Nomination Ballot 12.Pub: Fill & Download for Free

The Chartist movement was the first mass movement driven by the working classes in Great Britain. It grew following the failure of the 1832 Reform Act to extend the parliamentary vote beyond those owning property. We have mostly heard of the movement to gain women the vote(it is given huge publicity), but this movement literally referred to just men - and, within its’ time frame, was appropriate.This movement eventually had a monumental impact on government. It isn’t always given the prominence it deserves within the history of the United Kingdom. It changed the whole face of government from an upper class ‘Old Boys’ club to the system we have today that is accessible to all.At that time, becoming a member of parliament was something that couldn’t even be thought of by the working man. Even if he rose to the heights of owning a modest house (perhaps over his shop) that would entitled him to vote, the working class man couldn’t think of becoming a member of parliament as MPs were not given a living wage. In any case the voting public at that time was very much dominated by the ‘Old School Tie’ brigade - there were very few property owners amongst the working class. They quite rightly felt that until ALL men had a vote they had no chance of their views and opinions being represented in parliament.Although it was thought at the time that their petitions (the third was presented in 1848) failed as they were all rejected by parliament, reforms started to take place from 1850. Between that time and 1884 a number of reform acts had been passed and by 1918 all but the demand that elections be held annually had been allowed. Given the disruption caused by elections this is perhaps a good thing.The actual Chartists’ petition is an interesting read. In these days of relative equality it seems strange to find something that was written before equality between men and women had been accepted and legislated for. In these times we may object to having to read ‘men’ when we know what is meant is ‘men and women’ or ‘people.’ At that time it did literally mean men. So it makes an interesting and strangely disturbing read. I can imagine the outrage of women at the time - although I suspect most had been brainwashed into ‘knowing their place.’I have included below information from both UK Parliament and Wiki as I feel they each offer interesting insight to the times in which this was happening. This makes for a long read, but for those who are interested in the topic is raises many interesting points - including the role of the church.The Chartist movement (UK Parliament)In 1838 a People's Charter was drawn up for the London Working Men's Association (LWMA) by William Lovett and Francis Place, two self-educated radicals, in consultation with other members of LWMA. The Charter had six demands:All men to have the vote (universal manhood suffrage)Voting should take place by secret ballotParliamentary elections every year, not once every five yearsConstituencies should be of equal sizeMembers of Parliament should be paidThe property qualification for becoming a Member of Parliament should be abolishedUnrestIn June 1839, the Chartists' petition was presented to the House of Commons with over 1.25 million signatures. It was rejected by Parliament. This provoked unrest which was swiftly crushed by the authorities.A second petition was presented in May 1842, signed by over three million people but again it was rejected and further unrest and arrests followed.Feargus O'ConnorIn April 1848 a third and final petition was presented. A mass meeting on Kennington Common in South London was organised by the Chartist movement leaders, the most influential being Feargus O'Connor, editor of 'The Northern Star', a weekly newspaper that promoted the Chartist cause.O'Connor was known to have connections with radical groups which advocated reform by any means, including violence. The authorities feared disruption and military forces were on standby to deal with any unrest. The third petition was also rejected but the anticipated unrest did not happen.Despite the Chartist leaders' attempts to keep the movement alive, within a few years it was no longer a driving force for reform.Chartists' legacyHowever, the Chartists' legacy was strong. By the 1850s Members of Parliament accepted that further reform was inevitable. Further Reform Acts were passed in 1867 and 1884.By 1918, five of the Chartists' six demands had been achieved - only the stipulation that parliamentary elections be held every year was unfulfilled.ChartismFrom Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaPhotograph of the Great Chartist Meeting on Kennington Common, London in 1848Chartism was a working-class male suffrage movement for political reform in Britain that existed from 1838 to 1857. It took