Previous Entry Share Next Entry
(no subject)
2012
unknownj
Okay, you know what, fuck it - let's head on over to the BNP website and pull out a few facts.. I feel like this is possibly the only way to get over my anger over the whole thing..

They answer the accusations of racism by simply pointing out that organisations such as "Watford Asian Community care" are also racist, because they address themselves exclusively to the issues and concerns of specific communities. Like, wow, what a strong argument - thank goodness we have the BNP to stick up for the poor oppressed white folks whose interests are not looked after.

Ultimately they claim of course that they're not racist, and that "each and every community has the inalienable right to look after its own interests." I would say that what makes them racist is then their assertion that "indigenous British people" represent a distinct community to just about everybody else in the country, and that that community has some superior right to live in this country that is simply not present among the others.

It's the use to which they put their racial distinction that makes it the bad sort of "racist", not the fact that they make such a distinction in the first place. Acknowledging race is one thing, using it as a weapon is another.

From a personal point of view, they seem to have a real flair for getting that thin end of the wedge firmly in place, with such policies as:
The liberal fixation with the 'rights' of criminals must be replaced by concern for the rights of victims, and the right of innocent people not to become victims.
When last I checked, most of the "rights" that people tend to think of in these situations actually apply to those accused, not convicted of crimes. Especially since this sentence follows a remark about "freeing" the police from restrictions that prevent them from doing their jobs. I guess we're presuming guilt here, and therefore as a criminal, the accused is therefore to be denied their basic rights...? I don't really want to ask too many questions about what exactly they mean there :o\

I'm also a little unsure of this:
restoration of capital punishment for paedophiles, terrorists and murderers as an option for judges in cases where their guilt is proven beyond dispute, as by DNA evidence or being caught red-handed.
I mean, capital punishment being a dumb idea aside, it seems rather unfair that the sentencing of a crime should rely on whether or not a person has been caught in the act or not. I don't see how that materially affects the gravity of the crime, and as such, how can you justify a two tier punishment system? Hell, if I've just murdered somebody, and been caught in the act by a second person, I will be sentenced to death. Unless, presumably, I kill the only witness, therefore introducing that ambiguity which will later lead to a simple life sentence..? Good one.

I would also love to know how they define "beyond dispute". The law currently makes no provisions for anything other than "beyond reasonable doubt", which can be fairly assessed. Where do you draw the lines with "beyond dispute"? Oh, the slippery slope...

One of my favourite parts is where they say:
We further believe that British industry, commerce, land and other economic and natural assets belong in the final analysis to the British nation and people. To that end we will restore our economy and land to British ownership.
Because that worked so well in Zimbabwe, didn't it? The very idea that there is a fair way of even doing that is laughable, let alone making it practical. Apparently we'll also be banning (sorry, "selectively excluding") foreign made goods from British markets. I guess we'll need all that land for building all the shit that we currently get from countries that are actually good at it.... Still, on the plus side, in terms of education they would
give authority back to teachers and put far greater emphasis on training young people in the industrial and technological skills necessary in the modern world
It's a good thing they're going to get industrial training. We'll need to have an awful lot of manual workers once the foreign imports are banned...

Farms will be pleased:
Britain’s farming industry will be encouraged to produce a much greater part of the nation’s need in food products. Priority will be switched from quantity to quality
That's right, you will need to produce more food, while simultaneously focussing on quality, not quantity. Good luck balancing that!

Failure to understand that nothing is ever 100% perfect, and that you get diminishing returns on investment right here:
We will see to it that no money is given in foreign aid while our own hospitals are short of beds and the staff to run them
So basically, we'll never give foreign aid, because we could always be spending the money on something of ours. Presumably we'd rather spend £5,000 on a machine to save 100 lives per year than on, say, donating emergency money in the immediate wake of a disaster to provide clean drinkin water to save 5,000 foreign lives?

There's another section where they want to increase funding and incentives for public transport while cutting fuel tax - thus making it cheaper to run a car and reducing their own income.... I don't entirely see how these two things work together very well.

Want to help the poor in Bangladesh? Send some Bangladeshi people home, apparently:
We will link foreign aid with our voluntary resettlement policy, whereby those nations taking significant numbers of people back to their homelands will need cash to help absorb those returning
That's right. We'll only give countries money if we're allowed to "send back" n-th generation immigrants. How will we convince them to go back? Well for starters, they're about to be unemployed..
We also call for preference in the job market to be given to native Britons.
So I guess for the poor jobless "foreigners" (many of whom have lived in the UK their whole lives, have British accents, and identify is British, but just aren't white enough) moving back "home" is going to be the only option.

