Creeping fascism in the U.K.: a model for others? - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

Baraka_Guru · 06-09-2009, 03:50 PM

Quote:

Britain in shock after sending BNP to European Parliament
June 8th, 2009 - 7:17 pm ICT by IANS
By Dipankar De Sarkar

London, June 8 (IANS) Britain, one of the most multi-cultural countries in Europe, woke up Monday to the news that it had sent to the European Parliament two candidates whose party will not admit Blacks and Asians as members.

The news was greeted with shock and dismay by leaders of mainstream political parties, who had pleaded with voters not to vote for the British National Party (BNP), which campaigns on an anti-immigration plank and whose membership is reserved for Whites.

“It’s a terrible thing that happened last night,” Harriet Harman, Deputy Leader of the ruling Labour Party said after election results late Sunday night showed wins for BNP chief Nick Griffin and his colleague Andrew Brons.

“I think it is horrific that we have representing Britain in the European Parliament people who think that black people and people of Asian origin have no place in this country,” she said.

Foreign Minister David Miliband admitted the BNP’s success was “very damaging to Britain”.

Griffin, who was convicted in 1998 of distributing material likely to incited racial hatred, won from the North West England constituency, while Brons took the seat for the Yorkshire and the Humber region.

Describing their wins as “”desperately depressing,” Conservative Party leader David Cameron said: “The BNP are beyond the pale. They are an appalling bunch of people. I hope this is the extent of what they can do and that they go no further.”

Liberal Democrat leader Nick Clegg said the BNP was “party of thugs and fascists.”

“They are nothing but racists in suits,” added Britain’s Health Minister Andy Burnham.

The far-right party’s wins were put down to anger over the global economic recession and voter disenchantment with mainstream political parties whose MPs have been found to be claiming thousands of pounds in parliamentary expenses from taxpayers’ cash.

Across the 27 nations of the European Union that went to the polls ending June 4, Conservative centre-right parties generally outperformed ruling social democrats and centre-left parties despite the global recession - a result that some observers put down to better organisation.

“The BNP exploited people’s fears. We have to work to tackle the fear that led people to vote for the BNP,” Harman said.

Griffin denied his party is racist, saying “This is ordinary decent people in Yorkshire kicking back against racism, because racism in this country is now directed overwhelmingly against people who look like me [white].”

Voter turnout across Europe was a low 43.4 percent.

In Britain, Labour was beaten to third place as the Conservatives took 25 seats, and the right-wing United Kindom Independence Party (UKIP) 13 - the same number as Labour but with a greater share of votes.

The Liberal Democrats won 11 seats while the BNP and the Greens took two each.

Britain in shock after sending BNP to European Parliament

Politics outside of the U.S. and the Middle East tend to go by quietly here on the TFP, but I'd like you to take a good look at what's going on in the U.K. In the wake of the decimation of the Labour Party, the BNP has picked up two seats. The BNP (The British National Party) is a far-right, whites-only political party. (Read: fascist)

From their manifesto:

Quote:

We demand the right to preserve our culture, heritage, and identity. Our national character and native institutions are a precious inheritance, for which our ancestors have paid a high price over the centuries. They are not to be casually thrown away in the name of a "modernisation" that is often no more than a thinly-veiled cover for a quasi-Marxist cultural war against all things white, European and male.

Quote:

Our first step will be to shut the door. A BNP government would accept no further immigration from any of the parts of the world which present the prospect of an almost limitless flow of immigration: Africa, Asia, China, Eastern and South Eastern Europe, the Middle East and South America would all be placed on an immediate ‘stop’ list. This would later be subject to review in the case of genuine students accepted for training as part of our long-term policy of helping to build up Third World economies in order to facilitate the voluntary return of their nationals or their descendants under our long-term resettlement programme.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/shared/bsp/h..._manifesto.pdf Have a closer look for more references to White Britain.

Basically, BNP would like Britain to return to its former White glory. They have recently been legitimized as a political party by winning two seats in Europe under Britain.

I find it hard to believe that it is even legal for an essentially racist party to be able to run for elections.

Do you find BNP policies to be racist? If not, then what are they?
Is there anything wrong with BNP holding political power?
Does this gel with rights and freedoms (both in politics and in policy)?
Do you think the BNP's seats are just temporary as the Labour Party sorts out their mess?
Do you see the BNP gaining power? Do you see them influencing other, similar parties in Europe?
Is the BNP a powerless party in the grander scheme of things, or do they do harm race relations in the U.K. and beyond?

I think this is a serious blow to race relations in the U.K. I will say with no reservations that the U.K. now has blatant racists with racist policies holding political seats. As their manifesto implies, they'd like to send away their "coloreds" to their nation of heritage, despite actually being Britons...in order to make Britain a better, whiter place. They actually have a program for this.