its name from the People's Charter of 1838 and was a national protest movement, with particular strongholds of support in Northern England, the East Midlands, the Staffordshire Potteries, the Black Country, and the South Wales Valleys. Support for the movement was at its highest in 1839, 1842, and 1848, when petitions signed by millions of working people were presented to the House of Commons. The strategy employed was to use the scale of support which these petitions and the accompanying mass meetings demonstrated to put pressure on politicians to concede manhood suffrage. Chartism thus relied on constitutional methods to secure its aims, though some became involved in insurrectionary activities, notably in South Wales and in Yorkshire.[citation needed]The People's Charter called for six reforms to make the political system more democratic:A vote for every man aged twenty-one years and above, of sound mind, and not undergoing punishment for a crime.The secret ballot to protect the elector in the exercise of his vote.No property qualification for Members of Parliament to allow the constituencies to return the man of their choice.Payment of Members, enabling tradesmen, working men, or other persons of modest means to leave or interrupt their livelihood to attend to the interests of the nation.Equal constituencies, securing the same amount of representation for the same number of electors, instead of allowing less populous constituencies to have as much or more weight than larger ones.Annual Parliamentary elections, thus presenting the most effectual check to bribery and intimidation, since no purse could buy a constituency under a system of universal manhood suffrage in every twelve months.Chartists saw themselves fighting against political corruption and for democracy in an industrial society, but attracted support beyond the radical political groups for economic reasons, such as opposing wage cuts and unemployment.[1][2]People's Charter of 1838In 1837, six Members of Parliament and six working men, including William Lovett (from the London Working Men's Association, set up in 1836) formed a committee, which in 1838 published the People's Charter. This set out the movement's six main aims.[12] The achievement of these aims would give working men a say in law making: they would be able to vote, their vote would be protected by a secret ballot, and they would be able to stand for election to the House of Commons as a result of the removal of property qualifications and the introduction of payment for MPs. None of these demands were new, but the People's Charter became one of the most famous political manifestos of 19th-century Britain.[13]BeginningsChartist riotThe national convention, meeting on Monday 4 February 1839, at the British Coffee HouseChartism was launched in 1838 by a series of large-scale meetings in Birmingham, Glasgow and the north of England. A huge mass meeting was held on Kersal Moor near Salford, Lancashire, on 24 September 1838 with speakers from all over the country. Speaking in favour of manhood suffrage, Joseph Rayner Stephens declared that Chartism was a "knife and fork, a bread and cheese question".[14] These words indicate the importance of economic factors in the launch of Chartism. If, as the movement came together, there were different priorities amongst local leaders, the Charter and the Star soon created a national, and largely united, campaign of national protest. John Bates, an activist, recalled:There were [radical] associations all over the county, but there was a great lack of cohesion. One wanted the ballot, another manhood suffrage and so on ... The radicals were without unity of aim and method, and there was but little hope of accomplishing anything. When, however, the People's Charter was drawn up ... clearly defining the urgent demands of the working class, we felt we had a real bond of union; and so transformed our Radical Association into local Chartist centres ...[3]:60The movement organised a National Convention in London in early 1839 to facilitate the presentation of the first petition. Delegates used the term MC, Member of Convention, to identify themselves; the convention undoubtedly saw itself as an alternative parliament.[15]:19 In June 1839, the petition, signed by 1.3 million working people, was presented to the House of Commons, but MPs voted, by a large majority, not to hear the petitioners. At the Convention, there was talk of a general strike or "sacred month". In the West Riding of Yorkshire and in south Wales, anger went even deeper, and underground preparations for a rising were undoubtedly made.