» I wonder if the strongly negative reaction to the coup on Twitter and left & Labour blogs had any impact on it... 9 mins ago

» nice! who did that? RT @lukewaterfield: @pickledpolitics This far and away my favourite. @hopisen 's maybe? http://tinyurl.com/y9u7wbx 3 hrs ago

» Yup. RT @cathynewman: win win for the tories today: plot fails to topple brown, but exposes a desperately divided party 5 hrs ago

» Another excellent contribution RT @lukewaterfield: Even basement cat is scared of this kitteh http://tinyurl.com/ydpwmr2 7 hrs ago

» Lame journalism RT@channel4news: About to interview @guidofawkes in Westminster..keen to talk to other political bloggers re: Labour plot 7 hrs ago

More updates...


  • Family

    • Ala Abbas
    • Clairwil
    • Daily Rhino
    • Leon Green
    • Liberal Conspiracy
    • Sonia Afroz
  • Comrades

    • Andy Worthington
    • Angela Saini
    • Aqoul
    • Bartholomew’s notes
    • Blairwatch
    • Bleeding Heart Show
    • Bloggerheads
    • Blood & Treasure
    • Butterflies & Wheels
    • Campaign against Honour Killings
    • Cath Elliott
    • Chicken Yoghurt
    • Clive Davis
    • Daily Mail Watch
    • Dave Hill
    • Dr StrangeLove
    • Dr. Mitu Khurana
    • Europhobia
    • Faith in Society
    • Feministing
    • Harry’s Place
    • IKWRO
    • Indigo Jo
    • Liberal England
    • MediaWatchWatch
    • Ministry of Truth
    • MT and friends
    • Natalie Bennett
    • New Humanist Editor
    • New Statesman blogs
    • open Democracy
    • Operation Black Vote
    • Our Kingdom
    • Robert Sharp
    • Rupa Huq
    • Septicisle
    • Shiraz Socialist
    • Shuggy’s Blog
    • Stumbling and Mumbling
    • Ta-Nehisi Coates
    • The F Word
    • Though Cowards Flinch
    • Tory Troll
    • UK Polling Report
    • Women Uncovered
  • In-laws

    • Aaron Heath
    • Ariane Sherine
    • Desi Pundit
    • Douglas Clark's saloon
    • Get There Steppin’
    • Incurable Hippie
    • Isheeta
    • Neha Viswanathan
    • Power of Choice
    • Real man’s fraternity
    • Route 79
    • Sajini W
    • Sarah
    • Sepia Mutiny
    • Smalltown Scribbles
    • Sonia Faleiro
    • The Langar Hall
    • Turban Head
    • Ultrabrown



  • Technorati: graph / links

    EHRC v BNP on all-white membership is an own-goal


    by Sunny on 4th September, 2009 at 2:25 AM    

    It’s occurred to other people as well, but I’m really annoyed now that the EHRC didn’t think through their case against the BNP because of it’s whites-only membership rules.

    BNP must adapt membership rules or be crushed, says Nick Griffin. You see, he’s out-manoeuvred the EHRC. To his own party he can now say: ‘look guys, I’m sorry but the law is forcing us to change our membership policy‘, knowing that they would not have allowed it otherwise.

    But Griffin knows there aren’t going to be that many ethnic minorities who’ll join the BNP. But changing the rules takes away the most obvious and potent symbols that the BNP remains a racist party. If the rules change and Griffin goes on television and declares that he’s not racist, merely standing up for British culture, what can journalists obviously point at to illustrate the party’s racism?

    Sure, there are things we can probably point. But pointing out things he’s done in the past can easily be batted away. To the person considering voting for the BNP, the biggest source of stigma has been taken away. And you’re left with a party which is succeeding more and more daily in hiding its origins and true inclinations. This helps Griffin enormously and he knows it - which is why he’s embracing the change quickly. It’s a huge own-goal by the EHRC. Thanks guys.


                          Post to del.icio.us


    Filed in: Other racists, Race politics, The BNP






    58 Comments below   |   Add your own

    Reactions: Twitter, blogs


    1. Dave Semple — on 4th September, 2009 at 7:41 AM  

      This is exactly the point I made when dealing with the subject. However, one interesting point has come out of the whole thing: this move has cost them thousands of pounds and - if pursued as relentlessly as EHRC press releases indicate - might yet bankrupt the BNP. Alternatively Griffin might still be viewed with increased suspicion by his membership - and we already know that factionalism and Griffin’s iron rule is a problem for them anyway.

