Posts
"he was ejected from the meeting at an Essex pub."
Classy lot that BNP
Showing posts with label bnp. Show all posts
Showing posts with label bnp. Show all posts
Tuesday, 16 February 2010
Thursday, 11 February 2010
'Every Hindu and Sikh should be praising the BNP' | Politics | The Guardian
Very interesting. I always try to see everyone's point of view, and I can see why a Sikh would join the BNP, of course. Sikhs and Muslims have a pretty narcy history, so one taking sides against the other is hardly surprising. The far left's love-in with Islam mean that we could get into a case where the far-left and far-right have become so focused on Islam that they become engrained in that fight. That's the last thing we need.
What we need is community cohesion, a proper meritocracy where people are treated for who they are and what they do. A Muslim terrorist should be treated the same as a white, black, Sikh, Jew or mixed terrorist, to use an extreme example.
If blocs form and start seeing the other as the enemy then the country could end up torn apart, with the likes of Griffin cheering the split in the country they claim to love as it will enhance their power.
It's easy to judge people on their skin colour or background, but something wicked that way lies
What we need is community cohesion, a proper meritocracy where people are treated for who they are and what they do. A Muslim terrorist should be treated the same as a white, black, Sikh, Jew or mixed terrorist, to use an extreme example.
If blocs form and start seeing the other as the enemy then the country could end up torn apart, with the likes of Griffin cheering the split in the country they claim to love as it will enhance their power.
It's easy to judge people on their skin colour or background, but something wicked that way lies
Friday, 29 January 2010
Court gives BNP last chance to scrap whites-only policy
The party constitution all sounds deeply worrying to me. It's the fact that they are going on about one group to the exclusion of others that doesn't sit well with me, and doesn't sound very British. At our best we deal with people who who they themselves are, not their parents, birthplace or skin colour
Monday, 16 November 2009
more on tackling the BNP 2
"I think the link between alienation and the BNP, to me, comes from the Mail, Express, Telegraph and Murdochs grubby paws.
BNP and non-BNP people that i've talked to believe that the British are strangers in our own land, that we're down trodden and at the back of every queue due to political correctness, liberal elite etc. etc. you know the lines.
They see the BNP as cutting through this, and so are drawn to them. The BNP do have other policies, which tend to be populist and non-liberal. Some say they are far left, some say far right so it's probably fair to say that they're somewhere at that end of the doughnut.
Lots of people sympathetic to the BNP were carping about how Griffin wasn't allowed to talk about their wider policies on Question Time."
BNP and non-BNP people that i've talked to believe that the British are strangers in our own land, that we're down trodden and at the back of every queue due to political correctness, liberal elite etc. etc. you know the lines.
They see the BNP as cutting through this, and so are drawn to them. The BNP do have other policies, which tend to be populist and non-liberal. Some say they are far left, some say far right so it's probably fair to say that they're somewhere at that end of the doughnut.
Lots of people sympathetic to the BNP were carping about how Griffin wasn't allowed to talk about their wider policies on Question Time."
more on tackling the BNP
By me, from liberal conspiracy:
"My own views on this come (in part) from a conversation I had in a pub in south Essex with some mate's mates who were BNP supporters. At the time I was pretty unpleasant to them, in a down the pub in Essex sort of a way.
I think it was good to talk like that, and we were each pretty clear where we all stood. It's an area where the BNP came 1st, 2nd or 3rd in each council election that set of elections.
Some of their supporters are racist, but some feel abandoned by politics and politicians. One said that Labour used to be the party of the working man but now no-one was. So to some extent their is a link with Labour supporters. But Labour don't have a monopoly on the working class, and the BNP is a problem for all.
But the BNP is a legal political party so we have to accept that and engage with their supporters' concerns or they will feel that "the liberal elite" is not listening to them, reinforcing why they support the BNP in the first place"
"My own views on this come (in part) from a conversation I had in a pub in south Essex with some mate's mates who were BNP supporters. At the time I was pretty unpleasant to them, in a down the pub in Essex sort of a way.
I think it was good to talk like that, and we were each pretty clear where we all stood. It's an area where the BNP came 1st, 2nd or 3rd in each council election that set of elections.
Some of their supporters are racist, but some feel abandoned by politics and politicians. One said that Labour used to be the party of the working man but now no-one was. So to some extent their is a link with Labour supporters. But Labour don't have a monopoly on the working class, and the BNP is a problem for all.
But the BNP is a legal political party so we have to accept that and engage with their supporters' concerns or they will feel that "the liberal elite" is not listening to them, reinforcing why they support the BNP in the first place"
Tackling the BNP
From Liberal Conspiracy
My response:
"In my opinion, this post and the comments to go along with it are a disaster.