[citation needed]Newport RisingMain article: Newport RisingDramatisation of the trial of the Chartists at Shire Hall, Monmouth, including background informationSeveral outbreaks of violence ensued, leading to arrests and trials. One of the leaders of the movement, John Frost, on trial for treason, claimed in his defence that he had toured his territory of industrial Wales urging people not to break the law, although he was himself guilty of using language that some might interpret as a call to arms. Dr William Price of Llantrisant—more of a maverick than a mainstream Chartist—described Frost as putting "a sword in my hand and a rope around my neck".[16] Hardly surprisingly, there are no surviving letters outlining plans for insurrection, but physical force Chartists had undoubtedly started organising. By early autumn men were being drilled and armed in south Wales, and also in the West Riding. Secret cells were set up, covert meetings were held in the Chartist Caves at Llangynidr and weapons were manufactured as the Chartists armed themselves. Behind closed doors and in pub back rooms, plans were drawn up for a mass protest.[citation needed]On the night of 3–4 November 1839 Frost led several thousand marchers through South Wales to the Westgate Hotel, Newport, Monmouthshire, where there was a confrontation. It seems that Frost and other local leaders were expecting to seize the town and trigger a national uprising. The result of the Newport Rising was a disaster for Chartism. The hotel was occupied by armed soldiers. A brief, violent, and bloody battle ensued. Shots were fired by both sides, although most contemporaries agree that the soldiers holding the building had vastly superior firepower. The Chartists were forced to retreat in disarray: more than twenty were killed, at least another fifty wounded.[citation needed]Testimonies exist from contemporaries, such as the Yorkshire Chartist Ben Wilson, that Newport was to have been the signal for a national uprising. Despite this significant setback the movement remained remarkably buoyant and remained so until late 1842. Whilst the majority of Chartists, under the leadership of Feargus O'Connor, concentrated on petitioning for Frost, Williams and William Jones to be pardoned, significant minorities in Sheffield and Bradford planned their risings in response. Samuel Holberry led an abortive rising in Sheffield on 12 January, and on 26 January Robert Peddie attempted similar action in Bradford. In both Sheffield and Bradford spies had kept magistrates aware of the conspirators' plans, and these attempted risings were easily quashed. Frost and two other Newport leaders, Jones and Williams, were transported. Holberry and Peddie received long prison sentences with hard labour; Holberry died in prison and became a Chartist martyr.[1]:135–8,152–7According to Dorothy Thompson, "1842 was the year in which more energy was hurled against the authorities than in any other of the 19th century".[3]:295In early May 1842, a second petition, of over three million signatures, was submitted, and was yet again rejected by Parliament. The Northern Star commented on the rejection:Three and a half million have quietly, orderly, soberly, peaceably but firmly asked of their rulers to do justice; and their rulers have turned a deaf ear to that protest. Three and a half millions of people have asked permission to detail their wrongs, and enforce their claims for RIGHT, and the 'House' has resolved they should not be heard! Three and a half millions of the slave-class have holden out the olive branch of peace to the enfranchised and privileged classes and sought for a firm and compact union, on the principle of EQUALITY BEFORE THE LAW; and the enfranchised and privileged have refused to enter into a treaty! The same class is to be a slave class still. The mark and brand of inferiority are not to be removed. The assumption of inferiority is still to be maintained. The people are not to be free.[15]:34The depression of 1842 led to a wave of strikes, as workers responded to the wage cuts imposed by employers. Calls for the implementation of the Charter were soon included alongside demands for the restoration of wages to previous levels. Working people went on strike in 14 English and 8 Scottish counties, principally in the Midlands, Lancashire, Cheshire, Yorkshire, and the Strathclyde region of Scotland. Typically, strikers resolved to cease work until wages were increased "until the People's charter becomes the Law of the Land". How far these strikes were directly Chartist in inspiration "was then, as now, a subject of much controversy".[18] The Leeds Mercury headlined them "The Chartist Insurrection", but suspicion also hung over the Anti-Corn Law League that manufacturers among its members deliberately closed mills to stir-up unrest. At the time, these disputes were collectively known as the Plug Plot as, in many cases, protesters removed the plugs from steam boilers powering industry to prevent their use. Amongst historians writing in the 20th century, the term General Strike was increasingly used.