Voting day in Britain

Remove all ads!

Ziad. you, like the labour party use a bunch of quotes to support your argument without offering a bigger picture, many people could make millions of quotes from non BNP parties which sound offensive.

 

Every other ethnic group gets to advocate for their rights -- why shouldn't the native British people? Nothing in this article implies superiority or ethnic cleansing or even violence against another group. So barring such statements, I have no problem with this statement.

That ain't gonna happen anywhere, but an effort to make the system better would be great.

That's a fine idea all around. I'd like to see how voluntary they would make it. IMHO the criminal and illegal ones should be dealt with by every political party.

Can't fault that logic -- why should a sovereign country be taking orders from some supranational group?

Amen to that. I know it offends some people to suggest that criminals be held accountable for their actions and that decent, hardworking citrizens should actually be able to walk the streets without fear, but too bad. Nothing wrong with wanting Grandma to be safe.

Awww, yeah! I'd wanna teach in England if these guys ever get in power. Of course, given their immigration policies I couldn't, but still, a lot of teachers I know would kill for government policies like this.

That should be a given, but it doesn't get votes from the immigrant communities.

And this horse puckey isn't limited to England, sadly. Which is why a lot of people are getting fed up and angry.

Based on this link, I like these guys. Too bad they'll never get a chance to implement their policies -- too sensible for spineless people afraid of being called names like "racist" by those who want to stifle dissent under the guise of political correctness.

 

In terms of policies, a lot they say sounds good (I mean the http://bnp.org.uk/policies/ text). I just don't see how it could be put into practice without causing a mess, especially as the platform at times reads more like a "something for everyone" than an actual policy statement. It sounds like a lot of the platforms parties here have - they promise a lot and do not worry about keeping it.

As for my opinion on their stance on various issues:

Spoiler

IMMIGRATION - time to say ENOUGH! - Immigration reform is well and good. From then on, however, it becomes tricky. Deporting all illegal aliens is hard enough - a nationwide campaign like that will cost a lot of time and money. Voluntary resettlement... IIRC Germany tried it in the 1970s, as there were too many Gastarbeiter ("guest workers") and not enough Arbeit. Most weren't too keen on returning.

EUROPE - back to British independence! - I'm not quite sure what they want there, in particular if they want to preserve a free market with the rest of the EU countries. IF they did, they could just join the EEA (which is quite similar to that, an extension of the EU free market zone) - but yes, they do pay something for the membership, as this leads to a significant increase in trade. I think it means they want out of the common market at all though, which I'm not sure most Brits agree on. Perhaps the UK could compensate somewhat with additional trade with its former colonies. Still, Australia is neither the market France is nor is it just past the channel. BTW, in 2007 the UK net contribution to the EU came to around 4.7 billion pounds - around 90 pounds per person. It is a fair bit of money, but hardly crippling. This amount may rise somewhat (depending on whether the UK can keep its rebates, which it got for getting less than its share of the CAP money), as per the http://www.global-vision.net/perspectives11.asp study. Still, it would not be a significant amount of the UK budget as shown at http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Nl1/Newsroom/DG_070872 .

LAW AND ORDER - crack down on crime!- Oh yeah, that sounds good. If I had a stotinka for every time I've heard how someone will free the hands of the police... How exactly? More funding? More public surveillance (it was a bit of a problem in the UK already)? Less accountability? The police having to tiptoe around criminals is a laughing matter, but most people who read stories of how cops beat someone up are not amused. Corporal punishment for theft? Hm.

ECONOMY - British workers first! So, companies now hire foreigners first if they have equal qualifications or requirements as Britons do? As if. If foreigners are hired it is usually because they are cheaper. Why not pay more and attract British workers? Ask the bosses, they are usually British as well. Oh, and the whole "this way we will have perfect employment" thing - very nice. Yeah, sure, we had perfect employment as well, in the 60's and 70s. All you need is a state-run economy. Which can work, just don't expect it to be particularly efficient.

