More thoughts on BNP voters


by Sunny
24th February, 2010 at 8:00 pm    

In response to my CIF article, David Blackburn at the Spectator says:

No doubt, the party leadership is racist. Most have convictions for inciting racial hatred and connections with White Supremacists across the globe. It’s an open and shut case. Are the million who voted BNP also uniformly racist? Emphatically not. Research by Nothing British indicates that BNP supporters are not defined by extreme racial attitudes.

I have to run but I’ll respond quickly now – I don’t think racism is entirely just about extreme attitudes around whether black people are inherently more stupid than whites.

I remember getting into a long conversation with Simon Darby, now deputy leader of the BNP and then the press officer, about genetic differences. He maintained that black people were more stupid, but Asians (especially Chinese) and some Jews were more intelligent than whites.

So it’s more racial determinism than racial hostility in some ways. Racism though is racial hostility. It’s not about IQ but when you see someone of a different colour or background and hate them because of that background. In that regard someone could say they don’t have anything against Asians per se, but if they think they’re all mostly suicide bombers or benefit scroungers then that is naked prejudice.

The BNP have long abandoned citing racial differences in their strategy, hence the poll David refers to. Instead they focus on cultural differences and stigmatising minorities as ‘the other’ or as drug dealers, rapists, suicide bombers, benefit scroungers, thieves etc. That is still racism, and people who vote for the BNP on that basis are still racist. That Sikh guy who hates Muslims and is embracing the BNP – is he not xenophobic? Of course he is. It’s absurd to think otherwise.

David also adds:

BNP voters have been frozen out of mainstream political debate because they have been excluded from, to pinch a phrase, the proceeds of growth.

Maybe – though I’d like to see the polling data to support this. A roughly same percentage of people supported the BNP and NatFront back int he 60s and 70s when economic growth was much even distributed. What was their reason then?

And even if that is the reason now, surely Conservatives should be arguing for a more equal society and stronger employee rights for the poorest workers? But they don’t.


              Post to del.icio.us


Filed in: Race politics






76 Comments below   |  

Reactions: Twitter, blogs
  1. Noxi

    RT @pickledpolitics: Blog post:: More thoughts on BNP voters http://bit.ly/9h8YPb




  1. Lee John Barnes — on 24th February, 2010 at 8:11 pm  

    Sunny I wrote an article about you on my blog here ;

    http://leejohnbarnes.blogspot.com/2010/02/sunny-hundal-is-racist-twat.html

    The day that you grow a set Sunny and have the guts to undertake a real debate with people in the BNP, as opposed to to writing hysterical nonsense for your cringing lefty ladyboy pals in The Guardian, then give me a call.

    I will debate with you anytime, anywhere.

    We can film it and put it up on Youtube and let the public vote for the winner.

    But you wont will ya Sunny, as like all gobshites you can flap your chops about and act big when you are in the presence of the media maggots you work with, but when it comes to having a real debate you aint got the brains nor the balls.

    Go on Sunny, I dare ya.

    Are ya chicken ?

  2. MaidMarian — on 24th February, 2010 at 8:19 pm  

    [wiping cyber spittle from cyber brow]

    LJB – Is it because he is black?

  3. marvin — on 24th February, 2010 at 8:19 pm  

    Conservatives should be arguing for a more equal society and stronger employee rights for the poorest workers? But they don’t.

    What does a more equal society mean? Taking money from rich people and giving to poor people? Taking intelligent people out of schools with good grades and putting them in sink-estate comprehensives? Taking disruptive bully pupils and sending them off to schools with the best grades? I thought the political centre in this country had agreed socialism was a nice idea but useless or worse in practice?

    Stronger employee rights? Already we have very strong employee rights indeed. What kind of rights? Rights to not work when they want and get paid more? More rights to sue companies for thousands or millions for real or imagined sexual/racial discrimination?

    I think the buzzword from the Conservatives is a fairer society not some anachronistic and rather ominous “equal” ideology/

    Who isn’t for a fairer society? Bring it on.

    Employee rights? A bizarre one. I’m sure we all agree that Bob Crow and the RMT need faar more rights. They are perpetually being oppressed aren’t they?

  4. Lee John Barnes — on 24th February, 2010 at 8:23 pm  

    Aint you heard Maidmarian – White is the new Black as far as race attacks and racism is concerned.

    Politically Correct Anti-White Racism is the New Racism.

    You have been so long in Sherwood Forest that you can no longer see the wood for the trees.

    Get out of the ivory tree house baby, theres a whole new world out there.

  5. Carl — on 24th February, 2010 at 8:23 pm  

    Well as Jon Cruddas said, Barking is not awash with neo-nazis just because the BNP vote is high, it is a symptom of a deeper problem.

    But yet, even at the top, I get sick of the need to try and prove that intelligence between races is fixed, or generalisable. So some may find it strange or surprising to find that Simon Darby’s white supremacism isn’t predicated on dominant white intelligence – but this is not what should offend people (it’s just simply refutable), it is what that is supplemented with, that something as stupid sounding as races are dealt intelligence quotas, that forever are blacks this intelligent, whites are this, asians and Jews something else – it’s idiotic, and that is what is offensive, because it is unfounded the “theory” has been set up simply to offend, to divide (and, perhaps, conquer, or at least try).

    The crux of the intelligence argument centres only around crime figures, continent GDP and wealth, and educational attainment. Firstly, none of those things in numbers are limited to one race alone, the first flaw. Secondly, they only represent numbers, quantitative and qualitative, which is the type of evidence one should be aiming at to prove whether races have fixed intelligence.

    Their science is wacky, and even though Darby confesses to some type of disturbing modesty, doesn’t mean to say he isn’t way off the mark – just as any neo-nazi, black supremacist, Asian supremacist (like Kenneth Eng for example).

    Now lets see what LJB has to say (that troll)…

  6. Carl — on 24th February, 2010 at 8:24 pm  

    Ha! He’s already here!!

  7. Lee John Barnes — on 24th February, 2010 at 8:34 pm  

    I am not interested in academic and trite arguments in IQ – I am interested in the rape and murder of Whites in Britain by immigrants, the organised paedophile grooming, rape and sexual abuse of young white girls by Muslims all across Britain, the theft of jobs by immigrants, the abandonment of the white working class by traitor scum liberals and tories in order to create an Ethnic Middle Class, terrorism, sex slavery, people smuggling, gun crime and heroin importation and politically correct ant-white racism.

    I am not interested in old bollocks about IQ’s.

    This is what I am interested in ;

    http://leejohnbarnes.blogspot.com/2010/02/class-traitors-of-new-labour-and.html

    http://leejohnbarnes.blogspot.com/2010/02/why-equality-commission-came-for-bnp.html

  8. Carl — on 24th February, 2010 at 8:37 pm  

    Well it’s lucky that I’m not here to serve your wants and needs is it LJB, although wouldn’t you want to fight Simon Darby’s corner, if he did say those things to Sunny, which I’ve no reason to think Sunny is lying about?

