Vote BNP!!

[djf]

Please do not vote BNP as a protest vote. If you want to protest against the current morons who label themselves politicians then spoil your vote. Only vote for the BNP if you truly support the party and their policies. Vote BNP if you want guns in the majority of UK households. Vote BNP if you want British doctors, nurses and surgeons to be offered tax funded bribes to return to their parents or grand-parents countries of origin. Vote BNP if you want a return of the death penalty. Vote BNP if you want a notorious holocaust denier and nazi sympathiser representing the UK on the Europen stage. Vote BNP if you want our country represented by a man who supports whites fighting for their "rights" with boots and fists. Vote BNP if you want a party who considers ghurkas mercenaries. Vote BNP if you want a party who told a British soldier to "eff off" when he complained about them using his image in a party leaflet. Vote BNP if you want a party who are hypocritical enough to use foreign models in a "British Jobs for British Workers" campaign. Vote BNP if you want your political representatives to make up murders in London to stir up racist fervour. Vote BNP if you idolise the idiotic racist that was Enoch Powell. Vote BNP if you want bans on KKK leaders coming to the UK lifted. Vote BNP if you want BNP. Don't vote BNP if you don't want to vote for a mainstream party, it's far too dangerous.

 

The European Elections are different. Every vote counts towards getting BNP candidates on the European stage and access to great deals of funds. European elections historically prompt those who are against the union to vote. There is a lot of lethargy among voters of mainstream parties. The easiest way to protest is to spoil your ballot. No excuses. If you vote BNP then you are supporting the party. Only do it if you feel it is correct.

[Boris]

 

What may happen here is because of the parties of the left trying to rig elections through "proportional representation", the BNP may just get that very electoral success that eluded Mosley in the thirties.

 

How can Proportional representation = a rigged election?

 

Surely the term "proportional representation" is a clue in itself?

 

If the Scottish Parliament, for example, was not elected via PR it would have initially been a Labour landslide with the odd Lib Dem & SNP and precious few if any Tories.

 

Glasgow City Council is a prime example of how PR allows the will of the people to be properly and democratically represented.

 

If there is such a surge in the BNP vote in particular constituencies then so be it and if returned by PR then so be it - a fairer electoral system then makes it even more important to win the argument at the ballot box!

[Boris]

I reckon anyone that shakes their cyber head at a cyber response needs to climb down off their cyber high-horse. Or something.

 

What's 'right wing' about the Union Flag?

 

There is nothing at all right wing about the Union Flag.

 

It just depends on the context in which it is used.

[Deevers]

How can Proportional representation = a rigged election?

 

Surely the term "proportional representation" is a clue in itself?

 

If the Scottish Parliament, for example, was not elected via PR it would have initially been a Labour landslide with the odd Lib Dem & SNP and precious few if any Tories.

 

Glasgow City Council is a prime example of how PR allows the will of the people to be properly and democratically represented.

 

If there is such a surge in the BNP vote in particular constituencies then so be it and if returned by PR then so be it - a fairer electoral system then makes it even more important to win the argument at the ballot box!

 

 

Rigged so that centrist parties can always combine to out vote everyone else. It produces stale politics with no fresh ideas and no dynamism. Just take a look at the Scottish Parliament. Knock all the combined heads of labour Lib Dem's and the Nats together and you wouldn't get one fresh innovate idea to come out of any of them.

[kitster]

I was merely responding to the post which said that

 

 

 

Britain in the late 20's early 30's disproves this theory.

 

And will disprove it again despite the failings of the mainsteam parties.

 

very true Boris you were responding to a post..all I was trying to say is there are many other bones of discontent in some people in the country right now which means that we don't have a 'group together and ride it out' mentality that recessions seemed to have in those days. Division amongst us is cannon fodder to parties such as the BNP.

 

I do, however, happen to agree with you and prey that we are both right.

[Boris]

Rigged so that centrist parties can always combine to out vote everyone else. It produces stale politics with no fresh ideas and no dynamism. Just take a look at the Scottish Parliament. Knock all the combined heads of labour Lib Dem's and the Nats together and you wouldn't get one fresh innovate idea to come out of any of them.

 

It produces a legislature based upon the will of the people. If you say it is rigged to the centrist parties then this proves that the electorate is overwhelmingly centrist in its political opinion.

[jack D and coke]

Some good posts on this thread.

 

I see the thread starter has done a nash after being shot down in flames then.