    2. Katy Newton — on 4th September, 2009 at 8:53 AM  

      Griffin knows there aren’t going to be that many ethnic minorities who’ll join the BNP.

      Imagine if they did, though. Imagine if every single non-white person of voting age in the country joined the BNP. It would be the end of them.

    3. Noor the abducted — on 4th September, 2009 at 9:09 AM  

      Not if all the whites did the same.
      I think the BNP would like to thank the UAF,the EHRC, Harperson and the boyz in Luton for all their hard work and help.

    4. Philip Hunt — on 4th September, 2009 at 10:00 AM  

      Indeed. The EHRC are fools.

    5. irrelephant — on 4th September, 2009 at 10:44 AM  

      This is a great move. surely by its very nature this ruling sets up the destruction of the racist element within the BNP.

      without the agitation for the preservation of the white race from the dilution of inferior gened darkies and the necessary expulsion of islam from the world the racist part of the BNP have nothing to hold onto, and guess what will happen if a dedicated group of ethnic minorities, including muslims, decide to get involved as subscribing members.

      The racist BNP will be no more, they will all leave and set up a new underground party/join combat 18 and will have learnt the lesson that there is no place for them in the politics of the civilised world and what will be left is a party which is just for british identity, not based on race and against immigration for economic reasons.

      Griffin will continue to play that the BNP arent racist in the hope of gaining more support but the double edged sword for him is that it may genuinely lose its racist element and thus turn it into UKIP.

      point being this is chess not football…

    6. irrelephant — on 4th September, 2009 at 10:44 AM  

      This is a great move. surely by its very nature this ruling sets up the destruction of the racist element within the BNP.

      without the agitation for the preservation of the white race from the dilution of inferior gened darkies and the necessary expulsion of islam from the world the racist part of the BNP have nothing to hold onto, and guess what will happen if a dedicated group of ethnic minorities, including muslims, decide to get involved as subscribing members.

      The racist BNP will be no more, they will all leave and set up a new underground party/join combat 18 and will have learnt the lesson that there is no place for them in the politics of the civilised world and what will be left is a party which is just for british identity, not based on race and against immigration for economic reasons.

      Griffin will continue to play that the BNP arent racist in the hope of gaining more support but the double edged sword for him is that it may genuinely lose its racist element and thus turn it into UKIP.

      point being this is chess not football…

    7. Jai — on 4th September, 2009 at 10:46 AM  

      If the rules change and Griffin goes on television and declares that he’s not racist, merely standing up for British culture, what can journalists obviously point at to illustrate the party’s racism?

      Well, not necessarily. Griffin himself has said that the aim is purely to re-word the BNP’s constitution in order to remain within the boundaries of the law, and that he has absolutely no intention of changing the core racist focus of his organisation.

      In his own words (from the Guardian link in the main article):

      “I have no doubt that it is possible to redraft our constitution so as to ensure we comply with the new law while at the same time holding true to our core principles and most important of all to our purpose – to secure a future for the true children of our islands.”

    8. Misc. — on 4th September, 2009 at 10:49 AM  

      But what more could they do? They have a duty to combat discriminatory rules and practices, but they can only act within the law. They aren’t a political organisation; they aren’t acting with the goal of bringing down the BNP. That’s Sunny’s job ;-)

      Should the EHRC have done nothing, just so that a rule remains in place which journalists can obviously point at to illustrate the party’s racism? Yeah, things they’ve done in the past can be easily batted away, but pointing out that it’s clearly a cynical and meaningless rule change which makes no difference in practice when you look at the fact that there are no non-white members and that they continue to promote racist policies, may not be as simple for the average voter to grasp but is hardly a pointless exercise or a weak argument. Especially if the party is already struggling financially from the legal case, fighting media campaigns will cost it more.

