Referism - a movement for 'people power'?
Referism: '...is about the transfer of power, releasing people from the bondage of the elites and vesting in them control over their own government. It is about changing the relationship between government and the people, one in which the government says please...'
So, it's essentially a bottom-up Whiggish movement; a resurrection (or reinvigoration) of the 'Radical' which has been more than a little subsumed to the 'Tory' in what has become known as 'Conservatism'. But the Referism philosophy is thoroughly of the 'liberal-right': over the pond, it manifests itself in part as the Tea Party (small government, low budget), which some have attempted (without much success) to replicate here in the UK.
As Dr North knows well (from experience), it is not so much that a new movement needs a charismatic leader (though, however you want to reason it away, the people will demand a king - 1Sam 8); it is that such a leader will need to invest an awful lot of money (as Sir James Goldsmith found) for maybe a return of 2000 votes (if you work hard) in each constituency. Certainly, those 2000 may become instead a (sizeable) pressure group (ie, not a political paty), but that is precisely what 'The People's Pledge' are trying to achieve as far as the EU is concerned (and not without some success, though His Grace has not subscribed).
The problem with politics is the human ego. Each and every attempt at establishing a movement for change has foundered on the rock of aggressive assertions of individuality (often by the wealthy), such that A can't stand B, who refuses to work with C because of what D said to A five years ago, which was slanderous and resulted in B telling E, F and G never to work with D again because they simply can't be trusted. So, even though A-G all agree on the super-objective, they splinter into their own little cults to establish a coterie of like-minded disciples who will be faithful to their particular fragment of 'ever farther dis-union'. As a result, H, I and J just give up, even though their contributions and gifts would have been invaluable.
As someone very wise once said: '...a house divided against itself cannot stand.' His Grace will add that there's not a lot of point in building an entire estate of bungalows even if there's space for caravans and trailers. In the UK, Islam and the Greens have succeeded where (even) the Christians have not because they both (in different ways) induce fear: i) of civil unrest; ii) of plantetary destruction. His Grace is merely a philosopher and a theologian: perhaps a psychologist might care to comment.