  9. Lee John Barnes — on 24th February, 2010 at 8:47 pm  

    I coudlnt care less what Simon said – if he interested in debating IQ then good for him.

    Frankly I find it about as boring as debating how many angels are on the head of pin.

    I find the social effects of immigration interesting, not issues like IQ.

  10. bernard — on 24th February, 2010 at 9:12 pm  

    “I find the social effects of immigration interesting”

    Personally I find sex and good food interesting. But each to his own.

  11. Dalbir — on 24th February, 2010 at 9:32 pm  

    I am interested in the rape and murder of Whites in Britain by immigrants

    Being an NF type, you should remember your own f*#kers original attacks on peaceful immigrants – including murders. Like you wouldn’t like to bring your ‘glory days’ back if you could. What is it you don’t like? Murder per se or just the murder of whites by nonwhites? Seriously Lee.

    the organised paedophile grooming

    You might have a case if white men (including Brits) weren’t frequently prancing around places like Africa and other (especially) oriental locations such as Thailand/ Singapore in full paedo swing. Surely you must know of this?

    rape and sexual abuse of young white girls by Muslims all across Britain

    I don’t think the type of knobs you speak about are targeting them because they are white.

    the theft of jobs by immigrants

    Let’s be honest, a lot of those jobs are ones many white Brits are too thick or too lazy to do. What happened to healthy competition. My God, the people who liked to proudly push the old ‘survival of the fittest’ lark are now moaning because……

    Come on, keep up!

    the abandonment of the white working class by traitor scum liberals and tories in order to create an Ethnic Middle Class

    If you didn’t live in ladi da land, you’d know the white middle (and upper) classes have always considered the WWC as loathesome scum and treated them accordingly. This was before any immigrants turned up.

    I’m working class too, just not white. I’ve seen what goes down.

    terrorism

    If white men hadn’t been faffing around the globe with idiotic political and resource grabbing schemes, it wouldn’t be such a problem.

    sex slavery, people smuggling

    Mate, I get out and about. I have English ‘friends’. Don’t even try and make out like your own guys don’t use prostitutes, especially on holiday and stag dos. Come on, be serious! No one loves a bit of inter-racial more than an Englishman.

    gun crime

    Go Manchester, see those whites shites doing this. Don’t try and make out like it is only a ‘black problem’.

    heroin importation

    I’m with you on this but what about coke? In anycase why can’t Brit soldiers do more about this seeing as they are in Afghanistan as we speak? Isn’t that they type of stuff they are there for?

    politically correct ant-white racism.

    But you’re okay with racism from whites towards nonwhites?

    I am not interested in old bollocks about IQ’s.

    Good job too, you’d have those higher score achieving Chinese, Jews and Indians laughing at you if you were.

  12. bernard — on 24th February, 2010 at 9:35 pm  

    What have you got to say about this, Barnes?

    http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/yasmin-alibhai-brown/yasmin-alibhaibrown-if-you-dont-want-immigrants-will-you-then-do-their-jobs-1906513.html

    Well, if you did go out and labour on a farm or a building site you’d be doing something useful rather than trolling on websites pretending to be a man.

  13. xbox360player — on 24th February, 2010 at 9:54 pm  

    Barnes, I dont see why Fuhrer Griffin hasnt kicked your arse out of the BNP yet.

  14. MaidMarian — on 24th February, 2010 at 10:26 pm  

    Dalbir – Honestly!

    Your whole, spittle flecked post; what can all this mean in the final analysis, I ask myself. What it appears to mean is that someone – anyone – is either innocent or guilty purely by dint of their racial or cultural associations, however ascribed to them.

    Any white/dark/brown etc is to be taken as wholly indicative of an entire culture and is treated as a symbol of said culture. Any random white/dark/brown will do. Individual notions of responsibility or morality or belief are set aside, as one group is labeled blameless victims and another always and everywhere human filth to be treated as though radioactive.

    There are words that describe your sentiments: one of them is prejudiced. And there are many other words. And like many other members of the identity politics talkboard faithful you proudly and avowedly employ the language of the nationalist movement you condemn, you seem to be someone who believes that the color of a person’s skin condemns him by very definition and and justifies a priori moral condemnation and hatred of one and all displaying a blithe regard for actual experiences and personality.

    So the two extremes on this very thread seem to touch and are, in fact, virtually interchangeable. Both extremes spring from the premise that some races are somehow morally superior. If racialised ideology stems from a priori moral condemnation based on nothing more substantive than skin colour we are seeing it in all its ugly, panto-dame glory.

    Alleged “victimization” is held as ‘justifying’ any crime perpetrated by or on behalf of the oppressed. Regardless of whether the oppressed see themselves in such terms. Of course such victimhood is often faux.

    Just as the ideological tyrants of the C20th claimed self-defense as cover for the mass-murder of their “oppressors,” so some modern identity panto-dames profess their need to defend themselves against those morally condemned by thier identity extremism.

    ‘I get out and about. I have English ‘friends’.’
    ‘the abandonment of the white working class by traitor scum liberals and tories in order to create an Ethnic Middle Class.’

    If the man or woman who invented the internet is dead they are spinning in their grave.

  15. Lee John Barnes — on 24th February, 2010 at 10:26 pm  

    Ha ha ha ha

    It l;ooks like I touched a nerve eh Dalbir you dumbass.

    You really cant cope can you, you ethnic types, when you have white man who isnt afraid of being called ‘a racist’ by any opportunist, race relations extortionist.

    Wait until we restore free speech to the British people, you will really fucking cry then you sad twats.

    Wait until you really hear what the British people think of being ‘enriched’ by immigration and multi-culturalism when the laws are removed that muzzle free speech.

    The great wake up call is on its way.

    ha ha ha ha ha ha

  16. douglas clark — on 24th February, 2010 at 10:41 pm  

    Lee John Barnes,

    Are you well? I could quite understand that you feel a tad depressed, what with your failure to make a breakthrough and all.

    No doubt some sort of medication, well, any sort of medication really, would help stop you from coming here and making a complete arse of yourself. Quite why you do it is beyond me.

    It is people like you that give us white folk a bad name….

  17. Dalbir — on 24th February, 2010 at 11:02 pm  

    Lee seriously

    You really cant cope can you, you ethnic types, when you have white man who isnt afraid of being called ‘a racist’ by any opportunist, race relations extortionist.

    Firstly, I hope you’re not ‘Ha ha ha’ing like the villain Joker in a Bat Man comic. You know, like on the verge of insanity….????

    I couldn’t give a flying about whether you aren’t afraid of being called racist. I’m not either. I just don’t shite my pants at the site of a few minority ethnic groups doing better than my own lot, like you and your mates seem to do? You could admire the Brits a bit for the stiff upper lip bit…what happened to you?

    Wait until we restore free speech to the British people, you will really fucking cry then you sad twats.

    And what will happen then? The closet nazis will become brave enough to openly be themselves for a change? Yes, that’ll make me cry…

    Besides, judging by the the rate white Brits are going at it inter-racially, I’ll take a guess that there will be a lot of white Brits who don’t share your opinion.