I very much disagree with much written in the post, and then the childish-ness and blaming each other of the first two comments is depressing.
Firstly, the BNP is probably a racist party.
So are all the people who support them racist?
I think the author (Sunny) does a terrible job of attempting to tackle the BNP problem by just damning everyone as a racist. We live in a democracy, the BNP have such a profile because they have support from many people. The author is typical of those who stick their heads in the sand and refuse to listen to the concerns of voters.
I'm from south Essex originally, where there is a great deal of support for the BNP from people of middle and lower classes. Sticking your head in the sand and slating people as racists rather than listening to what they have to say is bad for everyone, except the BNP.
The BNP thrives on the idea that Britian is being taken over by foreign-loving liberals who don't listen to/care about the "British" people. This post, to me, reinforces that view"
Original post
David Blackburn writes for the Spectator’s CoffeeHouse blog that the BNP is, No longer a racist party, but a party of racists, in response to the news that BNP membership looks to vote overwhelmingly in favour of allowing non-whites to join the party.
David is highly confused. This is because he says:
The Spectator has maintained that the party’s domestic policies are inspired by racial supremacist ideology and that its economic policies are like Dagenham – that is, three stops beyond Barking.
Yes, I’ll agree with that. The party’s domestic policies are indeed inspired by a racial supremacist ideology. Which is why people should avoid following those policies right? Except, he does on to say centrist parties “must engage with (and I mean engage with, not shout down)” BNP policies. What a muddle. ‘Engage’ is a mealy-mouthed word that usually means ‘follow’.
Earlier this year Tim Montgomerie at ConHome said:
but I do think part of any anti-BNP strategy means addressing popular concerns about immigration, access to housing and championing people’s patriotic instincts… while ALWAYS attacking their racism.
I don’t know how people can take this man so seriously. If a party’s policies are driven by racism then it’s pretty idiotic to say we should slam their policies but take their “concerns” seriously anyway, as if that isn’t what the BNP want. They’ll just turn around later and say, quite rightly, that the other parties are hypocritical for slamming them while doing what they advocate anyway.
This goes to the heart of right-wing stupidity and hypocrisy over immigration and the BNP. Last week this govt announced some even more tightening up of immigration from non-EU countries. The Tories inevitably attacked them for not going far enough. But immigration from non-EU countries make up a small fraction of our immigration – most of it comes from the EU. Any problems that people face in housing, public services, increased labour competition and changing areas people face will be from other European countries not India, Pakistan etc.
And so the Labour Party has essentially moved to the Conservative Party position, which is the same as the BNP Party position, that they want to restrict non-whites coming into the UK as much as possible. That small proportion must be vastly more threatening than the Eastern Europeans because even the Tories are not planning to stop EU-immigration.
The day after the BNP-QT debate a radio presenter on 5 Live asked a Tory MP if he would stop companies from hiring American bankers or Indian software consultants if firms here needed to employ them. Of course not, he replied. And what about if a football club wanted to employ a football player from Brazil? No? The Tories are not against that you see, but they are against cleaners from Nigeria because apparently they’re destroying our culture.
A sensible discussion on immigration would involve pointing out that EU immigration is responsible for the biggest shifts in our population, and that stopping the darkies from coming here wouldn’t have any impact. They should then respond by strengthening rights for workers in the lowest paid jobs so they’re not easily fired and replaced by cheaper Eastern EU workers.
It would also involve saying that globalisation inevitably means increased population mobility, and that if people felt threatened that a sense of community was breaking down: then efforts could be made to develop a more positive sense of national identity that accepts Britain as more racially and culturally diverse than the vision the Daily Mail has.
To drive home this agenda: it’s worth pointing out that even though the Green Party gets much more support and votes than the BNP – you’ll hardly ever see an editorial in a right-wing magazine or website saying we should take the Green Party’s ideas or policies seriously because so many people support them.
No – they’re too busy denying global warming. And yet they want to listen to the concerns of a smaller and obviously racist party.
And so we get two parties saying they hate the BNP while carrying out policies advocated by the BNP, cheered on by a bunch of people who want them to do exactly that.
No surprise then to find that most of the commenters on that Spectator thread are quite annoyed that the BNP is being criticised. After all, why the hypocrisy Speccie writers? You lot helped lay the bed for the BNP. Now you have to lie with their supporters
My response:
"In my opinion, this post and the comments to go along with it are a disaster.
I very much disagree with much written in the post, and then the childish-ness and blaming each other of the first two comments is depressing.
Firstly, the BNP is probably a racist party.
