Peter Hitchens | The state of social conservatism | SDP Talks
Вставка
- Опубліковано 25 чер 2024
- Journalist, author, and broadcaster Peter Hitchens joins William Clouston, the leader of the Social Democratic Party, to discuss Britain’s political landscape. Peter and William talk about the state of social conservatism in Britain, its relationship to social democracy, and whether social conservatives should bother with political organisation.
Learn more about the SDP at: sdp.org.uk/
00:28 - What is social conservatism, and why is it important?
09:47 - Why have social conservatives failed to make political inroads?
19:20 - Can a social conservative be a social democrat?
24:26 - What happened to Labour's social conservatism?
27:04 - What's the case for railway nationalisation?
30:59 - How have local government and schools been squashed?
32:38 - Should social conservatives bother with politics?
Please stand in every constituency at the next election and you've got my vote!
You only have a vote in a single constituency; would you be prepared to pay the deposits in all the others.
He means the party not the individuals
If there were two contemporary Brits that I'd like to put in a room to converse, it would be these two. Actual discussion on actual key concepts and the importance of world view. Hitchens analysis of what has happened becomes sharper every year.
I abandoned the Tories today after 36 years.Tribalism is exactly why we are in the mess we're in. The Tories are socially and economically liberal. If you want a party defending family, nation state and community don't vote Tory or Labour.
Johnson will be ousted by his party sooner rather than later
I joined the party today, we must all collectively pushed this movement forward tell people about it, this party will attract both Labour and conservative voters who are disenchanted with their parties
me too. Its important to highlight to people that voting for the activist groups Reform and Momentum who have no intention of forming a government with leaders who don't want to be PM will not change anything in the long run. If we want change it takes courage to put your cross somewhere else thats serious about offering long term change.
Go to Church. Turn off the TV. Turn off your devices. Engage in community & culture. Read about your ancestors. Resurrect tradition and live it as best you can.
Who could have thought that the SDP, of all parties, would end up as one of the few torch holders for decency and truth.
Why say of all parties
They seem to try to represent the best of the so called left and right
Something we desperately need!
@@seanmoran6510 I'm comparing the SDP now to it's previous iteration.
@@PrincipledUncertainty Fair enough 👍
It’s a pity the Elites of this Nation didn’t work together decades ago.
@@PrincipledUncertainty do tell i'm 23
@@MyrddnWllt Oh to be 23 again. I miss the days when my brain could data scrape like an AIMLT. Tell what exactly? I'll consider your question and get back to you. Usually I say I will and forget, but I'll make the effort this time :)
When he said 'Tribalism' being the obstacle of any worthwhile political change he nailed it in a word. We will vote for a dead sheep as long as it is adorned with the appropriately coloured rosette.
I said something similar to a friend of mine recently, my analogy was a perfectly made 4 poster bed adorned with a dead alsatian, tongue lolling out, rotting, and the bed was made up with labour or tory colours. As I said, people would still jump into that bed and declare it to be absolutely the best night's sleep they'll ever have .. yet wonder in the morning why they smell a bit odd and not terribly rested.
I am politically homeless at the moment. I've just read, with enthusiasm, Christopher Insole's "Politics of human frailty" which seems to me similar so hope this venture grows as there must be many like myself who feel stuck between a "rock and a hard place"!
I've learned so much from reading & listening to Peter over the past few months, he has inspired me a great deal. Just love courageous free thinkers 👏👏👏
Agreed. Been reading his books "The Abolition of Britain" (particularly relevant for those who want to look out for British communities and culture) and "The Abolition of Liberty".
@@tobiasolds1550 The Phoney Victory is excellent
@@seanmoran6510 I happen to be reading it now, completely agree
He's hardly a "free thinker"
For all of Peter’s creditable opinions I wish he wouldn’t dominate conversations with Interruptions quite so much. Especially if his general stance on social conservatism is it’s now a lost cause, that’s not what social conservatism needs. It needs ideas and vocal representation. Middle England know much of these values instinctively. Keep attacking William, your support is gradually growing.