      Sure people who would already have voted BNP, being racist themselves or being naively taken in by its recent attempts to hide its racist origins, may find it easier to justify themselves openly, but I’m not convinced this will gain them many voters, at least in the short term. The BNP ‘brand’ has such a stigma on the streets; it isn’t just educated southerners who get that it’s a fundamentally racist organisation. And simply being a member of the BNP can still lose people their jobs because it is so widely renowned for violence. Yes, this perception could fade over a period of years if its origins are well hidden, but then if it begins to act like a non-racist organisation, operating under non-racist rules, then mightn’t it become so detatched from its origins that it will begin to become a non-racist (or, more realistically, at least a less racist) organisation over that period of years too?

      Maybe we could have some volunteers for an inside job??

    9. Noor the abducted — on 4th September, 2009 at 10:52 AM  

      The police etc will be able to join the BNP.

    10. hantsboy — on 4th September, 2009 at 11:11 AM  

      The word over at BNP Central is that new members will be charged a £1,000,000 fee on joining (existing members stay the same)

    11. Jai — on 4th September, 2009 at 11:18 AM  

      Actually, let’s analyse the following remark by Griffin for a moment:

      to secure a future for the true children of our islands.”

      So, presumably, anyone with any Scandinavian, Anglo-Saxon/Germanic, or other European ancestry from outside the British Isles within a particular timeframe (eg. 12,000 years, since Griffin likes to mention that specific figure) should not be allowed to join the BNP either.

      Multiple independent DNA tests would go a long way towards confirming a person’s ancestry in this regard.

      Either way, if — upon the amendment of the BNP constitution — these restrictions do NOT apply to the individuals listed above, then Griffin is contradicting himself. Not just logically, but from a legal standpoint too.

      Prosecuting lawyers should take note.

    12. Jai — on 4th September, 2009 at 11:33 AM  

      Let me modify my previous comment. Let’s say that the BNP’s constitution is amended so that non-white people are indeed allowed to join the BNP, as per various rumours. (See http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article6820847.ece ).

      Griffin has stated his organisation’s “purpose” is to “secure a future for the true children of these islands”.

      In that case, the various groups I listed in #11 would, logically, not be included. If they are included, then Griffin is still contradicting himself, particularly if he’s adamant about “12,000 years of shared history” — because, by that definition, Scandinavians, Anglo-Saxons, etc etc are not the “true children” of the British Isles and do not fall under the umbrella of his stated “purpose”.

    13. Cauldron — on 4th September, 2009 at 11:37 AM  

      #3 - quite. Leftist-inspired institutions have proven particularly adept at creating counterproductive policies when dealing with the racist fringe. Perhaps its time to admit that the whole identity politics/reverse discrimination policy framework since 1997 has played no small part in the rise of the BNP. With this number of own goals, leftist policy makers should consider playing for Arsenal.

    14. Ravi Naik — on 4th September, 2009 at 12:27 PM  

      But changing the rules takes away the most obvious and potent symbols that the BNP remains a racist party. If the rules change and Griffin goes on television and declares that he’s not racist, merely standing up for British culture, what can journalists obviously point at to illustrate the party’s racism?

      I have to disagree. Despite their whites-only policy they managed to get 2 MEPs elected. In my view, the worse thing that can happen to the BNP right now is to lose their wink wink ‘racist’ status and become cultural warriors like UKIP or the Tories. What then differentiates the BNP with other right-wing parties?

      I mean, wouldn’t hardcore BNP supporters be really pissed if anti-Muslim Asians and Blacks publicly supported their party?

    15. irrelephant — on 4th September, 2009 at 12:52 PM  

      “I mean, wouldn’t hardcore BNP supporters be really pissed if anti-Muslim Asians and Blacks publicly supported their party?”

      Presactly! this kills the BNP that everyone is so up in arms about and leaves behing somthing completely different albeit with the same name.

      If the far right/left/whatever element is gone then who cares if the bnp are around, hell we may even grow to like them?

    16. Cauldron — on 4th September, 2009 at 12:56 PM  

      14 -”What then differentiates the BNP with other right-wing parties?”.

      Perhaps the fact that their economic policies are left-wing?

    17. Shatterface — on 4th September, 2009 at 1:35 PM  

      ‘But changing the rules takes away the most obvious and potent symbols that the BNP remains a racist party.’

      Absolutely. They only need to wheel out a couple of ethnic members and they can claim they aren’t racist. Pretty hard to do while they’re exclusively white.

      It’s just a shame they don’t all have side partings and toothbrush moustaches.

