BNP myths: Are BNP voters ex-Labour voters?


by Sunny
28th October, 2009 at 6:31 pm    

I’m going to start a regular series tackling and breaking down myths relating to the BNP and the far-right in the UK.

One commonly repeated myth is that BNP voters are ex-Labour voters. This leads to several assertions that fit the writer’s prejudices but have little basis in fact or evidence. Such as:

- Therefore this shows Labour has abandoned working-class whites over their undying love for the fascist threat of ‘multiculti-nazism’.

- This shows the BNP is left-wing conspiracy because Hitler liked the term ‘National Socialism’ etc etc.

Actual evidence
In this article on Political Betting, the writer goes through polling and demographic evidence to ask ‘Where BNP votes were coming from’.

He concludes:

Far from BNP voters being similar to Labour voters and drawn from the same demographic sectors, the data shows that BNP voters are much more likely to be C2DE than any of the three main parties.

What’s the profile then of BNP voters from this brief analysis? We get a picture of a man or woman, most likely C2DE, who didn’t vote at the 2005 election (though if they did vote they were most likely to have supported Labour). It appears therefore that rather than the BNP tapping into disaffected Labour votes, they have actually managed to mobilise a previously non-participating part of the electorate and persuaded them to go out and cast ballots.

In other words they are disaffected voters who have not shown a preference for any party for several elections.

The small percentage of people who do vote BNP are broadly from poorer backgrounds. Historically, this demographic has always had lower voting percentages and so it isn’t very surprising they’re politically apathetic.

Those are target voters for the Labour party, but not excluded from the Conservatives given that Cameron declared his party would be the party to help the poor. But the idea these people now voting BNP were abandoned by Labour is not borne out by voting records. It could still true to say that Labour has abandoned many working class voters who traditionally voted Labour – but that largely does not apply for BNP supporters.


              Post to del.icio.us


Filed in: Race politics,The BNP






94 Comments below   |  

Reactions: Twitter, blogs
  1. pickles

    New blog post: BNP myths: Are BNP sympathisers ex-Labour voters? http://www.pickledpolitics.com/archives/6353


  2. Adam Bienkov

    RT @pickledpolitics New blog post: BNP myths: Are BNP sympathisers ex-Labour voters? http://www.pickledpolitics.com/archives/6353


  3. Rosie Hucklesby

    RT @pickledpolitics: New blog post: BNP myths: Are BNP sympathisers ex-Labour voters? http://www.pickledpolitics.com/archives/6353


  4. Christopher McKeon

    RT @pickledpolitics: New blog post: BNP myths: Are BNP sympathisers ex-Labour voters? http://www.pickledpolitics.com/archives/6353


  5. Chris Paul

    RT @AdamBienkov RT @pickledpolitics blog post BNP myths: Are BNP sympathisers ex-Lab voters? http://www.pickledpolitics.com/archives/6353


  6. maximal is me

    RT @pickledpolitics: BNP myths: Are BNP sympathisers ex-Labour voters? http://bit.ly/FLtwD


  7. George Weyman

    RT @MXML: RT @pickledpolitics: BNP myths: Are BNP sympathisers ex-Labour voters? http://bit.ly/FLtwD


  8. Larry Spence

    Pickled Politics » BNP myths: Are BNP voters ex-Labour voters? http://bit.ly/BsQS6


  9. Rob Parsons

    Pickled Politics » BNP myths: Are BNP voters ex-Labour voters? http://bit.ly/CnK9P


  10. James Bethell

    Pickled Politics » BNP myths: Are BNP voters ex-Labour voters? http://bit.ly/BsQS6 – the debate continue


  11. John Lostflame

    Pickled Politics » BNP myths: Are BNP voters ex-Labour voters? http://bit.ly/r65hc


  12. Noxi

    BNP myths: Are BNP voters ex-Labour voters? | Pickled Politics »http://ow.ly/x9KH


  13. BNP Teachers « Earwicga

    [...] between the fact that there is an election almost upon us with New Labour desperate to woo disaffected voters who might choose to vote BNP is there? That would be seriously disgusting, and it’s not like [...]




  1. cjcjc — on 28th October, 2009 at 6:52 pm  

    Well, inasmuch as they are C2DE’s, and I assume white, they can surely still be described as abandoned working class whites?
    And, as you say yourself, they are (were) Labour’s “natural constituency”.

    But I take your point about their not being ex-Labour *voters*, and will stop claiming so!

  2. douglas clark — on 28th October, 2009 at 6:57 pm  

    Sunny,

    I agree with most of what you have to say. Though I think it is reasonable to say that some C2DEs feel abandoned by Labour, whether they voted for them or not. And some did.

    The other arguement which may also have some merit is that many didn’t vote because they didn’t have a racist party to vote for, and now they do. This latter case is probably the more optimistic, because it would see a natural limit on BNP voting potential.

  3. Evan Price — on 28th October, 2009 at 7:10 pm  

    I wrote about this sort of thing a few days aga. Rather than repeat what I wrote, here’s the link:
    http://evanprice.blogspot.com/2009/10/experiences-of-talking-to-people-who.html

    I don’t think that the BNP voters are all or even mainly ex-Labour voters – although it is interesting to see many disaffected voters grappling with whom to vote for – and the results of the European elections in the valleys in South Wales are very interesting – with UKIP winning votes in numbers that we (Conservatives) severely underestimated before hand.

    It is clear that the BNP vote tends to be in areas where the Labour party used to clean up – and so, simplistically, it is able to make 2 and 2 add up – even if that simplicity itself disguises the reality …

  4. Kim — on 28th October, 2009 at 7:15 pm  

    You just go ahead under the misapprehension that all white folk want to be part of a multicultural experiment and be completely stripped of their customs, freedoms, heritage and roots and maybe one day, you’ll believe it.

    My family came from the East End (Bow to be exact). My roots are gone. My East End culture is no more. I am not racist, I am married to a gentleman from the caribbean.

    I am however (and so is he by the way) annoyed that London and other parts of the UK have begun to resemble parts of India, Pakistan and Africa…

    I would say BNP voters come mainly from Labour (the party that used to represent the white working classes). That would be us!

  5. Tom — on 28th October, 2009 at 7:16 pm  

    Interesting analysis, though given that it only compares with 2005 voting records I’m not sure you can be so certain.

    Voting turnout has declined an awful lot in the past few decades, and white working class voters might have felt many reasons to turn from Labour at the 2005 and even 2001 elections.

    How many traditionally-Labour voters stopped voting in 2001 and 2005, then decided to vote BNP in recent elections? What if we go even further back – did Labour take back National Front voters, only to lose them in the 1990s and 2000s?

  6. douglas clark — on 28th October, 2009 at 7:18 pm  

    Kim,

    I would say BNP voters come mainly from Labour (the party that used to represent the white working classes). That would be us!

    If you read the analysis that Sunny linked to you’d find out that that is not true!

  7. Sunny — on 28th October, 2009 at 7:19 pm  

    Well, inasmuch as they are C2DE’s, and I assume white, they can surely still be described as abandoned working class whites?

    They could be abandoned by the Tories as much as Labour. I’d argue they are Labour’s natural constituency but they are not Labour voters.

    My East End culture is no more. I am not racist, I am married to a gentleman from the caribbean.

    Wait a second. Why do people turn up with this claim of being married to a black or Asian person and then claim their roots are gone.

    If you wanted to preserve your racial roots then why didn’t you marry someone white?