Middle England is gradually shrinking though. Wokery is like a fungus sucking the Britishness out of everything
A good listen, but I’d say it’s no bad thing for Peter Hutchins to stay out of the SDP or any other party because he doesn’t seem to be a person comfortable with being in a gang. He’s a bit like one of those Old Testament prophets standing alone and warning others of their i impending demise if they don’t change their ways.
I’d rather like to see a conversation between William Clouston and Esther Krakue, in future.
I don't image Hitchens could see himself supporting SDP since Clouston spoke out it favor of lockdown.
Nice comment. And in a certain mood, I suspect Mr Hitchens would enjoy that analogy.
But I do believe both Hitchens brothers were/are vehemently against such forms of 'primate-worship".
Perhaps that’s he’s role
They are needed in times of crisis!
Indeed power should always be questioned
@@OnlineWipe For the First Month while a proper cost analysis was done ( which this government didn’t do or the Labour Party for that matter ).
They haven’t supported the lock down for a good while.
Having said that, Would William have been able to withstand the pressure from the Public and Media ?
Or would he have actually used the nightingales as they were supposed to have been used for .
Unfortunately we will never know.
@@benjamin4894 Seemed to me Christopher enjoyed being worshipped
Excellent conversation! Pity Mr Hitchens won't throw his hat back in the ring for the SDP!
He right to be neutral
We need independent minds to question power
I couldn't find an SDP runner in Liverpool West Derby last year.
Sadly it's very tribal here anyway. I think most people in my area still believe Labour are for the working class, or they still hate Thatcher, and automatically put a cross in the Labour box.
We still hate Thatcher and the Tories .
Let them vote Labour. It'll be an enormous shock to them when Labour winnows on the vine and other parties nibble away at their base from all sides (Greens, Lib Dems and now the SDP).
Great interview, I enjoyed it thoroughly
I just became a member of the SDP. A sorely needed political voice and I want it to grow.
"Trying to tell the difference between change and progress."
Perfectly put.
Gay
@@RealAugustusAutumn Oh, are you? That’s ok no one minds anymore
I’ve spoiled my ballot for years here in Kent
Are the SDP present in Kent ?
Always time for Peter Hitchens 👍
It's PA or bust.
@@Catonius PA ?
@@seanmoran6510 Patriotic Alternative
@@Catonius well when the economy starts to fly apart as well as the Union there time might come 🤷♂️
I wouldn’t be surprised if there will be a series of race and cultural struggles in the coming decades
Quite frankly if I had the means I’d take Peters Advice and leave.
I care very much about all the home nations but the England I love died a long time ago and it’s not coming back is it
But Who knows ?
Top Anime Crossover of All Time
A brilliant conversation, gentlemen: thank you.
It's damn true. Changing your mind on various topics will indeed make you lose friends. But sometimes having to talk to the wall if better than attempting to speak logic to a bunch of oafs.
I was with you all the way, but it was practically impossible to have a proper Conservative party while we had a Keynesian banking system. We have to rely on Trump to bring that down. Then we will have a new “ dialectic”. Probably conservatism vs classical liberalism. We will also have to have parties named after what they actually stand for. Do Conservatives really want to conserve what we have ? Liberal Democrats are neither liberal, nor democratic. The SNP are not nationalist - They are globalists. The Fabians infiltrated all the parties a long time ago.
Really like the description of social conservatism given by Peter
In the past, "social conservatism" meant just that, and thoroughly so. In fact, people of the past had the luxury of espousing these views largely unconsciously. This (and the previously tenable notion of democracy), were only possible due to being subjects in an ethnically homogeneous state, with the corresponding sense of being generally at evens with your fellows. The social conservatives of the past would find the modern "social conservative" a travesty. That inch between the two parties mentioned by Peter may have applied at some point previous, but nowadays, within a society as fragmented and removed from intuition as it is, the spectrum of societal discourse has become far greater than this inch, extending much further than either end, rendering the two-party system redundant.