    Mr. Barnes, I thought you were going to come back with a decent rebuttal of my points which exposed the fact that your own people are as guilty as the others you like to highlight, and curiously of the very same things?!? What’s that all about? Come on, you can do better than this.

    Wait until you really hear what the British people think of being ‘enriched’ by immigration and multi-culturalism when the laws are removed that muzzle free speech.

    The great wake up call is on its way.

    You seriously think some of us don’t know…….wake up yourself mate…..

    ANYWAY! When are we going to talk seriously, instead of all this crap.

    Dude, protect your identity. I don’t have any problems with that. But going around in this toxic, hate filled buzz, isn’t going to help you do that. Unless, the hate is a part of the identity?? You tell me?

    What is it? You just don’t like nonwhites? Fullstop. I asked you once before and chose to ignore it then. Allow me to ask again Lee:

    Have you never met a nonwhite that you warmed to, ever? I’m just curious dude. I genuinely want to understand the ‘whiteness’ you represent.

    Plus there is no need to get upset and call me a ‘dumbass’ if I make an attempt at rebutting your points.

    Come on, I’m all ears.

  18. Dalbir — on 24th February, 2010 at 11:06 pm  

    Maid!!

    I’m trying to communicate with Lee on a level.

    You just don’t get it.

    You’re misunderstanding, I’m not saying all whites are bad. I thought I’d explained this before….groundhog day….keep up son!

  19. MaidMarian — on 24th February, 2010 at 11:28 pm  

    Dalbir – 9:32 – ‘You might have a case if white men (including Brits) weren’t frequently prancing around places like Africa and other (especially) oriental locations such as Thailand/ Singapore in full paedo swing.’

    Dalbir – 11:06 – ‘I’m not saying all whites are bad.’

    No, can’t think where the misunderstanding comes from. I think I get it perfectly well.

  20. James D — on 24th February, 2010 at 11:30 pm  

    Well I have to admit I was willing to give the BNP the benefit of the doubt as a serious political party. I’ve become sick of the endless demonisation of them in the liberal media, of the easy stereotype of them as no more than a bunch of knuckle-dragging thugs.

    But having just read Lee’s posts, I have to come clean and admit I was wrong. Honestly, they have some serious work to do if this guy represents the mentality of the party. His comments above demonstrate a mindset so intellectually feeble and infantile it’s hilarious. Politicians often bypass the brain and use the ‘gut’ to sell their message to the voter. The problem with the BNP is that they actually seem to think with their gut in the first instance; there IS nothing else.

    They’re like the struggling Daily Express dressed up as a political party. Nevertheless I must thank Lee tonight for making my decision a little easier. It will now be down to UKIP or Tory for me. Farage’s speech impressed me tonight though I’m still not convinced they’ve got what it takes either. We shall see…

    James

  21. Dalbir — on 24th February, 2010 at 11:34 pm  

    So the two extremes on this very thread seem to touch and are, in fact, virtually interchangeable. Both extremes spring from the premise that some races are somehow morally superior. If racialised ideology stems from a priori moral condemnation based on nothing more substantive than skin colour we are seeing it in all its ugly, panto-dame glory.

    You just don’t get it.

    My point is that we’re all f**ked to an extent. You know why? Because we are all fallible humans.

    It doesn’t hurt to show others that they aren’t as superior as they might imagine. Call it mirror therapy.

    I not disinclined to put that mirror up to myself or the community/communities that I most identify with. I don’t believe in any immutable superiority between groups be they religious, racial or whatever. Sure, some groups can behave worse than others but this isn’t down to anything innate in my beliefs.

    Thing with humans in general is that we all have the capability for lowly as well as honourable behaviour. Sadly the latter isn’t promoted or demonstrated enough in society in my view. Instead, these days we just the usual mind numbing celeb shite.

    Do you get it?

  22. douglas clark — on 24th February, 2010 at 11:44 pm  

    MaidMarian @ 14,

    We may not agree on a lot, but I’ll try this on you.

    I assume you don’t think Lee John Barnes speaks for either you or I? I find him offensive and a bit of a bully. Do you agree or not?

    Whilst Dalbir can, sometimes, be a pain in the neck, I kind of agree with him more often than not these days. 21 is a very good post. At least I think it is. There is an increasing sophistication in what he posts here now, compared to a while ago.

    Just saying.

    (Though I quite expect to be called a condescending white liberal or summat :-( )

  23. dave bones — on 25th February, 2010 at 1:03 am  

    sorta related have you seen this The Day The Immigrants Left

  24. MiriamBinder — on 25th February, 2010 at 9:39 am  

    Posting in another posters name, aside from the fact that it is illegal, also shows that there is a distinct lack of both moral fibre and emotional maturity.

  25. platinum786 — on 25th February, 2010 at 9:48 am  

    I love LJB, I bet the soapbox he stands on has all the trimmings.

    I doubt your party will even win a seat in Parliament, a single seat from 646. You will in some despot areas that nobody cares about, perhaps run the government close, but when it comes to the crunch, you’ll win nothing. I bet even in your dreams your thinking of perhaps winning maybe 5-10 seats, best case scenario? Be honest for a minute, do you think you can even get a voice in Parliament?

    I mean the best opertunity you have is if the conservatives win, even then they’ll only get a slight majority at best, chances are we’ll have a hung parliament with the LibDems as king makers. We’ll see how you can push your racist policies then.

    What does the future hold for you? By the end of the next governments term, the economy will be slowly in recovery. Who votes right wing in the good times? You guys can even get a seat at the worst of times.

    By the time your next chance comes, 20 years time, next economic recession, Britain will have too many immigrant communities embedded into the fabric of it’s society for you to even matter. The numbers wll be too high for you to be able to stand against them. Today Pakistani’s, Indians, Afro-Carrobeans, Bangladeshi’s, Chinese are the embedded ethnic communities, those who are like the furniture, next recession, the Iraqi’s, Kosovans, Africans, Somali’s, Poles, Eastern Europeans will be in the same position. Heck by then the Turks might even be flooding the EU with 80 million Muslims.

    One thing I can promise you, there’ll be more Muslims in Parliament and the Lords than BNP representatives. You can make all the noise you like, it’s seats that matter.

  26. platinum786 — on 25th February, 2010 at 9:59 am  

    Lee, does it hurt to know the paki’s are right? I always wonder how that feels, knowing your on the wrong side and your fighting a losing battle?

    how does it feel to be one of the many blunt spearheads of the facist right wings last Hurrah? I mean lets face it, todays youth don’t support you, apart from those who will be too drunk by 10am to vote anyway. Your attempts to wow the kids aren’t too hot either are they? Bodecia? I’m more educated that most people who’ll ever even think of voting for you, and I had to google her name. How many of those who grow up with all these immigrants in their schools will vote for you?