What do you think of this? Is this just opportunism at a time of Labour's disintegration? Is this telling of worsening problems in the U.K.?

ObieX · 06-09-2009, 05:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Baraka_Guru

What do you think of this? Is this just opportunism at a time of Labour's disintegration? Is this telling of worsening problems in the U.K.?

Admittedly i know next to nothing about the politics of the UK but that is the first thing that came to mind as i was reading this.

That's the problem when the major parties get big heads with power and start to go corrupt or just fuck up.. it opens the door for the loonies to step in and make things even worse.

Personally i feel if the BNP wants to think that way they can.. but the UK is very different from America when it comes to stuff like free speech from what I've seen (as is the rest of Europe.) If the people want to elect them into office they must feel the same way, otherwise why would they throw their vote to them?

They WERE elected. Its not like they just moved in and took a seat. Taking that into account you have to then realize that the "problem" is pretty wide-spread. There have to be quite a lot of people who feel the same way over there.

As long as the don't go all Nazi there's probably little harm in them getting into office.

Strange Famous · 06-10-2009, 01:43 PM

What I dont like is that no politician has the guts to say that the people who voted BNP are racist.

The is a party which will not allow you to join it unless you are white

This is a party who denies the reality of the holocaust

This is a party who supports "voluntary repatriation" of coloured people

__

They are racists, and the people who voted them (about 6% of a turn out of about 34% of the electorate in the North West and Yorkshire and Humber) are not so stupid that they do not know they are voting for racist candidates

On the plus side, the increased media exposure they will get will likely show those who voted for them how pathetic, how hateful, how corrupt, and how weak the BNP is.

On the negative side, the people of those constituancies should feel a grave sense of shame today, and 3 million Euro of taxpayers money will now fund racist and anti-semitic propogande from these smut peddlers.

highthief · 06-10-2009, 02:54 PM

Whenever we see tough economic times parties like this tend to get a support. The Depression of the 1930s saw so many such parties across Europe and North America.

It's sad that they get this support but I take solace that they are a dying breed.

Charlatan · 06-10-2009, 03:51 PM

I am always amazed at what people will cling to when faced with tough times. Highthief is right to point out that this sort of reactionary voting is often associated with times of political and economic strife.

In fact, I would suggest that it isn't that many steps removed from the "Buy American" reactions we are seeing in the US. Same impetus, different flavour. We are seeing similar discussions here. There are articles in the papers discussing how "foreign workers" are taking jobs from locals.

ottopilot · 06-10-2009, 07:36 PM

We should worry about this trend as much as as we should worry about progressives and Eugenics. It's a response to a cultural pendulum swinging too far one way, and then the other. The wingnuts will burn themselves out.

roachboy · 06-10-2009, 07:46 PM

progressives and eugenics because....

this sounds not terribly unlike what happened in france when the front national started winning seats in local governments, or at the point jean-marie le pen got over 5% of the popular vote in a presidential election. people went "wait--they're fascists. no, really." the effect of it (so far) has been to freeze the fn at or below the levels it attained. and it also apparently solidified a constuency. which is odd.

ottopilot · 06-10-2009, 08:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by roachboy

progressives and eugenics because....

this sounds not terribly unlike what happened in france when the front national started winning seats in local governments, or at the point jean-marie le pen got over 5% of the popular vote in a presidential election. people went "wait--they're fascists. no, really." the effect of it (so far) has been to freeze the fn at or below the levels it attained. and it also apparently solidified a constuency. which is odd.

I'm just drawing on the extremes (as usual) to make a point. I don't think there is much to worry about here... squeaky wheels and their 5 minutes of fame.

tisonlyi · 06-21-2009, 05:11 PM

I think there should be a place at the table for every stripe of opinion, plenty of govt's around the world have coalitions with unashamed or crypto-fascists forming a minority partner. It should be that way, minority views should have representation.

The Greens, a very junior partner in partnership with the Social Democrats in Germany at the turn of the millennium had the country ban nuclear power and ramped up production and deployment of wind turbines and start up a mass of solar and other renewable industries... Not bad.

The turbines are a damned impressive sight as you travel through the country as well... Poetic, even.

Hey, if we hate the ultra-right, we have to start boycotting Israel.

wugglywoo · 06-22-2009, 08:40 AM

As someone said to me (or at least, I think someone said this to me. It could have been some news person for all I remember!), it's good that the BNP got elected to the European parliament, because this way they can make absolute idiots out of themselves in as grand a scale as possible. The whole of Europe will see how foolish they are. What could be better than that?