    Or is it that you have nothing against black people but your problem is the Asians moving in?

    I would say BNP voters come mainly from Labour

    Can you read, or did the post above go above your head?

    Or perhaps you simply copied and pasted this from somewhere else.

  8. Grumpy Old Man — on 28th October, 2009 at 7:26 pm  

    Did anyone else see Gary Younge’s very powerful article in the Guardian last week. He takes a somewhat different line to Sunny.

  9. douglas clark — on 28th October, 2009 at 7:26 pm  

    Tom,

    There is probably a thesis to be had on determining a methodology for analysing long term voting commitments based on loyalty, cross voting, tactical voting, protest voting and new voting.

    I do not know how easy it would be to actually do the analysis though.

  10. Refresh — on 28th October, 2009 at 7:26 pm  

    Is it possible these were the people who were ‘the price worth paying’ by Thather’s regime? That was after all when the core of British manufacturing was completely wiped out.

    All makes sense.

    Mr Bill Hayes (Head of CWU), on Any Questions this week commented that the genius of New Labour was the coalition of the trade union movement (organised working class) and the aspirational working class. Which points clearly to the probability that New Labour (and the working class) lost sight of the plight of the burgeoning long-term unemployed.

    The shame of it is that in 1997, we all expected to see this group uplifted as a priority and not in the end be pilloried for being poor. This failure resulted in a whole new coalition – intentional or otherwise – with the Daily Mail Tory and snobby-end of Labour.

    New Labour believed it was creating an atmosphere where people would do it for themselves. But to maintain the support of the Daily Mail Tory, it had to go on the occasional offensive against their own. Highly visible campaigns against benefit cheats and ASBO’s being obvious outcomes. And there are very many other examples – whilst the strategy of rights and reposibilities would seem to be a viable relationship between the government and the governed; it falls apart when rights are heavily biassed towards the majority of the population whilst the responsibilities fall on the powerless.

  11. douglas clark — on 28th October, 2009 at 7:30 pm  

    Grumpy Old Man,

    Could you provide a link? It makes me grumpy when people don’t.

  12. douglas clark — on 28th October, 2009 at 7:58 pm  

    Refresh,

    I agree with where you are coming from, I think, and I agree with your analysis to quite an extent.

    But I have issues also.

    I remember the 1997 election result in much the same way as you do. But Blair had got into power based on a policy which is politely known as triangulation and is more realistically known as appeasement. He, nor his government were exactly challenging to middle class prejudice, were they? Would I be correct in recalling that they said that they would continue with Tory taxation policy for at least two years?

    And their genuine love affair with a big role on the world stage, (and PFI, big IT, and big brother too), became more important to them than actually trying to transition a society.

    You said:

    it falls apart when rights are heavily biassed towards the majority of the population whilst the responsibilities fall on the powerless

    And I see your words piled up, and I agree.

    And then I wonder.

    Rights are biased towards the rich and the super rich, same as it ever was. Billionaires are welcome, no matter where they come from. For, whilst they might be here as a form of asylum, it is an extremely comfortable form of asylum is it not?

    And it is the correction of an old wrong – put people on disability for that will reduce the numbers of unemployed – that we face, even today, with agencies now motivated to attack these folk. Is that true, or not?

    Finally.

    It seems to me that the culture of entitlement has now extended to folk that don’t deserve it at all.

    They say things like:

    “Why should these asylum seekers get housing? Look at me! I’ve lived here all my life.”

    Well, yes, but you’ve contributed fuck all for longer than any asylum seeker.

    If the government had any balls at all it would allow asylum seekers to work in the UK throughout their time here. And if they had done good, as we say, they could stay anyway.

  13. obangobang — on 28th October, 2009 at 8:00 pm  

    The very fact you feel compelled to blog this suggests you are concerned by the possibility (probability?) that these people would traditionally be Labour voters, which is almost certainly true, they’ve just never been New Labour voters.

    The bigger issue, however, is that wherever they come from politically (and it may well be that many were non-alligned previously), the fact is that the rise of the BNP is a direct reaction to New Labour policies on immigration. Now whether you agree with these policies or not (I don’t have a problem with economic immigration, but if Neather’s accusations are true, New Labour has a great deal to answer for), you have to accept that if a direct result is the rise of the BNP, the policy has been a failure.

    Frankly I’m not sure identifying the previous voting patterns of BNP supporters really helps. It is far more important to discern why they support the BNP, even given its blatantly racist agenda, and address the non-racist issues raised head-on. It clearly is not the case, however, that one million people in the UK are foaming at the mouth, white supremacists, so there must be more to it.

    Espousing theories that ‘prove’ they are not ex-Labour voters may help you sleep at night, but it doesn’t really scratch the surface of the problem.

  14. douglas clark — on 28th October, 2009 at 8:12 pm  

    obangobang,

    It is also, perhaps, the case that racists didn’t have a party to vote for before, and now they do?

    Which is why I’d (optimistically) see their numbers being capped at pretty low levels.

    Can I ask you to speculate on what you said here:

    It clearly is not the case, however, that one million people in the UK are foaming at the mouth, white supremacists, so there must be more to it.

    Why? And what more to it is there than assuming that they are?

    I’d be genuinely interested in why you think otherwise.

    [Just so's you know, I think a million is a bit low, and two million is a bit high. There is no point in denying that they exist though.]

  15. Laban — on 28th October, 2009 at 8:22 pm  

    So the BNP are energising the previously apathetic ?

    All those Government grants to Operation White Vote have worked ;-)

    I must say I find that a tad surprising. Even the BNP themselves don’t seem to think that the underclass/lumpen vote is easy to mobilise. And if it’s not that, who are these new voters ?

  16. douglas clark — on 28th October, 2009 at 8:43 pm  

    Laban,

    Well, if you look at what Political Betting is saying..

    These appear to be people that only vote for a racist party, and only come out to vote when there is a racist party on the ballot paper.

    What, exactly, is hard to understand about that?

    Allegedly the new voters are C2DE’s.

    I find that a tad harder to understand as it is far too wide a social grouping to be meaningful.

    And, here we go, most C2D’s I know wouldn’t vote BNP if their life depended on it. They have friends and mates that the BNP vilify, and they don’t buy any of that stuff.

    Just saying.

  17. marvin — on 28th October, 2009 at 9:31 pm  

    So they are “not Labour” voters because they didn’t vote in the 2005 election. No other data has been provided. It does also say, I quote “though if they did vote they were most likely to have supported Labour”.

    It clearly is not the case, however, that one million people in the UK are foaming at the mouth, white supremacists, so there must be more to it.

    Espousing theories that ‘prove’ they are not ex-Labour voters may help you sleep at night, but it doesn’t really scratch the surface of the problem.

    Heh, well said.

    These appear to be people that only vote for a racist party, and only come out to vote when there is a racist party on the ballot paper.

    It’s people that didn’t vote in the 2005 election, and the vote dropped in several places where there were BNP candidates…

    An interesting post. But it does not prove that Labour voters preceding 2005 have not transferred to the BNP. It reinforces the view that these people are the disaffected.

    All political parties are responsible for an this disaffection given the abuses of the expenses system. Labour is however responsible for the unprecedented immigration in the past decade with it’s resultant problems.

  18. MatGB — on 28th October, 2009 at 10:06 pm  

    Sunny. On this?