    Used to be a time when the Paki’s were in one area, now event eh Pakistani’s have found their way into the suburbs. Used to be a time when the BNP had isolated communities in WWC estates, not even they’ve been penetrated by blacks, and now eastern europeans and Somali’s and Iraqi’s and Afghans.

    What will you do, how will you keep blighty for whitey?

  27. Jai — on 25th February, 2010 at 12:41 pm  

    MaidMarian,

    re: #14,

    Douglas (the real one) is correct about Dalbir’s statements on this thread. With all due respect, on this occasion his motivations and remarks don’t mean what you think they do, as Dalbir himself has accurately clarified in #21.

  28. Jai — on 25th February, 2010 at 12:42 pm  

    Dalbir,

    re: #11

    Very well said — quite brilliant. I also agree with your points in #17 — it’s amusing to see that the BNP appears to be under the grossly inaccurate impression that the Khalsa would be even remotely intimidated by them, regardless of how many “dire threats” they may hurl at us…..

  29. Abdul Abbulbul Emir — on 25th February, 2010 at 1:19 pm  

    Posting in another posters name, aside from the fact that it is illegal, also shows that there is a distinct lack of both moral fibre and emotional maturity.

    Really ?

    I must show this to Mrs A.

    She will not be amused.

    Peace.

  30. Jai — on 25th February, 2010 at 1:27 pm  

    have the guts to undertake a real debate with people in the BNP,…..then give me a call.

    I will debate with you anytime, anywhere.

    …..muzzle free speech.

    Fine. I’m removing all alleged “free speech restrictions” — therefore, providing a detailed and comprehensive answer in writing and on the record to the following straightforward question should not be an issue:

    Exactly how would a BNP government reduce Britain’s non-white population from 10% to 1% — confirmed as one of the BNP’s continuing aims by Nick Griffin directly on the BBC’s ‘Question Time’ in October 2009 — considering that Nick Griffin also confirmed during the latter half of 2009 that the BNP is now formally abandoning its proposed “voluntary repatriation” policy ?

    Since “free speech muzzles” do not apply in this case, for the benefit of the public the maximum amount of detail possible should be provided in relation to the specific procedures and actions involved in the planned BNP population reduction programme.

    The response should be restricted to the specific question asked and should also be accompanied by written confirmation that the contents have been formally authorised by the BNP’s senior leadership, are on the record, and are an accurate representation of the specific measures a BNP government would implement in order to achieve the aforementioned population reduction upon winning a national General Election in the United Kingdom.

    Finally, the response should be copied in full & verbatim in an email from a verifiable BNP email account to this website’s editorial team via both of the contact forms displayed here: http://www.pickledpolitics.com/contact , in order to provide an authenticated electronic record of the contents along with electronic confirmation that the author is indeed who they claim to be and has been formally authorised to speak for & represent the BNP in this matter.

  31. letameknow — on 25th February, 2010 at 4:52 pm  

    “Posting in another posters name, aside from the fact that it is illegal”

    Really? What laws does it contravene?

  32. Dalbir — on 25th February, 2010 at 5:08 pm  

    Doesn’t the Data Protection Act or Computer Misuse Act cover this stuff?

    Thing is, Internet based stuff is relatively new so it may be a case of the legislation probably needing updating to reflect it?

    Doug! Be a test case!

    From a summary of the CMA @ http://www.lancs.ac.uk/iss/rules/cmisuse.htm

    Example 1, Unauthorised Access to Computer Material.

    This would include: using another person’s identifier (ID) and password without proper authority in order to use data or a program, or to alter, delete, copy or move a program or data, or simply to output a program or data (for example, to a screen or printer); laying a trap to obtain a password; reading examination papers or examination results.

    Would be tricky to pin this one down, looks like another loophole that needs closing?

  33. douglas clark — on 25th February, 2010 at 5:22 pm  

    Dalbir et al,

    Thanks for the comments. This guy has shown how easy it is to steal someones identity. The consequences for debate are pretty dire. As I believe Rumbold pointed out in an earlier thread.

    It is a relief to me that no-one here has been fooled.

  34. Don — on 25th February, 2010 at 5:25 pm  

    Wouldn’t defamation cover it, in this instance?

    Defamation—also called calumny, vilification, slander (for spoken words), and libel (for written, broadcast, or otherwise published words)—is the communication of a statement that makes a claim, expressly stated or implied to be factual, that may give an individual, business, product, group, government, or nation a negative image. It is usually, but not always,[1] a requirement that this claim be false and that the publication is communicated to someone other than the person defamed (the claimant).

    Wiki.

  35. damon — on 25th February, 2010 at 5:54 pm  

    platinum786 – I understand you are talking to a BNP person, so anything you might say is fair enough in that regard. He does seem like a prize plonker and from looking at the imagery on his website, I’d guess that he was one of those nerd kids at school who was into the Lord of the Rings and knew lots about dinosaurs.

    However – you do seem to be having a bit of an Andrew Neather moment yourself there. The BNP probably can’t win a seat at parliament, but they might do quite well under PR. And immigration and race will be an issue for a long time to come, because so much baggage comes with diversity. There wouldn’t be a Pickled Politics website if there weren’t. And this guy (John McWhorter) would have to find another way to make his living.
    http://www.manhattan-institute.org/html/mcwhorter.htm

    I wonder what the reaction to this BNP youtube would be if it got aired on the TV – just after Coronation Street say. I think a lot of people in Britain might agree with its sentiments – even if they would not actually vote BNP.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-1b9J8D3tOg

    That level of diversity does have effects for everyone living there. If only insofar as the people who live there are often new to the country and grew up in (what some might call) the third world.
    Does it make any difference? It does change the street scene a bit – and maybe pubs will close down if the new people aren’t the sort who go to pubs.

    Not everyone wants to live in a neighbourhood like that. And some may fear that their’s will become like that. Which I think is what is behind the BNP’s relative strength in Barking and Dagenham.

    If you were to ask people in the English south coast towns, from Dover to Bournemouth, would they like their town to develop the same cultural demographic as Wembley, there may well be a majority who said no.

    Maybe it’s irresponsible of me to say this.

  36. Sunny — on 25th February, 2010 at 6:03 pm  

    What a brilliant thread.

    Thanks LJB – you do a brilliant job of exposing the BNP for me.

  37. bernard — on 25th February, 2010 at 6:28 pm  

    Yet these are the same cunts in the south-east who talk bollocks about a “free market” and “globalisation” when it gives them an excuse to slag the workers off, but can’t accept free movement of labour.

    If someone makes money out of opening a Nigerian restaurant where a chip shop used to be, isn’t making money what Tories worship anyway?

    These are the same thick fuckers who talk about “morality” without realising that neoliberalism is what undermines the social conservatism that used o exist before Thatcher destroyed its bases.

    Yet you never see these fucking tribunes of the “white working class” condemn Thatcherism for having gutted their communities, they prefer to divide the workers against each other while the likes of Damon can do nothing but whinge.