So are all the people who support them racist?
I think the author (Sunny) does a terrible job of attempting to tackle the BNP problem by just damning everyone as a racist. We live in a democracy, the BNP have such a profile because they have support from many people. The author is typical of those who stick their heads in the sand and refuse to listen to the concerns of voters.
I'm from south Essex originally, where there is a great deal of support for the BNP from people of middle and lower classes. Sticking your head in the sand and slating people as racists rather than listening to what they have to say is bad for everyone, except the BNP.
The BNP thrives on the idea that Britian is being taken over by foreign-loving liberals who don't listen to/care about the "British" people. This post, to me, reinforces that view"
Original post
David Blackburn writes for the Spectator’s CoffeeHouse blog that the BNP is, No longer a racist party, but a party of racists, in response to the news that BNP membership looks to vote overwhelmingly in favour of allowing non-whites to join the party.
David is highly confused. This is because he says:
The Spectator has maintained that the party’s domestic policies are inspired by racial supremacist ideology and that its economic policies are like Dagenham – that is, three stops beyond Barking.
Yes, I’ll agree with that. The party’s domestic policies are indeed inspired by a racial supremacist ideology. Which is why people should avoid following those policies right? Except, he does on to say centrist parties “must engage with (and I mean engage with, not shout down)” BNP policies. What a muddle. ‘Engage’ is a mealy-mouthed word that usually means ‘follow’.
Earlier this year Tim Montgomerie at ConHome said:
but I do think part of any anti-BNP strategy means addressing popular concerns about immigration, access to housing and championing people’s patriotic instincts… while ALWAYS attacking their racism.
I don’t know how people can take this man so seriously. If a party’s policies are driven by racism then it’s pretty idiotic to say we should slam their policies but take their “concerns” seriously anyway, as if that isn’t what the BNP want. They’ll just turn around later and say, quite rightly, that the other parties are hypocritical for slamming them while doing what they advocate anyway.
This goes to the heart of right-wing stupidity and hypocrisy over immigration and the BNP. Last week this govt announced some even more tightening up of immigration from non-EU countries. The Tories inevitably attacked them for not going far enough. But immigration from non-EU countries make up a small fraction of our immigration – most of it comes from the EU. Any problems that people face in housing, public services, increased labour competition and changing areas people face will be from other European countries not India, Pakistan etc.
And so the Labour Party has essentially moved to the Conservative Party position, which is the same as the BNP Party position, that they want to restrict non-whites coming into the UK as much as possible. That small proportion must be vastly more threatening than the Eastern Europeans because even the Tories are not planning to stop EU-immigration.
The day after the BNP-QT debate a radio presenter on 5 Live asked a Tory MP if he would stop companies from hiring American bankers or Indian software consultants if firms here needed to employ them. Of course not, he replied. And what about if a football club wanted to employ a football player from Brazil? No? The Tories are not against that you see, but they are against cleaners from Nigeria because apparently they’re destroying our culture.
A sensible discussion on immigration would involve pointing out that EU immigration is responsible for the biggest shifts in our population, and that stopping the darkies from coming here wouldn’t have any impact. They should then respond by strengthening rights for workers in the lowest paid jobs so they’re not easily fired and replaced by cheaper Eastern EU workers.
It would also involve saying that globalisation inevitably means increased population mobility, and that if people felt threatened that a sense of community was breaking down: then efforts could be made to develop a more positive sense of national identity that accepts Britain as more racially and culturally diverse than the vision the Daily Mail has.
To drive home this agenda: it’s worth pointing out that even though the Green Party gets much more support and votes than the BNP – you’ll hardly ever see an editorial in a right-wing magazine or website saying we should take the Green Party’s ideas or policies seriously because so many people support them.
No – they’re too busy denying global warming. And yet they want to listen to the concerns of a smaller and obviously racist party.
And so we get two parties saying they hate the BNP while carrying out policies advocated by the BNP, cheered on by a bunch of people who want them to do exactly that.
No surprise then to find that most of the commenters on that Spectator thread are quite annoyed that the BNP is being criticised. After all, why the hypocrisy Speccie writers? You lot helped lay the bed for the BNP. Now you have to lie with their supporters
Tuesday, 27 October 2009
Fact checks. Ish
Nick Griffin, you got factchecked bitch!
Well, not entirely. It's largely a bit about how nasty and wrong Nick Griffin is. Which he is.
Goes through what he said on Question Time, lots of it wasn't true.