[19][20] Some modern historians prefer the description "strike wave".[1][15] In contrast, Mick Jenkins in his The General Strike of 1842[19] offers a Marxist interpretation, showing the strikes as highly organized with sophisticated political intentions. The unrest began in the Potteries of Staffordshire in early August, spreading north to Cheshire and Lancashire (where at Manchester a meeting of the Chartist national executive endorsed the strikes on the 16th). The strikes had begun spreading in Scotland and West Yorkshire from the 13th. There were outbreaks of serious violence, including property destruction and the ambushing of police convoys, in the Potteries and the West Riding. Though the government deployed soldiers to suppress violence, it was the practical problems in sustaining an indefinite stoppage that ultimately defeated the strikers. The drift back to work began on 19 August. Only Lancashire and Cheshire were still strike-bound by September, the Manchester power loom weavers being the last to return to work on 26 September.[1]:223The state hit back. Several Chartist leaders were arrested, including O'Connor, George Julian Harney, and Thomas Cooper. During the late summer of 1842, hundreds were incarcerated; in the Pottery Riots alone, 116 men and women went to prison. A smaller number, but still amounting to many dozens – such as William Ellis, who was convicted on perjured evidence – were transported. One protester, Josiah Heapy (19 years old), was shot dead. However, the government's most ambitious prosecution, personally led by the Attorney General, of O'Connor and 57 others (including almost all Chartism's national executive) failed: none were convicted of the serious charges, and those found guilty of minor offences were never actually sentenced. Cooper alone of the national Chartist leadership was convicted (at a different trial), having spoken at strike meetings in the Potteries. He was to write a long poem in prison called "The Purgatory of Suicides."[21]Mid-1840s[edit]Despite this second set of arrests, Chartist activity continued. Beginning in 1843, O'Connor suggested that the land contained the solution to workers' problems. This idea evolved into the Chartist Co-operative Land Company, later called the National Land Company. Workers would buy shares in the company, and the company would use those funds to purchase estates that would be subdivided into 2, 3, and 4 acres (0.8, 1.2, and 1.6 hectare) lots. Between 1844 and 1848, five estates were purchased, subdivided, and built on, and then settled by lucky shareholders, who were chosen by lot. Unfortunately for O'Connor, in 1848 a Select Committee was appointed by Parliament to investigate the financial viability of the scheme, and it was ordered that it be shut down. Cottages built by the Chartist Land Company are still standing and inhabited today in Oxfordshire, Worcestershire, Gloucestershire[22] and on the outskirts of London. Rosedene, a Chartist cottage in Dodford, Worcestershire, is owned and maintained by the National Trust, and is open to visitors by appointment.[23]Candidates embracing Chartism also stood on numerous occasions in general elections. There were concerted campaigns in the election of 1841 and election of 1847, when O'Connor was elected for Nottingham. O'Connor became the only Chartist to be elected an MP; it was a remarkable victory for the movement. More commonly, Chartist candidates participated in the open meetings, called hustings, that were the first stage of an election. They frequently won the show of hands at the hustings, but then withdrew from the poll to expose the deeply undemocratic nature of the electoral system. This is what Harney did in a widely reported challenge against Lord Palmerston in Tiverton, Devon, in 1847. The last Chartist challenge at a parliamentary poll took place at Ripon in 1859.[1]:178–83,279–86,339–401848 petition[edit]Poster advertising the Great Chartist MeetingIn February 1848, following the arrival of news of a revolution in Paris, Chartist activity increased. In March there were protests or bread riots in Manchester, Glasgow, and Dublin, and a new demonstration was announced for 10 April 1848, to be held on Kennington Common, London. After the meeting, a planned procession would carry a third petition to Parliament. Marches and demonstrations were also planned for April 10 in Manchester and elsewhere.[24]In anticipation of the announced march, Parliament revived a statute dating to the time of Charles II that forbade more than 10 persons from presenting a petition in person. That was followed on April 7 by new legislation making certain seditious acts ("proposing to make war against the Queen, or seeking to intimidate or overawe both Houses of Parliament" or openly speaking or writing "to that effect") felonies in Great Britain and Ireland, punishable by death or transportation.