  38. letameknow — on 25th February, 2010 at 7:20 pm  

    The Data Protection Act has nothing to say about blogger ID’s nor does the Computer Misuse Act which relates only to the unauthorised login of a computer and only applies in practice to where it is clearly labelled as a privately owned system that requires authentication and authorisation (this has been tested in the past hence the use of banners by those in the know.)

    What this guy has done hasn’t fallen under any criminal law (and defamation is a civil offence by the way) and in fact he hasn’t even “stolen” any identity as there is no system of identity in place here, just three self-defined fields of which any information can be entered and not be deemed as an admission of ownership.

    Frustrating perhaps, but not illegal.

  39. MiriamBinder — on 25th February, 2010 at 7:21 pm  

    @ letameknow — on 25th February, 2010 at 4:52 PM: Following on from the other posts on the subject there is also the Malicious Communications Act 1988 (c. 27) (b)
    any [F2 article or electronic communication] which is, in whole or part, of an indecent or grossly offensive nature,
    is guilty of an offence if his purpose, or one of his purposes, in sending it is that it should, so far as falling within paragraph (a) or (b) above, cause distress or anxiety to the recipient or to any other person to whom he intends that it or its contents or nature should be communicated.

    I cannot help but wonder what letameknows’ interest in asserting the lack of legal recourse on this impersonation is? Maybe s/he knows more about it then s/he is willing to concede?

  40. Don — on 25th February, 2010 at 7:44 pm  

    So, both civil and criminal recourse, if the identity of the impersonator can be discovered.

  41. bernard — on 25th February, 2010 at 8:06 pm  

    Even if there are no laws that can be enforced, surely the impostors can be banned?

    I mean, people might want to post stuff under assumed names to avoid their own identities being known. But that is NOT the same as maliciously impersonating another person who is a well-established poster.

    Whoever “did” Douglas Clark is obviously not very clever. But imagine a more subtle troll who couldn’t so easily be detected? There is a case for finding their IP addresses and banning them.

  42. MiriamBinder — on 25th February, 2010 at 8:23 pm  

    Whoever ‘did’ Douglas Clark is not only stupid, malicious not to mention infantile (I expect s/he still rolls about in rapt amusement when someone passes wind) but also not worthy of having any more time wasted on discussing their imbecility.

  43. letameknow — on 25th February, 2010 at 9:16 pm  

    I see you are a conspiracy theorist MiriamBinder but certainly not a lawyer. That act only applies to the UK and is enforceable only in Britain, so if this guy is not in this country then all bets are off, and also the google blogger servers are based in the US and finally I can find no case of its prosecution in relation to blogger threads.

    Corrected you again, I am afraid, so I guess I must be nefarious myself. That’s how it works, no?

  44. letameknow — on 25th February, 2010 at 9:18 pm  

    Correction, this is not a google blogger site but is based and registered in the US:

    DreamHost Web Hosting
    417 Associated Rd #324
    Brea, CA 92821
    US
    +1.2139471032

  45. persephone — on 25th February, 2010 at 9:57 pm  

    so no response from Lee John Barnes then. Thats nothing new.

    I expect he’ll turn up on another thread bemoaning again the lack of free speech, a platform etc but backing off when faced with a few simple questions

  46. MiriamBinder — on 25th February, 2010 at 10:12 pm  

    It doesn’t really matter what you are letameknow … I don’t have to live with you.

  47. letameknow — on 25th February, 2010 at 10:17 pm  

    MiriamBinder, nor I you.

    Thank God.

  48. persephone — on 25th February, 2010 at 10:19 pm  

    heh heh @ 45

  49. MiriamBinder — on 25th February, 2010 at 10:32 pm  

    And I’d also be very wary of resting too comfortably on the notion of jurisdiction. Cases have been pursued and won quite successfully even where not only the servers were not located in the UK but the individuals themselves had at best only an economic tie with the UK.

  50. MaidMarian — on 25th February, 2010 at 10:47 pm  

    I doubt very much that passing one’s self off under any name is an offence under any computer law. There is no doubt that this is an example of bad faith, but I am not sure whether that is unlawful in itself. If there were some financial loss then maybe?

    Whether there is an argument to go down the registration route is another question.

  51. MiriamBinder — on 25th February, 2010 at 11:21 pm  

    It isn’t the passing oneself off as such but the malicious intent that matters.

  52. letameknow — on 25th February, 2010 at 11:54 pm  

    “Cases have been pursued and won quite successfully even where not only the servers were not located in the UK but the individuals themselves had at best only an economic tie with the UK.”

    Cases where the person paid for, and administered the domain and was thus legally responsible, show me one case of a prosecution of a poster of blog thread comments, my wannbe know it all, but sadly know nothing.

    And again, the malicious intent thing is very much a country by country affair and very subjective. Here the CPS has to deem a case in the public interest to proceed in the first place.

    Sorry MiriamBinder, but once again you cod para-legal advice isn’t worth a dime.

  53. damon — on 26th February, 2010 at 2:01 am  

    bernard @37, what’s whinging about what I said there?

    If you see that as whinging, when I was just trying to present things how I think they might just be – then perhaps we really don’r see things the same way, and I would suggest that your attitude is part of the problem the left faces in ever becoming more mainstream – as there is something dishonest ….. and even PC about it.

    I’m not surprised at a reaction like that though. I was banned and called a racist on another website for writing things like that. If you have the UAF mindset there isn’t much room for manoeuver when discussing things like those. And if I raise a point like that and do a link to a BNP youtube like that …. then the thinking goes, that that must be secretly my own personal opinion on the matter too.
    (It’s a cretinous way of thinking IMO – but that’s what I was stuck with).

    I find that there is some kind of large gap at the center of a conversation about the views of the BNP and that of mainstream anti-racists. And it’s very frustrating as it seems impossible to fill with constructive argument. It’s just ”the Nazi’s” on one side and the ”anti-Nazi’s” on the other.

    The only people I know who have consistently promoted an anti-racist agenda without slipping into the silly bollocks of UAF and SWP types, have been those people at Spiked.

    And Bernard, I remember a few weeks back you wrote something like ”Dear oh dear dammon, first you defend Rod Liddle and now Brendan O’Neill”.

    I haven’t got a clue about some of the stuff Brendan O’ Neill talks about climate change – and even China, but he is spot on sometimes, like here when he speaks about Nick Griffin on Question Time.
    http://www.spiked-online.com/index.php/site/article/7611/

    What do you reckon bernard?

  54. damon — on 26th February, 2010 at 2:13 am  

    bernard @37, what’s whinging about what I said there?

    If you see that as whinging, when I was just trying to present things how I think they might just be – then perhaps we really don’t see things the same way, and I would suggest that your attitude is part of the problem the left faces in ever becoming more mainstream – as there is something dishonest ….. and even PC about it.

    I’m not surprised at a reaction like that though. I was banned and called a racist on another website for writing things like that. If you have the UAF mindset there isn’t much room for manoeuver when discussing things like those. And if I raise a point like that and do a link to a BNP youtube like that …. then the thinking goes, that that must be secretly my own personal opinion on the matter too.
    (It’s a cretinous way of thinking IMO – but that’s what I was stuck with).

