7th of July this year, I received an email from Reform UK, and it was signed by Nigel Farage. The day before, he had resigned his seat as an MP, he resigned, with the intention of putting his seat up for election again. His email to me was headed: “I need you now, more than ever.” Inside, was the leader of the party’s plea for help in canvasing and winning his seat back. He is or was the member of parliament for Clacton on Sea, which is where he would need the help. When I clicked through via a button on the email, I was given a location and a set of dates and times.
I gave it some consideration overnight, and then became convinced that Farage did indeed need help, and that it would be an ideal time for me to do whatever I could. It seemed wrong to me, to just watch from a distance. He had resigned his seat, after a couple of weeks of pressure from the Establishment. The newspapers, tipped off by officials in government, and working with political rivals, had learned that Farage had received a gift of £5 million from a British man living overseas. The gift had been given around two years ago, and because he was not at that time in parliament, he had simply accepted it. And when he became leader of the Reform party, he had not thought it necessary to declare the gift to the parliamentary overseers.
When the gift was discovered and made public by the press, he faced a lengthy nuisance inquiry. Although there are procedural improprieties about not declaring the gift, we know that Farage’s political rivals, would gain from this inquiry, and the process he would undergo, because it would serve to discredit him before the people who were otherwise in favour of his policies, and who might decide to vote for his party in future times, and thus make him prime minister. So, journalists and officials began to hunt more and more, for anything which would harm him and his party. The war on him had begun. They resorted to visiting his home, and also the home of his daughter, which Farage considered a step too far.
In his eyes, and in mine, while these inquiries can be made to seem legitimate, they are also being done with the intention, of destroying him and his party. I sympathised with his anger, when he learned that newspaper reporters with camera crews, had attempted to locate and speak to his daughter. Farage claimed that he has spent his entire career making sure, that his family and his children stay out of politics and are not affected by his way of life, and what he sees as the dangers he has faced. And the journalico-governmental complex was now putting his family at risk.
In the couple of days which followed, people laughed at him, since, almost immediately, the other parties said that they would not be putting forward candidates to oppose him in the re-election struggle. His idea had been, to let the country see him campaign, and let the people of Clacton vote for either him, or his rivals. But when the opposing parties refused to engage in the election, they made it pointless for him to campaign. When I learned this, I had already decided to help him campaign in my small way in Clacton, because I sympathised with his anger about how they had brought his daughter into the matter. So, I had agreed to go to Clacton today, Monday 13th July. I said I would be there at 10am, but there were other opportunities to meet up at 12, and 3pm.
The other parties, three or four of them, had said that they would not campaign or stand for the election, so as to make him look foolish, and to spoil his attempt to put the vote to the electorate. To add insult to injury, a conventional comedy act, a sort of instance of the Establishment making a fool of itself for comic effect, called Count Binface, whose job it is to bring light relief or mockery to the voting process, insisted that he would stand, and therefore, there appeared to be a chance that the clown could be elected, since this one candidate would receive all the votes of the other parties combined. My view of this matter, is that the other parties, or what I would call, the Establishment, fear or loath Nigel Farage so much, that they would prefer that a clown and mockery of the entire democratic process, were in office, rather than him.
However, things did not end at this depressing stalemate. On Thursday night, while I was mulling over these things, one of Farage’s team, what I would call one of the ten chief members of the party, was murdered at her home. She is the 78 year old Ann Widdecomb, who had entered parliament in 1987, at the time of Margaret Thatcher. As far as I can work out, Widdecombe, still held the views she had held as a young woman, in the Thatcher era. She was what they call a conviction politician. After her death, I also learned, that, in order to justify her moral beliefs, she was drawn to the Catholic Church, and that she never liked to hide, that she was a Christian. She had left professional politics in 2010, and in the last years of her life, she had recognised in Reform, a party she could agree with, and she had become one of their official spokesmen. At the time of her death, she was the Reform spokesperson on Immigration.
Since his resignation, Farage had mentioned the danger he had been in, while working over decades for British independence. In response, in the press and the House of Commons, the other politicians of other parties were telling him that at least he was not dead yet; nobody had successfully killed him yet, they pointed out, since, that is what had happened to a Labour MP, around 2016, and a Conservative MP, in 2019. They asked him how he could compare his own situation, with theirs? Strangely, it was almost immediately following these illogical challenges to him, which implied that only his death would be proof that he had been in danger, that his colleague, Widdecombe, was indeed murdered.