[Konrad von Carstein]

I'm not going to vote for anyone, anytime soon...recently moved house and have not registered to vote...threw the papers in the bin.

 

Used to be a Labour voter and thought (niavely as it turned out) that "new" Labour were going to correct all the wrongs of the Conservative administration...turns out I was wrong and they have been shown to be as bad as each other, false promises and self serving policies.

 

Some people have the perception that the UK is now a haven for layabouts and spongers from foreign lands, this perception is what the BNP will try to manipulate to their advantage...the mainstream parties should be looking at acceptable ways to filter the actual wasters from abroad from those decent hard working honest individuals and families (no matter what colour or nationality) who want to come to the UK to contribute positivley and enhance our society.

 

For those afraid of the BNP gaining general acceptance in the British political scene this is one area that the next UK government should be aggressively addressing as IMO it will be effective in neutralising one of the main areas that gives the BNP a good chance of becoming a "player" in mainstream politics.

 

One thing about the BNP is that at least they (or rather the most vocal of their members) are clear on where they stand on the issues that are important to them.

 

This has turned into a rather wishy washy waffle so apologies to all who make it past the first sentence.

[Deevers]

It produces a legislature based upon the will of the people. If you say it is rigged to the centrist parties then this proves that the electorate is overwhelmingly centrist in its political opinion.

 

No it produces a spectrum of politicians who all say almost the same thing. Maybe that's why people are becoming so disenchanted with it all just now. The electorate are maybe just beginning to see through the facade.

[shaun.lawson]

No it produces a spectrum of politicians who all say almost the same thing. Maybe that's why people are becoming so disenchanted with it all just now. The electorate are maybe just beginning to see through the facade.

 

In the early 1980s, Labour moved ever further to the left and became ever more unelectable. The electorate rejected them four times; and only by moving back towards the centre could they win.

 

In the late 1990s and early this decade, the Tories moved ever further to the right and became ever more unelectable. The electorate rejected them three times; and only by moving back towards the centre are they now able to win.

 

The reason why parties are centrist and there seems little to choose between them is because the electorate have proved over and over again that we want it that way! What is quite wrong, though, is the way First Past the Post creates wholly disproportionate government majorities, puts far too much power in the hands of an executive often only one in four people have effectively voted for, and simply doesn't allow a third party to prosper. If you live in certain parts of the UK, there's no point in voting at a general election, because it's obvious who your MP is going to be.

 

There are many flaws with proportional representation: it's a very imperfect system, but less so than FPTP. Under PR, you would get a truly representative Parliament, and government based on reason and compromise; not Punch and Judy adversarial nonsense which turns so many people off. And once it became clear that, beyond the main two parties, the electorate at last enjoyed a broader choice, there's every chance that turnout would rise and participation in politics would grow. And before too long, I suspect parties would split - so there'd be at least five serious choices the public could consider: from left to right, Old Labour, the Lib Dems or equivalent, New Labour, One Nation Tories and right-wing Tories.

[Boris]

No it produces a spectrum of politicians who all say almost the same thing. Maybe that's why people are becoming so disenchanted with it all just now. The electorate are maybe just beginning to see through the facade.

 

I agree with you that the standard and quality of your average politician seems to be well below the standard we were once used to. There are very few with real gravitas. Where are the Robin Cooks or David Steels or even the Normn Tebbits? All parties seem to lack character and insist on apparatchiks instead.

 

To expect better from the likes of the BNP though is a wee bit fanciful imo. Look at the "calibre" of the Socialists who once sat at Holyrood. Outwith Tommy Sheridan they were hopeless (again imo).

[Craig R]

If i had 2 choices between Labour and the BNP it would be a no contest mate. I wouldn't pish on a labour MP if he was on fire. Gordon Brown is the biggest creep and cretin to ever have come from this country.

 

Jeremy Clarkson's description was absolutely bang on.

 

I wouldn't vote Labour either, however BNP absolutely disgust me.

[Craig_]

Before WW1 , women had no right to vote. That seems incredible to us now.

 

As you say, democracy has to be all inclusive. And it has to be so in every dimension, whether people like it or not ... regardless of race, colour, creed or IQ. Perversely its right that bigoted people should have the right to vote for parties that espouse intolerance. At least society can then see whats happening in the body politic, and take action to resolve the cause of grievance before it gets out of hand.

 

Ah, finally we've got to the root of the problem!

