bassnation

the abyss
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2009/oct/18/nick-griffin-question-time-bbc?commentpage=4

Not a bad article - makes v cogent points about the inability/unwillingness of mainstream broadcasters to challenge the BNP. Thursday looks very worrying, really, esp when you read the comments section.
two things about the comments section. the first is that the BNP regularly orchestrates saturation of comments and forum pages whenever an article is released online that mentions them. this is organised from their website. they are a small but very vocal minority who want to make it seem that theirs is the prevailing view of the general public.

secondly, the guardians comment pages (CiF) have been a breeding ground for "liberal racists" for some time now.

that aside, i truly believe this country is more right wing that i remember it being, in living memory. i think there is a lot of radicalisation and polarisation going on (predicted by john gray, along with the collapse of the capital system: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...roblems-weve-got-prozac-politics-1666033.html)

what is particularly worrying is the emergence of far right militia, the engish defence league. i can easily see a return to the dischord of the seventies. all those people arguing for allowing the BNP a platform for "democracy" i regard as useful idiots. griffin doesn't need to defend or make nuanced arguments. QT is not forensic and never has been, it is about rabble rousing. all he has to do is repeat the same easy soundbites, and he will have made his mark with a new section of the electorate.

its also well known that every time they make a step forward, racist attacks go up. if they ever gain power (and i don't think this is as unlikely as some - cf. le pen and that very close run thing) people like me in interracial relationships, along with my loved ones will be sent to the gas chamber. i couldn't give a fuck about freedom of speech when so much is at stake.
 

bassnation

the abyss
and i absolutely lay the blame for all this at the door of the establishment who have presided over economic liberalism that has only benefitted the rich, lining their own pockets at our expense, thus engendering new degrees of cynicism. they handed over control to corporations and threw away true represenation. we will now reap the whirwind as a result - and they should NOT be forgiven for this.
 

baboon2004

Darned cockwombles.
what is particularly worrying is the emergence of far right militia, the engish defence league. i can easily see a return to the dischord of the seventies. all those people arguing for allowing the BNP a platform for "democracy" i regard as useful idiots. griffin doesn't need to defend or make nuanced arguments. QT is not forensic and never has been, it is about rabble rousing. all he has to do is repeat the same easy soundbites, and he will have made his mark with a new section of the electorate.
.
exactly. but also, all the people who portray him as some kind of idiot are a problem too. He's clearly not a moron, and that's what makes him dangerous. Why do liberals assume that fascism and intelligence (taken in a common sense, rather than true intelligence, naturally) are antithetical? it's a very dangerous line to take, treating fascists like harmless fools. He's presenting himself as some kind of moderate in certain interviews, which unfortunately is a conjuring trick he's better at than many people would care to admit.
 
Last edited:

baboon2004

Darned cockwombles.
and i absolutely lay the blame for all this at the door of the establishment who have presided over economic liberalism that has only benefitted the rich, lining their own pockets at our expense, thus engendering new degrees of cynicism. they handed over control to corporations and threw away true represenation. we will now reap the whirwind as a result - and they should NOT be forgiven for this.
Yep. Unfortunately it's the logical end point of a capitalist system that privileges money over human beings, and subscribes to the religion of endlessly increasing profits and 'progress'.
 

bassnation

the abyss
exactly. but also, all the people who portray him as some kind of idiot are a problem too. He's clearly not a moron, and that's what makes him dangerous. Why do liberals assume that fascism and intelligence (taken in a common sense, rather than true intelligence, naturally) are antithetical? it's a very dangerous line to take, treating fascists like harmless fools. He's presenting himself as some kind of moderate in certain interviews, which unfortunately is a conjuring trick he's better at than many people would care to admit.
yeah, and doing that also plays into the BNPs hands. their lifeblood is white working class resentment, and patronising those people is just going to make things worse.

however, i deeply disagree with the Labour parties strategy for dealing with the BNP in the media, to whit:

hugh muir from the guardian said:
"Don't call racist Nick a racist or a fascist." Whatever he has said or done to turn the stomach, and there is a fair amount of that, whatever his views on those who are not Aryan, you can't call him a racist or a fascist, the MPs said, because the chances are that it will backfire.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2009/oct/16/hugh-muir-diary-jack-straw

this is an extremely high risk strategy and it begs the question, at what point will you confront these cunts? people keep saying oh give them media coverage as their ideas will be exposed, but when we have our elected representatives not even willing to call a spade a spade (ahem) how can this ever be possible? are they going to be marching into number ten before someone other than UAF confront them directly?
 

john eden

male pale and stale
Griffin will do well out of question time.

Some of the stuff in the media is absolute drivel, trying to tie the BNP in with nazi skinheads etc (for example the photo at the top of the Guardian piece which clearly shows people who are members of a different organisation entirely).

Q: "So Nick Griffin, you are a nazi! Ha! Ha! We're onto you sunshine!"

A: "No I'm not, what the BNP is really about is xxxxxxxxxxxx"

Q: "But you are a racist organisation you don't even let black people join!"

A: "Well firstly, we are reviewing that, and secondly (stuff about black police association). Follow on with the corrupt nature of the establishment, expenses, people are sick to death of it all and looking for an alternative...."
 

alex

Do not read this.
I am disgusted that the BNP have even been invited onto question time.