    I was wrong. I figured this out a few months back, but never got around to posting it–and now there’s even more survey data backing up what I was going to write.

    Laban–basic correlation; the safer the seat, the lower the turnout, the more marginal the seat, the more campaigning resources are put in, the more effective a GOTV effort is made, etc.

    That applies in local council elections as well as general elections.

    In any given district, there is normally an incumbent and a putative challenger. Because in many many safe Labour wards the other parties basically stopped working them and moved activists elsewhere, the “anti-Labour” vote in those wards and areas was up for grabs.

    The BNP has moved in to many areas (I live just outside Halifax, which is a named seat on that Guardian heatmap of BNP members) that the other parties weren’t fighting. Note, they’re not always in Labour areas, there’s a Tory/BNP marginal up the road from me(and I can’t explain it, not worked it, not got the resources).

    In many of those areas, other parties have then moved back in, the incumbents (typically Labour) have been forced to up their game locally, and the BNP are pushed back down again. On QT, when Chris Huhne said “and as we’ve seen in Burnley when the Lib Dems move in they are pushed out”, he’s 100% right; although I’ll admit a bias, the Lib Dem organiser there is a good friend of mine.

    In a safeish, abandoned ward, the parties don’t have the resources to campaign hard, and if the incumbents are crap local councillors, the BNP have an easy job.

    They’re in Labour areas, but they’re picking up the anti-Labour vote that was going begging.

    The psephologist in me should’ve known this, but I didn’t figure it out for ages. There’ve always been working class Tories and similar, Peel set up a chain of working men’s clubs to appeal to the working class vote.

    In most of those areas, the Tory party is dormant. Those people are natural targets for the BNP.

    (and look, I haven’t even mentioned how changing the electoral system to abolish safe seats would largely fix this problem… oh, wait, I just did)

  19. fugstar — on 28th October, 2009 at 11:52 pm  

    i dont like this abcdefg thing. but if its temporarily useful and that constituency is voting, rather than not even engaging, its good for our collective health.

    only im not sure its that simple. these rationalisations certainly feel like partisan hand wringing sometimes.

  20. dave bones — on 29th October, 2009 at 12:13 am  

    That is really interesting. I was assuming ex-labour voters in the North of England were voting BNP. Maybe its not as sad a day as I thought.

  21. Refresh — on 29th October, 2009 at 12:33 am  

    Douglas, agree. Triangulation is an appalling ideology. It is all about gaining and staying in power. Something Nick Griffin claimed (on The BNP Special) he was trying to do when addressing the KKK.

    It has washed away some of the really positive things the government sought to do. For example the target of 50% university places. But what good is all that when social mobility, as a measure, is at an all time low.

    As for transitioning society, New Labour managed to change the world and dragged society back to the 70s.

    As for your reference to entitlement through an accident of birth, the tragedy is that they are blaming the wrong people – which comes out of a lack of political awareness, a consequence of the general dumbing down (some might say shutting down of the senses) by the media and the politicos of those who are entitled to be angry.

    When it comes to billionaires they are the true inheritors of the earth. They are a part of the jetstream, which determines our political and social weather. They are the Untouchables.

  22. Refresh — on 29th October, 2009 at 12:35 am  

    Rumbold,

    I’ve had two posts that have failed to appear. Is the spam filter being over-zealous.

  23. Dr Anonymous — on 29th October, 2009 at 1:50 am  

    Firstly, I don’t know enough statistics to know whether 132 people is an adequate sample size for debunking an argument or not, but I would like some analysis from someone who does.

    Secondly, I agree with some of the commenters above who remark that the question is too narrow when conceived as whether BNP voters are ex-Labour voters or simply more likely to be a natural constituency for Labour but were non voters. If it is the former, then it means they are disaffected Labour voters. If it is the latter, it means they are people who were disaffected wtih the whole electoral system under New Labour governments to not bother voting at all until someone came along and tried to appeal to them.

    It would take a fairly compelling argument in light of everything that is known about British politics to convincingly argue that New Labour’s abandonment of the working class (white and otherwise) played no role in the rise of the BNP as a social force – which is really what the question is about.

    Thirdly, there seems to be an assumption on the part of some people that ‘racists’ are simply ‘racists’, are not shaped by any factors that lead them to be ‘racists’ and that there aren’t degrees of racism (e.g. direct crass racism like Nick Griffin’s vs. tacit but understood tolerance of institional racism vs. support for policies that lead to increased racism and racial tension).

    In this vein, it’s worth revisiting this:

    A subject-effect can be briefly plotted as follows: that which seems to operate as a subject may be part of an immense discontinuous network … of strands that may be termed politics, ideology, economics, history, sexuality, language, and so on. … Different knottings and configurations of these strands, determined by heterogeneous determinations which are themselves dependent upon myriad circumstances, produce the effect of an operating subject. Yet the continuist and homogenist deliberative consciousness symptomatically requires a continuous and homogeneous cause for this effect and thus posits a sovereign and determining subject.

    (Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak, “In Other Worlds”)”

  24. Shamit — on 29th October, 2009 at 2:01 am  

    “Highly visible campaigns against benefit cheats and ASBO’s being obvious outcomes”

    Thugs scaring little old pensioners and driving people to suicide – and ASBO is the reason why BNP gets more votes? I don’t think so.

    Did anyone watch the recent Panorama on Bristol Southmead? After watching that I don’t think anyone would agree with the notion that ASBO is a bad thing.

    Further, statistics and reports all show that two socio-economic groups have benefited most during the 10 years of Blair’s Premiership – the poorest and the richest in this country. And I also don’t buy the argument that the poorest and the unemployed were left to themselves.

    The investments made in education and skills, including child care for the very poor and creating opportunities were almost unprecedented. And they have paid dividends. Look at any statistics you would be surprised.

    Until the economic crisis hit this government did make some real ambitious goals on child poverty targets and they were on par with it. Today a 16 year old leaving school has far more options to enhance his skills at all academic levels than ever before.

    And this year alone the number of people taking up apprenticeships is a record high and it is benefiting both businesses and the youth.

    No one is denying that many were left behind some by their own choice and many because of the system’s failure. But that does not mean this Labour government looked the other way or left people to fend for themselves — in some cases the perceptions maybe so but reality especially policy wise has been very different. And there are results which any government should be proud of.

    There have been many political and strategic mistakes especially under Mr. Brown’s leadership but this government’s record on attempting to improve the lives of those who need help most is actually quite good.

    The successes of this government forces a Tory party to openly accept that State must show compassion and provide a helping hand when it is needed most. And Cameron acknowledged that in his speech at the party conference.

    So, Labour Government’s policies on benefit cheats and ASBOs have been the driving cause for BNP voters – that is not an acceptable argument folks.

    There are racist people in every society right around the world and some of the more intelligent racists always play the ‘blame the others” game which resonate with some who have fallen on hard times. And thugs also like that argument as it gives them some sort of legitimacy in their own eyes. And thats how BNP thrives.

    These rather lousy myths about how labour economic policies have driven the rise to BNP should be dumped. The very argument about BNP is economy — and mainstream parties should attack that flank. You think you have it bad — if BNP comes to power your regular balck and white TV would cost 1000 quid and you won’t be able to buy food at cheap prices or afford a new refrigerator — lets start with those please.

    Not this labour got BNP votes – that’s the myth and the perception is tere but doesn’t make it right or true in anyway.