EDUCATION - discipline, standards, achievement! Disciplines in the classrooms is a commendable goal, but how will it be enforced, by ye olde stick? It could work, but it is the parents, not the laws, who will most likely oppose such measures. BTW, I loved the part about indoctrination - it will be substituting one for another. After all, where does national pride come from?

AGRICULTURE - quality before quantity! - great on its own, high-quality diet can help with a lot of things. But you can not, in the same breath, talk about how you will feed a much greater part of a growing nation with less effective methods. Organic farming is less productive, and more labor-intensive. That's why it lost to large-scale farming, after all. Of course, there is also the small matter of other countries imposing limitations on British producers if their own are being discriminated against.

HEALTH - first-class healthcare for all! No problems with that, in general, the importance of prevention, need for sufficient pay for medical professionals and more investment are truisms. Cutting aid is trickier - more on that later.

TRANSPORT - time to invest! Sure, investments in infrastructure are often wise. Encouraging more people to use the public transport and save fuel is also nice. However, lower fuel tax and higher speed limits will have the opposite effect.

ENVIRONMENT - a cleaner, greener future! Okay, other promise this as well. The hard part is getting the industry to agree.

FOREIGN AID - time to spend our money on our own people! Okay-ish in principle, although I'm not sure how much money the UK state-funded agencies give out in aid; I have seen the total (public + private, all forms of aid) come to around 4 billion USD. The whole "pay them to take their immigrants back" principle depends on whether the immigrants want to go back. Besides, as I said, sometimes aid can help you reduce instability that can lead to a lot more trouble, even if only for your overseas trade.

PENSIONERS - pensioners before asylum seekers! - good for them. I hope whoever gets to power fixes that... but having a clearer idea about how it would be done would help.

NORTHERN IRELAND - an end to sectarianism! Yeah, if only we had been more forceful! I'm sure a lot of guys in Eire say the same. Oh, and a federation of the British Isles? I doubt the Irish would like it that much.

DEFENCE - no more cuts! - withdrawal from NATO, higher defense spending and compulsive military or civil service. Right now I agree NATO does not serve a vital security role (perhaps unfortunately), so that's for Britain to decide - and to pay for. And yes, it is more than it pays for the EU and aid.

FOREIGN AFFAIRS - Britain’s interests first! Hmm, I thought that is what the UK has been doing for a long, long time. I doubt their support for the US comes because they like vacationing to Aspen that much.

DEMOCRACY - letting the people decide! - Good, but again that is easier said than done, especially if you are in power. Oh, and especially if you want to make sweeping changes in pretty much everything, which a lot of people oppose.

 

They're not really the type of quotes that you can argue were misinterpreted or came out wrong though. I know there'll be elements of bias in the media but they've always come across very badly anytime I've seen or read about them.

I've had a look at their policies. To be honest they're a mix. There's a lot of fluffy obvious ones. Every party wants better hospitals with less bureaucracy. Knowing how to achieve that is something else though. I can't see any sign that they know how to go about these things. The other half of their policies are plainly wrong or worrying. The only one I liked was the push to reduce the power of the supermarket multiples. It's scary how much influence they have on the way we live our lives.

To me this sums up a lot that's wrong with them. The British Empire is long gone and Britain's relative position in the world is going downwards. It's not in a position to demand how the rest of the world treats it. The future will be dominated by the likes of US, China, Brazil, India, Russia. The only major player in Europe will be a united EU. If this doesn't exist we will all be minnows to be pushed around.

The points about farming and factories are overblown. A big reason why Britain no longer does these things as much anymore is that it's moved up the value chain. That's not a bad thing.

Britain does extremely well out of international trade, just look at all the major global companies ye host. International trade is almost always good for economic performance. Nobody knows how to get zero unemployment and they want to achieve this by withdrawing from the global economy?

The points about Northern Ireland are very worrying considering it's not even a foreign country they're talking about. They have noticed that the 'war' has basically been over for over decade? No? I hate the IRA as much as the next man but starting the violence again is crazy.