    I find that there is some kind of large gap at the center of a conversation about the views of the BNP and that of mainstream anti-racists. And it’s very frustrating as it seems impossible to fill with constructive argument. It’s just ”the Nazi’s” on one side and the ”anti-Nazi’s” on the other.

    The only people I know who have consistently promoted an anti-racist agenda without slipping into the silly bollocks of UAF and SWP types, have been those people at Spiked.

    And Bernard, I remember a few weeks back you wrote something like ”Dear oh dear dammon, first you defend Rod Liddle and now Brendan O’Neill”.

    I don’t defend people what ever they say. Just specific instances and arguments. And this from O’Neill is good.
    http://www.spiked-online.com/index.php/site/article/7611/

    It’s better than just running about like sixth formers shouting ”Nazi scum off our streets”.

  55. Sunny — on 26th February, 2010 at 2:44 am  

    Damon – you’re quoting a lot of Spiked these days aren’t you?
    I wish I had more time to take it apart but when O Neill cusses MPs he’s not actually saying anything interesting or new. We do that all the time. People like Straw et al aren’t meant to come up with new ideas and culture – that’s our job. The people from Spiked sometimes sound like Mel Phillips – all they do is bitch and moan about stuff. There’s a reason why people were hating on Griffin – and it’s nothing to do with his rabid climate denialism either.

  56. damon — on 26th February, 2010 at 3:29 am  

    I wouldn’t have mentioned them or O’Neill at all Sunny if Bernard hadn’t suggested that I ”can do nothing but whinge”. And I’d rather listen to the Spiked people on this issue than the UAF – who looked like complete arses when they got themselves worked up into a lather outside the BBC the night Griffin was there.
    Surging against the police? Why were they doing that?

    It’s great that we have the goons that we have on the far right. Because they are so pathetic and cartoonish that it makes it so easy to vilify them.

    But that still doesn’t deal with issues of identity and the tribalism and baggage that comes with diversity – like I tried to mention at #35 – but which can get labeled as whinging.
    As I said, I think there is something dishonest about the whole debate.

    Here is what happens to the debate when it’s left like it is. It’s a podcast of Phil Woolas on Nick Ferrari’s (tabloid like) LBC radio programmme on feb 23rd.

    http://lbc.audioagain.com/
    You click on Ferrari and it’s the first one.

  57. Sunny — on 26th February, 2010 at 4:50 am  

    But that still doesn’t deal with issues of identity and the tribalism and baggage that comes with diversit

    Well you do keep mentioning this, but I’m not sure you’re getting to the nub of the problem here. Spell it out for me – what’s the crux of the problem? What isn’t happening?

  58. damon — on 26th February, 2010 at 9:13 am  

    Not everyone welcomes the complexity of the modern multi-cultural society. Where even someone like Sir Ian Blair gets accused of being a racist.
    What was that about?

    You have the standard being set by self interested groups like Diversity Solutions. It would seem that they way they set out their agenda, no dissent is allowed. See their client list.
    http://www.diversity-solutions.com/

    What are you to do if you get sent on one of these courses by your employer, but don’t realy agree with some of what you are being told?

    Much of that thinking may well be sound. But who decides what the line is on any particular issue?

    It’s a short step from this, to suggesting that anyone who resists any part of it is some kind of reactionsry Tory – or worse. Bernard’s comment at 37 is an example of this.

    A large part of the country has little time for this liberal intelectualising of issues. You say Sunny that you don’t have any time for Spiked, but they have done some of the better analysis of things like the implications of the Macpherson report and the Big Brother racism stories.

    You don’t understand what I mean by the ”baggage” of diversity? I’m sure you’ve read a lot more of Ta-Nehisi Coates than I have. He’s OK from what I have read, but he points out the huge gulf of undrestanding that can exist between the races in the US.

    So does Damali Ayo
    http://www.rent-a-negro.com/negroabout.html

    … and so many others. Someone like John McWhorter who attempts to unravel some of this, soon gets people calling him an Uncle Tom, a sellout and a ‘media whore’ – and his ethnic ‘credentials’ are even questioned as some people suggest he is not really ”one of us”.
    He wrote a book called ‘Authentically Black’ about this subject, which got panned by many people on the black left. That’s the way it goes.
    http://www.amazon.com/Authentically-Black-Essays-Silent-Majority/dp/1592400019

    I’m not saying his book was a masterpeice or anything, but it raised some interesting ideas – and from my experience, the left cannot touch them with a barge pole as they attack what you yourself Sunny the other day called ”sacred cows”.

    That’s what I find a pity. The lack of engagement between different points of view.

    This counts as baggage surely.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Controversies_about_the_word_%22niggardly%22

    I already mentioned this story on PP in August. Remember the one that kicked up a bit of racist storm in Philadelphia when a group of black childern were asked to leave a private swimming club?

    I tried to give it the Five Chinese Crackers treatment and show that it was a race storm about nothing – but it seems that method doesn’t work the other way around.
    http://www.google.co.uk/search?source=ig&hl=en&rlz=1W1RNTN_en&q=racist+philly+swim+club&meta=lr%3D&aq=f&oq=

    Again it was John McWhorter who I thought had the best analysis of the situation.
    http://www.tnr.com/blog/john-mcwhorter/the-philly-swimming-club-you-know-what-thats-all-about-or

    What isn’t happening is a conversation where something like that can be discussed, and all aspects of it are up for discussion. That meaning, also the arguments that John McWhorter puts there when he says that some people are too ready to find a racist motive (or even just a racist) where that accusation might not be deserved. Ian Blair being a perfect example.

    Now that Ireland has become a multi-racial country, all this baggage has now turned up there too. No doubt the police have been deemed to be institutionally racist and all need to be send on Diversity Awareness courses, which in it self isn’t a bad thing, it just depends on how the agenda is being set and who by.

    I’m going there to live for a while in a couple of weeks so I’ll be interested to see how it’s going there.
    This is one story that I want to look in to in Dublin.
    http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/features/2010/0223/1224265025549.html

    It was in september 2008 that I did this link on PP about this blogginheads conversation, and highlighted the section about ”Will racism matter in November?” and ”Is it OK for white people to embrace whiteness?”. That’s the kind of conversation I like.
    Not UAF stuff about ”Nazi’s”

  59. bernard — on 26th February, 2010 at 10:04 am  

    I don’t have the “UAF mindset”, I’m just pointing out the hypocrisy of right-wing twats who slag immigrants off while supporting neoliberalism.

    They are only consistent in that both their positions involve hating the working class. Now people talk bollocks about the “white working class” being different to others. But the fact is, these are right-wing journalists who would scream their heads off if a pro-worker government was elected, so who are they to pretend to support the workers, especially given that they all live in middle-class areas… which they slag middle-class lefties off for doing, but which is supposedly ok if they do it themselves.

