Kemi Badenoch through to next round

[InTheCanteen]

If you have a Conservative MP and want to protect the rights of women and safeguard children please email them TONIGHT and ask them to support Kemi.

Penny Mordaunt still the bookies favourite (and they aren't often wrong) but we need to let everyone know how dangerous it will be for this woman to become PM; I don't believe she has changed her mind for one moment.

That sounds like fairly standard Conservative viewpoints. What exactly are the naysayers expecting her to say?! 🤯
Indeed. The Conservatives are not my people but I’m struggling to work up any outrage about a leadership candidate espousing conservative values.

And has feminism really not moved on from the idea that work outside the home is the only kind that holds any value?

I can't speak to this specifically at all, but you keep interjecting these one liners as if any political figure, or anyone who is not a political figure for that matter, can somehow run a nation and economy by only thinking about one set of problems.

That is just not how it works. There are always multiple factors, effects that will be felt in multiple areas. Decisions about specific policies are usually about trying to balance out all the factors as best we can.

That's not to say it's not possible to criticize any specific decision but that is not what you are doing.

Well if we did that we'd probably be aligned with Focus on the Family or something and that would make us Far Right.

I think if Conservatives could get over even a little bit of their ideological stance on small state / public funding, they could make a really good case for supporting women to be SAHM.

If stable, happy families would overall lead to better outcomes for children (and by extension the adults they grow into) then supporting this would provide significant future savings in terms of welfare and health spending.

It seems to me that there are many women who would like to stay at home and look after their children in the early years, but feel pressured to work either due to economic necessity or social pressure as it's not something a 'modern woman' should be engaging in.
I've also come across women who would like to have more than two children, but again don't feel able to do this due to economic constraints and social stigma.

It seems like a good opportunity for Conservatives to advocate for some sort of policy whereby SAHM receive a living wage plus pension/NI contributions from the government for X number of years for each child. Crucially, the payments go directly to the individual women and not as part of a consolidated household payment. Similar sort of payments would apply if it was the husband that stayed at home full-time, or in the case of same-sex couples whichever partner took on that role.

And maybe tax breaks or eligibility schemes for affordable housing for those families where one parent is a full-time carer in comparison to where both partners are working.

The role of tax, apart from reducing the overall supply of money to control inflation, is a way for governments (whether left or right) to nudge citizens into desired behaviour - increasing tax to discourage certain behaviours or decreasing tax to encourage certain behaviours.

But it does require acknowledging that governments do have an important role to play in shaping the societies we live in, and of course as citizens we decide on the type of government we want. And it does mean accepting that there are limits to capitalism / free markets and we should not let it dictate how we run important aspects of our society.

It's not an impossible idea, NonnyMouse.

The Conservative idea about small state is relative, and when you dig into it, it's not really about size per se as it is about not over-stepping. Which in theory allows maximum flexibility for each level of social function to adapt to the needs and desires of it's members - be that families, neighbourhoods, social institutions outside of government, city or regional governments, right up to national governments.

And there is also a long conservative tradition of subsidizing national infrastructure and projects that support social function but can't be undertaken by private groups.

There's no reason that couldn't be a well to draw from in terms of how to approach these kinds of problems.

Love that post nonnymouse. I'm not as good with describing political systems. I come at all this from an anthropological/ psychological pov. And as such see a focus on supporting families in order to best support the early years, which are The most important time for a human.

But that's not to say "stay with in the DV relationship" as this is also exceptionally damaging for young people. I've taught young people so damaged by their extremely violent earliest home lives that they've ended up being given diagnosis of autism when they reach teens as the traits for trauma and attachment difficulties and damage to early development can be so similar to autism, it's the better diagnosis to access the best support.

And has feminism really not moved on from the idea that work outside the home is the only kind that holds any value? yes this.

If stable, happy families would overall lead to better outcomes for children (and by extension the adults they grow into) then supporting this would provide significant future savings in terms of welfare and health spending.

This particularly.

But it's generational. It takes years and years of policy approaches to embed.

I've been wryly amused that the tories realised they need to reboot a version of sure start. (Though I will say that I was told recently by someone who oversaw one that the well off peeps started taking advantage of all the free stuff.)

I fear that there are two irreconcilable strands to conservatism. On the one hand supporting family and community structures, even traditions and distinct local culture but on the other neoliberal economics and the ideology of the free market. The latter leads to the destruction of families and communities as human beings are reduced to cogs in a money making machine swapped in and out, moved anywhere in the country or the world, to serve the pursuit of unadulterated capitalism. This is what we see in the US where there seems to be no help or support at all for families.

The former, supporting and valuing families and communities, could reduce the need for state support at some levels as families and communities provide a level support to each other in times of need, practical and emotional support which can prevent more serious problems developing. However it is in direct conflict with the profit motive being the highest value.

Yes

I do wonder if the former is encouraged because we have the nhs? Therefore better self health care via supportive communities and education means less costs for the state to have to handle.

Sorry slight derail but something about this thread and the others I've seen on Kemi Badenoch is bugging me. The strength of feeling about her and the way she's presented by some as if she's Margaret Thatcher on steroids just seem way out of proportion. Admittedly I've not been following the contest as closely as some of you but from what I've seen and read, her views on small state, lower taxes, market forces etc, just seem like bog standard Conservative values. Does anyone really expect the Tory party to elect a leader who isn't a Tory?

Leaving aside self ID, I think what marked her apart from the other candidates wasn't her opinions as much as her very clear communication style (and in that sense yes, she does remind me a bit of Thatcher) and her quick thinking, both excellent qualities in a Prime Minister surely (unless you're so partisan you'd really prefer to have the country run by an idiot, in which case good day to you). And yet on this and the other threads, we've had talk about her scariness plus allusions to the alt right and even (I think on another thread but still weird) Oswald Mosely for fucks sake.

