovereignty resting with Parliament. Its not like our current Queen absent-mindedly handed the whole thing over the gang of thugs and misfits that now inhabit the House of Commons, in the past few years.

By what means should the Queen effect the coup proposed on her behalf? I suppose she and her medal-festooned entourage could take control of the British armed forces.

The Queen remains Head of State to a number of Commonwealth countries, those who do not wish to become republics. The Commonwealth was a very successful trading bloc until we decided to betray our partners by joining the European Common Market. I think of agricultural produce in particular.

Well that was a diverting little adventure...

Joe Strummer

Those responsible for the now almost lawless, ramshackle sink council estates infested by crime and hoodies are supposedly " left wing" and wholeheartedly in support of " the working classes". They wouldn't dream of living there on a daily basis though, at anytime in fact.

The quiet,leafy suburbs are a much more fitting place to dwell away from the human dross and flotsam they've created.

Barackobama

Conservative Cabbie.
Utopianism is a universal condition that afflicts conservatives as well as revolutionaries (you dream don't you?). Contemporary "leftists" are invariably the least utopian. They have abandoned any hope of their idea of a perfect society being achieved. But they are libertarians: getting the state to ban smoking in public (notice, not in private) is a consistently libertarian position. They may smoke themselves but believe that the state should stop other people interfering with the air they breath. The ban on hunting is them projecting human libertarianism on foxes. They drive but hate traffic jams created, in their view, by everyone else making less important journeys.
More accurately, they are intolerant libertarians who want to be allowed to do what they like, but they want the state to stop other people doing what they don't like. If that's left-wing, then I'm Victor Meldrew.
The ugliest truth about "the left" in Britain (and the one that angers them most, I can assure you) is that it doesn't exist and never really has. They are functional bureaucrats and, in the main, opportunists pretending to be men and women of principle. That's why they drive Ms Phillips up the wall. They don't believe a word they say.
The problem is, and always has been, the ineptness of conservatives who have made themselves look inconsistent, and frequently stupid, by aligning with libertarianism, the free market, anti-intellectualism (including sola scriptura Christianity) and, often, prejudices about the young, other races and peoples, other religions, women and the poor.
If conservatives want to fill the gap left by the collapse of "the left" into liberal individualism, they are going to have to say: yes, there are things we would make illegal (like abortion beyond the moment life can be sustained outside the womb).
They should also stop degrading themselves by attacking the pathetic products of libertarian thinking like the mother of Baby P. Giving people the right to ruin their lives at everyone else's expense (the real consequence of liberal individualism) is debateable. But allowing them to destroy the lives of young people in their care is wrong. Place in protection girls aged 11 to 16 who are being failed by their parents.
Boys, God bless them, can look after themselves, but at least they'll have fewer to inseminate.

phil

Cabbie more common sense but it doesn't sit well with some -we are still hearing the nonsense about immigrants being to blame -how can this person get away day after day posting such untruths and in such an authoritative manner -is anyone fooled by this -those immigrants are usually the victims not the perpetrators -not that I advocate unrestricted immigration -I do not !!

The points you make are much more valid and need to be addressed rather than these attacks on people who have little to do with the behaviour problem -some do I know but most perform a useful job within our society and from personal experience I know they help each other to settle in here and integrate as many of us have done during the last century .Have any of you heard this sort of stuff before "You make receipt of benefits and a free flat dependent on them having vasectomies or having their ovaries removed"

Perhaps the person in question might advocate putting them in freezing cold water to bring them to their senses too -experiments could be carried out to see which worked best -yes you know where all this started and it sickens me that we have to read it .

For me the answer is right in amongst the families ,eat together .learn morality at the table listening to elders .know about respect .how to give it and how to earn it ,and the benefits to each individual of going down that path -yes there is more ,much more but it is a start .

david skinner

That's fine Phil, but are we talking about any old family structure, families that come in all shapes and sizes, where the co-habiting partners are of any number, gender, species or whose relationship endures for any lengthe of time?

phil

David Skinner --I know I am part of the dinosaur family , but I do believe in real families with married parents to give stability to the children rather than a home with 5/6 children all with different fathers -I am not trying to knock people in a stable relationship here either but I do think a child has a right to know he has a legal father ,the playground can be a very cruel place for those without one .