[25] The authorities knew that the Chartists were planning a peaceful demonstration, but still wanted a large-scale display of force to counter the challenge. 100,000 special constables were recruited to bolster the police force,[26] and the military threatened to intervene if working people made any attempt to cross the Thames.[citation needed]O'Connor, seeing that any form of resistance to authorities would be impossible, cancelled the planned procession to Parliament to present the petition. The meeting was peaceful and finished without incident, after which the petition with its many signatures was sent to Parliament in three cabs accompanied by a small group of Chartist leaders.[27][28]Parliament's repressive measures strengthened an already-present impulse to violent resistance. In June there was widespread drilling and arming in the West Riding and the devising of plots in London.[27]:116–22[29] In Bingley, Yorkshire, a group of "physical force" Chartists led by Isaac Ickeringill were involved in a huge fracas at the local magistrates' court and later were prosecuted for rescuing two of their compatriots from the police.[30] William Cuffay, a London labor activist and one of the organisers of the Kennington Common rally, was convicted of "conspiring to levy war" against the Queen and transported to Australia.[31]Decline after 1848[edit]Chartism as an organized movement declined rapidly after 1848. Throughout the 1850s, pockets of strong support for Chartism could still be found in places such as the Black Country,[1]:312–47[32] but the final National Convention, held in 1858, was attended by only a handful of delegates.[citation needed]Before the 1980s historians of the movement commonly blamed Chartism's decline on O'Connor's egotism and vanity,[33] but more recent historians (notably Dorothy Thompson) have tended to see the process as too complex to be attributed to the personality of a single individual.[3][34]Ernest Charles Jones became a leading figure in the National Charter Association during its decline, together with George Julian Harney, and helped to give the movement a clearer socialist direction.[35] Jones and Harney knew Karl Marx[36] and Friedrich Engels[37] personally. Marx and Engels at the same time commented on the Chartist movement and Jones' work in their letters and articles.[38][39]In Kennington, the Brandon Estate features a large mural by Tony Hollaway, commissioned by London County Council's Edward Hollamby in the early 1960s, commemorating the Chartists' meeting on 10 April 1848.[40]ChristianityDuring this period, some Christian churches in Britain held "that it was 'wrong for a Christian to meddle in political matters ... All of the denominations were particularly careful to disavow any political affiliation and he who was the least concerned with the 'affairs of this world' was considered the most saintly and worthy of emulation."[41]:24 This was at odds with many Christian Chartists for whom Christianity was "above all practical, something that must be carried into every walk of life. Furthermore, there was no possibility of divorcing it from political science."[41]:26 William Hill, a Swedenborgian minister, wrote in the Northern Star: "We are commanded ... to love our neighbours as ourselves ... this command is universal in its application, whether as a friend, Christian or citizen. A man may be devout as a Christian ... but if as a citizen he claims rights for himself he refuses to confer upon others, he fails to fulfil the precept of Christ".[41]:26 The conflicts between these two views led many like Joseph Barker to see Britain's churches as pointless. "I have no faith in church organisations," he explained. "I believe it my duty to be a man; to live and move in the world at large; to battle with evil wherever I see it, and to aim at the annihilation of all corrupt institutions and the establishment of all good, and generous, and useful institutions in their places."[42] To further this idea, some Christian Chartist Churches were formed where Christianity and radical politics were combined and considered inseparable. More than 20 Chartist Churches existed in Scotland by 1841.[43] Pamphlets made the point and vast audiences came to hear lectures on the same themes by the likes of J. R. Stephens, who was highly influential in the movement. Political preachers thus came into prominence.[41]:27–8Between late 1844 and November 1845, subscriptions were raised for the publication of a hymnal,[44] which was printed as a 64-page pamphlet and distributed for a nominal fee, although no known copy is thought to remain. In 2011, a previously unknown and uncatalogued smaller pamphlet of 16 hymns was discovered in Todmorden Library in the North of England.