  25. Sunny — on 29th October, 2009 at 2:25 am  

    MatGB – excellent point about Labour wards that have become one-party places and therefore easy meat for BNP supporters.

    The very fact you feel compelled to blog this suggests you are concerned by the possibility (probability?) that these people would traditionally be Labour voters, which is almost certainly true, they’ve just never been New Labour voters.

    No I’m writing this to dampen the rubbish assertions people make by making the above assumption.

    I don’t have a problem with economic immigration, but if Neather’s accusations are true, New Labour has a great deal to answer for

    Neather himself wrote later saying the accusations were not true and that rightwingers were batshit mad on immigration because they saw conspiracies everywhere.

    It is far more important to discern why they support the BNP, even given its blatantly racist agenda, and address the non-racist issues raised head-on.

    An important, but separate issue. But frankly, it’s like asking why so many people vote Conservative and then saying that to sort out the problem we must all follow Conservative policies.

    Just because a million people vote BNP doesn’t mean I am necessarily going to start advocating BNP policies in order to placate those people.

    Espousing theories that ‘prove’ they are not ex-Labour voters may help you sleep at night, but it doesn’t really scratch the surface of the problem.

    Depends what you think ‘the problem’ is. If the problem is non-whites ate my hamster and destroyed my culture and stopped me from practising Christianity then it ain’t my problem you’re a nutjob.

  26. Refresh — on 29th October, 2009 at 3:50 am  

    Shamit,

    The point about ASBOs and campaigns against benefit cheats wasn’t to suggest that was driving some to the BNP; it was to highlight New Labour’s need to placate the Daily Mail Tory. There are a substantial number of people who survive on benefits and come from families who have been on benefits for a long time. I would not for one minute put in resources to chase them to see if they are getting away with a few pounds a week. I would however spare none of the wealthy who cheat on their taxes amongst other things, include in that the corporate evaders.

    I would be delighted to see TV adverts depicting the well to do tax cheats being chased by searchlights and cross-hairs.

    I would have already dealt with the extraordinary bonuses the bankers are lining themselves up for. And hauled a few of them into the dock, with the threat of 150 years in jail.

    And what of the inaction over the utilities profiteering? Don’t forget everything costs disproportionately more if you are poor.

    More in response tomorrow.

  27. douglas clark — on 29th October, 2009 at 4:50 am  

    Refesh @ 21,

    I was going to quote you and stuff like that.

    And try to argue with you.

    However, I agree with you.

    Bloody hell!

  28. Lil — on 29th October, 2009 at 11:13 am  

    Why not use the correct terminology? In periods of capitalist crisis, the WORKING CLASSES are forced to choose between the politicians which got them in this mess, and those who promise a way forward.
    The capitalist CLASSES, who control the media, will always encourage them to oppose the progressive solution.
    The poisonous class system is far from dead. In fact, it has never been more noxious. Why ignore it in your analysis?

  29. falcao — on 29th October, 2009 at 12:00 pm  

    In any downturn in the economy the far right will always raise their ugly heads.

    Only difference this time round was we had labour MPs who started the whole finger pointing via jack straw and burkha issue and since then the bash the muslim community has become a tirade of abuse which no community has had to face probably since the 70′s and 80′s when the black and irish communities had similar attacks.

  30. obangobang — on 29th October, 2009 at 12:54 pm  

    #14

    Douglas,

    I’m not sure I get where you are coming from.

    I simply do not believe that one person in every fifty in the UK believes as a matter of faith that white people are superior in every meaningful sense to those of a different colour, race or creed, and therefore that a significant proportion of those voting BNP either do not understand the party’s founding principles, or more likely, do so because they have other concerns and do not feel that these are being addressed by the mainstream parties. Put another way, I believe that a large part of the BNP vote is effectively a protest vote and not simply objecting to immigrants and immigration, despite what the BNP itself may espouse.

    The point is, therefore, that whilst establishing in his own mind that they are not ex-Labour voters, may salve Sunny’s conscience, but what does he achieve beyond that? Not much really, in my opinion.

    #25

    Sunny,

    All of which rather proves my point really. Your only concern here is to refute any suggestion that if there is a problem, it has anything to do with you. Not entirely an untypical New Labour response in truth. Neather said what he said, and sounds about as convincing as Chris Grayling retracting his ‘Dannatt political stunt’ gaffe when he tries to ‘clarify’ those statements.

    In effect though, it doesn’t matter. A significant number of people believe what he says is true and the issue for New Labour should be to question why people are so easily led to believe such things. The problem is that when they start listening to part of the message from the BNP, how long will it be before they start to believe all of it?

    I think it’s a shame that you are only concerned about how the BNP’s rise makes New Labour look in the eyes of the electorate. I think there are more important issues, relating primarily to social exclusion, poverty and a sense of abandonment.

    As an SNP supporter, I am proud of the way my party is attempting to address these issues in Scotland and the fact that the BNP has virtually no support whatsoever in this country. If that makes me a ‘nutjob’ in your eyes, I too will be able to sleep at night.

  31. douglas clark — on 29th October, 2009 at 1:30 pm  

    obangabang,

    I think it would be honest to assume that some folk are racist. That they do, in fact, exist.

    As an SNP supporter, I am proud of the way my party is attempting to address these issues in Scotland and the fact that the BNP has virtually no support whatsoever in this country. If that makes me a ‘nutjob’ in your eyes, I too will be able to sleep at night.

    I am also a member of the dreaded SNP.

    We do not, as far as I know, select on the basis of ethnicity.

  32. cjcjc — on 29th October, 2009 at 2:31 pm  
  33. Rumbold — on 29th October, 2009 at 2:47 pm  

    Refresh:

    Sorry about the spam filter. It seems to be clear for now.

    What would be interesting to know who who BNP voters would vote for if they couldn’t vote for the BNP?

  34. obangobang — on 29th October, 2009 at 2:57 pm  

    #31

    Douglas,

    Of course there are racists. The vile Griffin is living proof of that. I am not disputing that fact. What I am saying is that I do not believe that every person represented by the 2-3% level of support generally suggested by opinion polls for the BNP are themselves fundamentally racist. I believe that a significant proportion of those expressing a willingness/desire to vote for the BNP are not doing so because they believe 100% in the central tenets of the BNP’s raison d’etre, i.e. white supremacy and forced repatriations, but more likely because they have other, basically justifiable complaints about their lot and place the responsibility for their plight squarely with the government. They do not believe that any of the mainstream parties offer them what they are looking for and so they turn to the BNP, because they are there.

    If all of the parties were serious about tackling these issues, they would spend less time decrying the BNP for being what it is (because let’s face it, it doesn’t matter what they do or say, the BNP ain’t going to change) and more time trying to engage with that section of society I am describing, persuading them that they have a voice in mainstream politics, and, most importantly, actually coming up with policies that might make a difference.

    Abandoning policies that make matters worse would at least be a start.

    “I am also a member of the dreaded SNP.

    We do not, as far as I know, select on the basis of ethnicity.”

    I have no idea what point you are trying to make with this comment.

  35. Refresh — on 29th October, 2009 at 3:08 pm  

    Rumbold

    ‘What would be interesting to know who who BNP voters would vote for if they couldn’t vote for the BNP?’

    No one. Like so very many others who have switched away from politics, often in disgust. Its still true that Blair won the last election by virtue of the fact that a lot of people sat on their hands.

    I do think there is merit in NOT voting (I know we’ve had this discussion before), but not untypically the politicians simple start arguing about how they could force us to vote. Rather than actually see what people are protesting about.