[billco98]

I am a social democrat and will vote for the only social democratic party available for me to vote for and that is The Scottish National Party.

 

'New Labour' is a souless, gutless, Thatcherite shadow of a party which has betrayed its social democratic credentials and, more to the point, its social democratic base.

 

As for the BNP, djf has said it all above. If we think the country is in the gutter now, well you ain't seen nothin' yet.

 

The thought of Cameron frightens me almost as much as the BNP.

 

We are approaching a watershed moment in British history. At least we have an opt-out available and by God we will probably have to use it.

[shaun.lawson]

The thought of Cameron frightens me almost as much as the BNP.

 

 

Given the absolute joke of a government we're currently enduring, why?

[Boris]

Given the absolute joke of a government we're currently enduring, why?

 

Perhaps because Cameron has not actually come out with anything concrete. What exactly are Tory policies? Cameron's bland soundbites in such an obvious way to curry favour with the public are so obvioulsy contrived, yet when pressed on substance....nothing.

 

Delve further though and we know that he was part of a group of upper class yobs who would trash restaurants just because they could, because they had the cash to buy their way out of trouble.

 

So for me, despite his populist remarks, he and his party are only interested in representing the interests of their rich circle of friends rather than the country as a whole.

[Ray Winstone]

Borris,

 

During the 1930's the British Communist Party experienced a vast increase in membership etc.

 

As well as the formation of the British Union of Fascists.

 

That period of time lead to a definite rise in promenance of extremist left and right wing parties.

 

Nowadays we have more established parties such as the BNP and to a lesser extent the Socialist Party which will now command more of the votes than they have done before.

 

They won't even come close to power but their % of the vote will increase.

 

Fact.

[shaun.lawson]

Perhaps because Cameron has not actually come out with anything concrete. What exactly are Tory policies? Cameron's bland soundbites in such an obvious way to curry favour with the public are so obvioulsy contrived, yet when pressed on substance....nothing.

 

Delve further though and we know that he was part of a group of upper class yobs who would trash restaurants just because they could, because they had the cash to buy their way out of trouble.

 

So for me, despite his populist remarks, he and his party are only interested in representing the interests of their rich circle of friends rather than the country as a whole.

 

Cameron's not the first Oxford student to behave like a ****, and he won't be the last. But the statements he's made on drugs, family breakdown, hoodies and more have been light years ahead not only of what any other Tory leader would've said, but any other political leader in this country, period. I don't think the Tories will make a huge difference; I do think they'll do a competent, solid job though.

 

He's a clever man is David. Better at connecting with the public than he's given credit for, and he'll probably turn out to be a decent leader governing from the centre. I also think under his watch, his party will become more liberal in a social sense, and hence, less hypocritical. At some indefinable point, the electorate crosses a rubicon and starts viewing the opposition as the government in waiting. We're well past that point now. I'll be voting Lib Dem at the next election, but would be perfectly comfortable with a Tory government: they've come a long way, and are far more worthy of power than the current embarrassing rabble.

[Boris]

Borris,

 

During the 1930's the British Communist Party experienced a vast increase in membership etc.

 

As well as the formation of the British Union of Fascists.

 

That period of time lead to a definite rise in promenance of extremist left and right wing parties.

 

Nowadays we have more established parties such as the BNP and to a lesser extent the Socialist Party which will now command more of the votes than they have done before.

 

They won't even come close to power but their % of the vote will increase.

 

Fact.

 

If so prominent, why no electoral success unlike on mainland Europe?

 

These parties were overwhelmingly rejected by the British electorate.

 

FACT.

[Ray Winstone]

If so prominent, why no electoral success unlike on mainland Europe?

 

These parties were overwhelmingly rejected by the British electorate.

 

FACT.

 

Because they were not as established as some of the extremist parties are today.

 

Sucess to the extremist parties back in the 20s and 30s was increasing their memberships and therefore prominance.

[Boris]

Because they were not as established as some of the extremist parties are today.

 

Sucess to the extremist parties back in the 20s and 30s was increasing their memberships and therefore prominance.

 

but, in the UK anyway, they were not prominant!

 

As political movements go they were not that significant.

[Ray Winstone]

If so prominent, why no electoral success unlike on mainland Europe? These parties were overwhelmingly rejected by the British electorate.

 

FACT.

 

And as I direct answer to the bit in bold....it was because the economic situation in Britain was knowhere near as bad as that to be found in France and Germany following the conclusion of the Great War.