""I do not have a conviction for Holocaust denial"
The BNP leader does not have a conviction for Holocaust denial because there is no such offence in English law. What he does have is a conviction in 1998 for inciting racial hatred by writing articles in The Rune magazine in which he denied the Holocaust and praised the Waffen SS. "
Well, not entirely. It's largely a bit about how nasty and wrong Nick Griffin is. Which he is.
Goes through what he said on Question Time, lots of it wasn't true.
""I do not have a conviction for Holocaust denial"
The BNP leader does not have a conviction for Holocaust denial because there is no such offence in English law. What he does have is a conviction in 1998 for inciting racial hatred by writing articles in The Rune magazine in which he denied the Holocaust and praised the Waffen SS. "
BNP support
Most people on the right were up in arms that the BNP were under-represented in the QT audience. But if their support is 2/3%, then they probably weren't as even 3% isn't much.
I'm never a great fan of polls, but here you go.
Typical bloody right
"A new Comres poll out today for the Independent shows that the weighted percentage of people who plan to vote for the BNP is down to their usual 2% average.
Following BBC Question Time there was some speculation their vote had jumped by a massive 50% from 2% to 3%. But that was also entirely within the margin of error.
Of respondents likely to vote, support for UKIP also remained low at 3%. Greens were slightly higher at 4%.
The poll also rubbished the myth that most BNP supporters stayed at home or had left other parties. When asked who respondents would vote for if they were legally required to, BNP support only rose to 3%. UKIP remained at 3% while the Greens rose to 7%.
Only 2% of all respondents saw themselves as natural BNP voters."
I'm never a great fan of polls, but here you go.
Typical bloody right
"A new Comres poll out today for the Independent shows that the weighted percentage of people who plan to vote for the BNP is down to their usual 2% average.
Following BBC Question Time there was some speculation their vote had jumped by a massive 50% from 2% to 3%. But that was also entirely within the margin of error.
Of respondents likely to vote, support for UKIP also remained low at 3%. Greens were slightly higher at 4%.
The poll also rubbished the myth that most BNP supporters stayed at home or had left other parties. When asked who respondents would vote for if they were legally required to, BNP support only rose to 3%. UKIP remained at 3% while the Greens rose to 7%.
Only 2% of all respondents saw themselves as natural BNP voters."
Margaret Hodge on the BNP
A really good piece, I think, on how to tackle the BNP. Starts with the idea of dealing with people as they are, not as we'd like to see them.
About re-connecting with voters, listening to their concerns and linking what people want with what happens.
About re-connecting with voters, listening to their concerns and linking what people want with what happens.
Friday, 23 October 2009
London
Apparently, London is "a city that is no longer British"
Fuck off Griffin. I live in London, and we're as British as roast beef mate. London has ALWAYS been a melting pot for different people. But it's the CAPITAL, that says something.
Conspiracy nutter that bloke
Fuck off Griffin. I live in London, and we're as British as roast beef mate. London has ALWAYS been a melting pot for different people. But it's the CAPITAL, that says something.
Conspiracy nutter that bloke
Thursday, 22 October 2009
Question Time
Got to really ain't ya?
I thought Straw and Warsi had a good debate about immigration, but overall none of them really tackled a big issue, which is that people buy the myth that English people have been made into second-class citizens.
The BNP thrive on the idea of a conspiracy, that X, Y and Z are conspiring against X, Y, and Z (the indigenous British in this case).
It's a shame that immigration is not tackled and then it takes the BNP getting 1 million votes before it enters mainstream debate, and then most of the show is about it.
Griffin showed himself as a far-right nasty-man who relies on the idea of this conspiracy, but the issues which force people into his grubby paws were not properly addressed. Straw tried, and I thought did pretty well all night, but didn't make the case forcefully enough. People need to know that it's ok to feel proud to be British without being labelled racist, which is something the Tories have traditionally done far better than Labour. Due, I think, to our more bleeding heart liberal wing (including me to some extent).
Griffin's a right winger, so I don't like him. But if enough people shun pride in their origins (e.g. being British), there is a vacuum created into which the likes of Griffin step.
I thought Straw and Warsi had a good debate about immigration, but overall none of them really tackled a big issue, which is that people buy the myth that English people have been made into second-class citizens.
The BNP thrive on the idea of a conspiracy, that X, Y and Z are conspiring against X, Y, and Z (the indigenous British in this case).
It's a shame that immigration is not tackled and then it takes the BNP getting 1 million votes before it enters mainstream debate, and then most of the show is about it.
Griffin showed himself as a far-right nasty-man who relies on the idea of this conspiracy, but the issues which force people into his grubby paws were not properly addressed. Straw tried, and I thought did pretty well all night, but didn't make the case forcefully enough. People need to know that it's ok to feel proud to be British without being labelled racist, which is something the Tories have traditionally done far better than Labour. Due, I think, to our more bleeding heart liberal wing (including me to some extent).