    There is a level at which we would have to say the elected politicians act without mandate. I think that was reached by Blair in 2005.

  36. Reza — on 29th October, 2009 at 4:18 pm  

    obangobang

    #30 was a very good post.

    “[Sunny’s] only concern here is to refute any suggestion that if there is a problem…”

    Exactly.

    Last Friday Neather suggested that the demographic composition of this country had been deliberately altered by the government in a deliberate deception of the British electorate who had voted it into power and whose cultural identity was now being deliberately and covertly destroyed.

    “In effect though, it doesn’t matter. A significant number of people believe what he says is true and the issue for New Labour should be to question why people are so easily led to believe such things. The problem is that when they start listening to part of the message from the BNP, how long will it be before they start to believe all of it?”

    Again, exactly.

    Sunny and co will go on, and on denying there is an issue.

    After all, the vast majority of British people love uncontrolled mass immigration. They revel in the increasing ‘diversity’ in their schools and neighbourhoods. They love ‘multicuturalism’ and see it as superior to the bland and worthless culture that it is replacing. And they overwhelmingly like Islam and have no concerns at all about the way this ideology is growing and affecting life in their country.

    You have to feel sorry for Sunny and co though. They know this to be true. They’ve done all the thinking necessary so that we gullible oiks won’t have to. Yet the voices of dissent just won’t go away.

    How can that be?

    Of course. It’s the media! Controlled by dark forces (those sneaky Joos, although Sunny will never admit it openly) with their Zionist, neocon and oil theiving agenda. They are trying to poison our harmonious multicultural Utopia.

    The plot thinnens.

    And the poor, stupid British people are too credulous to realise that they’re being played. Too stupid to just ignore everything they hear and see and put their faith in Sunny and his clever friends. They can tell them what they’re seeing. If only he was in charge of the media. He’d show-em.

    Life must really suck when you belong to such a small group of people clever enough to know that it’s all a dark conspiracy.

    Think I’ll buy me a tin hat.

  37. Sunny — on 29th October, 2009 at 4:33 pm  

    obangobang: All of which rather proves my point really. Your only concern here is to refute any suggestion that if there is a problem, it has anything to do with you.

    As I said earlier:

    Depends what you think ‘the problem’ is. If the problem is non-whites ate my hamster and destroyed my culture and stopped me from practising Christianity then it ain’t my problem you’re a nutjob.

    You haven’t clarified what the problem is.

    Do you think “Muslim demographics” are a problem, like our nutjob friend here Reza does?

  38. Reza — on 29th October, 2009 at 5:38 pm  

    “Do you think “Muslim demographics” are a problem, like our nutjob friend here Reza does?”

    I know it’s complicated for you Sunny, but I’ll try to explain again

    I don’t think that Muslim demographics are a problem just because the demographic is “Muslim”.

    It’s simply a question of numbers.

    It wouldn’t matter if the demographic were Sikh, Sinhalese or Mongolian.

    If any single group became large enough to create a ‘duo-cultural’ society then we’d have problems. Look at any major conflict, anywhere in the world today, for an example of what I mean.

    Regardless of whether Islam, as an ideology, is incompatible with Western liberal democracy, the problem we face is that Muslims make up the only group here that is in danger of growing large enough to create a ‘duo-cultural’ society.

    And there appear to be many more “nutjobs” like me out there, writing books and running newspapers, than nepotistic, multiculturalist ‘ethnics’ like you with your naïve, white, competitive-altruist pets.

    That must really get your goat.

  39. obangobang — on 29th October, 2009 at 6:08 pm  

    #37

    The problem, clearly, is that a significant number of people feel so politically disenfranchised that they believe they have no alternative other than turning to an openly racist party, despite, I believe, many of them not actually being racist themselves. And having lent them one ear, there is clearly a significant danger that they will eventually lend them both and we will have a full blown race war raging on the streets.

    Your response appears to be: “Don’t blame New Labour, these people weren’t our supporters before they became racist”.

    My point is, so what. Who cares who they supported previously. They are now lending the BNP their vote and if all the mainstream parties don’t do something pronto, and the government of the day must bear the lion’s share of responsibility here, they may become hardened BNP followers, which doesn’t need to be the case.

    Pretending that New Labour immigration policies have had nothing to do with this situation is simply deluding yourself.

  40. Old Arthur — on 29th October, 2009 at 6:35 pm  

    The whole business is disgraceful!

    The Lower Orders ought to vote the way the clever Fabian Society people tell them to!

  41. Paul — on 29th October, 2009 at 6:36 pm  

    Racism begins with our families, parents, brothers and sisters, aunts and uncles, grandparents, people we admire, respect and love.

    However, as we grow and mature we come to the realization that what we were told by our family when we were children were slanted lies base on their prejudices. We realize that most people are like ourselves and not so different and want the same things, like a home, steady work, a Medicare plan and schools for our children (if you travel you will see this). We realize that most people are of good hearts and goodwill.

    This reminds me of a parable from the good book where a Levite and Priest come upon a man who fell among thieves and they both individually passed by and didn’t stop to help him.

    Finally a man of another race came by, he got down from his beast, decided not to be compassionate by proxy and got down with the injured man, administered first aid, and helped the man in need.

    Jesus ended up saying, this was the good man, this was the great man, because he had the capacity to project the “I” into the “thou,” and to be concerned about his fellow man.

    You see, the Levite and the Priest were afraid, they asked themselves, “If I stop to help this man, what will happen to me?”

    But then the Good Samaritan came by. And he reversed the question: “If I do not stop to help this man, what will happen to him?”

    That’s the question before us. The question is not, “If I stop to help our fellow man (immigrant) in need, what will happen to me?” The question is, “If I do not stop to help our fellow man, what will happen to him or her?” That’s the question.

    This current climate of blaming others for our woes is not new. We have had this before and we have conquered it.

    Remember “Evil flourishes when good men (and women) do nothing”. Raise your voices with those of us who believe we are equal and we can win this battle again.

  42. Rumbold — on 29th October, 2009 at 6:48 pm  

    Refresh:

    I’m not sure that’s true. My interest is in what non-racist policies these BNP voters support?

  43. douglas clark — on 29th October, 2009 at 6:53 pm  

    obangabong.

    You said at 34, I think:

    If all of the parties were serious about tackling these issues, they would spend less time decrying the BNP for being what it is (because let’s face it, it doesn’t matter what they do or say, the BNP ain’t going to change) and more time trying to engage with that section of society I am describing, persuading them that they have a voice in mainstream politics, and, most importantly, actually coming up with policies that might make a difference.

    Well, why do you say this of an allegedly non racist party?

    “I am also a member of the dreaded SNP.

    We do not, as far as I know, select on the basis of ethnicity.”

    I have no idea what point you are trying to make with this comment.

    I think the SNP is willing to tackle these issues.

    I’d have thought it was fucking obvious. That we do not chose on an ethnicity, never have, and never will.

  44. Sunny — on 29th October, 2009 at 7:05 pm  

    obangobang: you contradict yourself:

    The problem, clearly, is that a significant number of people feel so politically disenfranchised that they believe they have no alternative other than turning to an openly racist party

    and then…

    despite, I believe, many of them not actually being racist themselves.

    and then

    there is clearly a significant danger that they will eventually lend them both and we will have a full blown race war raging on the streets.

    who is interested in starting a ‘race war’? certainly not minorities. Unless you have people attacking minorities, then you’re not going to have retaliation.