Daniel_ · 06-22-2009, 10:25 AM

Can we all just remember that the BNP got 6% of the vote in the two constituencies they fought, and people are suggesting that this makes the country racist.

The 7% that the Pirate Party got just across the North Sea doesn't make us all declare a new era of liberal file sharing is on the way.

Also, you have to remember that this vote came after weeks of damaging revelations about MPs expenses, which made many people want to not vote for traditional candidates.

Strange Famous · 06-22-2009, 10:33 AM

The BNP vote held steady while the Labour vote slipped away. This in a backgroud of Labour desperately trying to get the vote out in the North West especially telling them "The BNP might get in if you dont vote"

Of course it doesnt make the country racist, but what I am sick and tired of is every mainstream politician saying "dont blame the people who voted BNP, they arent really racist, they just dont know what the BNP really is"

I say all of those people voted for a racist party and they should be held acountable.

But what an awful piece of shit Nick Griffin is.

irateplatypus · 06-27-2009, 05:06 AM

i hope other parties draw this lesson from BNP success: constituents have not abandoned the nation-state though some political and intellectual circles have undermined it for decades. large numbers still value national allegiances as the primary means of ensuring their security and freedom. an appreciable number of these people are now willing to ally themselves with racist organizations.

mainstream parties are boosting the appeal of BNP by ignoring their constituents' complaints. there are plenty of rational and sober critiques to be made of current UK immigration, EU, and assimilation policies that do not throw vile racism into the mix. politicians should address those concerns before the issue becomes so desperate that more citizens justify supporting racist parties.

tisonlyi · 06-27-2009, 07:01 AM

Dar al-harb? Churchill fetish? Hmm.

You do know that the man wanted Britain into the EU far deeper and far more enthusiastically than anything pretty much anyone wants at the moment? That he encouraged and cheered us into the EEA and an economic arrangement with the Nordic countries that was a lot more integrated than the EU at the time we joined that. Right?

Quote:

We must build a kind of United States of Europe!
by SirWinston Churchill

An address at the University of Zurich, 19 September 1946

Mr. President, Ladies and Gentlemen,

I AM HONOURED to-day by being received in your ancient university and by the adress which had been given to me on your behalf and which I greatly value.

I wish to speak to you to-day about the tragedy of Europe. This noble continent, comprising on the whole the fairest and the most cultivated regions of the earth, enjoying a temperate and equable climate, is the home of all the great parent races of the western world. It is the fountain of Christian faith and Christian ethics. It is the origin of most of the culture, the arts, philosophy and science both of ancient and modern time. If Europe were once united in the sharing of its common inheritance, there would be no limit to the happiness, to the prosperity and the glory which its three or four million people would enjoy. Yet it is from Europe that have sprung that series of frightful nationalistic quarrels, originated by the Teutonic nations in their rise to power, which we have seen in this twentieth century and even in our own lifetime, wreck the peace and mar the prospects of all mankind.

And what is the plight to which Europe has been reduced? Some of the smaller States have indeed made a good recovery, but over wide areas a vast quivering mass of tormented, hungry, care-worn and bewildered human beings gape at the ruins of their cities and their homes, and scan the dark horizons for the approach of some new peril, tyranny or terror. Among the victors there is a babel of voices; among the vanquished the sullen silence of despair. That is all that Europeans, grouped in so many ancient states and nations, that is all that the Germanic races have got by tearing each other to pieces and spreading havoc far and wide. Indeed but for the fact that the great Republic across the Atlantic Ocean has at length realised that the ruin or enslavement of Europe would involve their own fate as well, and has stretched out hands of succour and of guidance, but for that the Dark Ages would have returned in all their cruelty and squalor. Gentlemen, they may still return.

Yet all the while there is a remedy which, if it were generally and spontaneously adopted by the great majority of people in many lands, would as if by a miracle transform the whole scene, and would in a few years make all Europe, or the greater part of it, as free and as happy as Switzerland is to-day. What is this sovereign remedy? It is to re-create the European Family, or as much of it as we can, and to provide it with a structure under which it can dwell in peace, in safety and in freedom. We must build a kind of United States of Europe. In this way only will hundreds of millions of toilers be able to regain the simple joys and hopes which make life worth living. The process is simple. All that is needed is the resolve of hundreds of millions of men and women to do right instead of wrong and to gain as their reward blessing instead of cursing.

Much work, Ladies and Gentlemen, has been done upon this task by the exertions of the Pan-European Union which owes so much to Count Coudenhove-Kalergi and which commanded the services of the famous French patriot and statesman Aristide Briand. There is also that immense body of doctrine and procedure, which was brought into being amid high hopes after the first world war. I mean the League of Nations. The League of Nations did not fail because of its principles or conceptions. It failed because these principles were deserted by those States who had brought it into being. It failed because the governments of those days feared to face the facts, and act while time remained. This disaster must not be repeated. There is therefore much knowledge and material with which to build; and also bitter dear bought experience to stir the builders.

