Cameron’s task
What’s in a name?
Many people will say that a name makes no difference. The famous question concerning roses springs automatically to mind… But of course there is a lot in a name that affects your reaction to something. Brands, particularly, have an image. Many people will not drink Pepsi and will drink Coca Cola’s Coke or vice versa not because they really like the flavour of one more than the other, but because Coca Cola is better at advertising.
New Labour was so named not because Blair fancied a change but because it made people ask themselves what the ‘new’ means. And Clause 4 was their answer.
Unfortunately too much has been made recently of the need for the Tories to have a ‘Clause 4 moment’. Every idea Cameron comes up with is tested against the Clause 4 criteria. The Political Editor of newspapers or of television news programmes all ask “Is this the Tories’ Clause 4 moment?”. But I think it may have already happened.
As I said previously the excellent Mat GB of Great Britain, not little England has highlighted the change already. The Tories are realigning themselves as the party of the liberal economics (as it was already) and liberal social policy (which is a major and welcome change). Pragmatic Conservatives are more and more understanding that the “Back to Basics” policy of Major and the unenlightened social policies of Thatcher were off the mark.
The Liberal Democrat’s name suggests, rightly, their liberal credentials as well as their Democrat tendencies (as in the US party of the left). With that nomenclature already in place in the UK’s political party system, it makes sense for the Tories to elaborate on this understanding. If the Tories wish to change their name I suggest:
Liberal Republicans
Of course “Republican” has a connotation in the UK which is different to the connotation in the US specifically about the formal role of the monarchy as head of state which I do have my own feelings on… But that’s for another post!
Like this entry? Share it with others:
| 
| 
| 
| 
| 
#1 by j0nz on January 3rd, 2006 - 12:01 pm
Liberal Republicans!
I’d like to hear you suggest that at Tory Conference lol
What about
The Conservatives Reloaded
#2 by John King on January 4th, 2006 - 8:52 pm
I quite like Modern Conservatives. “MC” is a young-adult-friendly title. “Vote MC” has a good ring to it.
I do worry that their new “liberal social policy” is a vote winning sham though.
#3 by Andy Cooke on January 4th, 2006 - 9:11 pm
Personally, I feel that “Republicans” has too much of an anti-monarchy connotation, as well as being associated with either the US Republicans or the Irish Republicans.
Reviving a Tory Party name from the past (and only partially tongue-in-cheek) – how about “Unionists” – short for “Conservative and Liberal Unionists”?
It puts us up against Nationalists, but we already are anyway. You may think that it writes off our chances in Scotland especially and Wales to a lesser extent – but there is sentiment in both countries against splitting from the UK.
#4 by Gav on January 5th, 2006 - 2:10 pm
The majority of Scots voted for the Scottish Parliament so Unionism in Scotland is dead. And if Unionism is dead in one country of the Union then the idea of the Union is dead overall…
And my experience tells me that there are not many Unionists within the Tory party any longer!
I did hint at it but as a Libertarian I have no sympathy for the Royal Family as head of state so my agenda is served by the Republican part.