The BNP do raise a lot of issues that mainstream parties are unwilling to tackle, particularly with regard to immigration. It's easy for me to talk about 'moving up the value chain' but if you're from a deprived area and working in a factory is the most you can aspire to that's not much use. I don't think the BNP is the one to address these problems but someone should. For all we laughed at her Sarah Palin did represent a demographic whose British equivalent is pretty much being ignored by the mainstream parties. That's pretty dangerous when people are just being ignored like that.

 

As people here know, I'm quite a patriotic person, but I'm almost ashamed to be British recently. Last weekend commemorations took place in honour of the D-Day Landings that clinched victory in World War 2 and thus depleted a regime of brutal ethnic cleansing, racism, and the belief that a supreme race existed. Almost 65 years to the day later, we have highlighted the hideous intolerance of multiculturalism that exists in this country. We can be truly proud of ourselves.

It is probably a good thing though that the BNP are now getting more direct media coverage. Ignoring the far right hasn't worked. These idiots are best dealt with through direct confrontation. I've already heard an interview with Griffin on Radio 4 in which the man made a complete tool of himself. This needs to happen more often. It will expose them for what they are. Get Griffin on Question Time and rip him and his thinly vieled agenda apart.

I feel embarassed about our current government, and it's depressing that I don't see many/any viable alternatives. However, I do not believe that not agreeing with the policies of the mainstream parties is an excuse to vote for a bunch of knuckle-dragging, white supremist bigots.

 

Talking of which he got proppa egged yesterday!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8091605.stm

W00t new gem!

 

WOOOO!!! Barmy's back!!

However, there are quite a few WW2 veterans that have voted BNP

 

Does that rule out the BNP being full of Nazi's or does that mean some of our soldiers were actually german spies?

 

Problem is, many people tend to see voting as some sort of whimsical pastime, if they're even botherwed to vote atall. They're easily swayed by emotional sentiments, focusing only on tiny issues that appeal to their emotions (in this case, the very basic emotions of hatred and intolerance). It makes me start to wonder if democracy even works in its current form. Whatever happened to voting for the party that represents your best interests, not your emotional state..?

So often I see people who tell me they voted impulsively for these intolerant parties, and many times it's obvious to me that the party in question doesn't have their best interests at heart. Words fail me in describing how stupid they are; it's self-destructive.

For example, a resident at a place i work, he told me he'd have voted for Geert Wilders PVV party, if he had found his voting card. I tried to get him to look at himself and his situation, with little success: I wasn't referring to him being a dark-skinned surinami, although 'his' party will undoubtedly go after him eventually. I was actually talking about his current situation, as a mental patient in a care home. He receives medication and care, so he definitely costs the dutch government more than he earns it. The first thing a right-wing party will do, is cut government taxes, so rich taxpayers can get a break (the deserving people). Then the expenditure must be tackled, and who better to cut costs on, than an undeserving mental patient, mooching off of taxpayers. His negroid heritage will just be icing on the cake. He'll be dumped in a spare cell instead of a care home, will get very cheap medication, and will talk to jail wardens instead of social workers.

Believe me, he's not alone. Many folk (just) above the realms of mental retardation also share his sentiment. The right wing will argue, that if they managed to get these people to vote against their best interests, that it's all fair and legal. Populist voting is an acceptable evil within the rules of democracy. Perhaps these people deserve no less than to be misrepresented in government.

But from my socialist perspective, I can see system abuse, and want it to be remedied. Perhaps populist politicians should be tackled in the same way that cult leaders, pyramid scheme bosses, rebel leaders, and other kinds of demagogues are... [read the link, it's uncanny!]

 

The problem with the BNP is that they have a bad rep.

labour in my area circled a leafleting campaign which made thin arguments and didnt back up their points, or when they did they used quotes which didnt really support the point.

Some members of the party are practically nazi's and very sexist, but atleast the BNP dismisses these people when they do something stupid like the guy who compared rape to force feeding women chocolate. These other parties have narrowminded, arrogant, biggoted perverts in their party often in the inner circle.

I completely agree with you coin, in my area labour could run a donkey and they would still win, lots of old people in my town who have and always will vote labour.

 

I've just been told that they will now have £3,000,000 to play with after winning their 2 seats, but I have no proof to back this...