I was very glad to read in the newspapers two days ago that my friend President Truman had expressed his interest and sympathy with this great design. There is no reason why a regional organization of Europe should in any way conflict with the world organization of the United Nations. On the contrary, I believe that the larger synthesis will only survive if it is founded upon coherent natural groupings. There is already a natural grouping in the western hemisphere. We British have our own Commonwealth of Nations. These do not weaken, on the contrary they strengthen, the world organization. They are in fact its main support. And why should there not be a European group which could give a sense of enlarged patriotism and common citizenship to the distracted peoples of this turbulent and mighty continent? And why should it not take its rightful place with other great groupings and help to shape the onward destinies of men? In order that this should be accomplished there must be an act of faith in which millions of families speaking many languages must consciously take part.

We all know that the two world wars through which we have passed arose out of the vain passion of a newly-united Germany to play the dominating part in the world. In this last struggle crimes and massacres have been committed for which there is no parallel since the invasion of the Mongols in the fourteenth century and no equal at any time in human history. The guilty must be punished. Germany must be deprived of the power to rearm and make another aggressive war. But when all this has been done, as it will be done, as it is being done, then there must be an end to retribution. There must be what Mr. Gladstone many years ago called “a blessed act of oblivion”. We must all turn our backs upon the horrors of the past. We must look to the future. We cannot afford to drag forward across the years that are to come the hatreds and revenges which have sprung from the injuries of the past. If Europe is to be saved from infinite misery, and indeed from final doom, there must be this act of faith in the European Family and this act of oblivion against all the crimes and follies of the past. Can the free peoples of Europe rise to the height of these resolves of the soul and of the instincts of the spirit of man? If they can, the wrongs and injuries which have been inflicted will have been washed away on all sides by the miseries which have been endured. Is there any need for further floods of agony? Is the only lesson of history to be that mankind is unteachable? Let there be justice, mercy and freedom. The peoples have only to will it, and all will achieve their hearts’ desire.

I am now going to say something that will astonish you. The first step in the re-creation of the European Family must be a partnership between France and Germany. In this way only can France recover the moral and cultural leadership of Europe. There can be no revival of Europe without a spiritually great France and a spiritually great Germany. The structure of the United States of Europe, if well and truly built, will be such as to make the material strength of a single state less important. Small nations will count as much as large ones and gain their honour by their contribution to the common cause. The ancient states and principalities of Germany, freely joined together for mutual convenience in a federal system, might take their individual places among the United States of Europe. I shall not try to make a detailed programme for hundreds of millions of people who want to be happy and free, prosperous and safe, who wish to enjoy the four freedoms of which the great President Roosevelt spoke, and live in accordance with the principles embodied in the Atlantic Charter. If this is their wish, if this is the wish of the Europeans in so many lands, they have only to say so, and means can certainly be found, and machinery erected, to carry that wish to full fruition. But I must give you a warning. Time may be short. At present there is a breathing-space. The cannons have ceased firing. The fighting has stopped; but the dangers have not stopped. If we are to form the United States of Europe, or whatever name it may take, we must begin now.

In these present days we dwell strangely and precariously under the shield, and I will even say protection, of the atomic bomb. The atomic bomb is still only in the hands of a state and nation which we know will never use it except in the cause of right and freedom. But it may well be that in a few years this awful agency of destruction will be widespread and the catastrophe following from its use by several warring nations will not only bring to an end all that we call civilisation, but may possibly desintegrate the globe itself.

I must now sum up the propositions which are before you. Our constant aim must be to build and fortify the strength of the United Nations Organization. Under and within that world concept we must re-create the European Family in a regional structure called, it may be, the United States of Europe. And the first practical step would be to form a Council of Europe. If at first all the States of Europe are not wiliing or able to join the Union, we must nevertheless proceed to assemble and combine those who will and those who can. The salvation of the common people of every race and of every land from war or servitude must be established on solid foundations and must be guarded by the readiness of all men and women to die rather than submit to tyranny. In all this urgent work, France and Germany must take the lead together. Great Britain, the British Commonwealth of Nations, mighty America and I trust Soviet Russia-for then indeed all would be well-must be the friends and sponsors of the new Europe and must champion its right to live and shine.

The UK itself is fracturing, Scotland will be gone in a decade or so. Wales a while after and N. Ireland's demographics will take their toll in due course. The flight to jingoistic nationalism mostly amongst the English can be seen as a reaction to those forces of history, grinding their way to their pretty obvious conclusions.