At first, we heard that she had died. And then the police begin giving messages, which are relayed to me via the radio station I listen to. She has been murdered, I learned. And later that day, that she had been battered to death in her home. The Devon police insisted throughout the weekend, that there was no reason for anyone to think, that the murder had been motivated by political rivalry. Before the whole case was handed over to the national Anti-Terror police, it was revealed that a man of twenty eight, who was white and not immigrant, had travelled 250 miles in a red car, directly to Widdecombe’s house. He had parked in the drive, entered the house, murdered her with a wooden baton, and then driven back home to Yorkshire. It is evident that the murderer had driven to the house to dispose of a woman with whose political opinions he disagreed. When they later on objected to anyone laying flowers at her home, the other politicians in parliament, indicated that they were not prepared to mourn for her.
I had heard Anne Widdecombe speaking on Talk Radio over the past few years. She appeared on that station, being invited regularly, to talk with presenters, about her opinions on various matters. At least in 2026, I found her opinions matched my own, but it did strike me sometimes, how brave she was to speak her mind in a plain way. It was quite striking to hear a person with political power, be as straightforwardly bold enough, to speak out loud, what I would generally only put into print, or speak in private. From the obituaries, and after a bit of moderate research, I found that she has always followed the principle of doing so, and had the rather strange untouchable quality, of differentiating herself from other people, by never having married, nor, it is claimed, ever having had any physical relations with men of any kind. She was a virgin, and a convert to Catholicism, and stood apart from the common run of mankind.
When I arrived in Clacton on Monday, as I had said I would, in fulfilment of my promise of help, I arrived an hour later than I had intended. It was just after eleven by the time I pulled up. Find the place was not easy, because, I learned, there was no signage and no indication of where the meeting place was. I had not given myself enough time to drive the 250 miles, or not enough to account for stops and delays on the road; but I knew that there were other times when canvassers would be expected that day, at twelve and three in the afternoon. The postcode I had been given in the email, led to a retail park; but I could not verify exactly where I should be, because, the original email form, which I had filled in, had been mysteriously withdrawn, and was no longer accessible. For some reason, the form sent to me last Wednesday, was no longer available; it seemed to me to have been scrapped. I began to think that the whole event and meeting had been called off.
With a couple of searches of the internet, I found out that there was once an office for the party on this estate; internet searches also informed me, that the office on the estate had been closed some time before. But I continued to look for it. And wandered around, from end to end of the place, two or three times. I bought a coffee and used the shop toilets. There were no public toilets. I returned to the car; waited, then set off to examine the local town, walking up and down Old Road, Clacton, spreading out my search to fifty, then a few hundred meters. I was looking for some kind of signage, a group of people with Reform insignia, but there was nothing.
The town reminded me of Blackpool, rather than the expensive Essex town I had expected. I returned to the car, and made a final circuit of the estate, waiting until 1pm. I sent an email to the local branch manager, explaining who and where I was, and asking for information. And, then, I became resigned to the idea of driving back the five or six-hour journey, angry about the waste of money it had cost me to do all this, for nothing. I wrote down some notes about ideas which had occurred to me in the day, then left the site at 1pm, having been there for two hours.
I supposed that the death of Anne Widdecombe, must have affected the plans to canvas, and that the day of representing the party, in order to give Nigel Farage help, as he had asked, had been called off, without me being told. I drove home.
What interested me on the way back, and what I want to say here, develops what I have said elsewhere, and recently. That an Establishment is what rules Britain, and that the Establishment is breaking up.
About a decade ago, I told my uncle, having not seen him since I was a boy, that in the years I had not seen him, I had joined the British Army, and become a senior NCO, after ten years, but that I had wanted to be an officer. I told him this privately, revealing something of the hurt and disappointment I had felt about how life turned out. He replied, that, in his day, only the lads with the old school tie, who were born into the Establishment, became officers.
I don’t remember if I replied to him, that in my day, in the last years of the twentieth century, one did not necessarily have to have been private educated, at a public school, nor to be rich or from an establishment family with connections; but an officer candidate did have to be the kind of person, I said, who would aspire to be Establishment, by agreeing with it implicitly. One had to be willing to give up his soul to it. I, evidently, was not that kind of person. And so I had joined the army as a private soldier. Back then, at Westbury and Sandhurst, where these things were decided for me, it was said out loud, to the assembled potential officers, that intelligence did not guarantee an officer’s commission. There are plenty of very intelligent private soldiers in the Army, the commanding officer had told the applicants; some of your soldiers will have a higher education level than you. What he meant was, that it is not so much efficiency and intellect which matter when it comes to being an army officer, but rather, being one of the class of the Establishment, and having no doubts or ideas about who you are, is what an officer needs.