    And besides, the police is there right? Anyway, you say that these people aren’t racist and yet you expect some sort of a ‘race war’.

    In fact, people could be turning to the BNP over MPs expenses, couldn’t they?

  45. obangobang — on 29th October, 2009 at 7:59 pm  

    #44

    Sunny,

    I don’t see anything contradictory about what I have written.

    You choose not to acknowledge the point I am trying to make, presumably because you fear that if you do, you may also have to acknowledge that New Labour has at the very least been complicit in creating an environment where a small, but significant, proportion of this country’s electorate find the policies espoused by an openly racist party in some way appealling.

    My argument is fairly simple. I believe a large proportion of those who would vote BNP are not racist. I believe they have turned to the BNP out of frustration with the mainstream parties because they do not believe those parties represent them, nor have any interest in doing so. Their concerns will be many, including housing, joblessness, social breakdown. Some, although not many, since as you yourself have stated, few of these people are overtly political, will have been affected by MPs expenses. (Personally, I think the Greens and UKIP are more likely to be beneficiaries of those disaffected by that particular topic).

    Once they have been drawn into the BNP’s sphere of influence, there is a far greater danger that they will then be persuaded by the racist agenda espoused by the BNP, and if that happens, there will be a small, but significant proportion of this country’s electorate who are overtly racist and willing to take those views onto the streets. No number of police will make me feel any happier about that.

    Tackling the issue by comforting yourself that if/when it happens, it won’t be your fault because they weren’t your supporters to begin with, is simply the most pathetic response I could conceive of. But it is not surprising that this should be New Labour’s over-riding concern, given that they are without doubt the most cynically political machine ever seen in the UK.

  46. obangobang — on 29th October, 2009 at 8:03 pm  

    #43

    Douglas, what are talking about? I did not write:

    “I am also a member of the dreaded SNP.

    We do not, as far as I know, select on the basis of ethnicity.”

    You did, at #31 above. I responded by writing:

    “I have no idea what point you are trying to make with this comment.”

    I still don’t.

  47. Don — on 29th October, 2009 at 8:38 pm  

    In fact, people could be turning to the BNP over MPs expenses, couldn’t they?

    They could certainly be turning away from the major parties for that reason, even voting against major parties having not previously voted. But if you are lodging a protest vote, why choose the BNP? There is a plethora of parties to choose from, UKIP, Greens, single-issue local indies, defecting from major party indies, monarchists, libertarians, christians, disestablishmentarians, antidisestablishmentarians…

    Why pick the only racist party? It’s not as though people don’t know who they are. For all Nick bigs himself up as having re-shaped their image I doubt that any significant number of people are genuinely in the dark about the real nature of the BNP.

    People vote for the BNP either because they are racist or, at best, because their idea of a protest vote is ‘Nobody likes me, everybody hates me, think I’ll go outside and eat worms.’ You never want to pander to that.

  48. Refresh — on 29th October, 2009 at 11:03 pm  

    obangobang makes a very important point. If we don’t grasp this issue without the usual party political tribalism, this could run out of control.

    The implication is clearly that we may end up where sticking plaster will be of no use. Or perhaps we are already there.

    The party in government (whoever it may be whenever the jackboots start getting pulled down from the attic) invariably seeks to pander. And its always a mistake. The issues have to be taken head-on.

  49. douglas clark — on 30th October, 2009 at 1:16 am  

    obangobang,

    Well, what was this about? @ 30 I believe.

    As an SNP supporter, I am proud of the way my party is attempting to address these issues in Scotland and the fact that the BNP has virtually no support whatsoever in this country. If that makes me a ‘nutjob’ in your eyes, I too will be able to sleep at night.

    How am I supposed to read that?

  50. Dr Anonymous — on 30th October, 2009 at 1:54 am  

    the problem we face is that Muslims make up the only group here that is in danger of growing large enough to create a ‘duo-cultural’ society.

    well, except for the upper class, which already has done both apparently.

  51. obangobang — on 30th October, 2009 at 11:36 am  

    #49

    I still don’t get what you are trying to say. The point I was trying to make was that in my opinion, the BNP has made very few inroads into Scotland because we have a government that is tackling the issues of social exclusion, poverty and abandonment at the grass roots, and the SNP is offering these people a mainstream political force to represent their views.

    Sunny called me a ‘nutjob’. If my political views make me a nutjob in his eyes, I can live with that.

    I don’t understand what is so controversial about that, particularly to someone who also claims to be a supporter of the SNP.

  52. Andy Gilmour — on 31st October, 2009 at 5:53 pm  

    Rumbold @ #33:
    “What would be interesting to know who who BNP voters would vote for if they couldn’t vote for the BNP?”

    That information *is* available in terms of the results of the Scottish parliamentary elections in 2007.

    Figures were eventually made available which allowed analysis of who BNP “regional candidate” voters were turning to in the first-past-the-post constituencies, where the BNP didn’t field candidates – with an overall vote share of under 2.5%, it would have been a complete waste of time & cash.

    Their first ‘switch’ party of choice were the Conservatives (just over 50% of BNP voters across Scotland chose them), followed by SNP, then Labour, and Lib-dems well behind.

    *BUT* there were some major local variations – e.g. in Alex Salmond’s constituency, his main challenger (LibDem), got considerably more BNP votes than he did. And the biggest single share of BNP votes in any Scottish constituency, happened in Glasgow, where they switched to Labour en bloc when opposing a muslim SNP candidate. In fact, they clearly choose whoever might best defeat any “non-white” candidate across the whole country.

    I know, that doesn’t help in terms of their far greater proportionate support in England, but it does show that while they might claim not to be a racist party, the folk who vote for them don’t seem to think the same way.

    Hope that helps a little?

    Raw data can be found at:
    http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/MSP/elections/2007/07index.htm

  53. Andy — on 1st November, 2009 at 7:19 am  

    Fascinating!
    I’m in the upper bloc of C2DE. The zone of people that actually create ‘value added’ to the Nations currency. The subset excluded from labours national looting scheme. The lowest classes are richer courtesy of the taxperson and the higher classes are also better off through the taxperson too. Who’s footing the bill? Yes, you guessed it. The man in the middle.

    When at my places of work, National politics raises its ugly head, often. One thing stands out amongst my peers: Propaganda has the opposite effect on the potential BNP voter. These classes of people have strong, cynical and independant minds. They are the ones who hear someone make a statement whithering the BNP while looking in the eye of the accuser and thinking, “Bullies always accuse others for what they most despise in themselves”. Or ‘pot calling kettle black’ for you people.

    Voting:
    I liked labour as an idea, once.. But were clearly incapable of letting companies run sustainably. They destroyed everything they Nationalised by not allowing internal investment. They stole profits as taxes. So never got my vote.

    Torys looked better under Major but I gave the benefit of the doubt to the sales in gas and oil fields. Never voted for these psychopaths either.

    On the EU elections:
    I made up a tick box of policies by all the parties.
    The BNP just nipped past UKIP. I voted BNP.

    So, to be brutally honest. I don’t care if N. Griffin is a bastard. Because he’s MY bastard.

  54. Andy Gilmour — on 1st November, 2009 at 3:11 pm  

    “They are the ones who hear someone make a statement whithering the BNP while looking in the eye of the accuser and thinking, “Bullies always accuse others for what they most despise in themselves”. Or ‘pot calling kettle black’ for you people.”

