Like a fool, I have been drawn repeatedly to reading Conservative Commentary . I don't know why - perhaps I was looking for something that explains the thinking behind Conservative ideology. I was to be disappointed.
You might say you're not surprised at me not liking this site. After all, I am deeply political; for very many years I have loathed the Tories and what they stand for. But, I thought, if I could get a sense behind why someone would want to be a Young Conservative it would aid my intellectual development.
To be honest, I found it deeply disturbing. I think it's a well-designed site, and there s absolutely no doubt that the chap that writes it is articulate, eloquent and well-read.
The problem is that he gives no hint of actually existing in the world. He is nineteen years old; in his 'about' page he has the following:
I detest the modish belief that the father is superfluous to the raising of children, and that a single parent family is just as well equipped to raise responsible and mature children. I see marriage as the bedrock of a civilised society and its general valuation as such as immensely important.
He is, of course, entitled to his views, but I assume he wishes to impose them on other people. I happen to think that it's slightly ridiculous for someone with seemingly no life-experience to attempt to dictate how other people live their life. Because he appears to live in a vacuum with no human contact he probably doesn't know how single parent families happen (every single-parent family I know has happened in a different way). He puts no evidence forward for why single-parent families are unable to raise sensible and mature children, whereas I could happily put forward reasons why, and present multiple examples to illustrate my reasons.
He's an ignorant so-and-so, but cleverly disguises his ignorance in fine rhetoric
I value true talent, disliking most modern art and music and in general preferring the great accomplishments of Western Civilisation. I am strongly patriotic, and see the British - through its democracy, its learning and its empire - as having been the greatest civilisation in human history, the Romans following closely behind.
For somebosy who praises British learning, his list of favourite music is devoid of any British (unless you count Handel) or, indeed, any non-Germanic composers. The choice is narrow and shallow - not the pieces themselves, but the sheer predictability of "Your Favourite Tunes Top 100 CD Box Set collection."
His list of favourite books is depressingly soul-less. Whilst some are actually to my liking, the list shows an ignorance of literature, as opposed to books about politics. My own reading is heavily biased towards the political, but my favourite book, ever, is Wuthering Heights.
Twice now I have written comments to his posts, but then deleted them because I don't feel that there is any point. His writings are so based on regurgitation of what he has read, that supports his own prejudices, with no evidence of independent thought, that I doubt he would understand what I have written.
I find it frustrating that there are so many people in the Conservative party who have not an idea of the realities of life. He talks like a member of a Sixth Form debating society with no reference to personal experience, or even to personal observations. To me there is an irony, because classical Conservative philosophy is to accept that humankind is flawed, and to build a society to mitigate those flaws. However, he implies in his writing that the world is full of merely misguided humans, and if we but listen to him, our lives will be fulfilled.
Perhaps it's old age on my part but I really don't want to be lectured by some little upstart, who isn't in a relationship and probably hasn't lost his virginity, let alone explored his musical or literary tastes, nor knows much about history beyond the GCSE syllabus, nor seems to know anything about human life.
And it's not because I'm biased against teenagers, nor am I too proud to learn from them. One of my favourite blogs is written by a teenager. He lives in his life in the real world, and because he pretends not to take himself too seriously, he offers some fascinating insights into the human condition.
Nick has also picked up on this Cuthbertson chap, and has expressed far better than me, something I emailed to Guardian in response to Sites of Resistance
I just want to express my opinion that 'political' blogs per se don't work or read especially well. Having served eight years as an elected politician, and having spent my entire working life in the public sector I feel that straightforward armchair punditry is similar to masturbation. If, like me, you believe that politics is about effect that public policy, or lack of public policy, coupled with social culture, has on the life of individuals, the more politically useful blogs have to be the ones that offer an intelligent narrative and analysis of aspects on everyday life.
I don't claim my own to be a shining example of what I say, but is, nevertheless illustrative. It includes gripes about public transport, comments about human behaviour, the inadequacy of so-called 'customer service', the occasional comment on the bias/dumbing down/sublime joy (delete as appropriate) of TV, the insensitivity of Ron Atkinson to oil slicks in Galicia, consideration of whether tourism can ever be ethical, annoyance at politicians and media misuse of words and concepts such as 'family'.
Being that it is about my life, it also contains groans about minor ailments, descriptions of dinners eaten, supposedly-humourous links, silliness, fed-up ness, 'what i did this weekend', guess what I've just bought
In my opinion, there is a particularly loud shouting form of (war) blogging that is very masculine, and based on the confidence of the writer being absolutely right - and any dissenter being wrong. Curiously, many of these come out from the US. I have yet to find a 'political' blog which is as well researched as a book, or as The New Statesman, or as the Special Reports etc in the Guardian. I do not think that instant punditry adds any value. What does add value is a personal interpretation of the consequences of politics, in its widest sense.