I can see some justice in this, since, Britain has been ruled by a class of people, who have a coherence and tolerance for one another, which has made them historically very effective in the competition against other nations. The Establishment order gives to the British ruling class, a singleness of purpose, and a community of mind and belief, which make their methods of government and their decisions for their own purposes, highly effective and good for the nation. And so, it would be possible to say, that whoever you vote for in British politics, you always get the Establishment. There was always only a sliver of difference between Neil Kinnock and John Major, between Tony Blair and David Cameron. And, the police chiefs, the judges, the Army generals, the bishops of the church, the newspaper owners, the House of Lords, the industrial owners and managers, the City bankers and investment managers, the university academics, and even the artists and journalists of Britain, were all part of the same effective system. One could rise into it, and fall from it, but it was not going to change.
The British system of government is therefore, obviously, only in part a democracy. Rather, it is a network of people who generally agree; and a population which consent to be ruled, because the rule is, although unfair economically, nevertheless is allows peace and stability, and some chance of freedom and success. Above all, the Establishment meant well for the British people, since they were themselves British.
In recent years, perhaps since 2016 most obviously, the Establishment has fractured. There has been what is technically called ‘Elite Defection’. Members of the Establishment, which is what the leaders of the Reform Party are, have formed new parties, which are evidently not rivals to the Establishment, but parts of it which have broken free. Richard Tice and Nigel Farage, and also Rupert Lowe, are elite educated, wealthy, well-connected men, who would in normal times be Establishment members. But they are, having formed their own party, as it were traitors to it. And they are also hated with the sincere hatred and disgust reserved for defectors and traitors.
The difference between the Establishment and this break away faction, involves a disagreement about nationalism. And, the break away group is not a small insignificant one. Tice, Farage and Lowe, are just the tip of the iceberg, they have around 25 or 30% of the vote, which indicates a large and silent part of the Establishment itself. It is sometimes said, that they are forming a party for the neglected people, as if they were mere populists setting up a party and a means of power for the common and disenfranchised, the silent majority of people, for the private soldiers, as it were. But this is not so. They are a rival British Establishment, which has drawn to it other people from the old political order. And such a fracturing and break up, signifies the break up of that ancient and traditional working consensus which once made it possible to talk about the English as a united nation, with a formidable and self-confident ruling class.
Immigration into Britain, which has reached unmanageable proportions, is a clear concern of this break away faction of the Establishment; they want to stop it, and reverse it if possible. On the other side, the Establishment encourage it, and are anxious to make the growing immigrant population of Britain into its new people. But immigration is only one of the causes of the split; I think that a simpler distinction of the two groups, can be described in two words, nationalists, and internationalists. The existing ruling culture of Britain is now almost entirely, at least in public, internationalist. We saw this in 2016, when the ruling parties of every type, voted for Britain to remain in the European Union, an economic alliance. While, the opposing faction, who had no party at that time, no complete party, insisted on British independence.
And so, Reform UK, and one or two other new parties, such as Restore, represent a breakaway faction of elite defection, within the Establishment. And, elite defection is one of the markers of civil war, one of the contributory factors which make civil war happen, wherever it comes about. Another is elite over-production, and a surplus of people who want to be in the Establishment, but cannot be. Where there is elite overproduction, there is a body of young ambitious people, who are ready to join the new faction, and have a part in the civil war. Now that two factions are formed, a civil war is likely, since an Establishment faction must rule; it is what it is for. And, one of the shapes of civil war, in its early stages, is what in South America, they called a ‘dirty war’, where people are assassinated. Attempts to assassinate leading new Establishment, nationalist, figures, we know about. And it is appropriate, to my mind, to speak of Ann Widdecombe as a victim of an incipient dirty war.
There is another party to the civil war, namely, the immigrants; and, today, it was revealed that the security services of the United Kingdom, had successfully arrested a cell of around ten people, who had planned to do some harm to Muslims at a large gathering. But we must always understand official reports of this kind of thing, as efforts by the state, or the Establishment, to control the mood of the population. That is, when a new Establishment figure is murdered, then evidence of New Establishment violence against Muslims or others, must also be reported, so as to bring about calm, and balance, as if to insist, that no matter how violent the Establishment is, the New Establishment is as bad or worse. Indeed, it has not gone without notice, that, when the murder of Ann Widdecombe was spoken of by the police, their statement included the racial profile of the suspect, which is something which is never usually done, when the suspect is foreign. Such details are usually withheld. And, in another attempt to keep the British nationalists in a state of compliance, it was also and untruthfully said, that Ann Widdecombe’s death, was not related to her politics. So, while it was reported alongside the political murder, that there had been arrests of British nationalists, we cannot trust such news any more. Later and non-media based accounts, have revealed that the ten supposed nationalists have been arrested under terror laws, but had been merely using drones to get video evidence of what Muslims were doing at one of their gatherings in England.