    I am black, I see no conflict of interest living in a poor and mainly Asian area, or being a union man in a mostly white workplace. People have been racist towards me before. But as Dalbir identifies, the workers were treated like dirt by the ruling class in the supposed good old days when there were no immigrants. So it is completely wrong to side with bosses who have the same colour skin but no real interests in common.

    Do you think I’d give a fuck if every member in a right-wing government was black? No, I’d still lose out. Do gay working-class people rejoice if a bailed-out banker shares their sexual orientation? No, they know what tir real interests are.

    And that is why I condemn those who seek to divide us, and that includes not only the BNP and Tories but also Islamists and those black activists who reject the concept of unity with whites in a similar position, in the real world.

    Going back to what I wrote. Why do people think they have the right to slag immigrants off when they support neoliberalism? Why does no one ever confront right-wing hypocrisy, and let completely out of touch middle class conservatives who have no interest in my welfare set the agenda whilst talking bollocks?

  60. platinum786 — on 26th February, 2010 at 10:21 am  

    Damon, I don’t know who Andrew Neather is, but I was just doing the wind up merchant bit.

  61. douglas clark — on 26th February, 2010 at 10:31 am  

    I kind of agree with Bernard. Rich folk, Russian Oligarchs and the like, have complete freedom of movement and of their major asset, capital. They live in a broad global economy that certainly seems to have damn near no borders. Which is a bit different from the one the rest of us are supposed to live in. Different strokes for different folks?

  62. damon — on 26th February, 2010 at 11:04 am  

    I wrote a rather long post with several links in it an hour ago, but it seems to have disappeared now.
    So I feel kind of stumped. I was asked to explain myself and spell it out, but it’s gone.
    Oh well.
    Bernard I hear what you are saying … and maybe we are talking about different things. I couldn’t give a stuff about the right wing press, and this is meant to be about BNP voters. So ”neo-liberalism” really doesn’t come into it.

    My point was that rapid change can be disorientating.
    And that you’d have to really expect the very best from people for there not to be problems in this area at times. As for the rest, well I said it and now it’s gone.

    And platinum786 …. I know you were.

  63. damon — on 26th February, 2010 at 11:39 am  

    This is weird. That ”missing post” is now back (@58)
    I thought it’d been deleted for it being a bit ”mental” or something.

  64. douglas clark — on 26th February, 2010 at 11:46 am  

    damon,

    Just to let you know, I’m not seeing your post @ 58. It’s still bernard that holds that number. Your previous post to that at 61 is at 56, timed at 3:29am

  65. bafta — on 26th February, 2010 at 2:58 pm  

    “Russian Oligarchs and the like, have complete freedom of movement…”

    Really, what about Oleg Deripaska for one?

  66. douglas clark — on 26th February, 2010 at 3:24 pm  

    bafta,

    Never heard of him. His Wiki entry is ‘interesting’.

    I was thinking more of this, also from Wiki:

    Moscow on Thames
    A significant number[quantify] of Russian oligarchs have bought homes in upscale sections of London, England, which has been dubbed “Moscow on the Thames”.[7] Some, like Boris Berezovsky and Abram Reznikov, are expatriates, having left Russia permanently. Most own homes in both countries as well as property and have acquired controlling interests in major European companies. They commute on a regular basis between Europe and Russia; in many cases their families reside in London, with their children attending school there. In 2007, Abram Reznikov bought one of Spain’s mega recycling companies, Alamak Espana Trade SL, while Roman Abramovich, considered the wealthiest of the oligarchs, bought the English football club, Chelsea F.C., in 2003, and has spent record amounts on players’ salaries.[8]

  67. Dalbir — on 26th February, 2010 at 3:58 pm  

    What’s the deal with Lee John Barnes LLB (Hons)?

    He’s run off everytime I’ve asked a few straight forward questions? Not what you’d expect from a qualified lawyer?

    Strange……

  68. persephone — on 26th February, 2010 at 4:39 pm  

    “But that still doesn’t deal with issues of identity and the tribalism and baggage that comes with diversity”

    These are all pretty generic and not solely the province of diversity or multiculturalism. All people have an identity and so it follows evince tribalism & baggage subject to that identity.

    And identity is a melding of your political stance, religious/atheist beliefs, gender, personality, family, height, dress, colour of your hair…. the list of things that lead and make an identity are endless so the permutation of different tribes is endless. Unfortunately so is the baggage.

    To deal with identity issues you must therefore deal with the whole of humanity.

    Unless of course associating identity issues with diversity or more literally (and honestly) groups of people that are seen as ’different’ to another group of people is the objective. And I find that odious.

  69. damon — on 27th February, 2010 at 2:11 am  

    Persephone. We are talking about potential BNP voters – not you or me. Here is a couple of people who feel pretty hacked off about living in a crap part of Birmingham.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pwxa4_xAwhw

    You might have a hard job to persuade people like the first couple, that they should really try to identify with the whole of humanity.

    And I still think that BNP video where they drive through Wembley showing the street scene is a good place to start a discussion. To try to work out what you would say to people who would agree with some of the sentiments in it.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-1b9J8D3tOg
    So far, what I’ve got from the anti-racist movement is that you call them Nazi’s ….. which I don’t think is really good enough.

    The post that disappeared is definitely back @58, and I missed a final link at the very end. I said I preferred a conversation like this instead of UAF kind of talk.
    http://bloggingheads.tv/diavlogs/11372?in=00:28:48

    The parts where they talk about ”Will racism matter in November?” and ”Is it OK for white people to embrace whiteness?”

    I have found this subject to be one of the hardest things you can talk to people about. Left or right.
    When saying exactly these things on another (left wing) forum, I faced a wall of hostility and was called all sorts of names and then banned.
    They were just not going to tolerate a point of view that was questioning their principled left wing stance.

    I got loads of flack for suggesting that culture was really sometimes very backward. I had mentioned the huge number of honor killings in Kurdish regions, and was told that there was violence against women everywhere. And when I suggested that family groups killing their daughters was a bit different to lone men in the west committing violence against women – I was told to clear off.

    This is the village of Khata in south eastern Turkey where the young girl was buried alive by her father and grandfather for talking to boys.
    People are different there. That’s all I was saying, but it seems to hit a raw nerve with many people on the left, and they can only think the person saying this is racist.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2b8yjX6_S1s

    Which is a big problem in my opinion. Because it means that conversations soon hit the buffers and everyone gets their backs up.

    You can have a factually based and compassionate programme about child brides in Northen Nigeria on a programme like Unreported World…..

    http://www.channel4.com/programmes/unreported-world/episode-guide/series-2008/episode-17/

    …. but I have found some people on the left very sensitive to anyone saying something about a situation like that if it wasn’t ‘on message’

    So the BNP would say that it wasn’t really a good thing for too many people from places like that to come to Britain …. and all we can do is totally disagree with them.

    Bernard and Douglas Clark, even though I agree with your sentiments, I feel you’re gliding over issues like this a bit too lightly. Bernard, it’s not whinging on my part, but a disire for a wider ranging conversation.

    If you want to work against the likes of the BNP, it’s better to have the ability to argue against things they would bring up in my opinion.