    Andy,

    So outlining, with evidence, members of the BNP’s neo-nazi links, racism, bigotry, lies about asylum seekers, etc somehow automatically makes the person accusing the BNP also a neo-nazi, or some bizarre ‘inverse’ equivalent, according to your way of thinking?

    “strong, cynical, independent minds” might benefit from a brief course in ‘evidence-based reasoning’ and logic…

  55. Andy — on 1st November, 2009 at 7:11 pm  

    Now you have wrote that. Have you reflected on what I have said?

    Have your views on the world never changed in your lifetime? Mine have so I cannot be called a bigot like we see on question time where Griffin had questions thrown at him and as soon as he spoke he was interrupted.. A sure sign of bigotry because they are not interested in his answers.

    I don’t give a damn over an individuals belief. Its the party vote that matters. Yes, I know it means nothing if you are Labour or Conservative.

    Try taking a look at the actions of the UAF/SWP/AFA/Searchlight crews. Theres even a 16 year old boy from down Cornwall on terrorism charges. What about the “Oldham gang rapist” that was *supposed* to be in the BNP? He was a known Labour activist who’s Father in law was a councillor. This (drunken, rowdy pig of a) man was REFUSED membership to the BNP because they saw him as trouble. But the media still tell lies. Manchester people talk. You must live in a bubble Andy G.

    Try taking a peep at foreign wars from our present National socialist Government. Should I foreshorten its name with a German twang? Its na-zi. A million deaths not enough? The BNP’s stance is “They are Sovereign nations. We have no right to interfere”

    How about the paying off the media to nit pick and tell lies? Its not from Labour party funds. Its MINE!

    Lets take a look at yougov and the prison, mental health, employment, social housing costs, etc. etc. Over those people who were born outside of this country. They are twice as bad as us at everything. Don’t call yougov racist will you.

    The only political figure I personally knew, (Labour) Is now serving 6 years in prison on Paedophile and weapons charges.

    Its funny how they lie about the BNP and stifle the news over themselves. Its enough to make radio Tirana blush.

  56. Andy Gilmour — on 1st November, 2009 at 11:49 pm  

    Andy,

    in response to your (somewhat incoherent), almost conspiracy-theorist-paranoia-laden comments, I can only refer you to my previous post.

    Cheers,

    Andy

  57. Andy — on 2nd November, 2009 at 1:06 am  

    Andy G.

    So you think I am dreaming everything up?
    Pot calling Kettle Black?

    Bigot…. Got you on that earlier.
    Pot calling Kettle Black?

    Neo- (i.e. pretend) nazi. Got you on that one too. Nothing has been more NAZI than this labour party. Look at everything they have done!
    Pot calling Kettle Black?

    Fascist. Its almost the opposite of nazi. So what are the BNP? I wish confused drones would make their collective mind up.
    Pot calling Kettle Black?

    Lies about asylum seekers? We have none of those people here anyway. Read the UN resolutions: THE FIRST SAFE AVAILABLE BORDER. Not a third of the way around the globe! I live near Wigan, which is short of a block of flats because two (Albanian) Kosovo’s decided to bypass the gas meter.
    Pot calling Kettle Black?

    Racism.. Racist against who? Me and my people by any chance? Try reading UNDRIP. UN Declaration of the Rights of the Indigenous peoples.
    Pot calling Kettle Black?

    The prisons are choc full of labour voters. The documents are on the net to read for proof.
    Pot calling Kettle Black?

    Beware for what you wish for. I wish you for evidence based reasoning and logic. x

  58. Naadir Jeewa — on 2nd November, 2009 at 1:49 am  

    UNDRIP’s not too hard to read actually. But there’s nothing in it that would be applicable to the UK. There’s no land to protect for any “indigenous groups” since the state privatised land rights centuries ago, and whatever’s left is held in common. The political and social system of the UK also happens to happily coincide with a centuries old, pre-immigration system, so I don’t know what the real problem is.

    However, you should perhaps take note of what it says at the end of Resolution 61/295:

    “1. Nothing in this Declaration may be interpreted as implying for any State, people, group or person any right to engage in any activity or to perform any act contrary to the Charter of the United Nations or construed as authorizing or encouraging any action which would dismember or impair, totally or in part, the territorial integrity or political unity of sovereign and independent States.
    2. In the exercise of the rights enunciated in the present Declaration, human rights and fundamental freedoms of all shall be respected. The exercise of the rights set forth in this Declaration shall be subject only to such limitations as are determined by law and in accordance with international human rights obligations. Any such limitations shall be non-discriminatory and strictly necessary solely for the purpose of securing due recognition and respect for the rights and freedoms of others and for meeting the just and most compelling requirements of a democratic society.
    3. The provisions set forth in this Declaration shall be interpreted in accordance with the principles of justice, democracy, respect for human rights, equality, non-discrimination, good governance and good faith.”

    All things the BNP in its fascist & nazi ways oppose, so don’t expect the Security Council to help you.
    Pot calling Kettle Black?

  59. Andy — on 2nd November, 2009 at 8:32 pm  

    This states laws are an irrelevance to EU and UN law. Simple. You should know that.

    Oh, right, so if The Australian Gubmint ‘privatised’ All of Australia then this law would not be applicable to the Aborigines? But it is!

    Naadir It is discriminatory… Against the indigenous peoples! Its what its all about!

    A couple of points for those who have not bothered to find it:
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    Article 3
    Indigenous peoples have the right to self-determination. By virtue of that right they freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development.

    Article 5
    Indigenous peoples have the right to maintain and strengthen their distinct political, legal, economic, social and cultural institutions, while retaining their right to participate fully, if they so choose, in the political, economic, social and cultural life of the State.

    Article 6
    Every indigenous individual has the right to a nationality.

    Article 8
    1. Indigenous peoples and individuals have the right not to be subjected to forced assimilation or destruction of their culture.
    2. States shall provide effective mechanisms for prevention of, and redress for:
    (a) Any action which has the aim or effect of depriving them of their integrity as distinct peoples, or of their cultural values or ethnic identities;
    (b) Any action which has the aim or effect of dispossessing them of their lands, territories or resources;
    (c) Any form of forced population transfer which has the aim or effect of violating or undermining any of their rights;
    (d) Any form of forced assimilation or integration;
    (e) Any form of propaganda designed to promote or incite racial or ethnic discrimination directed against them.
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    I wont put all in but you see what I mean? Unless you are so blinded by the words.

    I’m all for diversity. Its what borders are for!

  60. Naadir Jeewa — on 2nd November, 2009 at 8:59 pm  

    Andy, I don’t believe for one second that you’re stupid enough to misread Resolution 61/295 so utterly and completely.

    No, I think you are a slimy fucker who is misusing a groundbreaking agreement designed to empower indigenous communuties who have suffered historic oppression at the hands of colonial powers. You know full well that you are don’t fit the category of an “indigenous peoples” because the majority government and your government are the one and the same thing.

    Also, you probably know full well that in international law, when a claim is made against one law which contradicts another, then the difference must be minimised in favour of the Declaration of Human Rights. But yet you racist fucks want to deprive British citizens of their human rights.

    FUCK OFF.

  61. Don — on 2nd November, 2009 at 9:20 pm  

    Actually, Naadir, it is possible to be that stupid and that slimy at the same time. It’s not easy, but it is possible.