Cornish Independence is a tiny entity at the moment, but I can see that becoming more of an issue over time as well... as one example of a kind of break up within England itself.

The days of monolithic states are over, there will doubtless be extreme reactions to that... it's natural.

highthief · 06-28-2009, 07:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tisonlyi

Dar al-harb? Churchill fetish? Hmm.

You do know that the man wanted Britain into the EU far deeper and far more enthusiastically than anything pretty much anyone wants at the moment? That he encouraged and cheered us into the EEA and an economic arrangement with the Nordic countries that was a lot more integrated than the EU at the time we joined that. Right?

The UK itself is fracturing, Scotland will be gone in a decade or so. Wales a while after and N. Ireland's demographics will take their toll in due course. The flight to jingoistic nationalism mostly amongst the English can be seen as a reaction to those forces of history, grinding their way to their pretty obvious conclusions.

Don't forget the times. Churchill wanted a strong and united Europe to A) preclude Germany from doing something silly yet again, and B) more critically, to stop the USSR from taking everything over. There were some very serious military threats sitting on the doorstep.

As for Scottish seperation - not gonna happen. Same here in Canada - we've lived with the threat of Quebec seperation for two generations now, and the whole push for such a breakaway is failing badly. Even former hardline seperatists have virtually given it up. In Scotland, you have a similar situation. The desire for independance was stronger in past generations, even if the nationalists get more press coverage today. A seperate Wales is even more unlikely.

Northern Ireland - maybe, or maybe unification with Eire, but I think the status quo is largely satisfactory at this point in time.

irateplatypus · 06-28-2009, 07:59 AM

your comments on my icon and byline are silly.

if you want to discuss what churchill thought about pan-european institutions... that's fine. he did advocate for a strong europe united under common formal structures. but, it's a strong leap to justify what has happened since with his original vision. i suspect that his vision of a united europe didn't include the UK to such a degree (read the last sentence of the speech you cited. he includes the UK along with other powers who would exist outside the United States of Europe). neither would he encourage UK participation without more popular support. i'm quite sure that churchill would not approve of the prevailing doctrines concerning immigrant assimilation.

even if there is a good argument to be made that churchill foresaw these problems and would, nevertheless, approve of current policy, it's still a bad idea.

tisonlyi · 06-28-2009, 10:28 AM

As for whether Scotland, Wales and N. Ireland will end up leaving the UK... Whether Quebec will leave Canada.. We'll see. I don't have a crystal ball, but I do see a problem with historical legs, traction and means. It'll be interesting to see how it goes.

As for commenting on "State of war"/Dar al-harb and a Churchill fascination; When a person is putting up a fairly staunch justification of (petty) nationalism at least, then I should think a little sojourn into the iconography that surrounds it is pertinent. The particular quote is a recipe, an excuse and a call-to-arms for perpetual imperialistic war... pertinent. "State of war". Pertinent. Combination while commenting on petty nationalism? Intriguing.

I put forward a view of nationalism and jingoism as the minority reaction to a state that is on the road to break-up, as a different point of view to that of 'vile racism' sullying the pure and legitimate waters of petty nationalism and xenophobia. In UK political terms, that's BNP versus UKIP.

Myself, I'd class the real difference between the two in semantics and sophistication of language. Nothing more.

Spade versus Shovel.

irateplatypus · 06-28-2009, 12:24 PM

thank you for reminding me why i stopped posting.

tisonlyi · 06-28-2009, 03:13 PM

irateplatypus: ?

highthief: I don't know how well you know the situation in the UK, Scotland particularly, but the Scots have their own legal system, a hefty and growing measure of home rule, Nationalists in power in said parliament with growing support.

This wave of nationalist feeling only really started in the 50's for Scotland (forming of the SNP) and late 60's/early 70's for Wales (with language protests). Their tides are still rising, at least by any possible metric.

---------- Post added at 12:13 AM ---------- Previous post was Yesterday at 11:32 PM ----------

Just to put some meat on those bones:

Scottish Parliament - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

highthief · 06-28-2009, 05:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tisonlyi

highthief: I don't know how well you know the situation in the UK, Scotland particularly, but the Scots have their own legal system, a hefty and growing measure of home rule, Nationalists in power in said parliament with growing support.
[/url]

Oh, I'm well familiar with the whole devolution thing. Providing greater degrees of autonomy in some areas does not equate to seperation. In some ways, US states have more autonomy than Scotland does from central government, and Quebec certainly does. If Scotland were a homogenous nation filled with nothing but Scots, I'd agree that seperation might happen. But like Quebec, there is a solid minority of English in the Borders regions and in major centers, along with enough Scots who are either apathetic towards seperation or who outright oppose it. Economic interests are largely against it as well, and people tend to choose prosperity over political ideology in developed nations. Hell, why is it that only "lesser" nations - the USSR, Yugoslavia, Ethiopia, etc tend to splinter as opposed to wealthy and advanced nations like Canada, Belgium, the UK, or any other nation that has had to face up to a seperatist agenda? In the end, pragmatism wins out.

