- Why anybody would support them
- Why people get so arsey about them
I read the BNP's policies and they are very honeyed words indeed. However, when you actually think about what the honeyed words mean, at their core the BNP appear to be a protectionist, socialist, statist, corporatist bunch (if you exclude the racist nature attributed to them.) In other words, largely indistinguishable from the Labour Party, apart from their hatred of the EU.
So it would seem to me that the only reason to support the BNP would be because a) you want out of the EU, b) it's a protest vote, c) you are a bit dim and fell for the nice words or d) you are a racist. Otherwise, you might just as well vote Labour.
Or Tory.
Or LibDem.
But that's your choice, I guess. And people make funny choices.
The bit I really don't understand, though, is why people get so frothy about the BNP. To me (as you can see) they don't look substantially different from any of the mainstream parties, apart from their anti-EU position. But then UKIP are anti-EU and they don't get the same level of abuse.
And why are police or whatever not allowed to join the political party of their choice if that happens to be the BNP? Why do people frown upon nurses or teachers who are in the BNP?
So, this is my honest, genuine and heartfelt question: can someone explain to me (intelligibly) why the BNP is so unacceptable, despite being a legally recognised political party?
25 comments:
I think you've pretty much listed the reasons above. But I think it's a special level of ignorance and what we know they're prepared to do.
UKIP don't get as much grief for a few reasons:
1) They're not racist
2) The message that they aren't hard right statist little englanders is finally getting through
3) An anti-EU message is a majority opinion in the country.
Well, according to Jackie Ashley, it's because they are planning a takeover of the police:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/nov/18/police-bnp-racism
If your a member of the SNP your a hero but the BNP makes you a racist ok does that explain everything clearly?
I don't get it either but free speech gives them the right to exist just like the labour vermin.If you don't agree don't listen simple really.
They are white-only as well; which to fair, isn't very good PR.
@saltedslug: fair enough, but what then about the NBPA? OBV? Etc.
And really, bad for PR? My teeth are "bad for PR". I've heard nothing yet that explains the utter loathing and rage the BNP inspires.
OK, I'll give it a try, though I don't know how intelligent it will turn out.
Let's start with a bit of history. The Soviet communists were in truth International Socialists. That is, they believed they were fighting for the rights of the proletariat the world over. "Workers of the world unite", the IWW and so on.
The party we call the Nazis, on the other hand, were national socialists (Nazi = The German Workers' National Socialist Party", the German-language equivalent of our calling the Liberal-Democrats the "LibDems"). At first they were able to side with the Soviets. But eventually they came to say, "What have the workers of Germany to do with workers elsewhere? We're on the side of the German workers only."
The Russian International Socialists, AKA the Soviets, regarded this as insufficiently leftist, so they called them "right wing", and that, in a nutshell, is why the Nazis are considered right-wing extremists today. Yes, they are a right-wing party - but only if you're coming from an International Socialist (i.e., Communist) perspective.
Sorry, Trixie.
For anyone else, the Soviet International Socialists and the German National Socialists are merely internal squabbles on the same side of the coin (cf. the People's Front of Judea and the Judean People's Front).
OK, so what about the BNP? Well, their platform is pretty much indistinguishable from that of the German National Socialists. They are in favour of the British workers first and foremost, with all the racism and protectionism and socialism that involves.
I can't lay my hands on the source now (sorry, I know it would be useful), but about 30% of self-identified Labour Party supporters list the BNP as their second choice after Labour. That factoid doesn't get a lot of airplay on our media. Perhaps it's too embarrasing. But what it amounts to is that the BNP is attractive to Old Labour*.
A while back Lord Tebbitt was on R4's "Any Questions". He said that the BNP were not an extreme right-wing group but were left-wingers. He was hooted down by the audience. He was right, they were wrong.
The single issue that the BNP are hated for is their racism. That is the single greatest sin one can commit in Modern Britain. But what is called "racism" by the MSM is, by the internal logic of national socialists, simply looking after one's own first.
Does this help at all?