[45] This is believed to be the only Chartist Hymnal in existence. Heavily influenced by dissenting Christians, the hymns are about social justice, "striking down evildoers", and blessing Chartist enterprises, rather than the conventional themes of crucifixion, heaven, and family. Some of the hymns protest the exploitation of child labour and slavery. One proclaims, "Men of wealth and men of power/ Like locusts all thy gifts devour". Two celebrate the martyrs of the movement. "Great God! Is this the Patriot's Doom?" was composed for the funeral of Samuel Holberry, the Sheffield Chartist leader, who died in prison in 1843, while another honours John Frost, Zephaniah Williams, and William Jones, the Chartist leaders transported to Tasmania in the aftermath of the Newport rising of 1839.The Chartists were especially critical of the Church of England for unequal distribution of the state funds it received, resulting in some bishops and higher dignitaries having grossly larger incomes than other clergymen. This state of affairs led some Chartists to question the very idea of a state-sponsored church, leading them to call for absolute separation of church and state.[41]:59Facing severe persecution in 1839, Chartists took to attending services at churches they held in contempt to display their numerical strength and express their dissatisfaction. Often they forewarned the preacher and demanded that he preach from texts they believed supported their cause, such as 2 Thessalonians 3:10, 2 Timothy 2:6, Matthew 19:23[46] and James 5:1-6.[47] In response, the set-upon ministers often preached the need to focus on things spiritual and not material, and of meekness and obedience to authority, citing such passages as Romans 13:1–7 and 1 Peter 2:13–17.[41]:38Legacy[edit]Plaque commemorating Samuel Holberry in Sheffield's Peace GardensFormer Chartist Mural in Newport commemorating the uprisingEventual reforms[edit]Chartism did not directly generate any reforms. However after 1848, as the movement faded, its demands appeared less threatening and were gradually enacted by other reformers.[48] Middle-class parliamentary Radicals continued to press for an extension of the franchise in such organisations as the National Parliamentary and Financial Reform Association and the Reform Union. By the late 1850s, the celebrated John Bright was agitating in the country for franchise reform. But working-class radicals had not gone away. The Reform League campaigned for manhood suffrage in the 1860s and included former Chartists in its ranks.[49]In 1867 part of the urban working men was admitted to the franchise under the Reform Act 1867, and in 1918 full manhood suffrage was achieved. Other points of the People's Charter were granted: secret voting was introduced in 1872 and the payment of MPs in 1911.[50] Annual elections remain the only Chartist demand not to be implemented.[citation needed]Enabling political progressions[edit]Political elites feared the Chartists in the 1830s and 1840s as a dangerous threat to national stability.[51] In the Chartist stronghold of Manchester, the movement undermined the political power of the old Tory-Anglican elite that had controlled civic affairs. But the reformers of Manchester were themselves factionalised.[52] Chartism has also been seen as a forerunner to the UK Labour Party.[53]Development of working class confidence[edit]Participation in the Chartist Movement filled some working men with self-confidence: they learned to speak publicly, to send their poems and other writings off for publication—to be able, in short, to confidently articulate the feelings of working people. Many former Chartists went on to become journalists, poets, ministers, and councillors.[54]

Growing New conservativesThe core strength of any conservative party is ambition, moving forward in voters own lives and moving your kids forward. That applies as much to a hispanic family in Chicago as their white neighbours. In America that should be a slam dunk, but it isn’t, not yet.Lessons can be learned from the British Conservatives who have a far broader vote.Margaret Thatcher, the most successful British Conservative in recent times slashed regulation in the British labour market. America is supposed to be the land of opportunity, yet British visitors to the states are struck by the fact that bartenders, hairdressers and many other occupations require a licence. Sure I want my dentist to be qualified but the guy pouring me a drink ?That creates many entry level jobs and not a small number of the next rung up, people moving up should be people moving towards us.British Conservatives believe that the more people see they have a stake in a country’s success the more successful it will be and success means they are more likely to support us. We have only ever lost when we lose that plot.Every business owner, regardless of race is a possible conservativeAs a Brit