There was a classic puff piece on Tory wimmin in The Times yesterday by Blairite commentator Rachel Sylvester. It seems the Tory wimmin are in a flap over losing the ‘female vote’, because all females vote the same, don’t you know? You never hear pollsters talk about the male vote – they are just voters.
The Tory wimmin are in a flap because some members of the Conservative party think it a good idea to be a) conservative and b) listen to voters, in particular, over immigration. But this is not the way to win the election – we are told- as female voters are not up for this.
“It’s a very Ukip-driven agenda and the literature is very aggressive and not empathetic,” says one senior Tory quoted by Ms Sylvester. “It’s not at all female-friendly.” This senior Tory is not willing to say this in public, mind – just mouth off to journos like Rachel. But I guess this is standard operating procedure.
Ah, yes the little ladies – like me – do not like ‘hard politics’. We want our politicians to be ‘empathetic’, like the Care Bears. I can only assume that this means we want our politicians to be ‘nice’ and very pro spending other people’s money to make them look cuddly and soothe middle class guilt.
Well, we don’t all think like this, senior Tory wimmin, many of us do not believe it is empathetic to pursue liberal social and economic policies heaping more debt on our children’s shoulders. Speaking of children, the one area where Tory wimmin are certainly not empathetic is when it comes to supporting mothers to care for their own children.
They are not up for this so much – best to pursue policies that separate mothers from their young children so GDP can be increased by some tiny percentage. It is not like any of these Tory wimmin look after their own kids, so we cannot expect them to support other mothers who believe caring for children is a worthwhile vocation.
We are also told by Rachel that it is all about culture. “There are some Tories who are comfortable with Britain as it is in the 21st century, but there are others who deep down preferred it as it was in a previous era: whiter, straighter and, in terms of power, more male.”
Ah, yes glorious 21st century Britain. Now I am not saying things were fantastic ‘back in the day.’ Reform was needed. Reform was necessary, but not revolution and in particular not a revolution on liberal terms. Do we see the distinction?
I have written about 21st century before, where we have proud Londoner Jihadi John beheading charity workers, where 12-year-olds boys rape 5-year-girls with impunity, where the police cook the books over serious sexual crimes and where marriage has collapsed in lower economic groups. Sure what’s there not to like? Let’s not forget the mounting debt – a direct result of liberal social policy, but we cannot articulate this as it is mean and ‘nasty’ and not very Care Bear.
Ultimately, it all comes down to a thirst for power – not actually implementing conservative policies for the good of the country. “The big strategic question for the Conservatives is: which election do we want to win?” says one senior figure in Rachel’s Times article. “We can try and limp over the line in 2015 by echoing Ukip but that will damage us five years down the line.” In other words lets just flog whatever policies we can to get elected because all we want is more power. If this means implementing liberal policies and running the country into the ground then so be it.
These liberal Tory MPs remind me of that not so attractive character from some daft American sitcom – Home Improvement. His catchphrase was “I need more power”.
This is all the ‘modernisers’ in the Tory party want, not conservative economic or social polices, but just more power at any cost. No wonder their traditional base is abandoning them at high speed.