WHAT a difference 15 years – and the almost complete capture of Britain by the woke left – makes.
Y’see, dear reader, I’ve been here before. The report I posted last Thursday on the need for the right to organise didn’t come from nowhere. It’s been 15 long years in the making, as I explained in early February:
In 2011 no one was willing to stand with me. Today, people are stepping up.
Yes, but how?!
I’ll admit it, I’m as guilty as anyone on the right of perpetuating the failure. Look at what I’ve done here: spotted the problem – that while the left organise, the right write papers –and immediately reached for my laptop to write a carefully argued paper on why we shouldn’t do that. Oh, the irony!
Partly I think we’re like this by nature: wonkish, keen on analysis, and above all possessed of a deep instinct to conserve rather than break up and try something radical and new. Partly I think it’s a habit we’ve learned. It’s just ‘how things are done’ on our side. Leave it to the green-haired septum-ringed lot to do anything as crass as organise.
Whatever the reason, the lesson we need to learn is to stop asking why, and instead ask: HOW? The left don’t talk about organising, they just get on and do it. So what is it, specifically, that we’re going to do?
Thankfully, a kind chap (who I think doesn’t want to be named, so I will just call him ‘M’) has come up with a game plan. I think it’s a good one. I wanted to share it here to gain support and momentum:
The question is: how do we turn strategic analysis into functioning institutions with staff, funding, and operational plans?
Show me the money
The first issue we must confront is funding.
Building the seven institutions proposed in my paper would likely cost around £8million–£12 million per year.
This would cover:
• A central co-ordinating body (small staff team, travel, operations)
• A leadership academy to train organisers and future leaders
• 50 community organising hubs
• An electoral intelligence unit for polling and data analysis
• A civil society incubator to support new organisations
• A philanthropic trust to distribute funding strategically
• A strategic communications network to co-ordinate messaging
This figure is significant but not extraordinary in institutional terms – it’s just a quarter of the US Heritage Foundation’s annual spend. The real problem is not the absence of money but the absence of co-ordinated fundraising.
Potential sources include:
• existing conservative donors
• international philanthropic networks (particularly in the United States)
• structured small-donor membership schemes
• and eventually corporate funding
• and earned income.
Fundraising must come before institution-building. Dependence on government grants should be avoided to preserve independence.
Three audiences, three conversations
Building this infrastructure requires communicating differently with three distinct audiences.
• First are major donors, who need a clear investment prospectus rather than a political essay;
• Second are operational leaders and organisers, who must see a credible career path, training structure, and professional opportunity rather than vague calls to activism;
• Third are existing right-leaning organisations, which may initially view a co-ordinating body with suspicion.
The proposal therefore frames the co-ordinating institution not as a command centre but as a switchboard, helping organisations collaborate, fill gaps, and amplify one another’s work.
Crucially, the sequence matters: secure funding first, recruit operational talent second, and only then integrate existing organisations into the network.
How do you actually build this?
Attempting to build multiple institutions simultaneously would likely lead to failure. Instead, the proposal outlines a phased implementation strategy.
Months 0-6: The co-ordinator and the money. A single credible co-ordinator supported by a small team should focus on mapping the landscape, building relationships, and raising multi-year funding commitments.
Months 6–18: The academy and electoral intelligence. Once funding is secured, the first operational priorities, run in parallel, should be (1) launching a leadership academy to train organisers and (2) establishing an electoral intelligence unit focused on data and polling.
Months 18–36: Community network and civil society incubator. Only after trained personnel exist should the network expand into local organising hubs and a civil society incubator for new organisations.
Year 3+: Everything else scales. Over time, additional elements such as a philanthropic trust, communications network, and long-term academic projects could be developed.
The bottom line
The proposal concludes: ‘If I were advising, I’d say this: don’t try to publish another paper. Write the prospectus. Convene 10-15 serious people in a room. Stress-test it. Refine it. Then start building. Quietly.’
So that’s what I’m going to do. I will commit to writing the prospectus, but today I’m putting out a call for two or three well-connected individuals who are serious about building the organisational infrastructure the right needs to start winning. Together we will form the core team required to carry out the initial phase of the plan: mapping the landscape, building relationships, and raising multi-year funding commitments.
If you are interested, please email me at donna.rachel.edmunds@gmail.com
Let’s do this.
This article appeared in Freedom Radio on March 9, 2026, and is republished by kind permission.