Conservative I am dumbfounded by the licencing for businesses in the US. This isn’t just something the Conservatives got rid of decades ago, even the Labour party doesn’t suggest anything like this despite being led by someone widely regarded as a left wing maniac by much of his own party.Licensing is a race bar. Oh I know we say that that the process is fair and doesn’t discriminate, but let’s be honest with ourselves, unless the business is handling nuclear materials why do you need a business licence at all unless it is to protect a well connected vested interest ?When I set up my business in the UK, the government bureaucracy I needed before opening was done in a morning, recently I met a guy running a project to get it to 40 minutes. Lacking even the vaguest possibility of corruption means it also plays to Conservative views of law and order. More regulation always equals more corruption and less well connected minorites suffer more.Fixing this cuts the cost of living for everyone else, grows the economy, there are individual boroughs of London that have more startups than the whole of France. Guess what ? Yep they are a positive rainbow of ethnicities and regard left wing increases in regulation as evil.This is a state by state fight, which ironically is a good thing for conservatives because it is loud and local, this is politics guys, you want to win, you have to win things a few people loudly hate you for, but more people thank you.In the long run, nothing good comes without short term cost.So successful was Thatcher’s de-regulation and related polices (like ending union power to stop jobs), that when at last the political tide turned, the next Labour government was actually more conservative in terms of deregulation etc than some nominally conservative ones. I say to our American friends “Tony Blair”, some may not realise that President Bush’s best foreign friend was leader of Britain’s left wing party.When you rule unchallenged for as long as Thatcher and move the opposition to your point of view, you can call the policies successful.Voter FraudWhat moron came up with this ? I’m not into conspiracy theories, but I can’t come up with a better explanation for the Republican policy on this than the idea that undercover Democrats have inflitrated to produce the policy most certain to strnegthen Democrats hold on minority voters. Harassing non-white people at election ? Really ? Are you serious ?Yes it might help you win a few close run seats, but at the cost of ensuring millions equate conservatism with racism.Play this movie in your heads..You sweat blood develop good ads, developing polices, getting them passed into law and the day comes to cash the cheque for that hard work at the ballot box.Then some fuckwitted racists decide to hassle black and hispanic voters, maybe arrest a few for “voting whilst black”, maybe some “resist arrest”, and “fall down”Do you reckon that movie is in the minds of Democrats building attack ads ?It doesn’t even need to happen. The mere fact that the developmentally delayed end of Republicans gloat over this shitty idea means minorites already reckon it’s happening. A few tweets and carefully edited videos and everyone with darker skin than Melania Trump is pissed.Also it is wrong. We are conservatives because we are people who do the right thing. If you want to stop voter fraud, then do it properly without racism but with truly harsh penalties.I literally walk the streets at election getting out the vote, I encourage everyone to vote, even if they have explained clearly that they aren’t going to vote our way. I talk of how good people have died for their right to vote against us and that there are countries that if you said this to a member of the ruling party, bad things would come your way. The message I am sending is that I listen to them, we are reasonable people, that we understand that we’re not uniformly liked and am planting a seed of doubt that we might be able to harvest next time.…and honestly, if you don’t in your heart believe democracy is more important than your party then I don’t want you in my party.Half of ethnic minorites are also womenA harder issue is women. It is naive to believe that any serious inroads can be made with the currently actively misogynist polices of the Republican party, that’s not easyto hear, but with all the passion I can send I ask you to look at conservative parties in other countries.You put in a clause to stop poor minority women from getting full healthcare insurance. Oh I know you tell yourself it is all women, (makes it better?) but poorer people are more vulnerable to outsourcing your morality.Pro-life/choice is a contentious issue, but with deep irony one has to learn from people in the Catholic Church, especially nuns. Outside the US many see abortion as the worst thing and rather than simply