Sadly, today's social conservatism today essentially and effectively rounds down to milquetoast conservatism. As long as "conservatism" fails to take stock of the direct and irreconcilable conflict between different ethnic interests within a nation, it will remain at its current station in society, at best. Conservatism favours decency (and had in doing so been able to successfully sustain itself) but in the current context this will be its undoing. The conservative's sense of yearning is palpable, understandably, but this is an increasingly tragic yearning (see the creeping sense of tragedy and resignation in Scruton's output, to whom I nonetheless owe an enormous amount for my own development). Like a grown man competing against an impetuous child in a game, and repeatedly, deliberately missing (but only slightly missing) his target so as not to upset the child, social conservatism continues to consciously miss the point, in the interest of "good taste". The result is that the man loses the game, and that the conservative ultimately loses his nation.
Like the analogy of the grown man and Impetuous child. It seems the case that conversations that need to be had are withheld for fear of upsetting the children and looking beastly. Authority and good governance are sacrificed for the sake of looking trendy and down with the kids. An affectation which has afflicted leadership since the 1960s.
19-4-18 did a great deal of damage to this nation
I believe it’s beyond repair to be honest
I’ve also come to the conclusion that Britain is a fake financial and political construct built for Empire
It has no social or cultural identity in of its self
I personally think the Union needs to go before the identities of the home nations eroded away completely
Then add effects of America on us which has completely infantilised the culture.
I may of just found my new political home. 🤔
@Pep we’ll see about that over the next few years bud.
I'm thinking that too
An intelligent party leader! Wow! We social conservatives have been squeezed out and made into spectators. Social conservatism has been largely erased in the education system and social conservatives are treated with great suspicion. Empirically-grounded criticism of ideas or policies or whatever is responded to with instant suppression. You were right about the Tories letting everyone down.
Subscribed. Thank you.
"If I'm being wrong..." - that's the most important thought most people omit systematically.
But I might be wrong about that statement.
Good one.
Peter Hitchens is such a pessimist that he doesn't think the fight can won, which is why he didn't support Brexit. So don't let him put you off political action.
He did support Brexit. He didn't vote in the referendum because he hates referenda.
No surprised he’s pessimistic after all these years of nobody listening.
20:00 ... The reason people wonder about whether social conservatism is compatible with social democracy is because social democracy has been a byword for gradual communism for the past 100 years or so...
Thank You !
Also, please look up :- Huge !!! Canadian Court Victory.
Social democracy i.e. mixed market economy with closed borders and low immigration is what i want.
I care massively about immigration, critical race theory, post modernism.
And ofcourse excessive bank sector control on the economy and re-industrialisation ,affordable housing,sustainability and science and technology research and development.
I don't, on the other hand are about weed
We are becoming like the image of God. We are human beings. We learn as we walk through the journey of our lives. We are not human doings. We find our humility toward god as we become fathers and mothers, true friends, true colleagues etc. We throw out the love of God at our peril. The downfall of the family has been the biggest change in our country s history and we lack so much because of this. Thank you for this discussion .
An interesting mind has Peter but not the greatest debater . I would find a conversation with him very frustrating.
Weird ending
As a Scandinavian I would say that it is not possible to be a social democrat and a social conservative. The best case would be a soft-social democrat.
There are two reasons for why:
Firstly, social democracy is still based on a socialist goal of equality. The wish to equalize everything is inherently anti-conservative. You cannot support social conservative policies to the family, with traditional gender roles, traditional views of marriage and regard parrents as knowing what's best for the children rather than the state while being a social democrat who supports equality.
Social democracy also generally support equality regarding gender outcomes, encouraging women to go out in the workforce and seeking big careers and spending years on higher education, all in the goal of equality. Sure, you could potentially have it both ways, but if that does not become possible, social democracy encourages equality rather than social conservative norms.
The other problem is more in regards to consequence of social democracy. Social democracy encourages the state to take on the burdens that usually befell civil society. Things like neighbourhoods, extended family, local community, the Church etc. becomes the role of the state. This weakens social cohesion because instead of relying on these social institutions for help, you now rely on the state. This fosters individualism and atomization and thus weakens the kind of society that the social conservative desires. This was even the goal of Scandinavian social democrats. It's called State Individualism.