Griffin's a right winger, so I don't like him. But if enough people shun pride in their origins (e.g. being British), there is a vacuum created into which the likes of Griffin step.
Factcheck
That Nick Griffin MEP is getting a lot of attention ain't he?
Here's another little number from Factchecker.
Apparently, Griffin is as close as it gets to lying without claiming that Southend United are on course to win the World Cup.
I love factchecker, and I'd really like to see much more use made of it
Here's another little number from Factchecker.
Apparently, Griffin is as close as it gets to lying without claiming that Southend United are on course to win the World Cup.
I love factchecker, and I'd really like to see much more use made of it
Wednesday, 21 October 2009
A gay non-racist pro-asian BNP member
Don't see this every day, a turkey voting for christmas.
I wonder if the BNP will beat him up. If they do, will he deserve it?
I say that because I think the BNP use violence as a policy. I think Griffin's attack on the generals as Nazis who should be hanged shows his true colours.
Anyway, quote:
"I am voting for the BNP, even though some of their policies could negatively affect my life - I'm gay and married to an asian, and the BNP want to get rid of civil partnerships and "inter-racial" marriages.
My partner will also be voting for them. One doesn't have to agree with everything a party says in order to vote for it. No party has every provided me with everything I want. My partner has no fear of forced deportation because that is not the BNP policy.
Why will be voting BNP? Because like the other 600,000 voters the BNP have acquired in the last 4 years, we are more worried about the failure of successive governments to stem the rise of islam in Europe than we are about losing some of our own civil rights.
Am I racist? Is my asian husband racist? Islam is not a race - there are white muslims. Once the BNP change their constitution, both my partner and I will become paid up members. As will many more people. The BNP's talk about "race" is foolish. And it will end. They can be nationalists and anti-immigration without using that idiotic concept.
All the people posting here saying the BNP have no sense of history should start reading some of the many books published in the last 5 years on the history of islam and the rise of islam in Europe. Then they will see that this is the number one political issue of our generation. That's why Geert Wilders party is the leading party in the Netherlands."
I wonder if the BNP will beat him up. If they do, will he deserve it?
I say that because I think the BNP use violence as a policy. I think Griffin's attack on the generals as Nazis who should be hanged shows his true colours.
Anyway, quote:
"I am voting for the BNP, even though some of their policies could negatively affect my life - I'm gay and married to an asian, and the BNP want to get rid of civil partnerships and "inter-racial" marriages.
My partner will also be voting for them. One doesn't have to agree with everything a party says in order to vote for it. No party has every provided me with everything I want. My partner has no fear of forced deportation because that is not the BNP policy.
Why will be voting BNP? Because like the other 600,000 voters the BNP have acquired in the last 4 years, we are more worried about the failure of successive governments to stem the rise of islam in Europe than we are about losing some of our own civil rights.
Am I racist? Is my asian husband racist? Islam is not a race - there are white muslims. Once the BNP change their constitution, both my partner and I will become paid up members. As will many more people. The BNP's talk about "race" is foolish. And it will end. They can be nationalists and anti-immigration without using that idiotic concept.
All the people posting here saying the BNP have no sense of history should start reading some of the many books published in the last 5 years on the history of islam and the rise of islam in Europe. Then they will see that this is the number one political issue of our generation. That's why Geert Wilders party is the leading party in the Netherlands."
A liberal (Socialist) take on free speech and the BNP
Not my words, but my sentiment:
"The fact that other parties are trying to silence a minority voice makes them no better than the BNP.
Rational people are unlikely to vote for them so why is there such a furore?
Censorship and biggotry go hand in hand, it breeds discontent and hatred.
There will be a backlash if they try to prevent this, it is irrelevant that the government and other parties disagree with alternative viewpoints, the simplest fact that the governemnt are legislating against free speech and opinion is an attack on all our freedoms.
Let them have their say, let us make up our own minds. The only way BNP will benefit from this is if their argument is more convincing than others and if that is the case than maybe the other parties don't have the right people or ideas.
BTW I totally disagree with the BNP policies."
"The fact that other parties are trying to silence a minority voice makes them no better than the BNP.
Rational people are unlikely to vote for them so why is there such a furore?
Censorship and biggotry go hand in hand, it breeds discontent and hatred.
There will be a backlash if they try to prevent this, it is irrelevant that the government and other parties disagree with alternative viewpoints, the simplest fact that the governemnt are legislating against free speech and opinion is an attack on all our freedoms.
