Well done on thsi new venture, i wish you luck and i hope it becomes a bit of a rival to the Guido’s and Dale’s of this world. But please lets try and keep it relevant to the real world, remember most people who vote Labour are not ardent liberals.

My comments (or should that be whinges?) about this project can be found on my own blog, here: http://community.livejournal.com/theyorkshergob/7140.html

Chris Dillow has blogged about the conspiracy on his site.

here’s the link

It will be very useful to have this kind of anti-state (as well as anti-big company) thinking here!

The Tories are being nice because they can’t tell the shape or strength of this new player on the field.

As soon as this looks influential they’ll be on it.

I think the “Tories” – though as you know most right wingers and libertarians despise the Tories, for different reasons – are just ebing polite!

I am strong supporter of social liberalism and I shall be watching the blog closely.. I don’t believe in deleting comments but what about Comstock – above – who seems to be a nutter?

On the comments policy, I think it may be a mistake to be using words like “militant”. The comments policy is not the story.

Why not just have a stringent comments policy, write it down, stick to it, and don’t make such a fuss.

>the Tories were surprisingly supportive of the project

That “surprisingly” – to me – indicates a slightly depressing acceptance of pre-existing assumptions.

Why should you be surprised?

(And who do you mean by “Tories” ?)

Love the Devil’s quote though (paraphrased) – go on, disprove him: “Lots more of Polly Toynbee”.

>the Tories were surprisingly supportive of the project

Like Matt, I raised an eyebrow at the ‘surprisingly’.

What did you expect, that they would slam the project simply because it comprised leftwingers? Rubbish a project because it gives a platform to views different from their own?

Is that what I should expect from the intelligent liberal-left thinkers if/whenever the centre-right etc launch a project similar to this one? In other words, do you attack projects simply because they are run by people of a different political leaning from you? And if not, why do you expect the Tories to do so?

I like the idea behind this website, and am looking forward to visiting often, and reading the articles written by what appears to be an intelligent group of bloggers. However, you will dilute the quality of your work if such unthinking partisan comments appear all over the place.

All the best on the project.

Dear Bel and Matt – given that a lot of discourse on right-wing blogs revolves around throwing slurs such as “the looney left” in broad terms, you’ll have to forgive the scepticism.

Sunny, I understand that. I must say it works both ways. Leftwing blogs are not averse to throwing abuse at ‘rightwing bigots’ etc.

Still, I don’t believe a good quality blog needs to resort to abuse, which is why I was delighted when I came across this blog via Tygerland. It is getting increasingly hard to sift good quality blogs from all the rubbish out there, so the Liberal Conspiracy is definitely a good thing for me. The idea is that I can come to one place and read a lot of intelligent articles from well-regarded writers.

All the best, Sunny and co. I’ll keep reading.

When I heard about this site, my first thought was that it could be a left-liberal version of Samizdata (I would have preferred it to be left-libertarian but you can’t have everything!) Samizdata has largely descended to comic book attacks on lefties, but even so it is one of the few sites where UK libertarian thought gets an outing. Lets hope this site survives long enough to become a platform for the wide range of left perspectives in the UK – including left-libertarianism – and provide something a bit more challenging than the sort of stuff coming out of the Fabian Society/Compass et al

The Conservatives are definitely sitting on their hands as they watch to see how this project pans out. As will I (although from a completely different perspective).

The challenges can already be glimpsed in the comment thread above, where attempts to make the association between the ideals of this site and commenters personal position are clearly visible.

Liberal Conspiracy must start by making the one defining decision: does Liberal Conspiracy accept established definitions of what left-right-centre mean, or does Liberal Conspiracy reserve the right to forge its own definition?

From the outlined mission statements I’m assuming a form of political secularism will be house policy. I just wonder how long this will last.

Will Liberal Conspiracy turn into some form of talking-shop, a rallying point for some form and faction of ‘new liberalism’, or is it to extend tentacles in the way a real conspiracy does?

Thanks for the comments everyone.

Thomas, to answer: does Liberal Conspiracy accept established definitions of what left-right-centre mean, or does Liberal Conspiracy reserve the right to forge its own definition?

I’m not sure if it’s actually helpful to get into an argument about definitions. I prefer having a broad discussion about policies and outcomes based on shared ideals. So for example, our contributors may want to reduce (absolute) poverty but may have different ideas on how to approach the issue.

From the outlined mission statements I’m assuming a form of political secularism will be house policy.

Indeed. Well, we’re all clear on the idea that we need to build a broad coalition, so let’s see.

or is it to extend tentacles in the way a real conspiracy does?

Active campaigning is something we will increasingly do. There are more long term plans too, but let’s see how we fare in the short and medium term first.