something to feel self righteous about, but since they are educated in Christian doctrine they understand St. Thomas Aquinas view of the lesser evil. Thus nuns in schools outside the US often teach contraception with a passion. Again looking at the UK as an example of how a Conservative party can reach out, the Conservative government has made the requirement to teach Contraception and Consent as legal requirement for all schools.In a pub with a couple of Conservatives someone mentioned “abstinence education”, we just stared at him, until we realised it was a deadpan joke, when we say “contraception” we mean “things that work”.In one term you can halve the abortion rate. Maybe more. Guess what the abortion rate is doing in Britain, yep, it’s dropping far more effectively than forcing women to be probed or watch horror movies or threatening doctors. Any conservatives here unhappy to see abortion numbers coming down ? Are fiscal conservatives sad that this is being achieved with almost no cost at all ?That’s an ethnicity issue because in the US they are denied both the education and healthcare around contraception far more than white people and they hate conservatives for it.Unplanned pregnancies lead to poverty, oh let me think a little, I wonder which way poor people with children wholly dependent on the state vote ? No, the question is too hard, I can’t possibly answer it.I lied.I said that teaching thorough contraception in schools had a low cost. It makes a profit, because poor women including those of colour end up having their baby at a state funded hospital and if a mother isn’t able to support it you get welfare costs as well. Also young unmarried mothers have less chance of building a good citizen to present to society. For the cost of a few lessons, some rubber and cheap tablets you slash abortion and persuade a good number of people of colour that you don’t hate them.Climate change and Evolution are race issueOnce you’ve freed people of colour from feeling they have no option but to vote Democrat, you then have to persuade them to vote for you. That means conservatives need to stop being offensively and loudly stupid. No one who isn’t an American conservative believes any of the bollocks American conservatives emit about Evolution and Climate change. Again I cite The Holy Catholic Church, who has good credentials about social conservartism, the Pope calls Creationism nonsense (in Latin of course), You may or may not be a Catholic and accept he speaks for God in matters of faith, but surely it must get through that that Creationism makes conservatives look stupid. So much so that when twinned with views on Climate Change easily refuted by an average 12 year old I again come back to the idea of self inflicted wounds.Pretty much everyone whose education has reached the point of knowing that the Earth goes round the Sun has accepted climate change. Again drawing a parallel withn the British Conservative Party. It has forbidden by law the teaching of Creationism in science lessons and the Department of Energy includes in its title and Climate Change,For the love of God stop calling people with decent educations “the elite”People of colour often use education to advance in their lives, by saying education is bad and that you think science should be about a small number of uneducated white people having stupid opinions you cut yourself off from many for ever.By saying educated people are “them”, “the enemy” may feel good, but serving your country isn’t about feeling good, it is about making good happen.You’re going to need some black candidates that unlike many recent ones aren’t so obviously stupid and in need of urgent mental healthcare. That means educated black people who don’t laugh at you, which leads to…EducationIf you want minorities to bcome conservative you have to get them richer and that means better educated. I guess there must be some conservative somewhere who thinks that the allocation of funding to schools in Republican controlled areas isn’t purely racist, but I doubt they can read at all let alone are reading this. The Democrats aren’t all that much better, they’re easily beatable on this.The takeaway from this is that you need to stop thinking of them as people of colour but people with hopes and ambitions that you can remove obstacles from.(*) I mentioned above that UK schools are required to teach Consent issues around sex. It’s a bit more than “no means no”, but there can be no clearer example of what is wrong with the Republican party than the widely asserted view that “legitimate rapes can’t get women pregnant”. Sure any large conservative party has dimwits like that, but we don’t put them up as candidates for senior positions we literally mock them and that’s just the men, the female conservatives are a lot less polite than just pointing and laughing at them.