Let them have their say, let us make up our own minds. The only way BNP will benefit from this is if their argument is more convincing than others and if that is the case than maybe the other parties don't have the right people or ideas.
BTW I totally disagree with the BNP policies."
Monday, 19 October 2009
Daily Mail bollocks comment of the day
From Mad 'Mel Phillips'
I haven't read the whole thing coz i'd get angry. I can't stand that woman. Which is the point, she's a WUM.
Her headline "Our leaders are queuing to prove their virtue by denouncing the vile BNP. But it's they who are to blame for its rise".
I take issue with that, I think it's the likes of her and Littlejohn going on about immigrants taking over, the middle classes being squeezed from all angles and their usual lines that they trot out about the English being under seige.
Hardly surprising if someone then believes them, is it?
So i don't buy it.
"[Griffin] opposes mass immigration, Islamisation and the loss of sovereignty to the EU...These are all legitimate concerns which are widely held by people who fear the loss of Britain's historic identity - but which are stigmatised as beyond the pale by an intelligentsia which considers any such expression of nationalistic sentiment to be a form of racism"
This about nationalistic sentiment being seen as racism is largely bollocks, and the kind of bollocks that provides a great deal of support for the BNP. Publications like the Mail are doing most of the BNP's ground work for them.
"The BNP really is racist. Its constitution states it is 'wholly opposed to racial integration' between British and non-European people, and that it wants to restore 'the overwhelmingly white makeup' of Britain before 1948.
But because legitimate feelings about national identity are also deemed to be racist, Griffin has been able to present the entire political mainstream as a conspiracy against the interests of ordinary people."
Having a national identify of which you're proud is not racist, and only some mentals on the margins SEE it as racist. The problem is that publications like the Mail are full of stories every day about how Britains are being attacked by the political establishment for being British, which is not true.
Typical mad bullshit:
"The liberal intelligentsia has put the BNP's rise down to the bigotry and imbecility of ordinary people.
Having turned patriotism from a civic virtue into a racial crime, however, it is that elite which has driven thousands of decent, patriotic British people, both white and dark-skinned, to supporting the BNP."
The liberal elite? Ha!
I added these pearls of wisdom, let's see if they post it:
"What utter rubbish.
I'm a lefty liberal and i'm very proud of being British. I don't consider it racist for anyone to be proud of who they are or where they're from, and no one else I know does either.
It's cynical Wind Up Merchants like Mad Mel Phillips that are to blame for the rise of the BNP, spreading this myth that British people are under attack, rubbish!
I'm British and proud, and the BNP make me sick to my stomach"
I haven't read the whole thing coz i'd get angry. I can't stand that woman. Which is the point, she's a WUM.
Her headline "Our leaders are queuing to prove their virtue by denouncing the vile BNP. But it's they who are to blame for its rise".
I take issue with that, I think it's the likes of her and Littlejohn going on about immigrants taking over, the middle classes being squeezed from all angles and their usual lines that they trot out about the English being under seige.
Hardly surprising if someone then believes them, is it?
So i don't buy it.
"[Griffin] opposes mass immigration, Islamisation and the loss of sovereignty to the EU...These are all legitimate concerns which are widely held by people who fear the loss of Britain's historic identity - but which are stigmatised as beyond the pale by an intelligentsia which considers any such expression of nationalistic sentiment to be a form of racism"
This about nationalistic sentiment being seen as racism is largely bollocks, and the kind of bollocks that provides a great deal of support for the BNP. Publications like the Mail are doing most of the BNP's ground work for them.
"The BNP really is racist. Its constitution states it is 'wholly opposed to racial integration' between British and non-European people, and that it wants to restore 'the overwhelmingly white makeup' of Britain before 1948.
But because legitimate feelings about national identity are also deemed to be racist, Griffin has been able to present the entire political mainstream as a conspiracy against the interests of ordinary people."
Having a national identify of which you're proud is not racist, and only some mentals on the margins SEE it as racist. The problem is that publications like the Mail are full of stories every day about how Britains are being attacked by the political establishment for being British, which is not true.
Typical mad bullshit:
"The liberal intelligentsia has put the BNP's rise down to the bigotry and imbecility of ordinary people.
Having turned patriotism from a civic virtue into a racial crime, however, it is that elite which has driven thousands of decent, patriotic British people, both white and dark-skinned, to supporting the BNP."
The liberal elite? Ha!
I added these pearls of wisdom, let's see if they post it:
"What utter rubbish.
I'm a lefty liberal and i'm very proud of being British. I don't consider it racist for anyone to be proud of who they are or where they're from, and no one else I know does either.