[Ray Winstone]

but, in the UK anyway, they were not prominant!

 

As political movements go they were not that significant.

 

They were more 'prominant' than they had been before WWI.

 

And that was down to the declining economic situation in the country.

[billco98]

Given the absolute joke of a government we're currently enduring, why?

 

Do you honestly think the Tories are going to be much better? State one cast iron policy which the Tories have which will be of benefit to the country as a whole. Cameron flip-flops from one stance to the next. He jumps on any expedient bandwagon that passes his door. He is as eager for power as was his proto-type Tony Blair.

 

Say what you like about Brown, but he tackled the business of rebuilding the tattered remains of much of our strategic infrastructure inherited after twenty years of criminal neglect by the Tories, and would have managed more had Neo-Con Tony not dragged us into an illegal and costly war in Iraq which, incidentally, Cameron endorsed to the hilt.

 

Cameron bangs on about not mending the roof in the good times, but of course that is precisely what Brown attempted.

 

Whilst not agreeing with the policy of PPI's at least progress has been made in replacing hospital and school buildings long past their sell by dates. Improvements in the NHS are evident for all to see, except of course the blue tinted specs brigade from the right-wing press who disparage the NHS on a daily basis. The railways, despite a botched privatisation by the Tories, are at least back to a semblance of good order - the broken rails and trains falling of the track are hopefully in the past, at least for the first 10 years of a Tory administration.

 

The current economic ills of the country and the rest of the world can be traced back to Mrs Thatcher and her pal Ronald Reagan who set up the lessez faire neo-liberal economic master plan which has now gone belly up. The 'Big Bang' as it was called at the time was misnamed. In fact they set a time bomb which finally exploded in September 2007. Brown cannot take the blame for that.

 

All that said the New Labour initiative was not required in 1997. If the only way for a social democratic government to be elected in the UK is to pander to the selfish whims of middle England then our goose is well and truly cooked.

 

I can see the break-up of the United Kingdom on the near horizon - Scotland does not have the stomach for a throw back Old Etonian Tory government.

[Rick Grimes]

I want to live in the Bahamas, don't mean its going to happen though.

 

 

 

you wouldn't like it. its full of brown people.

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

The BNP are racist vermin who would never get my vote. However, I think the way Labour have tried to whip up fear of them being elected shows out of touch they are with their natural core support. It might be better if Labour actually listened to that support to ensure that the BNP weren't even being listened to on the doorsteps.

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

Do you honestly think the Tories are going to be much better? State one cast iron policy which the Tories have which will be of benefit to the country as a whole. Cameron flip-flops from one stance to the next. He jumps on any expedient bandwagon that passes his door. He is as eager for power as was his proto-type Tony Blair.

 

Say what you like about Brown, but he tackled the business of rebuilding the tattered remains of much of our strategic infrastructure inherited after twenty years of criminal neglect by the Tories, and would have managed more had Neo-Con Tony not dragged us into an illegal and costly war in Iraq which, incidentally, Cameron endorsed to the hilt.

 

Cameron bangs on about not mending the roof in the good times, but of course that is precisely what Brown attempted.

 

Whilst not agreeing with the policy of PPI's at least progress has been made in replacing hospital and school buildings long past their sell by dates. Improvements in the NHS are evident for all to see, except of course the blue tinted specs brigade from the right-wing press who disparage the NHS on a daily basis. The railways, despite a botched privatisation by the Tories, are at least back to a semblance of good order - the broken rails and trains falling of the track are hopefully in the past, at least for the first 10 years of a Tory administration.

 

The current economic ills of the country and the rest of the world can be traced back to Mrs Thatcher and her pal Ronald Reagan who set up the lessez faire neo-liberal economic master plan which has now gone belly up. The 'Big Bang' as it was called at the time was misnamed. In fact they set a time bomb which finally exploded in September 2007. Brown cannot take the blame for that.

 

All that said the New Labour initiative was not required in 1997. If the only way for a social democratic government to be elected in the UK is to pander to the selfish whims of middle England then our goose is well and truly cooked.

 

I can see the break-up of the United Kingdom on the near horizon - Scotland does not have the stomach for a throw back Old Etonian Tory government.

 

Thanks Gordon.

 

BTW, you asked for one policy. Here's one - Cameron's plans to cut the number of MP's are the best start possible because the UK is over-governed, particularly since 80% of legislation originates in Brussels.