  70. MiriamBinder — on 27th February, 2010 at 4:37 am  

    It never really has been about compare, prefer, defend or attack though … That is where a lot of people go wrong.

    It has never been whether to have a family bury a girl alive for talking to an unrelated male is better or worse then having a group of yobs beat a young bloke to death for having the wrong skin colour. Or whether child brides is right or wrong in a given situation.

    Wrong is wrong and compare and contextualise is not going to alter that one little bit. Descending to compare and contextualise with the BNP is essentially playing the same game they are; essentially giving them the game because the last word will always be “We have paedophiles/murderers/child abusers/benefit scroungers/uninsured drivers etcetera and ad infinitum enough of our own, why invite more in.”

    And to tell you the truth, I agree … I don’t see much point in eulogizing what is patently inhumane, deplorable, barbaric behaviour merely due to its cultural origin.

    What is possibly a far more constructive debate is the policies. Trouble is few, if any, are able to discuss those with any degree of depth.

  71. damon — on 27th February, 2010 at 10:58 am  

    MiriamBinder, it’s not about the BNP and talking with them. I agree that’s a waste of time. This is about people who might share some of their views.

    If they are plain mean and full of hatred, then stuff them, but the case isn’t always as simple as that. Right wing arguments come in many forms – and some of them could have validity if you view the world in a right of center way.

    And I think that there lies the problem. The anti-racist left will never consider a right of center opinion legitimate.
    I mentioned the terrible crime that happened in Turkish Kurdistan not to compare and contrast. It’s just something that happens there quite regularly,
    and thousands of Kurdish young men now live in Britain. Maybe they just want to get away from that village life and be part of the modern world. I’m sure that’s the motivation for many.
    But not everyone here shares the internationalism and universal solidarity that many people have. I just wonder what you do with those that don’t.
    Fight against them seems to be what is to be done. And to hell with their opinions, democracy or not.

    I’m not sure about this line from Sunny’s piece at the top.

    Racism though is racial hostility. It’s not about IQ but when you see someone of a different colour or background and hate them because of that background.

    It’s not always a question of hating people.
    I don’t think Richard Littlejohn hates ethnic minority people particularly – but his opinions could be seen as racist. But if you support removals of failed asylum seekers, Kurds for example – who have ended up in Europe often because it has now become a custom for young men to go away to seek their fortune, but now there’s more rules and regulations and things like Visas that there never used to be.
    If you think it’s OK for them to be shipped home, does that make you a cold hearted monster?

    As for Rod Liddle, did anyone see his latest Spectator blog about the ”racism” of BBCs Crimewatch programme?
    http://www.spectator.co.uk/rodliddle/5802008/stop-the-bbcs-racism.thtml

    I wonder if whether you find that (mildly) funny or not says what kind of person you are.

    As for policies MiriamBinder, which ones do you mean.
    Immigration policy? Different people will read stories about the plight of failed asylum seekers in the UK with different feelings. You might be full of compassion, while other people would think that it’s right to forcibly put them on planes.
    Both opinions can be legitimate I think.
    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/two-pictures-of-britains-brutal-asylum-policy-758877.html

  72. MiriamBinder — on 27th February, 2010 at 3:12 pm  

    @ Damon # 71 – I have no problem with the concept of addressing wrongs as wrongs, regardless of where or why they occur or whom the actors may be. Whether a given group has either a cultural proclivity to go forth and seek their fortune or whether it is dire, inhumane circumstances that force it to flee for an uncertain reception in an unknown land would have a distinct bearing on whether or not any given individual can be granted the status of asylum seeker; thereby ultimately being granted either indefinite leave to reside or residency status or not as any given case might be.

    Firstly I find that generally speaking few people seem aware of the various statuses that are possible for foreign born individuals. This leads to a great deal of confusion when trying to address issues raised. The BNP for one relies to a great extent on this wide-spread ignorance to inflame feeling. The press too in certain circumstances seems unaware, or certainly do nothing to emphasise the very real differences.

    Where a given individual breaches the rule of law, they should be dealt with to the fullest extent of the law. However this should not mean that we, as a nation that has undersigned the Human Rights Conventions, can absolve ourselves from responsibility if taking one option available to us in law would lead to a possible abuse of that given individuals’ universal human rights. Alternatives must then be sought and applied; and I would hold that seeking and applying those alternatives is more for our sake as co-signees and upholders of the Convention of Human Rights.

    I agree that calling an individual racist merely for ascribing to the BNP or feeling attracted to elements as proffered by the BNP is dismissive and contentious. That is not to say that I do not hold the party as a whole extremely racist.

    As for the policies:

    The Sons and Daughters policy would be a nice one to start with.

  73. Blanco — on 27th February, 2010 at 5:34 pm  

    If the BNP only have support among “disaffected, white working class voters”, most of whom don’t vote at all, then why were there so many doctors, teachers and other middle class professionals on the BNP membership list?

    You can’t excuse the racism of some people because they are poor and cannot be arsed to get jobs, and resent immigrants for being given anything at all by the state. Some people are just racist and have no “legitimate grievances”.

  74. damon — on 28th February, 2010 at 1:08 am  

    As I said, this is about the most difficult thing I can think of to discuss objectively, as it’s a virtual minefield ready to explode underfoot at any moment, such are the passions it arouses.

    At it’s simplest, there is a large section of society that is not as sympathetic as others. Is selfish and nationalistic. And this state of being, I would argue, is one that comes quite easy and is alarmed by media stories and the change people have seen in their societies.
    So it’s not surprising that countries like Denmark and the Netherlands have thrown up anti-immigration political parties and charismatic individuals who have either led, or responded to a mood that was against further immigration.

    And it also doesn’t surprise me that there are doctors and middle class professionals who would join the BNP.
    I think many go that far out of a sense of frustration that ”something isn’t done” about the (what they would see), as the flagrant abuse of our immigration and asylum policies.

    There are stories like this everyday in the British press.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vAhdAvYLZD0

    That’s not made up – it seems that that’s exactly what happens – and the difference is, some people would say ”So what? We’re all part of the same human race on planet earth” and plenty of others might feel that something is being taken from them.

    Here was a story I saw on the news last year, and the BNP have picked up on it and done nothing with it except put their logo on the first couple of seconds of it.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qWmyWI_youc

    It speaks for itself (I guess) in their eyes. My dissapointment has been that the discussion of things like this is so partisan, that someone talking like I am here is likely to be viewed with suspicion by some – which is what happened to me before, and I was told to just admit it – that I shared those BNP feelings.

    But maybe this partisan attitude is the way to go. ”Which side are you on?” and all that.
    That maybe this is how a new society comes about, and how like Sunny has said, the Southall riots and the storm over Satanic Verses are things to be welcomed, as they kick history foreward (or something like that).

  75. Trofim — on 28th February, 2010 at 8:59 am  

    @71
    Rod Liddle. Not principally intended to amuse, rather to throw down a gauntlet to Sunny et al.

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.