It's cynical Wind Up Merchants like Mad Mel Phillips that are to blame for the rise of the BNP, spreading this myth that British people are under attack, rubbish!
I'm British and proud, and the BNP make me sick to my stomach"
Thursday, 15 October 2009
BNP open to everyone?
I do think it's pretty funny:
"BNP leader Nick Griffin has agreed to ask his party to amend its constitution so it does not discriminate on grounds of race or religion, a court heard."
At least they could say they're not racist now.
Funny.
BUT, will any ethnics join? Who'd want to? More than most would expect, i'd guess.
'Racist Party Elects Black Leader' would be a great story.
Now this snippit is interesting:
"A BNP spokesman told the BBC: "We have got to comply if we want to stay in the game. Of course it's not right, it's an infringement of our rights.""
That is, surely, the right to be racist. A very telling quote
"BNP leader Nick Griffin has agreed to ask his party to amend its constitution so it does not discriminate on grounds of race or religion, a court heard."
At least they could say they're not racist now.
Funny.
BUT, will any ethnics join? Who'd want to? More than most would expect, i'd guess.
'Racist Party Elects Black Leader' would be a great story.
Now this snippit is interesting:
"A BNP spokesman told the BBC: "We have got to comply if we want to stay in the game. Of course it's not right, it's an infringement of our rights.""
That is, surely, the right to be racist. A very telling quote
Saturday, 12 September 2009
Racism and right-wing extremism
From here, my pennies:
Cor blimey, what a mess.
We have a media doing their best to insight people to believe they are under attack by benefit-stealing foreigners, people who believe it who aren’t proper racists, proper racists and those who protest against racists starting a riot because they’re bored.
There are many people at fault, and what to do is a big problem. There is no doubt plenty of people feel (rightly?) that they have been abandonded by the political establishment and they are angry. I don’t think University-educated middle-class liberals talking down to them and telling them they are naughty for supporting the likes of the BNP is going to help.
There is a serious problem and the MUWs at the Mail and Express etc. are throwing gallons of petrol on the fire, but blaming them is not enough
Cor blimey, what a mess.
We have a media doing their best to insight people to believe they are under attack by benefit-stealing foreigners, people who believe it who aren’t proper racists, proper racists and those who protest against racists starting a riot because they’re bored.
There are many people at fault, and what to do is a big problem. There is no doubt plenty of people feel (rightly?) that they have been abandonded by the political establishment and they are angry. I don’t think University-educated middle-class liberals talking down to them and telling them they are naughty for supporting the likes of the BNP is going to help.
There is a serious problem and the MUWs at the Mail and Express etc. are throwing gallons of petrol on the fire, but blaming them is not enough
Tuesday, 8 September 2009
BNP on the BBC
This again. There's a lot of it about.
i’m not happy about the lack of consideration for free speech on Liberal Conspiracy.I thought it was supposed to be a LIBERAL forum. Being a liberal means tolerating those you don’t agree with, even when they are nasty racist nutters. the point is that everyone seems to be calculating what to do on the basis of what will do most damage to the BNP, rather than considering what is best for democracy. I know the BNP in power is bad for democracy as we all know what they’d do, but i’m getting pretty sick of so called ‘liberals’ trying to deny basic liberal rights to people they disagree (very strongly) with.
"This article does rather seem to imply that the British public are inbred morons, ready to march straight to the ballot box and vote for whichever candidate has the nicest sounding name. I have a bit more faith in them than that (most of them, anyway).”
I don’t. (prove me wrong, britain, prove me wrong)
Benevelont dictatorship is the way forward I say. I only post here because nobody has created ‘authoritarian conspiracy’ yet.
More seriously, the problem isn’t so much the BNP’s appearence, but the fact nobody else in the mainstream parties is going to be capable of making pro-immigration arguments. We’ve had over a decade of hysteria about immigration that leads to moronic comments about britain having an open door policy (it doesn’t – anyone who thinks this is asked to explain why it would be necessary to have a campaign to allow Iraqi interpreters into the UK if we actually did have an open doors policy) and frequent inaccurate assertions about the benefits immigrants are entitled to. So much so that I doubt even the more literate and nuanced members of the anti-immigration brigade would be capable of writing a few paragraphs that put the pro-immigration case if a gun was stuck to their head – which isn’t the case with other political issues where most people at least know some of the arguments against their own position. I’d rather see Griffin face a couple of academics from Compas or the centre for migration policy research than a couple of loyal party hacks reciting the party line.
For that matter I’d rather see an entire panel of experienced academics discuss the issues of the day than a bunch of party loyalists more interested in making soundbites. Imagine a panel comprising proffessors of economics, criminolgy, international relations, history, social policy and physics. Now that would be worth watching."
