Common Purpose, who are they?

[Esseesse]

Following on from this thread in the archive: http://www.pistonheads.com/GASSING/topic.asp?h=0&a...

I'd like to find out more, as they get mentioned fairly frequently on other threads. Do we know who they are yet and what they do?

[Esseesse]

Mention by James Delingpole here...

He describes it as a "secretive Fabian organisation". So maybe this should be broadened to the Fabian Society too. IIRC they get a mention by Peter Hitchens quite often.

[Esseesse]

TTwiggy said:

This forum never ceases to amaze me. If one were to suggest that man never landed on the moon, or that 9/11 was the work of the CIA, (justified) ridicule would ensue. Yet the idea that some socialist think tank is controlling all of the top jobs in public office is widely embraced.

I haven't suggested anything. IMO it would be interesting to know what they do, and their aims seeing as there appears to be many high profile politicians and journalists who support them or are a member etc. It's not exactly obvious what the membership benefits are.

[Esseesse]

BrassMan said:

Seeing Socialist conspiracies is a sign of a Fascist, as seeing Fascist conspiracies is a sign of a Socialist.

The roots of Fascism are in Socialism.

[Esseesse]

s2art said:

BrassMan said:

Esseesse said:

BrassMan said:

Seeing Socialist conspiracies is a sign of a Fascist, as seeing Fascist conspiracies is a sign of a Socialist.

The roots of Fascism are in Socialism.

They are an antagonistic pair. The various International Congresses (can't remember the years) expressed worry that Fascism would draw Socialism's natural supporters away. Saying that one pre-dates the other is like asking about the chicken and the egg as they both pre-date our current vocabulary, for example most of the socialists I've met have shown interest in various peasant's revolts.

Not really. Its well known that fascism evolved from syndicalism (a type of socialism) in Italy. Mussolini championed it, Hitler took in an a very dark direction by adding racism to the mix.

Leftists become incandescent when reminded of the socialist roots of Nazism

[Esseesse]

carinaman said:

I reckon Emily Thornberry is Common Purpose. I think her Tweet has made her look as questionable as Judge Constance Briscoe's handwriting expert 'witness'.

Can't see anything about Common Purpose, but this does suggest that she is a Fabian. http://www.fabians.org.uk/labours-britain-ending-w...

[Esseesse]

Breadvan72 said:

Mnanagement gobbledegook is just like any other trend. Buzzwords and blether spread in all fields.

As for sex education for children, of course I support it, and suggest that opposition to it is frankly weird. Would you rather children just stumble their way into early pregnancies and diseases? Is telling a little girl about menstruation so she doesn't freak out when it first happens a bad thing? Also, if there is an inference in the loony list above that people can be trained to be homosexual, that's more tinfoil woo.

Sorry I removed my post because I decided it too off topic. Your 'stumbling' suggestions are undesirable, but sex education has lead to higher rate of teenage pregnancies. These topics should be tackled by parents, they're not a job for the state.

Edited by Esseesse on Friday 21st November 16:13

[Esseesse]

Apparently Julia Middleton, the Common Purpose founder is an ex-editor of Marxism Today.

True?

[Esseesse]

carinaman said:

Are the Common Purpose tentacles wrapped around the ConDem coalition? I don't think their influence is restricted to the left, or what passes for the left in 2015.

I'd concur with the previous post, if anything (not saying they are or not) it could well be LibLabCon.

Anyone who seriously thinks the Torys are conservative, or are socially right leaning/wing (slight distinction) are in denial.

For example... it may be un-PC to oppose in 2015 (thanks to Common Purpose and the like?), but the normalisation of homosexuality and legalising of gay marriage is a socially left thing to do. It's not conservative (what radical change is), and it's not right leaning/wing (which IMO as it happens is synonymous with social conservatism).

Aside: I merely make the distinction between conservative and 'right leaning' because in another situation if the historical normal was a left of centre position, then I suppose conservatism in that instance would also be 'left'. The Tory party are regularly described as 'right' and 'conservative', in many ways (most?) they are neither.