I know it's largely immaterial now but I'm still wondering what's been going on.

‘Does anyone really expect the Tory party to elect a leader who isn't a Tory?’

Yes, some people are judging the best person to lead the Tory party by how socialist they are prepared to be. I have a lot of instinctive sympathy with socialist ideas (although I don’t believe actual socialism is a good thing, redistributive policy is a very understandable political position), but we can’t reasonably expect the Tories to elect a left-wing politician.

Couldn't we hope that the Tory party would elect a moderate competent honest politican?

Floisme, I agree. I think that in many ways Kemi is an old fashioned, say it as it is, Tory. Perhaps in the Norman Tebbit/Keith Joseph mould, with an appeal to blue collar socially conservative wing of the party.

The contrast is then Sunak and Mordaunt who are both employing heavyweight PR support. All sheen and difficult to dig down to see what lies below. Obviously Sunak is more accomplished/experienced than Mordaunt but both will attract the same hesitation from party members who are sick of the OE Cameron gloss. Perhaps why Sunak is rumoured to be plotting to lend some support to Mordaunt so she ends up in the final two, giving his PR people a month to rip her to shreds. It is unlikely she can stand up to intense scrutiny.

And Liz is today's Theresa May. May's position was different. No one much wanted the poison chalice left by Cameron and she was the most experienced pair of hands willing to take it on. The Tories though are now looking for someone to take them into the next election. Truss is a very experienced and a team player who has handled several large portfolios with a level of loyalty to her boss that Sunak could not muster. Is she a leader though?

Personally I think that Sunak would be mad to try to manoeuvre to compete with Mordaunt rather than Truss. Truss' supporters would be angry. Boris' supporters are already angry. Mordaunt could win. It would be a huge betrayal to Britain, and lay bare where his loyalties actually lie. (Himself rather than country.)

I think the comparison to Norman Tebbit is a good one.

Tebbit in his time was at the extreme right of the Tory party. Kemi holding the same views 30 years later is apparently at the centre of the Tory party.

That tells us all we need to know about the direction of travel of the Tory party.

I could have seen some of the red wall constituencies taking to Badenoch - at least compared to the other candidates. I think the party's missed a trick there.

Couldn't we hope that the Tory party would elect a moderate competent honest politican?
I would say some of the views I have seen about Badenoch, both on this thread and this board as a whole, are anything but moderate, and I'm curious as to why.

That may be because she supports the deportation of some of the most vulnerable people in the country to Rwanda. A policy based entirely on hate.

It may be because she voted to deny millions of children free school meals during the summer. A policy based entirely on hate.

It may be because she voted to increase NI in a regressive fashion.

It may be because she has supported a policy of making it harder and harder for the disabled to claim benefits. A policy based entirely on hate.

And yet some would like us to believe she is kind and compassionate and cares about families. Well at least those families that she approves of.

Listening to Times radio I don’t mind PM supporter views, but she was silly to annoy women who care about their rights

One concern I have is cut in fuel duty, yes it will help consumers but how does it square with environmental concerns

He did seem to get the latter but I need detail on what it will encompass to feel ok about duty cut

I find it interesting to hear the detail of different approaches between the top three. I’m less worried about who gets it just that can do well in a GE

I don’t mind Labour generally but after the last few years we’ve had with global issues Starmer and Rayner concern me - but I will listen to manifestos at the time to decide

Well thank you jgw1, you couldn't have illustrated my point more clearly if she tried. Yes, Badenoch is a Conservative and supports Conservative policies and values. You may well find those values hateful but I don't see how they're massively different to those of any of the other candidates. Like I say, the strength of feeling and emotive language directed at her, compared to the others, seems quite bizarre.

Sorry - if you tried

I do think that the NHS is a protective factor for us in the UK. I heard on the moral maze trailer that it is like a religion to the British people or something along those lines. Long may that be the case! So many beneficial policies in health and elsewhere stem from it in my opinion and the need to use public money wisely rather than make the greatest profit possible for private health companies. The best possible health outcomes for the least expense is better for all of us.

I'm curious as to why.

We all know why.

She's a black woman that isn't following the course that people on the left feel that she should, therefore she's a traitor, far right, Britain First sympathiser, etc.
If a white man said the same things, I'm sure he would be criticised, but this is much more personal in my opinion.
It's just racism from a different angle, although that will be loudly denied, of course. I don't think a lot of them even realise what they're doing, to be honest (I bet a lot of them call themselves anti-racist though).

The point I was making was not that I find the policies of Kemi and the other far right members of the Tory party that have stood in this election hateful.

It is that those policies are based entirely on hating others, those that in some way are different from them have to be hated.
I do not know what it is about the current Tory party that makes that so.
Where is the compassionate conservatism of Kenneth Clarke, Dominic Grieve and those like them?

I agree with this

It won’t be looked at and uncomfortable questions will be ignored but we are seeing a shift in opportunity and structures - more diversity. This is brilliant imo but it comes with strain in some areas

You are quite correct of course. Boris has of course not been criticized at all for any of the ghastly hated filled policies his government have introduced.

The point I was making was not that I find the policies of Kemi and the other far right members of the Tory party that have stood in this election hateful.
It is that those policies are based entirely on hating others, those that in some way are different from them have to be hated.
And if all your posts had been along the lines of: I-don't-give-a-toss-who- wins-they're-all-Tories-just-look-at-their-policies-to-hell-with-them-all kind of thing then that would have made complete sense to me. But that's not how your posts read.