Widdecombe’s politics, and that of the break away Establishment faction of Reform and Restore, is nationalistic. And it is therefore, a faction attuned to the majority of the population, who make a claim to the nation as theirs. Meanwhile, the official Establishment, which is still largely represented by the parliament, the police, the courts, the armed forces, the educational institutions, and so on, is internationalist, and seeks at all costs, to ensure that the British people remain quiet and compliant. The British have a grievance, that, internationalist policy seems to want to replace them with a foreign and new population. And, I think, their suspicion is well founded, and demonstrably true. They are being replaced. The break away faction of the Establishment is said to be ‘populist’, because their views coincide with the views of the British people in general, rather than with the views of the ruling class and its unity of international purpose. The defectors, Reform and Restore, claim that the nation is being broken down, on purpose; and the population is being replaced, on purpose.
I would make a final remark in this chapter, about the ethical dimension to this problem. The ethical dimension is what makes this difference of opinion, into something which can result in murders and assassinations. Ann Widdecombe has been murdered, and I think that her lone murderer, will claim that she was ethically not fit to live, in his view. The internationalist British Establishment, which has for one reason or another, control of all major government parties, and all the other arms of the state, including the civil service, is by definition internationalist. And, by logic, it is in various ways, not in favour of British ways of life, British history, and so on. The internationalist Establishment does not really belong in Britain, because it belongs to the whole human race, to the global humanity, to the liberated future human race. While, the British nationalists, on the other side, naturally belong to these islands. Now, ethics, or a man’s sense of right and wrong, derive from the place where he lives, and the people he has grown up with. So it is, that in one country, it is ethical to do things, which in another land, would not be ethical. Tradition and place, give the rules to a man. So, it is ethical in Britain, to give hospitality to strangers, but not to give them the rights which only our people have. It is right to welcome strangers, but not right to let them move into our house and take possession of it. These are British ethical attitudes. By contrast, an internationalist who only accidentally lives in Britain, but really thinks of himself as living on the whole globe, with global humanity, his ethical standards are based on the community of all mankind. Therefore, he sees all men as equally entitled to live in Britian, since all men are equal and have the same rights, according to this global citizenship. The ethics of the internationalist are not the same as those of the nationalist. And what an internationalist thinks is good, is thought of as treason, by a British person. Whjile, what is thought to be sensible and cautious by a British person, is said to be ungenerous evil, by an internationalist.
Thus it is, that every internationalist person living in Britain, thinks that Nigel Farage, is literally evil, because by the ethical standards of the global citizen, he is so. And, being evil, it is right, to a man who is globally minded, that Farage be treated as a criminal, or to be threatened with death. And, hence, we can see how, it has become normalised, to speak of the Reform party, as a criminal and evil organisation, for, by the standards of the global citizen, it is evil and obstructive.
Dominic Cummings, who has observed government, and those inside the Establishment for a couple of decades, has said recently, before the trouble broke out, that the globalist British Establishment will do everything in its power to destroy Reform and Farage, going to any length.
The Establishment has fractured, along national lines, and nothing can put it back together. The different is ethical; it is a difference of opinion so grave, that war is likely. In a war, one side must surrender, but it is common that wars escalate, before any side does so. This is what I was thinking, as I drove home from Clacton in Essex, listening to the gradual revelations about the murdered Reform spokesperson, who was beaten over the head by a man who had travelled 250 miles to find her and kill her at home. And while reports came in that the Establishment were trying to prove that Nigel Farage should not mourn for his friend, and other people said that Widdecombe had it coming.
I must admit, I had not wanted to do any canvassing in Clacton anyway; but I had turned up, and was ready to get involved. I struggle to see the use of knocking on doors, really, knowing that most people have already made up their minds how they will vote. But, I understand that not everyone does vote, so that if canvassers can get a promise from supporters, that they will go out to the polling booth and do so, that is something. Nevertheless, I had never done that sort of work before, and still don’t know if it suits me.
-----