The SNP may be the ruling party, but it's a minority is it not, with seperation opposed by the other 3 parties?

As far as I know, there has never been a public opinion poll where - given the options of 1) Independance, 2) the status quo, or 3) a bit more autonomy - that support for independance has ever come close to carrying the day.

tisonlyi · 06-29-2009, 01:51 PM

SNP support is up to around 33% at the last Scottish election, and they're polling around there with a view to the next Westminster election. 32% in the next election for the SNP would be a +14% increase.

Two-horse race for Westminster | SNP - Scottish National Party

The actual data is from an 'independent' source commissioned by The Telegraph.

Since the mid-eighties the SNP vote has marched up fairly consistently... Scottish Nationalism is no longer a ridiculous notion, it's a potential reality in our lifetimes.

A crisis. An event. A message. (A leader.)

That's all it takes.

highthief · 06-29-2009, 05:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tisonlyi

SNP support is up to around 33% at the last Scottish election, and they're polling around there with a view to the next Westminster election. 32% in the next election for the SNP would be a +14% increase.

Two-horse race for Westminster | SNP - Scottish National Party

The actual data is from an 'independent' source commissioned by The Telegraph.

Since the mid-eighties the SNP vote has marched up fairly consistently... Scottish Nationalism is no longer a ridiculous notion, it's a potential reality in our lifetimes.

A crisis. An event. A message. (A leader.)

That's all it takes.

In Quebec, we've had two referendums on sovereignty/independance (there's an important distinction).

In the first, it was about 60% to 40% against. In the second, it was a lot closer at 51% to 49%. At both times, the Parti Quebecois held solid majority governments within the province, something the SNP hasn't even sniffed yet.

Although polls have sometimes seen support for seperation go well over 50%, when it comes time to vote, there is an awful lot of soft support.

When support for Scottish independance gets well over 55% in a poll, I'd consider worrying.

Fact is, for generations after the Act of Union and other legal efforts to bind Scotland to England (and Wales), most Scots didn't want any part of it. You can say that those were different times, most people did not have the vote, etc., and that's true, but the sentiment has been there long, long before the SNP ever came into being.

06-10-2009, 01:43 PM	#3 (permalink)
Strange Famous follower of the child's crusade?	What I dont like is that no politician has the guts to say that the people who voted BNP are racist. The is a party which will not allow you to join it unless you are white This is a party who denies the reality of the holocaust This is a party who supports "voluntary repatriation" of coloured people __ They are racists, and the people who voted them (about 6% of a turn out of about 34% of the electorate in the North West and Yorkshire and Humber) are not so stupid that they do not know they are voting for racist candidates On the plus side, the increased media exposure they will get will likely show those who voted for them how pathetic, how hateful, how corrupt, and how weak the BNP is. On the negative side, the people of those constituancies should feel a grave sense of shame today, and 3 million Euro of taxpayers money will now fund racist and anti-semitic propogande from these smut peddlers. __________________ "Do not tell lies, and do not do what you hate, for all things are plain in the sight of Heaven. For nothing hidden will not become manifest, and nothing covered will remain without being uncovered." The Gospel of Thomas

06-10-2009, 02:54 PM	#4 (permalink)
highthief Junkie Location: Ontario, Canada	Whenever we see tough economic times parties like this tend to get a support. The Depression of the 1930s saw so many such parties across Europe and North America. It's sad that they get this support but I take solace that they are a dying breed. __________________ Si vis pacem parabellum.

06-10-2009, 03:51 PM	#5 (permalink)
Charlatan Getting it. Super Moderator Location: Lion City	I am always amazed at what people will cling to when faced with tough times. Highthief is right to point out that this sort of reactionary voting is often associated with times of political and economic strife. In fact, I would suggest that it isn't that many steps removed from the "Buy American" reactions we are seeing in the US. Same impetus, different flavour. We are seeing similar discussions here. There are articles in the papers discussing how "foreign workers" are taking jobs from locals. __________________ "My hands are on fire. Hands are on fire. Ain't got no more time for all you charlatans and liars." - Old Man Luedecke