I absolutely love this bit:
In the long run, we wish to end the conflict in Ireland by welcoming Eire as well as Ulster as equal partners in a federation of the nations of the British Isles.
Yeah! Right! That's really going to work so well, the Irish I'm sure would love that... Their Northern Ireland policy is basically a paragraph about how crap the IRA are, which is something of an outdated point of view - not that they're not still crap, but they're not really there in a way that makes any difference to anything.. For all their faults, Sinn Fein aren't currently blowing stuff up, so their assertion that Ulster politicians are currently terrorists is a few years out of step..

Again, we appear to be back in the 1940s when we get..
We will boost Britain’s armed forces to ensure that they are able to deal with any emergency, and defend our homeland and our independence.
That's right, we need more soldiers in case somebody tries to take our independence. Dare I ask where this threat might come from? Or is that too difficult a question..? Perhaps the Germans again!

Nationalism really gets summed up by their foreign policy, which goes:
Britain’s foreign relations should be determined by the protection of our own national interest and not by our like or dislike of other nations’ internal politics. We would have no quarrel with any nation that does not threaten British interests.
Come back Pinochet, Pol Pot, Gaddafi, all is forgiven.. Fuck that, come back Hitler, so long as you're not directly threatening us, we'll be totally okay with anything you care to do in Europe. Hell, we might even be able to further our own objectives if we help you!

I mean are they fucking serious?

Wait, they are.. Well, I mean, as serious as a group of people can be about politics without actually understanding how the Westminster system of government works..
The British people invented modern Parliamentary democracy. Yet in recent years the British people have been denied their democratic rights. On issue after issue, the views of the majority of British people have been ignored and overridden by a Politically Correct 'elite' which thinks it knows best.
o noes, massive failure to comprehend the system. I'm afraid the entire mechanism of our system of government - the one that we invented and exported to the rest of the commonwealth, is that you elect an "elite" representative who "knows best", who makes decisions for you. That's how parliament works. Want Direct Democracy? Then go get it, but don't pretend like we're not currently running Parliamentary Democracy, or that the system that you want is in any way like anything we've had before.

And this is what people voted for. Not many people. But enough to make a difference. What were people thinking?

I can only reiterate what I said last time, because it's the only real sentiment I can muster for people who'd support these assholes - fuck you.

  • 1
(Deleted comment)
It's ever so simple - offer non-whites money to leave the country, offer the countries from which their grandparents originated money to accept them, and make sure that if they stay, there will be no jobs for them. Easy, right?

Shame about all the Polish folks over here - they really fuck up the whole "purity of colour" bullshit they've got going on... :o)

Nick Griffin MEP read Mein Kampf when he was thirteen and admits that it had quite an impact on him.

(Deleted comment)
Yeah. Also, some of my best friends are black, so I can't be racist, right...?

(Deleted comment)
It did. I'd just been waiting for an excuse to trot that line out :o)

Will they be repatriating members of the Royal House from Saxe-Coburg and Gotha to the continent while they're at it?

No, they're white, and so long as they stay white by not getting involved in any inter-racial marriages, it'll all be fine...

I do wonder if maybe they're opposed to inter-racial marriages just because it really complicates the repatriation paperwork...

How silly of me, of course. Although, Prince Philip has a pretty deep tan, if you ask me...

Hello there, English Language A2 coursework! (I got 98%. Still happy about that.)

I bet you lost the 2% for not ending it with "fuck you" ;o)

I guess that settles the argument on whether Northerns are generally more stupid than the rest of the country...

Sigh.

Alas, there's a BNP member sitting on the London Assembly :o\

Ah yes, I forgot about that chap.

It may surprise you but while my views are relatively right wing I am actually deeply saddened we live in a country where racist cunts like the BNP can get voted into a position of some sort of meaningful power.

Oy. And people are voting for these? Enough to get them elected in some capacity?

Not many people. But enough for them to have two seats in the European Parliament..

They won 3% of the available seats, with 6.2% of the popular vote.

Oy, we have all kinds of fringe parties here too, but they never get elected.

See the list of 'other parties recognized by Elections Canada' [wikipedia]. The Christian Heritage Party is somewhat scary.

Edited at 2009-06-08 06:53 pm (UTC)

Wooo! Get after 'em! I'd be pissed, too.

Besides, it's always a nice change to read about idiocy going on somewhere other than the States.

  • 1
?

Log in

No account? Create an account