"There are environments in which it is deeply unfashionable to voice a opinion which has traces of conservatism - rock music, for instance... ....For your average Joe Bloggs, I would add that Twitter is one of those environments." I think that DM has nailed it with this statement. To be perfectly honest I hide behind a daft name principally because of the possible effect (sorry impact) on employment. However there is also the feeling of social stigma that can come from being openly conservative. I believe this is why Peter Hitchens is correct in not attempting to soften his approach. The smug self satisfied Left and meek apologists for the Right are both part of this problem, I also know that actions like mine are part of the cause. But experience tells me I'm not alone. I find politics on an evening out is a taboo but in certain environments assume that "left" is the default position. The odd thing is that once someone dare be an icebreaker and opine anything conservative, it's satisfying to watch the general agreement. But in an internet environment with your own name behind it, I'd be apprehensive to stray from banality. I reluctantly use facebook and twitter for commercial purposes, though as little as possible. I dearly hope social media is a passing fad that will pass by unreplaced. Similar to ebay that has changed from being an online car boot sale to just an other comercial market place.

TCFKAMKB whinges: "To reach his blog many people have to scroll down through the crass, patrionising, sexist circus that is the 'femail' column; passing by stories about perfect, slim bikini bodies, hideous imperfections, revealing cleavages . . . etc, etc, blah, blah. No you don't, you can do what I and probably most other regulars do, which is to use the bookmark feature and come straight onto this blog. You remind me of that old joke about the woman who complains that the man next door sunbathes in the nude. When the policeman asks her how she could possibly see her neighbour over his high hedge she replies "Well, you can if you stand on the water butt on tip toes".

“I do solemnly and sincerely in the presence of God, profess, testify, and declare, that I do believe, that in the sacrament of the Lord's supper there is not any transubstantiation of the elements of bread and wine into the body and blood of Christ, at or after the consecration thereof by any person whatsoever; and that the invocation or adoration of the Virgin Mary or any other saint, and the sacrifice of the mass, as they are now used in the Church of Rome, are superstitious and idolatrous.” (Art. 12, 13 Wm. III, c. 2).

No-one's saying those days of 60 years ago were perfect but any sane pertson knows they were a whole lot superior to the mess of a society we're presently living in. But yes they were "good old days" - a good old days where suicide rates hadn't gone through the roof , where the murder rate was about 20th of what it is today, where violent crime in general was similarly a fraction of the size, where you didn't need to turn your house into Fort Knox to stop it getting burgled, where you could walk the streets (anywhere) at night without risking a beating or worse, where old people weren't terrified inside their homes, where private companies didn't charge ridiculous rates for basic utilities to line their own pockets, where an ever-growing number of the youth weren't being driven out of their minds by street drugs, a good old days free of ridiculous manufactured politically correct hysteria over racism and "homophobia" where a tiny minority of middle class liberals try to foist their peculiar attitudes on the rest of the population... I could go on but I don't think even Jeff Pollitt and Kevin Brown actually really believe things are better now - although deluded people like this believe if they tell themselves something enough it might be true.