Nevertheless the most important thing is for the child to know it is loved and cared for and that it has grown up examples to follow -to see respect and love and learn to give it . Sorry if this offends anyone but I do not believe a child already having lost its real mum and dad ,deserves to have two mothers or two fathers-I have no doubt the child will be loved ,but balance that with the knowledge that it has to face its peers and suffer the inevitable mocking .That child will be damaged ,but even as I write this I hope I am wrong .

David I grew up in a a family where all my uncles and aunts provided a second home for me anytime I might wish to visit .I received that love and care that all children deserve and I got hugs and kisses unlike the crazy way adults are constrained to treat children nowadays .Its no wonder to me that children are confused and often difficult ,they do not even get the affection afforded to wild animals or pets .I have no quick fix for these problems as the authorities we have all invented pass on each problem one to another, as sadly we have just seen .no one is responsible in law, but for me they are ,if only morally .Baby P was shunted from minister level right down the chain to the social worker -who do you think is responsible -I know where my vote would go .

david skinner

Phil, I don’t understand why you are so apologetic and defensive regarding your views on the family. Please explain; the government has declared war on the family and our children. You ought rather to be reaching for the nearest weapon at hand.

Let us look at the context in which children, in addition to suffering high levels of alcohol addiction, mental illness, not to mention homelessness,
are receiving and dishing out violence and murder.

http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/im-not-gay-but-my-four-mums-are/2007/06/15/1181414542339.html

The above article, “I‘M NOT GAY BUT MY FOUR MUMS ARE“, claims that the young man is unaffected by having four mothers and no father; but this could be in spite of his family background. We have to ask the question: How many other examples of children being reared in such fluid relationships are equally smart, articulate, well-balanced, socially aware, and just downright nice? This article is a classic piece of propaganda, written by a feminist and familyphobe who in pursuit of anarchy is prepared to play fast and loose with the documented fact that children do best by being raised by a father and mother.

These other links are merely random fragments of a growing picture of a Tsunami that is heading to engulf our families and nation, driven by individuals with faces and names like Ben Summerskill, the Chief Executive of Stonewall.

http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/585/print

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=563303&in_page_id=1770

Lady Hale (who ,for many years ,was the key person driving the Law Commission’s anti-marriage agenda ) said back in 1980: “‘Logically, we have already reached a point at which we should be considering whether the legal institution of marriage continues to serve any useful purpose.”

If you value the family, Phil, I would urge you to please sign this petition and get others to do likewise:
http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/Parentchoice/

For fear that I am becoming boring, I offer you this light relief.

http://linkstersblog.blogspot.com/2008/06/city-hall-in-san-francisco.html

Herbert Thornton

A few posts earlier, I drew attention to the arrests, in Liverpool of people for distributing political leaflets.

Now we've hear of Damian Green and a Whitehall official being arrested, accused of "leaking" information that the government wanted kept quiet.

I had an uneasy feeling that it sounded familiar - Google the name of Ralph Wigram and I think you will understand why.

Conservative Cabbie

Phil/ David Skinner

I'm afraid that the family genie is out of the bottle, we're not going to be able to put it back in. The family unit is a thing of the past and I don't see a return to it ever, we live now in a world of non-committed relationships, empowered single-mums and tolerated dead-beat dads.

We need to look to other avenues to restore society to a moral and responsible one. My view is that education, engagement (people feeling they have a stake in society) and a sense of responsibility are the ways to achieve this.

Herbert Thornton

CC,

You write - "The family unit is a thing of the past and I don't see a return to it ever, we live now in a world of non-committed relationships, empowered single-mums and tolerated dead-beat dads." -

Reading that, I feel horrified that you can have been overtaken by feelings of such hopelessness.

To my mind it is as biologically unnatural for fathers to easily abandon their children as it is for mothers to do so.

When that in fact happens, surely it points to society being brainwashed by its "educators" (themselves brainwashed by the poisonous ideas of Gramsci) into acceptance of behaviour that is utterly unnatural and destructive of human society?