Miriam Cates/National Conservatives conference

[AdamRyan]

Miriam Cates was due to speak at the NatCon conference in Brussels tomorrow, on the topic of "Save The Children!"
The conference has been shut down because the Mayor will not tolerate the far right.

Here is a tweet to GB news discussing why the conference was shut down:

https://twitter.com/implausibleblog/status/1780239986861744280?s=19&t=hHgjMANzaGdj92-GTys1ig

I'm putting this here because I know a lot of GC feminists support Cates - I don't, and this stuff is why. She is awful.

I'm a supporter of Miriam Cates.
So perhaps this is directed at me?

I hugely admire her integrity and her commitment to positions which get you labelled as 'far right' but which in fact have grounding in truth and reality.

She is particularly focused on families and children and takes positions that I think are true but most people won't say because of the backlash you get for saying it.
Sound familiar?

Anyone or anything described as far right these days immediately gets a pass over from me.
It usually means: saying things the left liberal consensus have decided you can no longer say.

And look where that's got us.

Do you know why someone so focussed on children and families didn't vote to ban smoking yesterday?

Medya news is quite a niche source. And it doesn't appear to say what you think it says

Anyway, clicking links I got to this:

"The December meeting had sparked indignation within other Saint-Josse officials, who called the meeting at the town hall "unacceptable" because it bypassed the cordon sanitaire, a symbolic agreement to never mingle with the far-right, to which many Belgian political parties adhere to."

That's quite useful context about why the Mayor may have felt uneasy about the conference. I didn't know they had that principle in place.

Even the bastion of impartiality the BBC!!!

TRA’s gonna TRA I guess.

Nope. I'm a very boring UK centrist voter. Nice smear though

This is a good point jess

Given that most of the people on this thread (including @AdamRyan ) would be described as "far right" by some for having even the mildest GC views, I'm no longer especially worried or shocked by that label. I'll judge people by what they say and agree and disagree with them per issue.

It would appear that Cates is unlikely to be an MP for much longer.
Perhaps her constituents don't share her concerns for women and children?

https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/fcgi-bin/calcwork23.py?postcode=S36+7BX

I judge people by what they say and do. Because a lot of politicians say a lot, and do very little. Sometimes they say contradictory things or even outright lie (looking at you Boris).

Miriam Cates says and does a lot of stuff I find objectionable. Choosing to speak at a far right conference would be one of those actions.

Others can feel free to support her, I just think knowledge is power and this board doesn't give a particularly balanced view of her.

If I were Sunak I'd be asking both her and Braverman what they think they are playing at. He won't though because he has no authority left.

If you think I'm a TRA that shows how 100% meaningless the term is. The only "activism" I do is feminist e.g. for females.

It is certainly interesting how far the Tory party has shifted in the past 4 years.

https://news.sky.com/story/tory-mp-daniel-kawczynski-reprimanded-but-avoids-suspension-for-conference-talk-alongside-far-right-figures-11927858

How much should we judge politicans by the company they keep?
Should Corbyn have been criticised for some of those he met with?

Should Corbyn have been criticised for some of those he met with?
No I don't think he should have. All this "shared a platform with..." nonsense seemed to start around that time and it was as infuriating then as it is now.

No, it's been going on for ages.

Do you remember when Gerry Adams wasn't allowed to be shown on the BBC? Or when Nick Griffin wasn't given air time?

I think actually we've got more relaxed about letting people say things that previously would have been considered dangerous.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_Platform#:~:text=The%20British%20National%20Union%20of,share%20a%20platform%20with%20them.

Wikipedia says it was started in 1974!!

I remember, but I don't think those examples & "no platforming" generally are exactly the same thing that is happening here.

Anyone expressing traditional coservative views is labelled far-right these days. I guess it's click-baity.

When I hear for example Kenneth Clarke expressing traditional conservative views I don't hear him being labelled Far Right.
But the current Conservative party does not appear to hold the traditional conservative views of the likes of Kenneth Clarke.

"I'm putting this here because I know a lot of GC feminists support Cates"

FWIW. most posters on here are adult women and have the level of intelligence to agree with some points that a politician makes while disagreeing with other points. There are a small number of posters who have difficulties with these fundamental concepts about democracy.

He's been in politics for over 50 years and his views are particularly moderate, he's actually moved towards the left over his career.

Quite a lot of Tories didn't vote for the smoking ban. It was mainly supported by Labour. Some tories even called it un-Conservative. It does seem like a bizarre law which is going to be increasingly difficult to police as the cohort affected gets older.

But you would agree that he holds traditional conservative values dear and isn't labelled Far Right?
Or can you find examples of when he has been labelled Far Right?

How do you explain the reprimand for the MP for Shrewsbury and Atcham in 2020 for speaking at a far right (as judged by the then Conservative leader) meeting in Rome in that year?

The Left - "We want to ban speech we disagree with"
Everyone else - "No"
The right - "We want to ban speech we disagree with"
Everyone else - "No"

Problem solved.

Its Sunak's big project. He Sunak un-conservative?

You seem to think that everyone on the right must think the same about every issue. Ken's views would not be considered conservative by many people on many issues, hence it would be absurd to suggest he is far-right.

The point may be, that a former Conservative Chancellor holds views that are no longer deemed Conservative, showing how far to the right the Conservative party have moved in recent years.

How do you explain the reprimand for the MP for Shrewsbury and Atcham in 2020 for speaking at a far right (as judged by the then Conservative leader) meeting in Rome in that year?

Maybe the people that didn’t vote were smokers and didn’t want to be outed as hypocrites.