[Boris]

They were more 'prominant' than they had been before WWI.

 

And that was down to the declining economic situation in the country.

 

Fascism wasn't about prior to WWI, so yeah it was more prominent after. I'm not disputing that the economic condition of the country made some people find the BUF attractive, but to suggest that there was a groundswell of opinion in their favour due to the economic situation is simply wrong. Electoral stats prove this.

 

They were never a threat to the political status quo.

[shaun.lawson]

Do you honestly think the Tories are going to be much better? State one cast iron policy which the Tories have which will be of benefit to the country as a whole. Cameron flip-flops from one stance to the next. He jumps on any expedient bandwagon that passes his door. He is as eager for power as was his proto-type Tony Blair.

 

Say what you like about Brown, but he tackled the business of rebuilding the tattered remains of much of our strategic infrastructure inherited after twenty years of criminal neglect by the Tories, and would have managed more had Neo-Con Tony not dragged us into an illegal and costly war in Iraq which, incidentally, Cameron endorsed to the hilt.

 

Cameron bangs on about not mending the roof in the good times, but of course that is precisely what Brown attempted.

 

Whilst not agreeing with the policy of PPI's at least progress has been made in replacing hospital and school buildings long past their sell by dates. Improvements in the NHS are evident for all to see, except of course the blue tinted specs brigade from the right-wing press who disparage the NHS on a daily basis. The railways, despite a botched privatisation by the Tories, are at least back to a semblance of good order - the broken rails and trains falling of the track are hopefully in the past, at least for the first 10 years of a Tory administration.

 

The current economic ills of the country and the rest of the world can be traced back to Mrs Thatcher and her pal Ronald Reagan who set up the lessez faire neo-liberal economic master plan which has now gone belly up. The 'Big Bang' as it was called at the time was misnamed. In fact they set a time bomb which finally exploded in September 2007. Brown cannot take the blame for that.

 

All that said the New Labour initiative was not required in 1997. If the only way for a social democratic government to be elected in the UK is to pander to the selfish whims of middle England then our goose is well and truly cooked.

 

I can see the break-up of the United Kingdom on the near horizon - Scotland does not have the stomach for a throw back Old Etonian Tory government.

 

I don't think Cameron flip flops. I think he's short on policies purely because he knows that oppositions don't win elections, but governments lose them; no-one knows where we'll be economically a year from now, so it'd be foolish to commit his party to particular fiscal policies at this stage; and also because party politics is itself changing. We're not that far off choosing between two management consultancies who want to run the country: one called New Labour, the other called Modern Compassionate Conservatism.

 

That's weird, I know - but increasingly, governments will probably be able to do less and less except provide a safe pair of hands when times are tough. It's ridiculous to expect one minister to be in charge of thousands of employees across the country; and it's increasingly daft to expect our government to be fully autonomous in a globalised world in which multi-national corporations have all the power.

 

All that said, I think Brown's made a spectacular mess of the public finances; the railways remain an over-priced joke; and the NHS has improved, but is scandalously target driven, meaning you'll get great treatment if you have one particular illness, not at all if you have another. You do realise GPs are told to deal with a certain number of cases of a particular illness every week? It's insane. Mental health treatment remains an absolute disgrace; "tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime" wasn't borne out in action at all.

 

The current economic ills of this country are partly down to global conditions, partly down to Thatcher and Reagan, and partly also because New Labour consolidated the neo-liberal consensus, as well as chronically over-borrowing and building fake prosperity which was always going to collapse. The cost of living has gone ever upwards, and the only people benefiting from this so-called prosperity were those rich enough to be able to live in London. And the gap between rich and poor has got bigger and bigger and bigger.

 

As I posted above, I don't think the Tories will be a huge improvement; but I do think they'll be competent, hungry and more in touch with the times than Labour now are. Labour need to return to opposition and re-think their whole raison d'etre: they've run out of ideas and ability, which is essentially inevitable after being in power for so long anyway.

 

Oh, and the United Kingdom might well break up in time: I've written before that by 2100, I think what's now the UK might well have become an independent Scotland, united Ireland and the Republic of England and Wales. But that's principally a matter for the people of Scotland and Northern Ireland: as a democrat, I believe in self-determination, as well as the right of the people to choose in what form their Head of State should consist of (for the record, I'm a 'soft' Republican, but have no issue with the monarchy, and think zillions of issues are more important).