    18. billaricaydickey — on 4th September, 2009 at 2:33 PM  

      For once, Sunny boy, you have got something right.

    19. Sunny — on 4th September, 2009 at 3:23 PM  

      But Ravi - how many blacks or Asians are actually going to support them?

    20. Kdee — on 4th September, 2009 at 3:51 PM  

      ‘But Ravi – how many blacks or Asians are actually going to support them?’

      http://isupporttheresistance.blogspot.com/2009/09/rajinder-singh-and-bnp.html

      http://martinwingfield.blogspot.com/2009/09/let-rajinder-have-honour.html

    21. Cyburn — on 4th September, 2009 at 4:05 PM  

      On agreeing with the other comments, ethnics aint exactly gonna be queuing to join the BNP.

      Maybe they get a few Arab Christians who are islamophobic due to experiences of christians in muslim countries.

    22. Dalbir — on 4th September, 2009 at 4:12 PM  

      #20

      If I had seen my father hacked to pieces in front of me as a kid I would probably be scarred for life. I’ve always thought that Rajinder guy was suffering from some psychological issue stemming from this.

      I know parts of the Sikh and Pakistani community have relationships that leave much to be desired, but I doubt Sikhs will be queuing up to join the BNP en masse.

    23. Noor the abducted — on 4th September, 2009 at 4:54 PM  

      There doesn’t seem to be BNP members queuing up on mass to stop any Sikhs joining.

    24. Dan Dare — on 4th September, 2009 at 6:25 PM  

      If, as someone suggested above, every single non-white person of voting age where to join the BNP the net effect would be an increase in BNP income by £30 for each new member, say £60 million conservatively.

      None of these probationary members would be entitled to vote in General Meetings for two years, after which period the BNP could simply wind itself up, and re-constitute itself as a new party as the Vlaams Blok did a few years ago.

    25. Harry — on 4th September, 2009 at 8:56 PM  

      “Imagine if they did, though. Imagine if every single non-white person of voting age in the country joined the BNP. It would be the end of them”-Katy Newton

      Well it would be the end of the BNPs financial worries as the new members have to pay a mandatory £30 joining fee so maybe that isnt such a grand idea Katy.

    26. IMarcher — on 4th September, 2009 at 8:57 PM  

      A very bad move indeed. Now the Black Police Officers Association and Association of Asian Businessmen, Black Lawyers, Asian Housing Associations etc etc will have to open their doors to whites!

    27. Harry — on 4th September, 2009 at 9:05 PM  

      IMARCHER-this rule wont affect those groups as this only applies to political parties.

    28. IMarcher — on 4th September, 2009 at 9:16 PM  

      Harry, if it is only to apply to political parties it would be discriminatory on the basis of belief, which is illegal. The only way round this is to apply it to everyone regardless of race.

    29. smack4head — on 5th September, 2009 at 12:50 AM  

      #26

      it wouldnt matter how much money “they” had because “they” wouldnt be “them” anymore. All the racist element of the BNP would be gone if all of a sudden loads of ethnic minorities started getting involved with them there would be a BNP in name only which stands for nothing but “british identity” which would implicitly then have to include all the brown people who have joined up!.

      suggest anyone who is committed to ending the racist BNP join up and start pushing for change from within? all it would take is 100 muslims/people of varying race turning up to the BNP festival and all the racist element will go join the EDL or some other bunch of nutjobs…boom the time when the racists started making genuine headway in British politics until the “liberal fanatics” came and ruined the party will be a memory, toasted to on the odd occasion they meet up in swastika draped living rooms to moan about how the country is being ruined by immigrants.

    30. Shatterface — on 5th September, 2009 at 2:26 AM  

      Well, if you want to join the BNP ‘in order to destroy it from within’ you can kiss goodbye to a career in the police, teaching, etc. or any other service where membership of the BNP would bar you from working - unless you then claimed being in the BNP doesn’t automatically make you a racist, and therefore do the BNP’s job for them.

    31. smack4head — on 5th September, 2009 at 3:27 AM  

      going in circles.

      firstly being a member of the BNP does not automatically make you a racist.

      secondly if ethnic minorities join the BNP then it by its very nature can no longer be a racist party agitating for the interests of one race over another.

      too much focus and boogeymanising of “them” and the term “BNP”

      “them” is a mix of people of varied beliefs and intelligence. Racists have created and used this vehicle called the BNP to normalise their views on white supremacy through rhetoric, as a result, fairly normal people (as well as really thick but not necessarily racist people) have signed up.

