To this is fucking dangerous and why we must get the Tories out?

[dontlookbackyourenotgoingthatway]

This:

nationalconservatism.org/national-conservatism-a-statement-of-principles/

Look at the speakers;

nationalconservatism.org/natcon-uk-2023/

How can anybody who has studied any history whatsoever vote for this?

Are living in some kind of shit, TV movie about the fall of the UK?

Despite hardly anyone in attendance, we should be afraid given the Home Secretary was there. These movements and threats start small before they break through.

There have been multiple attempts to derail this thread by people posting about Trans and Labour. But I’m glad to see people are becoming wise to it and it’s not working. This thread is about the Nat C conference where the holder of the 3rd highest office of state and her assorted colleagues made pretty scary comments.

As a minority I’m on alert. I believe all minorities in this country should be listening carefully and have the means/ability to leave when necessary. Braverman is unleashing forces which will also destroy her own children. She’s dangerous with deep levels of self hatred.

"Of course they were. There was never any point in soft Brexit.

This was obvious to anyone who had given it any real thought."

And how has a hard Brexit worked out for us?

And it’s not just Braverman. If you think Cates isn’t meeting with her American evangelical peers to discuss ways in which to reduce women’s rights and make it harder to obtain abortions, think again.

As a minority I’m on alert. I believe all minorities in this country should be listening carefully and have the means/ability to leave when necessary. Braverman is unleashing forces which will also destroy her own children. She’s dangerous with deep levels of self hatred

People in the US are leaving their own States to go to safe States where they think they and their chiildren will be safe.

For such small audiences, it's attracting a lot of prominent people and household names.

What if they get back in? A coalition again?

It could happen and this, this is what we will get.

Universities not allowed to carry out research that criticises the gov? That will no doubt extend to gov research units, the work of which is supposed to form the basis of evidence-based policy decisions. I appreciate that this is a bit dry and hard to grasp, but this would have massive implications for everyday life.

This is what happened during the last years of USSR. Officially, everything was going great but then nobody was allowed to carry out any research that indicated otherwise.

Badly. That was also obvious from the beginning.

If as you say this is a major issue for many woman, then I am sure when you or someone you support stands on that ticket in an election they will do well.

I wish you every luck in your endeavour.

Such an immature argument. "Grow up" is on par with saying "Calm down dear".
At what point do we accept National Socialism? As this where this is heading.

If they get back in again it will be thanks to the least effective opposition in history missing a completely open goal.

I see, you think I am terrified in the same way that you think David Lammy said that woman grow cervixs.
Excellent.

May I save other posters time by saying you didn't answer the question?

Even though you did.

As a GC woman I am still more worried about abortion becoming main stream, or that female refugees (who have no safe spaces) are being denied safe passage.

Just to ward off the continual sarcasm and sneer of pp quicker than people can reply

Yes you did answer. I’ll come back to it as doing dc stuff but it looks interesting

You're either being snide or you haven't the foggiest idea how our electoral system works. Or most probably both.

Do you think it's OK that voters have a binary choice between this lot and the lot who describe women defending their own rights as "dinosaurs who hoard rights"? Because I do not.

For such a well publicised speech, there was hardly anyone in attendance and I’d bet my bottom dollar, at least 20-30% were journalists.

This is what concerns me. Once again the MSM are normalising a niche event and giving it lots of air space. Most events with this kind of attendance and crank opinions wouldn't even trouble the pages of the village newsletter.

Jgw does have a point though. If people with different opinions don't stand, or aren't given publicity, what can anyone do? It will continue as it is.

What do you think David Lammy actually said then? You've been directly asked, several times, and refused to answer. Why is that?

For what it's worth I'm more scared about the dinosaurs comment than the cervix comment, although both are an indication that he's unfit to govern.

And actually most people don't vote based on what someone thinks a woman is. Believe me, I've been asking around and found most people aren't really interested in knowing what a woman is.

& Badenoch was keen to get an endorsement from DeSantis last summer.
Truss has been in Washington meeting the same groups.

And PLEASE will left leaning posters not take the bait and engage in fights about “what a woman is”. There is an effort to make this philosophical question the central political issue, when it actually is not, in an effort to stop people voting Labour.

Trying to persuade otherwise left-leaning people not to vote Labour because “they don’t know what a woman is” is like telling the Turkey that they should vote for Christmas because “Santa knows what a Turkey is.”

Choosing to die on this molehill is ignoring the mountainous issue of how dangerous the conservative party has become.
The presence of government ministers and MPs at this event says a whole lot both about the government and wider party membership, because that is how this horrible lot have landed in positions of power and influence over us.

We are boiling like a frog and don’t realise how widespread these views are until there are such numbers that the e mask can be revealed. And then it is too late!

The way our electoral system works means that one of the two main parties needs to support women's rights in order for women to be able to choose a party which supports their rights.

Why doesn't Labour support women's rights?

And this is what Lammy said:
Lammy: "...it's probably the case that trans women [born male] don't have ovaries, but a cervix..is something that you can have following various procedures, hormones and all the rest of it..."
I suspect he was just getting his biology wrong but he's right that men can have the rest - not naturally but surgically / by medical intervention.

Yes this is true. In Florida, De Santis has moved beyond trans and widened his scope to include all gays. As a result families with gay parents are fleeing.

If he becomes president of the entire country, I don’t know what will happen. Incidentally he came over here a couple of weeks ago and met with Badernoch to offer support. Meloni supports Sunak.

These are the types of people currently in government in the UK.

@Blancmangemouse good point.

@MargotBamborough you know there's a lot more ways to support women's rights than just the one you keep banging on about? Equal pay, mat leave provision, child care cost support, to name but a few.

Exactly.

Who knows what the USA could look like soon?
The warning signs are there.