[Boris]

Thanks Gordon.

 

BTW, you asked for one policy. Here's one - Cameron's plans to cut the number of MP's are the best start possible because the UK is over-governed, particularly since 80% of legislation originates in Brussels.

 

So more constituents per MP? That's service! Sonds like gerrymandering to me.

[Super T]

There's the problem right there mate.

 

I do not believe that stupid people should have a vote. I genuinely believe that to gain a vote, people should have to prove that their IQ is over 100, also that they understand the manifestos of the major parties.

 

No taxation without representation, therefore those with an IQ under 100 could live all their days tax free. I'm sure I could manage to fail that test. Then I could afford to relocate to the Bahamas

[Ray Winstone]

Fascism wasn't about prior to WWI, so yeah it was more prominent after. I'm not disputing that the economic condition of the country made some people find the BUF attractive, but to suggest that there was a groundswell of opinion in their favour due to the economic situation is simply wrong. Electoral stats prove this.

 

They were never a threat to the political status quo.

 

Thats exactly the point I am making about the BNP this time around.

 

They will gain popularity but will not threaten the 'political status quo'.

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

So more constituents per MP? That's service! Sonds like gerrymandering to me.

 

The States has around 430 members in the House of Representatives and 100 Senators for around 250m people. Do you think they are being gerrymandered?

 

Gerrymandering in the UK occurs in areas like Orkney and Shetland given the size of their electorates relative to the population. In fact, the electoral bias towards the cities at present gives Labour an advantage as well.

[Super T]

Some excellent points on this thread and I think it shows how difficult it is going to be for any 1 party to connect with most voters over the next year.

 

I feel find that Labour have lost the confidence of the nation therefore will find it very difficult to be re-elected. I have never voted for them before and doubt I will next time.

 

I can't stand Cameron nor most of the other 'bafoons' in his party but do feel they will be the party that gets in. I can't quite put my finger on why he annoys me so much but he's up there with Lewis Hamilton and Piers Morgan on my list of people i wouldn't tire of slapping.

My biggest concern is what was stated earlier about them having no policies. They are just letting Labour have the rope to hang themselves rather than actually chalenging them with seperate/new ideas.

 

Lib Dems - voted them last time purely as it wasn't the top 2.

 

SNP - Have never voted for them as have never agreed with most of their policies but over the last 18 months have started to sway towards them. Maybe I need help

[shaun.lawson]

Lib Dems - voted them last time purely as it wasn't the top 2.

 

 

Lib Dems = third force, and the natural choice of Hearts fans everywhere, I'd have thought?!

[interista]

In a democracy, people can vote for whoever they want and for whatever reason they want. Without that right, we don't have a democracy.

 

Is democracy such a good idea? I have my doubts.

[shaun.lawson]

Is democracy such a good idea? I have my doubts.

 

I agree. Benign dictatorship is the way to go. But how to find a genuinely benign dictator who isn't corrupted once in power?

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

Is democracy such a good idea? I have my doubts.

 

It was Churchill who said that democracy was a rotten system, but it was better than all the other ones!

[ToYouToMe]

In a time of economic crisis - a country will naturally move towards extremist parties.

 

Sadly this is true and people do not learn from history.

[Ulysses]

Here's one - Cameron's plans to cut the number of MP's are the best start possible because the UK is over-governed, particularly since 80% of legislation originates in Brussels.

 

What number is he proposing?

[I.J]

Surely the clever people are the ones that read between the lines and work out what the party in question actually intend to do.

 

Whatever it takes to continue their gravy train.

 

IJ - iq of 133.

[Bomber Harris' Best Mate]

*shakes head*

 

To go back to the OP, I read it as meaning this...people may vote for the BNP as a sort of protest against the mainstream parties without realising exactly what they are voting for i.e. a party with a racist agenda.

 

By the way, did anyone else see the way the BNP referred to one of our most recent Victoria Cross recipients? Scandalous.

 

 

which I thought wasnt said and they are looking into suing ? Certainly they are with the Sun.

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

What number is he proposing?

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/conservative/5145102/Conservatives-plan-to-cut-number-of-MPs-by-65.html

[Deevers]

Fascism wasn't about prior to WWI, so yeah it was more prominent after. I'm not disputing that the economic condition of the country made some people find the BUF attractive, but to suggest that there was a groundswell of opinion in their favour due to the economic situation is simply wrong. Electoral stats prove this.