      If ethnic minorities joined then the racists would have to leave because now the vehicle would no longer serve its purpose, it would smell abit like curry and probably have little annoying boxing gloves with various religious symbols painted on them dangling from the rear view mirror.

      people who are against the bnp are not supposed to be fighting the political party as a registered organisation but the racists within it, this move helps those opposing the racists to combat them in a more effective way than before, provided they can be bothered to sieze the initiative.

    32. dave bones — on 5th September, 2009 at 9:50 AM  

      Did I miss a meeting? I thought that is was a given that as soon as the BNP opened its membership it was going to be flooded with black and asian members no? I thought that was already being arranged by UAF or someone.

    33. bert — on 5th September, 2009 at 10:14 AM  

      I didn’t join the BNP because the BNP are white, I joined them because I want my country back, and I fully recognise there are many non white people that feel the same way and love living the British way of life. (The older British way of life , not the Marxist socially engineered one we have now)
      I have no problem in accepting them as members in the BNP. look at the overwhelming support on the BNP website.
      This will throw off the stupid racist tag once and for all, leading to many on the fence joining and voting BNP, It also paves the way for the BNP to be in the police and prison service, as more and more people wake up, and support the BNP.

    34. IMarcher — on 5th September, 2009 at 11:01 AM  

      smack4head — on 5th September, 2009 at 3:27 am, I guess you must be a member of the BNP yourself – a mole perhaps - as you sound so familiar with their membership. What are they like? What are their meetings like? Their online forums? Have you put to them your opinion of “white supremacy” in Britain? I guess they would weasel out of that one by pointing out the example of Mahatma Gandhi!

    35. Noor the abducted — on 5th September, 2009 at 12:32 PM  

      Mahatma Gandhi a weasel? thats bad.

    36. Dalbir — on 5th September, 2009 at 12:48 PM  

      If ethnic minorities joined then the racists would have to leave because now the vehicle would no longer serve its purpose, it would smell abit like curry and probably have little annoying boxing gloves with various religious symbols painted on them dangling from the rear view mirror.

      The ethnics could always shave their heads, wear chavy clothes including football tops and jettison decent grammar to try and fit in I guess?

      Wot if dhey wuz too start talkin like dat guv. You know the old “dunno wus goin on mate, the darkies are all takin ova and that” malarkey. Maybe they could fit in?

    37. Ravi Naik — on 5th September, 2009 at 2:21 PM  

      But changing the rules takes away the most obvious and potent symbols that the BNP remains a racist party. If the rules change and Griffin goes on television and declares that he’s not racist, merely standing up for British culture, what can journalists obviously point at to illustrate the party’s racism?

      If the BNP had taken the initiative to open its membership to non-whites, then in fact they would have a case that they had become non-racist. Except that now, the EHRC has pretty much closed the door on that. Even if the BNP parades its token non-whites to show it is non-racist, anyone can point out that they were forced to accept them. And I am sure that the BNP doesn’t want to fight the EHRC on this, as it would be all over the newspapers and it would be highlighted their racist ideology.

      In any case, having a single non-white BNP member is enough to break the ethos of the BNP party and destroy the moral of hardcore BNPers. That can’t possibly be a bad thing. ;)

      However, this might be a good opportunity for Nick Griffin to make the BNP more mainstream in the image of the French FN or the Northern League. Both European parties are nationalistic and xenophobic, but they also accept non-whites as members and as officials representing the party. So, let’s see what Nick Griffin is going to do. I am sure that being shuned by European nationalistic parties in the European Parliament might precipitate a new BNP. The BNP is not going to disappear, but I think it is positive if it evolves to a non-racist party, even if it is xenophobic like the UKIP and some of the Tories.

    38. Shamit — on 5th September, 2009 at 3:53 PM  

      “The word over at BNP Central is that new members will be charged a £1,000,000 fee on joining (existing members stay the same)”

      What a typical thick BNP response.

      Haven’t we asked you enough times to have someone with brains from BNP (I know its hard to find) to come and write on this blog. But you don’t get it do you now?