Bearded Socialist:
"I'm certainly with you on the panel of specialists rather than party hacks, sounds amazing. But there would only be you and me watching it because it's 'boring'. Even if we got thousands to sign up to support it, it wouldn't never get off the ground because it's not 'young' or 'sexy' enough.
On addressing the issues, you're quite right.
The media are full of stories every day about migrants coming over here, stealing our jobs, lazing around on benefits, committing crimes, overtaking our culture, putting down the ingenous people.
I don't think it's true, but the fact that it's there all day every day makes it become near enough true.
That, to me, is a big part of the problem. I wonder how much of the BNP's support comes from personal experience, how much from the media"
i’m not happy about the lack of consideration for free speech on Liberal Conspiracy.I thought it was supposed to be a LIBERAL forum. Being a liberal means tolerating those you don’t agree with, even when they are nasty racist nutters. the point is that everyone seems to be calculating what to do on the basis of what will do most damage to the BNP, rather than considering what is best for democracy. I know the BNP in power is bad for democracy as we all know what they’d do, but i’m getting pretty sick of so called ‘liberals’ trying to deny basic liberal rights to people they disagree (very strongly) with.
"This article does rather seem to imply that the British public are inbred morons, ready to march straight to the ballot box and vote for whichever candidate has the nicest sounding name. I have a bit more faith in them than that (most of them, anyway).”
I don’t. (prove me wrong, britain, prove me wrong)
Benevelont dictatorship is the way forward I say. I only post here because nobody has created ‘authoritarian conspiracy’ yet.
More seriously, the problem isn’t so much the BNP’s appearence, but the fact nobody else in the mainstream parties is going to be capable of making pro-immigration arguments. We’ve had over a decade of hysteria about immigration that leads to moronic comments about britain having an open door policy (it doesn’t – anyone who thinks this is asked to explain why it would be necessary to have a campaign to allow Iraqi interpreters into the UK if we actually did have an open doors policy) and frequent inaccurate assertions about the benefits immigrants are entitled to. So much so that I doubt even the more literate and nuanced members of the anti-immigration brigade would be capable of writing a few paragraphs that put the pro-immigration case if a gun was stuck to their head – which isn’t the case with other political issues where most people at least know some of the arguments against their own position. I’d rather see Griffin face a couple of academics from Compas or the centre for migration policy research than a couple of loyal party hacks reciting the party line.
For that matter I’d rather see an entire panel of experienced academics discuss the issues of the day than a bunch of party loyalists more interested in making soundbites. Imagine a panel comprising proffessors of economics, criminolgy, international relations, history, social policy and physics. Now that would be worth watching."
Bearded Socialist:
"I'm certainly with you on the panel of specialists rather than party hacks, sounds amazing. But there would only be you and me watching it because it's 'boring'. Even if we got thousands to sign up to support it, it wouldn't never get off the ground because it's not 'young' or 'sexy' enough.
On addressing the issues, you're quite right.
The media are full of stories every day about migrants coming over here, stealing our jobs, lazing around on benefits, committing crimes, overtaking our culture, putting down the ingenous people.
I don't think it's true, but the fact that it's there all day every day makes it become near enough true.
That, to me, is a big part of the problem. I wonder how much of the BNP's support comes from personal experience, how much from the media"
Monday, 7 September 2009
BNP on the BBC
From this discussion:
I personally think that as an elected and legal political party the BNP have every right to a platform, even if i can't stand the garbage that comes out of their mouths. I don't think the educated liberal elite has the right to ban them any more than the BNP has the right to ride roughshod over the educated liberal elite.
My response to the original post includes an anti-Ian Dale rant
I personally think that as an elected and legal political party the BNP have every right to a platform, even if i can't stand the garbage that comes out of their mouths. I don't think the educated liberal elite has the right to ban them any more than the BNP has the right to ride roughshod over the educated liberal elite.
My response to the original post includes an anti-Ian Dale rant
Wednesday, 2 September 2009
Baseless attack?
The BNP come under fire from Kevin Maguire here.
Usually i do like a bit of Kev, but there is nothing to support what he says in this article.
I'm as much against the BNP as he, or indeed anyone who's not an idiot, but I don't like the way he's gone about it here.
Stirring up fear and hatred is what the BNP do, we've got to be better than that to defeat them.
Usually i do like a bit of Kev, but there is nothing to support what he says in this article.
I'm as much against the BNP as he, or indeed anyone who's not an idiot, but I don't like the way he's gone about it here.
Stirring up fear and hatred is what the BNP do, we've got to be better than that to defeat them.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