I dont have affluent enough knowledge when it comes to politics to debate this in depth however

and i absolutely lay the blame for all this at the door of the establishment who have presided over economic liberalism that has only benefitted the rich, lining their own pockets at our expense, thus engendering new degrees of cynicism. they handed over control to corporations and threw away true represenation. we will now reap the whirwind as a result - and they should NOT be forgiven for this.
I agree with this totally. And it also saddens me greatly and to some extent makes me so ashamed of where I come from, (Ilford, however I have strong ties with friends in Barking and also my Girlfriend and other friends live in Dagenham) I feel that sometimes people tarnish me with the same brush as these ignorants. I cannot stress to others how much the BNP anger's me and I worry so much what would happen if the MP for us were to change to a member of the BNP instead of Labour.

Worrying times.
 

john eden

male pale and stale
its also well known that every time they make a step forward, racist attacks go up. if they ever gain power (and i don't think this is as unlikely as some - cf. le pen and that very close run thing) people like me in interracial relationships, along with my loved ones will be sent to the gas chamber. i couldn't give a fuck about freedom of speech when so much is at stake.
There is no way the BNP are going to get into power - if they get close then their agenda will be taken on board by the mainstream parties - cf Thatchter and the NF in 79.

That is the main worry - how the mainstream political discourse is framed. There won't be any gas chambers.
 

john eden

male pale and stale
why has bonnie greer been used to represent immigrant briton though?
presumably because she's a staple of newsnight. And I think has been on QT before. She's not actually representing anyone really, though.

It would be much better if they put Riko Dan and Paul Gilroy on.
 

bassnation

the abyss
There is no way the BNP are going to get into power - if they get close then their agenda will be taken on board by the mainstream parties - cf Thatchter and the NF in 79.

That is the main worry - how the mainstream political discourse is framed. There won't be any gas chambers.
but their agenda is already similar to the mainstream in many ways on immigration. in fact labours agenda on this has been set by the bnp, the mail and other assorted undesirables.

i'm not convinced it could never happen again. if gray is right then this century will be characterised by increasing internecine disputes and warfare over increasingly scarce resources. who knows what could happen? from what i see and hear, i've become more and more concerned over this lurch to the far right.

and if far right policies are implemented by main parties, whats the difference in terms of being subject to those policies, whether its labour or the bnp doing it?
 
Last edited:

scottdisco

rip this joint please
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2009/oct/18/nick-griffin-question-time-bbc?commentpage=4

Not a bad article - makes v cogent points about the inability/unwillingness of mainstream broadcasters to challenge the BNP. Thursday looks very worrying, really, esp when you read the comments section.
very good stuff i think Baboon, cheers. re 'tactics' on Thursday's show (i am in total agreement w all who criticise the lightweight, pub thug nature of QT's actual content most of the time) i think his paragraphs where he rightly shines a light on shady aspects of the recent histories of Warsi and Straw carry serious weight.

Paul Gilroy, Riko, Darcus Howe, and, say, Lionel Blue would be great to get on there, but in context, Gove and Cruddas would be far better than Warsi and Straw.

as we all know, Bassnation is quite correct re Labour's dog-whistles being influenced by the trash that the Mail and Express bleat about re immigrants.

Greer's alright, her and Hunhe might actually get the best shots in, my gut tells me.
there again, Straw is a tough bastard, so if he can defend himself from Griffin pulling out his stupid quotes about burkas in his surgery etc, he might land a few decent punches.
Warsi i have little time for.
 

crackerjack

Well-known member
but their agenda is already similar to the mainstream in many ways on immigration. in fact labours agenda on this has been set by the bnp, the mail and other assorted undesirables.
what you mean is labour's immigration agenda has been slightly more cautious because they're concerned it's unpopular. the fact is, their period in power has witnessed record levels of immigration. whereas a bnp govt would presumably witness none, except perhaps a few old colonials escapting zimbabawe and s africa.

how you regard these two as similar is beyond me...
 

baboon2004

Darned cockwombles.
this is an extremely high risk strategy and it begs the question, at what point will you confront these cunts? people keep saying oh give them media coverage as their ideas will be exposed, but when we have our elected representatives not even willing to call a spade a spade (ahem) how can this ever be possible? are they going to be marching into number ten before someone other than UAF confront them directly?
The idea that their ideas will somehow be 'exposed' in front of a hypothetical deeply liberal british public is itslef problematic.
 

baboon2004

Darned cockwombles.
oh for fuck's sakes, this is the cheapest 'argument' strategy.So capitalism (esp of the sort that has been so exposed over the past year as highly hypocritical, and which comes crying to the state when it can't support itself) doesn't prioritise profit over humans then? Which world are you living in, can I ask, and what profession do you work in?
 
Last edited:

john eden

male pale and stale
and if far right policies are implemented by main parties, whats the difference in terms of being subject to those policies, whether its labour or the bnp doing it?
The difference is that people get distracted by the BNP instead of taking to task those in power.

For example the campaigns by Unite Against Fascism which are designed to get the vote out so that the BNP don't get in. I.e. - vote for the established parties to "keep the nazis out"...
 

bassnation

the abyss
what you mean is labour's immigration agenda has been slightly more cautious because they're concerned it's unpopular. the fact is, their period in power has witnessed record levels of immigration. whereas a bnp govt would presumably witness none, except perhaps a few old colonials escapting zimbabawe and s africa.

how you regard these two as similar is beyond me...
there is no doubt about it - their policies have been driven by the mail, who's editorial line is sometimes indistinguishable from views held by the BNP.
http://enemiesofreason.blogspot.com/2009/10/mail-dont-t-like-bnp-oh-no.html

in addition, we are locking up children just because their parents are immigrants, denying them benefits and many are homeless. the rhetoric about immigrants has at times been deeply offensive and has contributed to the general poisonous atmosphere.

so what if they are getting there by degrees, instead of jumping to the end game? this is all well documented in the uk press and is widely recognised by just about everyone other than the BNP and the daily heil.
 
Top