      Well if BNP tries to use that 1 million pound entrance fee - you realise you have to charge the same for whites and non-whites. And your potential member base does not have that kind of money to shell out.

      But thinking, analysing things through are not really your forte is it now? I have a good suggestion do some basic reading and develop some skills of analysis before you come and comment here.

    39. Sunny — on 5th September, 2009 at 7:52 PM  

      A very bad move indeed. Now the Black Police Officers Association and Association of Asian Businessmen, Black Lawyers, Asian Housing Associations etc etc will have to open their doors to whites!

      Why are people so stupid? These orgs already allow whites to join them! Check their damn websites, fool.

    40. johnb — on 5th September, 2009 at 8:01 PM  

      We BNP supporters would like to thank Trevor and the EHRC et al for that terrific own goal. Now it is time for some of the tremendously thick here to listen up.
      (1) Griffin Wingfield and Darby and others like them, like Brons were NEVER stupid enough to either dream of or work for a lily white Britain. They have been dumping those with that stupid dream out of the party since Griffin took over in 99. It is a long process. It has been completed now and we would like to thank Trevor and that Biased judge for their invaluable assistance.
      (2) WHAT THEY DO WANT IS (Essentially not wholly) THE UK OF THE EARLY 1960’s BACK. a UK that had a positive balance of trade and jobs for its citizens and was not paving over it countryside with ugly housing estates.
      (3) Since the population density of China is 135 persons per square mile and the USA is about 30 they see no reason that the UK at 267 and England at about 335 (same as Bangladesh) should need to cram in more people from ANYWHERE!!
      (4) All intelligent persons who have studied the subject know that this economic Crisis is wholly the creation of the international Banksters. So you might ask yourselves why amongst all the political parties it is only the BNP who have as a policy the nationalization of the banks? And you might further ask yourselves if it is not this policy rather than the alleged “racism” which is the source of such unremittingly savage and false characterization of The BNP and it members and supporters in the establishment owned press??

      It is long past time for you sleepers to wake up and see what is really going on all about you.

    41. The Queen of Fiddlesticks — on 5th September, 2009 at 8:08 PM  

      I’m sorry to laugh sunny I’m not making fun I swear but that’s a silly response …. I wonder how many white members those groups have … and just the fact they call themselves organizations according to race is, well in a way racist. Is there a “white police officers Ass.”
      (haha I love to abbreviate that word)

      my point is you will have to find another line of argument against the BNP.
      I think it would be good to show more of the party you do support ….
      I’m not saying there is no extreme right wing dangers …. just I don’t think right now they are a majority.
      and I don’t think this approach is really opening any discussion.

    42. The Queen of Fiddlesticks — on 5th September, 2009 at 8:45 PM  

      and for you johnb ..
      that is the only reason you have to support the BNP?
      Immigration?
      No one at this point needs BNP to tell them overcrowding should be a concern.
      I am confused about how other BNP policy fits into the big picture …like the lack of support for the war in Afghanistan …
      http://bnp.org.uk/tag/tory-lies/
      Or their education goals which seem to put a lot of emphasis on punishment …
      I’m sorry but reading their site is like a flash back to pre war Nazi Germany! … is that what you want for your country? To yourself become the very thing you once fought against?

      just as I keep telling Sunny …his attack on BNP as a racist party won’t win ….
      your failure to support them with more than issues on immigration makes me think its you who needs a cup of coffee!

    43. persephone — on 5th September, 2009 at 11:37 PM  

      “WHAT THEY DO WANT IS (Essentially not wholly) THE UK OF THE EARLY 1960’s BACK”

      Aah the 1960s.

      It was the 60’s when the term “flower children” was introduced to describe the peace-loving, free spirited people who yearned for an idyllic society based on mutual love….

      I just knew that Griffin was doing all of this from a place of love. I can picture him now with a daisy in his hair midst a slight waft of marijuana …

    44. Noor the abducted — on 6th September, 2009 at 3:33 AM  

      This is no joke.

    45. Ravi Naik — on 6th September, 2009 at 11:03 AM  

      But Griffin knows there aren’t going to be that many ethnic minorities who’ll join the BNP. But changing the rules takes away the most obvious and potent symbols that the BNP remains a racist party. If the rules change and Griffin goes on television and declares that he’s not racist, merely standing up for British culture, what can journalists obviously point at to illustrate the party’s racism?