* Dog-whistle politics, about which we heard so much in the MSM when the Conservatives tried it under Aussie advice, but jack-all when New Labour was in favour of "British jobs for British workers", "British homes for British workers", and so on.
Scapegoatism.
There's always got to be a bogeyman.
@robert: I still struggle to accept that it's simply racism that causes such a furore. And anyway, isn't racism illegal? So if they're racist, how come the BNP is legally allowed to recruit members?
I'm a bit baffled, still.
Cynically, I have to ask: do people perhaps hate the BNP because they recognise themselves in there? :o)
I think mitch and deft have nailed it.
The LibLabConsensus needs a bogeyman, some smaller party against which they can put up a united front to maintain the illusion that they are 'democratic' and fighting the forces of [whatever the opposite of democracy is]. UKIP are happily in second place in the bogeyman stakes for the reasons Trixy outlines. The Green Party are a sort of cuddly toy in relative terms.
Personally, I find the BNP's policies abhorrent (apart from scrapping TV licence and getting out of EU). But it is striking that they are never, ever, invited on to Question Time and so on, despite being a legally constituted party with dozens of democratically elected local councillors.
But the BNP in turn have an easy job, and Nulab's PC policies are making them all the easier. Perhaps it's a bizarre symbiotic relationship - Nulab's PC-crap drives people to vote BNP; and then Nulab can say "Oh we need extra funding for all these PC organisations and quangoes to defeat the BNP threat"; which in turn drives more people to vote BNP ad infinitum.
Obo -
Understaning that by now I have half a bottle of Scotland's finest by way of Mr. Morrison under my belt, I'll try to eludicate. :-)
When two group agree in their essentials the only way to distinguish them one from the other is in the inconsequentials. Yes, racism is a sufficient explanation.
It's the Internationalists vs. Nationalists argument all over again. The BNP are Nationalists. The MSM are Internationalists. From the perspective of an internationist, nationalism is the same a racism. Ergo, they are not only wrong but evil*.
[*] This is something I've never quite got my head round. From the viewpoint of the Right, the Left is mistaken in their thinking. From the viewpoint of the Left, however, the Right is evil**. I don't get it.
[**] Was it Harold Wilson who said, "This party is a moral crusade or it is nothing."?
Why you apologising to me?
Have for years been saying that the Communists and the Nazis were pretty much the same.
Both hateful organisations.
If it helps, obo, there are only two political parties I don't hate. The rest can, in my opinion, be bundled into a group called 'dangerous, lying fuckwits'.
@trixy: I sincerely hope that one of the two is UKIP! :o)
Trixy -
My apologies. I misread your original comment. Having hung around my fave corners of t'interwebs for longer than I care to think about, I should have known better. I should have remembered that you are one of the good guys.
Soz.
The first job of socialists is to find someone to victimise.
BNP socialists and non-BNP socialist disagree on who to victimise.
I think it all goes back to Trotsky. Let me explain.
The rise of National Socialism took Marxists completely by surprise, which is embarrassing if you claim to be able to predcit the future.
Trotsky claimed that he had seen it coming, and added that National Socialism was a necesary stage to the Communist Future.
In 1940 Stalin had Trotsky whacked, and Trotsky's opportunistic scribblings became Holy Writ.
So for many on the Left the BNP are sort of like the Anti-Christ for Last dayers. The dispassionate viewer will see the BNP as a small collection of tragic jokers. But for lefties their existence is a sign that the Revolution is imminent, and they believe the BNP is real threat because they have the wind of history behind them.
From today's Daily Mash:
"According to the list, published on the internet, British National Party supporters now include doctors, vicars, teachers, sports commentators and children's clowns."
Nice explanations, robert.
Old Tebbitt's pretty much on the money on most things, not surprising the loony left shout him down so often.
The problem that I see is that there will be a backlash when the pendulum swings towards the "right" and because it is currently so far to the left (enabling the BNP to gain support from the extreme left who don't realise quite where they are at - ie up their arses) it will end up with hard far right bent. From one extreme to the other. But I bet you'll be hard pressed to tell them apart, two cheeks of the same arse. Extremists of either hue are dangerous, but like scum, rise to the surface because they put so much effort into it.
