Reading this week's New Statesman magazine, one article quoted philosopher Michael Oakeshott's summation that to be a conservative "is to prefer the familiar to the unknown, to prefer the tried to the untried, fact to mystery, the actual to the possible, the limited to the unbound, the near to the distant, the sufficient to the superabundant, the convenient to the perfect, present laughter to utopian bliss.
In another article, former conservative cabinet minister William Waldegrave says, "How on earth have British Conservatives, inheritors of the immensely successful pragmatic intellectual tradition I have described, borrowed out-of-date, business-school speak and paraded themselves as 'disruptors' - a word representing everything they should oppose."
You will have your own opinions, but I can only think both of these are correct. So, what next for Conservatism? The party which wears that name no longer seem to fit the description. Where will they go now the cover they sought is dragged away from them? What becomes of them now they are slowly but surely being seen by the majority for what they are?
COUNTRY, CITY, AREA, PLACE -Game 21