      If the BNP wants to reform itself and become a non-racist party, then I think we should encourage that transformation. I do believe Nick Griffin wants to become more mainstream, after being humiliated in the European Parliament by other nationalist parties because they saw them as too racist. The fact is that the two most successful nationalist (and deeply xenophobic) parties in Europe - the French FN and the Italian Northern League - not only have non-white members - but they actually had elected non-white officials representing those parties.

      I believe that the EHRC move is a good one. It highlights the racist policies of the BNP (so Nick Griffin will most likely not fight it and have this grow out of proportion in the media), and I think you only need a SINGLE non-white BNP member to destroy the ethos of the party. I also think that the BNP will not be able to parade their non-white token members and claim they are not a racist party, because everyone can point out that they were forced to do so by the EHRC as opposed to voluntaryly accepting them.

      If the BNP positions itself as another UKIP, it will become irrelevant and inconsequential. As any mainstream party can hijack their rhetoric (see Sarkozy), and their most hardcore racist elements would have gone to NF.

      So I do not see how this EHRC move benefits Nick Griffin in the long run….

    46. persephone — on 6th September, 2009 at 11:34 AM  

      ^ agree its no joke but the rationale is so laughable it needs to be pointed out

    47. Ansund — on 6th September, 2009 at 12:00 PM  

      The BNP already have voters from BME backgrounds who despise things like black gangster rap culture which brings a bad name on law abiding blacks and also get votes from Hindus and Sikhs.

      There’s nothing wrong with promoting the cultural values which thrived during the earlier half of the 1900’s where Britain was a much more law abiding place and morally admirable nation.

      That’s what the BNP is fighting for, and good luck to them.

    48. persephone — on 6th September, 2009 at 12:25 PM  

      @ 46

      There has been a lot of progress since the early part of the 1900’s too. Votes for women, anti discrimination measures and the rest.

      We also had two world wars in that period. WW2 was to fight an ideology akin to the BNP

      So not a period that all would want to revisit.

    49. Ashwin — on 6th September, 2009 at 4:25 PM  

      persephone-”WW2 was to fight an ideology akin to the BNP”

      I wonder how our war vets feel about multicultural cities like Bradford or Birmingham that are not remotely British in culture or peoples.

    50. Ashwin — on 6th September, 2009 at 4:29 PM  

      Sunny-why dont you try starting a White policemans association then………..Im sure the law will let you!(A PIG JUST FLEW PAST MY WINDOW)

    51. persephone — on 6th September, 2009 at 4:38 PM  

      Ashwin

      Do you not see the citizens of Bradford or Birmingham as British?

      And why pick those areas? For eg there are parts of London with a higher than average Ozzie population. In the same vein do you think war vets see that as the Ozzification of regions of London - as in they take our jobs, drink their indigenous beer?

    52. Don — on 6th September, 2009 at 5:35 PM  

      I wonder how our war vets feel …

      War vets are a pretty diverse bunch. They probably have diverse views.

      @46

      That position doesn’t really stand up to scrutiny.

    53. Ravi Naik — on 7th September, 2009 at 9:01 AM  

      But Griffin knows there aren’t going to be that many ethnic minorities who’ll join the BNP. But changing the rules takes away the most obvious and potent symbols that the BNP remains a racist party. If the rules change and Griffin goes on television and declares that he’s not racist, merely standing up for British culture, what can journalists obviously point at to illustrate the party’s racism?

      If the BNP wants to reform itself and become a non-racist party, then I think we should encourage that transformation. I do believe Nick Griffin wants to become more mainstream, specially after being humiliated in the European Parliament by other nationalist parties because they saw them as too racist. The fact is that the two most successful nationalist (and deeply xenophobic) parties in Europe - the French FN and the Italian Northern League - not only have non-white members - but they actually had elected non-white officials representing those parties.

      I believe that the EHRC move is a good one. It highlights the racist policies of the BNP (so Nick Griffin will most likely not fight it and have this grow out of proportion in the media), and I think you only need a SINGLE non-white BNP member to destroy the ethos of the party. I also think that the BNP will not be able to parade their non-white token members and claim they are not a racist party, because everyone can point out that they were forced to do so by the EHRC as opposed to voluntaryly accepting them.