  62. douglas clark — on 2nd November, 2009 at 9:36 pm  

    Don,

    Why don’t you just spell it out? Andy is BNP or worse. And he deserves to be told to fuck off. I agree that PP should be open to comment, I really do. But that has to be open to us defending ourselves too.

  63. Andy — on 2nd November, 2009 at 9:56 pm  

    Oh, so you deny my rights as an indigenous citizen of his own Country!

    You are a racist discriminatory fuck. I’m happy to say it and show you why.

    How would you feel if 10 million Britons came to your old country and started making the same demands as you do here? Yes, you would kick up. Dare I say it. You would be a bunch of racists! As we say; Whats good for the goose is good for the gander. Baroness Warsi admitted on TV she would not like it.

    The commonwealth was precisely what it said on the tin. For instance, we gave you rails and the train. My family were tithed to dig your coal and died an early and horrible death because of it. If you faced working in heavy industries, cotton mills and mining, would we see your sort on these shores so quick? no, you wouldn’t! You didn’t!

    This is the thanks you get. Your old countries are still murderous, selfish shit heaps which proves its not our (GB’s) fault.

    The human rights act applies to ALL races. Even mine. So what? Your last reply proves all to me and nothing to you.

  64. Andy — on 2nd November, 2009 at 10:02 pm  

    Don,
    if you have a point, come back with facts.
    No facts, no truth.

    Bullying reflects the sad weak people who hate whats bad in themselves.

  65. bernard — on 2nd November, 2009 at 10:07 pm  

    I deny your rights. What are you going to do about it?

    Tit.

  66. Andy — on 2nd November, 2009 at 10:08 pm  

    Jeez!
    Douglas,
    Another one….
    I came on here and told of my working social status. How I chose the BNP over other parties to vote on the EU election. I’m not a member but do read everything political I can find.

    I made my choice. You know what? There has been no argument here that makes me feel I’ve made a mistake.

    Please do correct me with facts, figures, law and finances.

    I await your fine minds.

  67. Andy — on 2nd November, 2009 at 10:15 pm  

    Deny me, deny yourself Bully Bernard.

    What a tit!

  68. Don — on 2nd November, 2009 at 10:22 pm  

    deny my rights as an indigenous citizen

    Hear that, Andy?

    The sound of the world’s smallest didgeredoo.

  69. bernard — on 2nd November, 2009 at 10:28 pm  

    67, I’m black, so you presumably deem me not to be “indigenous”. My wife is half black and half white, is she acceptable?

  70. douglas clark — on 2nd November, 2009 at 10:53 pm  

    Andy @ 66,

    Jeez back to you too Andy baby! There are two threads here that answer your questions.

    Both of them were addressed to your political party of choice. Neither were answered to my satisfaction, however you probably see it otherwise.

    Here they are:

    http://www.pickledpolitics.com/archives/4889

    and:

    http://www.pickledpolitics.com/archives/5057

    If you consider these reasonable answers from Lee John Barnes (LLB Hons), legal advisor to your very favourite political party then……..

  71. douglas clark — on 2nd November, 2009 at 10:56 pm  

    bernard @ 69,

    As far as I am concerned, if you say you are, you are. Tell the rest of the bastards to fuck off.

  72. bernard — on 2nd November, 2009 at 10:58 pm  

    Yes. I’m not as agitated as I probably come across. But there’s nothing on telly so I am commenting on blogs. Tonight’s episode of Come Dine With Me is completely wank.

  73. douglas clark — on 2nd November, 2009 at 11:05 pm  

    bernard,

    This is a shower of rubbish, rather than some of the thunderstorms of complete shite that befall anyone that comments here for longer than a week or so, and does not subscribe to the lunacy that sometimes befalls us.

    Call it intemittent gales or summat.

    Usually we see them go away.

    But I stand by what I said at 71.

  74. Don — on 2nd November, 2009 at 11:12 pm  

    Nothing on telly? ‘Life’ was amazing. Again.

  75. Don — on 2nd November, 2009 at 11:22 pm  

    The notoriously quarrelsome Sarcastic Fringehead Fish was a joy, then it got better.

  76. bernard — on 2nd November, 2009 at 11:47 pm  

    I’ll be back next time I get bored. You won’t see me scarpering on account of the tits. But I am going to bed now, as my wife is in bed and I can’t be arsed to stay up any longer.

  77. R-do V2 — on 2nd November, 2009 at 11:56 pm  

    oops, sorry about that, seems I’ve been “modded”. A hollow victory for me.

    Bernard,

    There is a very outspoken BNP guy near me in Wigan. He was married to a (true) Asian gal and has a daughter by her.

    That BNP scouser who had his head stoved in by a claw hammer from some guy in the “respect party”.. Has a Japanese wife.

    Some guy who donated £38k to the BNP has a Serbian(?) wife.

    Simone Clarke the ballet dancer married a half Chinese half Cuban and they had a child between them. She’s in the BNP.

    This is not telling of Eastern European and Jewish councillors and gays in the BNP.

    A Black Ghanian gentleman (An author) gave a speech about the EU in St. Helens BNP meeting, near me. Yes, Nick Griffin shook his hand and he was also asked if he would like to do another sometime.

    My girlfriend is Bulgarian. My previous (xyl) has a black son… We’re still friends … Your point was?

    Maybe for once it would be good not to listen to propaganda. Tales from 3rd party sources one cannot afford to sue for defamation. Oh, and those haters and bigots. Remember my lesson on bullies?

    Douglas,
    Hmm, you have me stumped on how to speak for another. did that barnes guy wake up from his coma after answering half of that lot?

    last attempt and last post.. It was fun. x

  78. douglas clark — on 3rd November, 2009 at 12:13 am  

    Don,

    The ‘Sarcastic Fringehead Fish’ exists? What say you to the Babbelfish?

  79. Don — on 3rd November, 2009 at 12:15 am  

    Anything I damn well want.

    G’night all.

  80. douglas clark — on 3rd November, 2009 at 12:17 am  

    Hah hah!

    Night night.

  81. Andy — on 3rd November, 2009 at 12:33 am  

    oops, sorry about that, seems I’ve been “modded”. A hollow victory for me.

    Bernard,

    There is a very outspoken BNP guy near me in Wigan. He was married to a (true) Asian gal and has a daughter by her.

    That BNP scouser who had his head stoved in by a claw hammer from some guy in the “respect party”.. Has a Japanese wife.

    Some guy who donated £38k to the BNP has a Serbian(?) wife.

    Simone Clarke the ballet dancer married a half Chinese half Cuban and they had a child between them. She’s in the BNP.

    This is not telling of Eastern European and Jewish councillors and gays in the BNP.

    A Black Ghanian gentleman (An author) gave a speech about the EU in St. Helens BNP meeting, near me. Yes, Nick Griffin shook his hand and he was also asked if he would like to do another sometime.

    My girlfriend is Bulgarian. My previous (xyl) has a black son… We’re still friends … Your point was?

    Maybe for once it would be good not to listen to propaganda. Tales from 3rd party sources one cannot afford to sue for defamation. Oh, and those haters and bigots. Remember my lesson on bullies?

    Douglas,
    Hmm, you have me stumped on how to speak for another. did that barnes guy wake up from his coma after answering half of that lot?

    last attempt and last post.. It was fun. x

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

Pickled Politics © Copyright 2005 - 2010. All rights reserved. Terms and conditions.
With the help of PHP and Wordpress.