 

They were never a threat to the political status quo.

 

We'll never really know how things might have panned out - the onset of WW2 meant that they were completely unelectable. From 1937 it became increasingly obvious to most people that Germany was on the march again and Mosley's relationship with Hitler made most people here extremely uneasy.

 

The strange thing is that in many ways conditions now are not that unlike the early 1930's - looming recession, a Labour Government that had failed many of the people who had voted for it and a general disenchantment with politicians generally.

[Boris]

We'll never really know how things might have panned out - the onset of WW2 meant that they were completely unelectable. From 1937 it became increasingly obvious to most people that Germany was on the march again and Mosley's relationship with Hitler made most people here extremely uneasy.

 

They were unelectable prior to WWII anyway. Support was dropping for them by the mid 1930's, apart from in London's East End - hardly national, John Cormack's Protestant Action fought against the Black Shirts in Edinburgh. The British electorate knew exactly what the fascists were about and they, the BUF, were never a mass, national organisation.

 

The strange thing is that in many ways conditions now are not that unlike the early 1930's - looming recession, a Labour Government that had failed many of the people who had voted for it and a general disenchantment with politicians generally.

 

Perhaps, but the BUF were by 1934 a busted flush due to their aggressive and dare I say anti-British way of politics.

[Deevers]

They were unelectable prior to WWII anyway. Support was dropping for them by the mid 1930's, apart from in London's East End - hardly national, John Cormack's Protestant Action fought against the Black Shirts in Edinburgh. The British electorate knew exactly what the fascists were about and they, the BUF, were never a mass, national organisation.

 

 

 

Perhaps, but the BUF were by 1934 a busted flush due to their aggressive and dare I say anti-British way of politics.

 

Maybe just my memory playing tricks - but I always thought that Cormack had pro BUF views. In any case Cormack is hardly someone that anyone with any knowledge of Edinburgh in the 1930's would view as being a shining light of moderation. Indeed he's really a stain on the reputation of Edinburgh as being a home for religious toleration. Many people from a generation just older than mine were disgusted by the mob attacks on bus loads of catholic children attending a religious festival at Waverley Market, egged on by Cormacks anti papist oratory.

 

The thirties were certainly a time when there were extreme views of left and right at the very forefront of daily life. Views and political opinions which would make today's right and left wing politics seem tame by comparison.

[Boris]

Maybe just my memory playing tricks - but I always thought that Cormack had pro BUF views. In any case Cormack is hardly someone that anyone with any knowledge of Edinburgh in the 1930's would view as being a shining light of moderation. Indeed he's really a stain on the reputation of Edinburgh as being a home for religious toleration. Many people from a generation just older than mine were disgusted by the mob attacks on bus loads of catholic children attending a religious festival at Waverley Market, egged on by Cormacks anti papist oratory.

 

The thirties were certainly a time when there were extreme views of left and right at the very forefront of daily life. Views and political opinions which would make today's right and left wing politics seem tame by comparison.

 

I agree with you re Cormack but used it as an example of how little the BUF impacted on what may be perceived as their "natural constituents".

[maroonlegions]

The BNP have racist and fascist views and polices , they attract like minded voters. The danger here is that there is a real possible opportunity here for them to gain more in roads into the British political public's mainstream thinking. The current climate of the 3 main British political party's situations and popularity's gives them this opportunity. Germany in the 30s was the same and the Socialist Party who Hitler was a member took full advantage of this, that party then became more extreme in their views on The Mother Land under Hitler's influence.The time it took that party to whip up anti Jewish hatred was not long down to them exploiting and manipulating the current situations Germany and its people were suffering from in that time.Nationalism is a very dangerous weapon in the wrong hands, it can be used against certain ethnic backgrounds , the possibility is there without doubt.

 

 

 

"First they came for the Jews, i did nothing and did not speak out for i was not a Jew."

"Then they came for the Socialists , i did nothing and did not speak out for i was not a Socialist."

"Then they came for the Trade Unionists.", i did nothing or speak out for i was not a Trade Unionists."

Then they came for me and there was no one to do anything or speak out for me.":thinking2:

[maroonlegions]

[Rick Grimes]

I agree. Benign dictatorship is the way to go. But how to find a genuinely benign dictator who isn't corrupted once in power?

 

I'll do it. You lot revolt & once I'm in power I promise to be good.