      If the BNP positions itself as another UKIP, it will become irrelevant and inconsequential. As any mainstream party can hijack their rhetoric (see Sarkozy), and their most hardcore racist elements would have gone to NF.

      So I do not see how this EHRC move benefits Nick Griffin in the short or long run.

    54. Ravi Naik — on 7th September, 2009 at 9:02 AM  

      But Griffin knows there aren’t going to be that many ethnic minorities who’ll join the BNP. But changing the rules takes away the most obvious and potent symbols that the BNP remains a racist party. If the rules change and Griffin goes on television and declares that he’s not racist, merely standing up for British culture, what can journalists obviously point at to illustrate the party’s racism?

      If the BNP wants to reform itself and become a non-racist party, then I think we should encourage that transformation. I do believe Nick Griffin wants to become more mainstream, after being humiliated in the European Parliament by other nationalist parties because they saw them as too racist. The fact is that the two most successful nationalist (and deeply xenophobic) parties in Europe - the French FN and the Italian Northern League - not only have non-white members - but they actually had elected non-white officials representing those parties.

      I believe that the EHRC move is a good one. It highlights the racist policies of the BNP (so Nick Griffin will most likely not fight it and have this grow out of proportion in the media), and I think you only need a SINGLE non-white BNP member to destroy the ethos of the party. I also think that the BNP will not be able to parade their non-white token members and claim they are not a racist party, because everyone can point out that they were forced to do so by the EHRC as opposed to voluntaryly accepting them.

      If the BNP positions itself as another UKIP, it will become irrelevant and inconsequential. As any mainstream party can hijack their rhetoric (see Sarkozy), and their most hardcore racist elements would have gone to NF.

      So I do not see how this EHRC move benefits Nick Griffin in the long run.

    55. johnb — on 10th September, 2009 at 10:17 PM  

      I notice one responder glossed over my statement with the snide comment “No one at this point needs BNP to tell them overcrowding should be a concern.”

      Really!! Well if you are at all “concerned” you should be also “concerned” that despite promises to crack down on illegal immigration the Immigration Service only conducts a personal interview of .1 percent of the applicants prior to issuing a work visa. That is one in one thousand. So which Political Party do you actually think will really do something about HALTING immigration and DEPORTING, illegals, criminals , and fakes? Your “concern” does not ACTUALLY EXTEND to doing anything about the problem, does it? It is just another liberal sentiment, a PC sound bite that means nothing, along with all the other liberal nonsense. like “concern” over violent crime does not actually extend to demanding long sentences for violent criminals. Want to stop “grooming” Rape? crack down and actually prosecute more than the 2 or 3 percent that is done now. Want to stop gang crime? Put a whole 40 man squad in under cover, with covert video surveillance and
      recordings on gang estates and neighborhoods, one gang at a time. Put the gang members behind bars with the maximum sentence for every crime recorded. Take away the prison’s comforts and make them actually miserable places to be in. No TV, no fancy food, and privileges only for those who are put to work doing something useful for the community.
      You also said “I am confused about how other BNP policy fits into the big picture” well I hope that now you are less confused, at least on the crime and immigration issues. Or you could go to the BNP web site and read up a little bit.

    56. BUNDESPOPEL — on 12th October, 2009 at 8:59 PM  

      Just greeting Nick.
      He is a jolly good fellow.

    57. Streona — on 12th October, 2009 at 9:53 PM  

      If non-white (or even white) people want to join the BNP I certainly would not want to support them in doing so, but if it costs the BNP money then so much the better.

    58. KB Player — on 12th October, 2009 at 10:14 PM  

      As for non-white or any people joining the BNP in order to out-vote or alter them a party doesn’t have to accept anyone who wants to join, does it? Won’t they just turn down people saying, you’re not quite what we’re looking for? Or have I missed the point?

      I do believe Nick Griffin wants to become more mainstream, after being humiliated in the European Parliament by other nationalist parties because they saw them as too racist.

      I had the impression that without his racism Nick Griffin would be nothing. That’s his core belief. Anything else is just the icing on the cake. If he decides he likes being an MEP, never mind how he betray’s his party’s ideals, his supporters may leave and form a Real BNP or something.



    Pickled Politics © Copyright 2005 - 2009. All rights reserved. Terms and conditions.
    With the help of PHP and Wordpress.