However, there is the possibility of being a weak or soft social democrat. I personally believe that things like health insurance should be public for example. Certain things that would be a public good, but perhaps too expensive for families to deal with, should probably be part of the state's role. There are certainly other things which should be under the state, but the giant welfare state is not something that supports social conservative ideas.
I get the Feeling Peter is a Hobbit living in the Shire where Saruman was not defeated and quite possibly welcomed.
I know I do.
Spot on!
On tribalism, there is virtually no difference in party affiliation across class anymore. The dividing line is age, and as a Scot I have to mention geography
Maybe the party political system is what is outdated.
☕🌱
Peter speaks a lot of sense. But he doesn't fit into any type of political party.
Please try and get Russell Brand on at least to up your public awareness. Think tactically and pragmatically in engaging the mainstream, only then in my view will you stand a chance of having support at the next election. If you bag Jordan Peterson, if he returns to public life. You'll be up to your chest in new members. Your values of family, community, nation and he's views on the sanctity of that as the cornerstone of the west will win hearts and minds in my perhaps ignorant view
Russell Brand are you serious !
@@seanmoran6510 I can understand your adversion to that however Russell Brand would genuinely be a good person to put the case for social conservatism against. A spiritual man someone who desires harmony between people. Someone who grew up in a single parent home and has all the trappings of that and I believe an argument well constructed to simple Christian ethic about that situation said in good faith would carry weight as a conversation worth having. Not to mention it would provide a greater level of views more in the tens of thousands of views opposed to just eight thousand views. The end of the day if you're a old party with limited influence the game should be not sell out your views but to have them challenged in the public realm and to create public consciousness of what you wish to achieve. Fight the south and you will lose, embrace the south with a better future and you may succeed.
Billy Duffin Owen Jones called Russell Brand the Orwell of our time 🤦♂️
That should tell you all you need to know about were we are as a country.
Russell called PH a Homophobe just because he was out thought so no !
I listened to Russell and Jordan Peterson and while Russell seemed to go along with Jordan
Peterson I get the feeling that when the crunch comes and the piper wants paying Russell is no longer there to be found !
A plus point in Russell’s corner was that he interviewed Jordan Peterson while the Guardian Brigade where howling JP was a Facist !
Haven’t heard Russell defend JP since the Cambridge Student Body blocked JP if I’m wrong send me the link.
@@seanmoran6510 I reckon ya wrong amigo. Also I'm not gonna hold Owen Jones' idiocy against Brand
No thanks
Well at least Hitchens believes in re-nationalising the railways. That's a start. And it was interesting to hear him say that Academy schools are a form of nationalisation. I'm pleased to hear William say that free-market economics and conservatism do not go together. You can't conserve anything if, for example, you allow young people to be priced out of the housing market.
Free market is vague because you need free market capitalism but to what degree? Libertarianism, Communism or a mixture. Personally I think social Democrats and Libertarians have valid points each like there is too much welfare and red tape for small business owners. While the train service is a disgrace and free trade with China, India etc isn't working.
Very true. They're faux-conservative crony-capitalists. As discussed, they're not remotely 'conservative'.
@@owenthompson5214 Western governments have long since sold off anything that produces wealth - such as energy and the railways - in favour of growing the unproductive/therapeutic aspects of our bloated public services. I think it might actually do our governments some good to re-initiate themselves with the business of yielding a profit?
...Who knows, some of that revanue might actually find its way back into the broader society. And let's face it, they couldn't be doing a worse job than their current contract holders!
Alligator
Yes, the government did all of this. For the interests of the elitist oligarchs.
@Alligator And planning laws - it's not a true free market if there are government imposed restraints on supply.