[Esseesse]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/10423070/...

"David Cameron officially declares that he is patron of an initiative run by Common Purpose, a charity linked to the campaign for tougher regulation of the Press"

[Esseesse]

Digga said:

carinaman said:

Digga said:

don't think that scratches the surface of it.

Yes, they have followers in all three of the (previous) main parties, but also have influence throughout the public sector and police - especially W. Mids it would seem.

ETA frankly, anyone reading the published facts in the last two articles and not finding any dots to join up is rather obtuse.

Do you think there could be a Common Purpose involvement in Dr Sonia Sharp getting that job in Australia despite her failures to safeguard children at Rotherham?

I don't know, but to an extent, any industry or profession is a matter or who you know, so that in itself might not be any more or less useless/sinister than it seems at face value.

Sonia Sharp is a member of CP it would seem. Is this in question?

[Esseesse]

I cannot answer the above questions. Maybe someone else can.

Sex education's roots are in Marxism however, I'm quite certain.

[Esseesse]

tangerine_sedge said:

Esseesse said:

I cannot answer the above questions. Maybe someone else can.

Sex education's roots are in Marxism however, I'm quite certain.

Some sex education was provided during the late Victorian time, primarily as part of the desire at the time by liberal Victorians to educate the working classes (also see the rise of Mary Stopes, public lending libraries and state funded schooling).

Widespread (though very basic, i.e. birds & bees) sex education was introduced post war primarily to counteract the increase in VD at that time (i.e. lots of people movement across Europe and men being away from home).

It only really started becoming more graphic (i.e. actually showing pictures of men and women) during the early 70's, and was probably due to the social changes at the time (i.e. changes in birth control and a more liberal approach to sex).

The thought that somehow educating our children is a marxist conspiracy seems a little bit tin-foil hattery to me...

Who said anything about a conspiracy? I said roots, i.e. where the idea comes from. See Georg Lukács/Hungarian Bolshevik.

[Esseesse]

jogon said:

carinaman said:

jogon said:

It looks like two UKIP MEPs are also graduates of Common Purpose - http://www.cpexposed.com/graduates - Suzanne Evans and Jane Collins. Certainly worth keeping an eye on. This organisation has no limits or boundaries it seems.

Shame I liked Suzanne.

I can't say I've heard of her. Googling her name bought up a review of her book on The Mirror newspaper website with several animations.

Smiler. said:

The programme isn't about CP, they were mentioned in passing.

Thank you for the heads up. I enjoyed the programme last week about Mini Cheddars and Victor Nealon.

She is a UKIP MEP along with Collins although Suzanne has appeared more in the news and QT of late.

It may come across a bit tin foil hat but when you look in to how far this organisations tentacles have grasped while been relatively unnoticed it does lead to some serious questions been asked.

This fifth column, wrong type of political correctness, we keep on hearing about has CP all over it.

edit: I wouldn't be surprised if one of these women or perhaps both jump ship with some explosive anti-UKIP news in the next 70 days such is my confidence in democracy currently in this country.

Roxanne Duncan the evil UKIP racist despite been a Conservative member for 20 years prior - would any sane individual really say what she said to a BBC camera crew with 20 years experience of keeping those views quiet? One does wonder how much Cameron might have paid her for this performance.

Edited by jogon on Wednesday 25th February 00:55

Wrong Suzanne Evans apparently... https://twitter.com/suzanneevans1/status/572868631...

[Esseesse]

Digga said:

TTwiggy said:

carinaman said:

If Sue Berelowitz was talent spotted as a Future Leader that can Lead Beyond Authority who are we to argue?

You must realise that when you type phrases like that – complete with capitalisation – you look like a conspiracy theory nutter.

Right now, there are a lot of people with egg on their faces for dismissing a lot less plausible matters as conspiracies.

Also... Conspiracy: 2 or more people trying to further their aims by not revealing their true intentions. Surely happens regularly.