06-10-2009, 07:36 PM	#6 (permalink)
ottopilot let me be clear Location: Waddy Peytona	We should worry about this trend as much as as we should worry about progressives and Eugenics. It's a response to a cultural pendulum swinging too far one way, and then the other. The wingnuts will burn themselves out. __________________ "It rubs the lotion on Buffy, Jodi and Mr. French's skin" - Uncle Bill from Buffalo

06-10-2009, 07:46 PM	#7 (permalink)
roachboy Super Moderator Location: essex ma	progressives and eugenics because.... this sounds not terribly unlike what happened in france when the front national started winning seats in local governments, or at the point jean-marie le pen got over 5% of the popular vote in a presidential election. people went "wait--they're fascists. no, really." the effect of it (so far) has been to freeze the fn at or below the levels it attained. and it also apparently solidified a constuency. which is odd. __________________ a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear it make you sick. -kamau brathwaite

06-21-2009, 05:11 PM	#9 (permalink)
tisonlyi Nothing	I think there should be a place at the table for every stripe of opinion, plenty of govt's around the world have coalitions with unashamed or crypto-fascists forming a minority partner. It should be that way, minority views should have representation. The Greens, a very junior partner in partnership with the Social Democrats in Germany at the turn of the millennium had the country ban nuclear power and ramped up production and deployment of wind turbines and start up a mass of solar and other renewable industries... Not bad. The turbines are a damned impressive sight as you travel through the country as well... Poetic, even. Hey, if we hate the ultra-right, we have to start boycotting Israel. __________________ "I do not agree that the dog in a manger has the final right to the manger even though he may have lain there for a very long time. I do not admit that right. I do not admit for instance, that a great wrong has been done to the Red Indians of America or the black people of Australia. I do not admit that a wrong has been done to these people by the fact that a stronger race, a higher-grade race, a more worldly wise race to put it that way, has come in and taken their place." - Winston Churchill, 1937 --{ORLY?}--

06-22-2009, 08:40 AM	#10 (permalink)
wugglywoo Upright Location: UK	As someone said to me (or at least, I think someone said this to me. It could have been some news person for all I remember!), it's good that the BNP got elected to the European parliament, because this way they can make absolute idiots out of themselves in as grand a scale as possible. The whole of Europe will see how foolish they are. What could be better than that?

06-22-2009, 10:25 AM	#11 (permalink)
Daniel_ Evil Priest: The Devil Made Me Do It! Location: Southern England	Can we all just remember that the BNP got 6% of the vote in the two constituencies they fought, and people are suggesting that this makes the country racist. The 7% that the Pirate Party got just across the North Sea doesn't make us all declare a new era of liberal file sharing is on the way. Also, you have to remember that this vote came after weeks of damaging revelations about MPs expenses, which made many people want to not vote for traditional candidates. __________________ ╔═════════════════════════════════════════╗ Overhead, the Albatross hangs motionless upon the air, And deep beneath the rolling waves, In labyrinths of Coral Caves, The Echo of a distant time Comes willowing across the sand; And everthing is Green and Submarine ╚═════════════════════════════════════════╝

06-22-2009, 10:33 AM	#12 (permalink)
Strange Famous follower of the child's crusade?	The BNP vote held steady while the Labour vote slipped away. This in a backgroud of Labour desperately trying to get the vote out in the North West especially telling them "The BNP might get in if you dont vote" Of course it doesnt make the country racist, but what I am sick and tired of is every mainstream politician saying "dont blame the people who voted BNP, they arent really racist, they just dont know what the BNP really is" I say all of those people voted for a racist party and they should be held acountable. But what an awful piece of shit Nick Griffin is. __________________ "Do not tell lies, and do not do what you hate, for all things are plain in the sight of Heaven. For nothing hidden will not become manifest, and nothing covered will remain without being uncovered." The Gospel of Thomas

06-27-2009, 05:06 AM	#13 (permalink)
irateplatypus can't help but laugh Location: dar al-harb	i hope other parties draw this lesson from BNP success: constituents have not abandoned the nation-state though some political and intellectual circles have undermined it for decades. large numbers still value national allegiances as the primary means of ensuring their security and freedom. an appreciable number of these people are now willing to ally themselves with racist organizations. mainstream parties are boosting the appeal of BNP by ignoring their constituents' complaints. there are plenty of rational and sober critiques to be made of current UK immigration, EU, and assimilation policies that do not throw vile racism into the mix. politicians should address those concerns before the issue becomes so desperate that more citizens justify supporting racist parties. __________________ If you will not fight when your victory will be sure and not too costly, you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a precarious chance for survival. There may even be a worse case. You may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to perish than to live as slaves. ~ Winston Churchill Last edited by irateplatypus; 06-27-2009 at 05:20 AM..