It occurs to me that if you're socially conservative you're almost inevitably going to have at least some social democratic views. If you believe that order and wellbeing are achieved through things like maintaining the family unit in society, you're going to want a way for people to easily have the economic means to start and maintain one. I mean, you get Blue Labour types (not as MPs in the current party) who are essentially socialists/base a lot of their thought around community but want lower levels of immigration, reforms to welfare etc. and seem to be in favour of maintaining traditional British institutions like the monarchy. Think they're even in favour of gay marriage but frame it as a way of preserving the family unit/institution of marriage.
Sop talking over him.
Bring back the Fasc.
Was "deconstructing the idea of biologically based sex" the nice way of talking about lgbt rights?
Just t
@@ralphdavidson9542 that was my nickname in high school
They are coming for you, libertarian. Pick a side.
That is so true.
I am not a liberal or a capitalist. I am a conservative Christian who is completely anti abortion, pro traditional marriage and do not support gay marriage due to my religious convictions. I live in the USA ,and do not embrace car centric culture. Does this make me a conservative socialist? I dont think capitalism is Biblical. Republicans typically share my moral beliefs, but not my economical beliefs. Democrats do not share my moral beliefs, but I tend to agree with them on issues like public transportation. I feel I don't have a voice here. What does it mean in the UK to be a social democrat?
What... You do know that "social conservative" does not stand for "socialist, conservative," right?
"Social" simply refers to "social policy" as in wellbeing and welfare, poverty reduction, social security, justice, unemployment insurance, living conditions, animal rights, pensions, health care, social housing, family policy, social care, child protection, social exclusion, education policy, crime and criminal justice, urban development, labor issues, government involvement in culture, religion, civil rights, whether or not various types of marriages should be legal or illegal... A huge number of issues.
Social conservatives are conservatives whose attention is directed at how people live their lives and want to drive legislation on how people ought to live their lives.
It has nothing to do with socialism.
He does speak some nonsense at times - wishes the motor car hadn't been invented...
The motor car kills approx 1.4 million people a year, that's about 3700 per day. A very strong argument against the motor car in fact.
Yes he seemed to be saying that a good public transport system would be better than everyone having cars. The individual freedom of car ownership can never be replaced by any form of public transport I can imagine.
biological sex...
FIGHT FOR EUROPEAN/ POLISH SOCIAL BALLROOM DANCES: POLONAISE AND MAZURKA ESSAYS, VIDEOS AND INSTRUCTIONS: GO TO THE INTERNET AND SEARCH FOR: ACADEMIA.EDU………..RAYMOND CWIEKA
TO VIEW THE VIDEOS PASTE THE VIDEO - WORD - ESSAY TO A WORD
DOCUMENT AND THEN CLICK & PRESS THE CTRL KEY ON THE VIDEO.
ORIGINALLY THERE WERE SOME 49 BOOKS AND ESSAYS OF MINE.
Just when I thought Hitchens couldn't be any more of a joke....
I like him up to the point when he disagrees with anything, at which point he shuts down and doesn’t accept whatever it is. He said he listens to his opponents.... Sit him down with some friends and some of his favourite music, and give him some edible cannabis. I’m sure he’ll have a harmless and enjoyable, maybe revealing experience. I know he drinks so what’s the difference?
The difference is, if you read his stuff, is that cannabis causes mental illness - the type of mental illness that enables brutal murders... www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2963357/PETER-HITCHENS-real-mind-blowing-terror-threat-midst-cannabis.html
On a societal level, weed causes degeneracy, and anyone with eyes to see doesn't need "scientific proof" for something like that
Dzem I stopped smoking it because I was on it too much. The same can be said for anything. Treat it with respect and have an informed approach and it’s fine.
OnlineWipe cannabis amplifies certain mental illnesses if they’re there or likely to be. It doesn’t cause them. Over and improper use, along with the high strength strains that aren’t natural are all part of it. Many people respect the drug and use it without any issues. It’s a matter of choice, or should be. It will never be eradicated from society and fighting it does nothing. There’s decades of proof on this.
Rwecosher - these are just assertions - none of which is supported by evidence. Particularly the “decades of proof” you claim exists - in reality cannabis laws have been ignored for decades and not enforced.
Talk talk talk … BS .. DONT VOTE MUSLIM LABOUR
No religion please!!