Part of settling down and marking time, as Roger Scruton would say, is protecting our environment. Doing so is an unchosen obligation upon us.
Conservatives should restate the moral case for taxation and at the same time find innovative ways of revenue raising that are both popular and effective.
But unless his fully-developed vision of the future can capture heart-and-minds, I’d expect control of the party to stay with the mainstream.
What about those who worship different gods, those who delight in civil rights movements, those mothers who want to go out to work?
It is not for nothing that the ‘hero’ of Ayn Rand’s despicable book ‘The Fountainhead’ is an architect.
“Some who did the damage to our country were crass and careless. But some wrought monstrous havoc knowingly, wilfully. All of them Philistines. Well now the Philistines have met their David.”
In advancing controversial policies without an explanation other than economic return, the party has been left open to claims of acting from greed and elitism.
In recognising the philosopher’s work, this honour also recognises the importance of the wider conservative family.
When more than 30 million of us regularly drink wine, why does the pub – not the wine bar – continue to represent political expediency?
Of course budgeting is about priorities: but the Comprehensive Spending Review decision seems short-termist and wrong.
You can certainly get away with saying things about us that would be a sacking offence if aimed at things like religious beliefs.
Our country, families, the environment, home – we love them all. The object of life is love and we ought to aspire toward the triumph of love.
Plus: Charlie Hebdo and 7/7. Mildenhall’s closure: a garden city opportunity? More bad news for the Bow Group. And: I ditch the Telegraph for the Times.
Conservatism and socialism part company in their responses to politics, power, and the money interest.
Here are three points on which I differ from his view.