Sunny, I admire the sentiment behind what you are trying to do. The left certainly need to up their game online. However, please don’t take offence when I say that your post read to me like what I would imagine Gordon Brown’s thought processes to be at present, starting with the obligatory “if I don’t like what their going to say then I’m not going to listen” – not a great way to start a discourse with fellow thinkers.

Next, you’re throwing out politico buzzwords: ‘progressive’, ‘forward-looking’, ‘positive vision’, ‘robust discussion’, ‘shared narrative’, ‘broadly identify’, ‘shared values’ – what the heck do any of these really mean? Although we have learnt to cut through this rubbish when listening to politicians, if you truly want to become a refreshing voice for the left, a good start is to leave all this spin-speak behind. We’re done with it and want straight talking.

“Militant” – did I really read that word? I honestly thought I would never again have heard that word in any use from the left. If you are trying to reinvent the word over time, then good luck!

In fact, good luck all round. I shalln’t be commenting beyond this thread, as I have nothing whatsoever to agree with you about, but I wish you the best of luck all the same.

Edward

Thanks for the response, Sunny. It shows you are aware of the problem that you felt the need to give a clarification.

From what you say I can infer that you feel The Labour Movement can no longer claim to represent the aims or ideals of what you call the ‘liberal left’.

I fully understand the desire to build a broad coalition, as that is what is necessary to gain a majority in any form of democratically assembled forum. However I must question why you feel people with open minds and floating opinions are likely to continue to side with the ‘left’ while the party which claims affiliation to that side of any argument continues to exist as the established power of officialdom.

As for your claim that you don’t think it is helpful to get into arguments over definitions, surely this then debases the whole raison d’etre of Liberal Conspiracy – if you are not here to create a redefinition of the left/liberal established majoritarian rule that exists to support our current government (because you are dissatisfied/unsatisfied with it) then what is the overriding question that you wish to attract people here to debate?

While I remain happy to see good policies enacted and practised I feel it is dishonest and disingenuous of the policy setters here to pretend that they have no prior loyalties to which they (and you) are attempting to co-opt a wider readership into.

I fear for the continuing relevance and applicability of this site, unless it can overtly and explicitly justify it’s claim to non-partisanship.

As would appear to be the over-riding conclusion of a certain G. Brown’s thesis, which he himself is evidently finding hard to resist the temptation not to try, you can’t please all of the people all of the time.

So why should anyone try, especially any group of conspirators?

Hi Edward:
I say that your post read to me like what I would imagine Gordon Brown’s thought processes to be at present, starting with the obligatory “if I don’t like what their going to say then I’m not going to listen” – not a great way to start a discourse with fellow thinker

I don’t have a problem with dissent, we don’t want to be hijacked by right-wing nuts though, who’s idea of discussion is to go on about how lefties are authoritarian mad.

Next, you’re throwing out politico buzzwords: ‘progressive’, ‘forward-looking’, ‘positive vision’, ‘robust discussion’, ’shared narrative’, ‘broadly identify’, ’shared values’ – what the heck do any of these really mean?

I’m happy to explain that over time. I’m not sure if the words matter as much as the sentiments. But you’re wlcome to see what it translates into.

Thomas:
From what you say I can infer that you feel The Labour Movement can no longer claim to represent the aims or ideals of what you call the ‘liberal left’.

Yes, partly. I don’t think any party really represents me.

As for your claim that you don’t think it is helpful to get into arguments over definitions, surely this then debases the whole raison d’etre of Liberal Conspiracy

I think the problem is more that one can keep arguing about definitions ad infinitum. And what I’d like to see is a discussion about ideas, how they translate into policy, and then how to turn that into action. Just having an argument about definitions means you don’t even get past that stage.

are attempting to co-opt a wider readership into.

I want to forge an agenda for all of Britain, not just middle-class liberals. So yes, this is a broad coalition.

That’s interesting Sunny.
Clearly you have developed you political awareness to the level that you are prepared to represent your own views rather than be represented by others.
In which case I heartily recommend you make a decision to reconcile your platform and make a stand within a party in order to put yourself forward as a candidate in an election, particularly as I think you’d be welcomed (if not completely wholly accepted, as nobody ever is) by whichever group you throw your lot in with.
The old truth about choosing wisely your route into office will hold true even now, as it will still determine the limits of any ability you gain to exercise power and make decisions.
The evidence suggests you are more than capable of making good arguments, so you should have nothing to fear from our democracy in action.
If you are prepared to do what else is required I think I’d vote for you.

I know this comment comes a little late (months lol), but I just discovered this post.

Please don’t use my name in vain, Sunny. 😉

After all we’re both Hundals….

Have no idea if we’re related though.

Have a good one, and interesting blog.

Just asking – redpesto

Am trying to find the right plugin to do that redpesto…

lol @ kitty hundal.