More normal people have real lives to be getting on with.
It won't be pretty.
The Penguin
"I still struggle to accept that it's simply racism that causes such a furore."
I think Robert has the measure of it, Obnoxio. As far as the significance of racism is concerned, racism has become the worst sin you can commit, or more precisely that a White person can commit, in the UK. It's a toss-up as to whether being accused of racism or being accused of paedophilia is the more damaging.
Yes I do think accusations of racism are sufficient to make the difference; it is a taboo of quite startling potency.
However, unlike paedophilia, racism is complete bollocks.
We are all the same race, no matter what our skin colour or nationality.
So why the fuck is xenophobia called racism? Or call it extreme narrow-minded nationalism, or just hypocritical bigotry, but it should not be called racism.
The Penguin
I think you're pretty much right about the BNP in your sum up - they are very much Old Labour. In other words they are socially conservative socialists. As I am a nationalist myself (civic rather than ethnic) a lot of what they say makes sense to me, but as I'm also a conservative a lot of what they say strikes me as plain bonkers.
So why do people support them? Well, the main reason is that they see very little alternative. If you're an old style Labour supporter - culturally conservative, a British patriot and proud to still be a traditional working class man - then who else are you going to support? None of the 3 main parties represent your views, UKIP are old Tory - the very thing they despise and the Socialist Workers Party are just barking mad Trots. The BNP, in that case is a very attractive proposition.
Why do people hate them? Racism per se is not the reason - what it actually is is that the BNP reminds those that despise the BNP that they themselves harbour huge prejudices and bigotry of their own - and nobody likes to be reminded of their faults.
So the cry of "racism" is used as a justification for their own bigotry and prejudice as that is one of the few things these days which you can get away with being intolerant about.
I'm not sure I can answer this Obnoxio.
I guess two negatives indentified with the BNP are their xenophobic bent and the association (real or imagined) with the National Front of old.
Having once strayed onto their website some years ago, I was amazed at their heavy socialistic policies... I even wondered if I were being pranked. It certainly wasn't the party I'd been lead to believe it was by the media etc.
Later, someone asked me to encapsulate what the BNP were about... I spun it around and said "essentially, the Labour Party is the political wing of the BNP". Having witnessed where Labour has taken us since, that (in my mind at least) still holds true.
It is all about racism!
There is nothing that the South East Chattering Classes hate as much as being anti blacks and Asians - except Northerners!
Politically, the BNP are just xenophobic socialists - and there is nothing as bad as admitting you are a socialist - even Labour don't do it anymore.
In my world, I would remove all of these silly bans on them, and let them argue their case on merit - within 6 months, they would loose any of the credibility they have among their membership.
There is nothing like a ban from the establishment to make you sexy with the common man!
Robert, I reckon you are pretty much spot on there with your analysis. I think they are hated and villified because they provide a real alternative to the 3 mauin parties which seem really to be a bunch of clones (with respect to Mr. Obo LOL).
Sorry, Chalcedon, apart from the desire to leave the EU, there isn't a hair's breadth between the BNP and New Labour.
That is no alternative to a Libertarian.
I know I'm weeks late with this, but here's my opinion anyway.
I belive it is alot down to sibling rivalry. The most bitter hatreds can usually be found within the same family.
As has been pointed out BNP and Labour are ideologically very close. Labour recognise this, and the danger it poses electorally, certainly in some marginal seats.
The racism of the BNP is a convenient bogeyman to villify them with that most people would agree was a loathsome policy. Calling them right-wing hlps to tar the Tories with the same brush. A win-win for labour.
It should also be remembered that the Labour movement (and the US Democrats) have in their past had racist, and even eugenic policies to some degree. The unions opposed immigration as it would put British workers out of jobs. Marie Stopes propsed eugenic policies for unworthies. etc etc
Straight from the horses mouth
Oswald Mosely: "I've never been a man of the right" (or something like that anyway)
Post a Comment