06-28-2009, 07:59 AM	#16 (permalink)
irateplatypus can't help but laugh Location: dar al-harb	your comments on my icon and byline are silly. if you want to discuss what churchill thought about pan-european institutions... that's fine. he did advocate for a strong europe united under common formal structures. but, it's a strong leap to justify what has happened since with his original vision. i suspect that his vision of a united europe didn't include the UK to such a degree (read the last sentence of the speech you cited. he includes the UK along with other powers who would exist outside the United States of Europe). neither would he encourage UK participation without more popular support. i'm quite sure that churchill would not approve of the prevailing doctrines concerning immigrant assimilation. even if there is a good argument to be made that churchill foresaw these problems and would, nevertheless, approve of current policy, it's still a bad idea. __________________ If you will not fight when your victory will be sure and not too costly, you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a precarious chance for survival. There may even be a worse case. You may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to perish than to live as slaves. ~ Winston Churchill

06-28-2009, 10:28 AM	#17 (permalink)
tisonlyi Nothing	As for whether Scotland, Wales and N. Ireland will end up leaving the UK... Whether Quebec will leave Canada.. We'll see. I don't have a crystal ball, but I do see a problem with historical legs, traction and means. It'll be interesting to see how it goes. As for commenting on "State of war"/Dar al-harb and a Churchill fascination; When a person is putting up a fairly staunch justification of (petty) nationalism at least, then I should think a little sojourn into the iconography that surrounds it is pertinent. The particular quote is a recipe, an excuse and a call-to-arms for perpetual imperialistic war... pertinent. "State of war". Pertinent. Combination while commenting on petty nationalism? Intriguing. I put forward a view of nationalism and jingoism as the minority reaction to a state that is on the road to break-up, as a different point of view to that of 'vile racism' sullying the pure and legitimate waters of petty nationalism and xenophobia. In UK political terms, that's BNP versus UKIP. Myself, I'd class the real difference between the two in semantics and sophistication of language. Nothing more. Spade versus Shovel. __________________ "I do not agree that the dog in a manger has the final right to the manger even though he may have lain there for a very long time. I do not admit that right. I do not admit for instance, that a great wrong has been done to the Red Indians of America or the black people of Australia. I do not admit that a wrong has been done to these people by the fact that a stronger race, a higher-grade race, a more worldly wise race to put it that way, has come in and taken their place." - Winston Churchill, 1937 --{ORLY?}--

06-28-2009, 12:24 PM	#18 (permalink)
irateplatypus can't help but laugh Location: dar al-harb	thank you for reminding me why i stopped posting. __________________ If you will not fight when your victory will be sure and not too costly, you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a precarious chance for survival. There may even be a worse case. You may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to perish than to live as slaves. ~ Winston Churchill

06-28-2009, 03:13 PM	#19 (permalink)
tisonlyi Nothing	irateplatypus: ? highthief: I don't know how well you know the situation in the UK, Scotland particularly, but the Scots have their own legal system, a hefty and growing measure of home rule, Nationalists in power in said parliament with growing support. This wave of nationalist feeling only really started in the 50's for Scotland (forming of the SNP) and late 60's/early 70's for Wales (with language protests). Their tides are still rising, at least by any possible metric. ---------- Post added at 12:13 AM ---------- Previous post was Yesterday at 11:32 PM ---------- Just to put some meat on those bones: Scottish Parliament - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia __________________ "I do not agree that the dog in a manger has the final right to the manger even though he may have lain there for a very long time. I do not admit that right. I do not admit for instance, that a great wrong has been done to the Red Indians of America or the black people of Australia. I do not admit that a wrong has been done to these people by the fact that a stronger race, a higher-grade race, a more worldly wise race to put it that way, has come in and taken their place." - Winston Churchill, 1937 --{ORLY?}--

06-29-2009, 01:51 PM	#21 (permalink)
tisonlyi Nothing	SNP support is up to around 33% at the last Scottish election, and they're polling around there with a view to the next Westminster election. 32% in the next election for the SNP would be a +14% increase. Two-horse race for Westminster \| SNP - Scottish National Party The actual data is from an 'independent' source commissioned by The Telegraph. Since the mid-eighties the SNP vote has marched up fairly consistently... Scottish Nationalism is no longer a ridiculous notion, it's a potential reality in our lifetimes. A crisis. An event. A message. (A leader.) That's all it takes. __________________ "I do not agree that the dog in a manger has the final right to the manger even though he may have lain there for a very long time. I do not admit that right. I do not admit for instance, that a great wrong has been done to the Red Indians of America or the black people of Australia. I do not admit that a wrong has been done to these people by the fact that a stronger race, a higher-grade race, a more worldly wise race to put it that way, has come in and taken their place." - Winston Churchill, 1937 --{ORLY?}--