General politics discussion thread

[Enter Raven]

Possibly.

 

Or maybe it has more to do with the influence these media forms can have over people when it comes to political matters that actually make a difference to what happens in the country.

In theory, I am totally with you. I completely disapprove of large corporate entities, and individuals owning mass amounts of influential enterprises. However, this doesn't change anything about the BNP. The BNP are not being dragged through the gutter because the media has presented outright lies condemning them as something they're not, they are being dragged through the gutter because despite having one or two policies that SOME of the British public agree with, their ultimate agendas and more radical policies are completely at odds with anyone who isn't an outright fascist.

[David]

However, this doesn't change anything about the BNP.

 

I never said it changed anything about the BNP, did I?

 

The BNP are not being dragged through the gutter because the media has presented outright lies condemning them as something they're not, they are being dragged through the gutter because despite having one or two policies that SOME of the British public agree with, their ultimate agendas and more radical policies are completely at odds with anyone who isn't an outright fascist.

 

Regardless of what you think about the BNP, and I think we all know that a party as small and insignificant as them deserve nowhere near as much media coverage as they got last week, what Griffin said about Winston Churchill has been reported as true.

 

Thats not a plus for the BNP, because they could put fucking Ghandi on their pamphlets and it still wouldn't change what they represent.

 

What it does highlight however, is the easy way in which the facts were discarded during that show.

 

After Griffin mentioned the Churchill situation we still had all of the other politicians on the panel spout off about how he would "never have agreed with such policies".

 

To highlight those facts about Churchill would have put a dent in the good old "we won the war against the evil Nazis" story. Old Winston is a British hero, a good man who stood for what was right in this country, and all that shit.

 

I'm not saying that Griffin deserves any sympathy at all, and I certainly wouldn't say he deserves anyone's support, but the bottom line is, he was right in that instance.

 

Maybe there are other occasions when he was right as well?

 

It's easy to highlight the areas where he is totally out of line, such as immigration.

 

Doing that helps to gloss over the fact that he is drawing attention, intentionally or not (most likely not), to matters such as the EU and the war in front of 8 million people.

 

I'm solidly of the opinion that the main reason the Labour Party didn't want him on national television wasn't because he's an intolerant racist, or because they believed that he represents a threat to our lovely society.

 

It was because by simply being there, he forces some uncomfortable questions to be asked about their policies and actions over the past ten years or so.

 

The BNP will get nowhere, thats a fact.

 

But having them making noises about immigration, the situation with the EU, the wars in the middle-east etc isn't ideal for the current mob.

 

Them passing themselves off as the bastions of all that is good & decent in society, acting in our best interests by trying to keep Griffin off television is almost as laughable as Griffin trying to pass himself off as a legitimite politician.

[JNLister]

It depends on what you mean by "what Griffin said was right".

 

I can't find any record either way about whether Churchill said the immigration stuff. He did say the stuff about Islam, though the quote is from 1899, so may not be reflective of his attitudes during the 1940s.

 

However, it's certainly not a fact that he would have joined the BNP because no other party today would have him:

 

* His descendants, who may have some insight, say that isn't the case.

 

* From what I remember of the quote Griffin assigned to him about immigration, it's very possible he'd be allowed in the Conservatives today, albeit probably not as leader. But then most former Conservative leaders wouldn't be considered suitable to lead the party today.

 

* Given that the claim was about Churchill's views on immigration rather than race, if he were barred from the Conservatives today, he'd presumably have a natural place in UKIP, not BNP.

 

* In terms of general direction, Churchill was on the same side with many policies as the British Union of Fascists, the 1930s equivalent of the BNP. He didn't join them.

 

* Even if Churchill got in a time machine, arrived in 2009, and decided the BNP was the party best aligned with his views, I can 100% guarantee he would not have joined them. Why am I so confident? Because somebody would have told him that the BNP's director of communications Mark Collett called him "a fucking cunt."

 

But having them making noises about immigration, the situation with the EU, the wars in the middle-east etc isn't ideal for the current mob.

 

The BNP isn't needing to force that debate on Question Time. Immigration is regularly discussed. EU gets talked about a lot, and they regularly have anti-EU people, including UKIP the previous week. And as far as I remember, somebody in the audience (and often people in the panel) have questioned and attacked the government over the Iraq war on every episode of Question Time for the past six years.

 

Anyone who tries to argue that immigration isn't discussed by the major parties should take a look back at the last general election when the Conservative party pretty much talked about nothing else, and even came up with the policy of putting a quota on asylum.

 

Oh, and not that it makes any difference to the validity of any political arguments, but it turns out Nick Griffin's dad was a radio engineer in the war and didn't actually see any combat.

Edited October 25, 2009 by JNLister

[JNLister]

While I'm up at an ungodly hour and nerding about...

 

The next election is by no means a slam-dunk in terms of who forms the next government, even though Labour likely won't win a majority. Based on current polls, electoralcalculus.co.uk predicts a Conservative majority of 44. However, it only takes a 1.5% swing back from Conservative to Labour and you've got a hung parliament with the Tories maybe just scraping a government with the help of the Northern Ireland unionists and a couple of independent/minor parties. Bump that up to 2% and they've got no way of making a government without the Lib Dems.

[David]

It depends on what you mean by "what Griffin said was right".

 

I can't find any record either way about whether Churchill said the immigration stuff. He did say the stuff about Islam, though the quote is from 1899, so may not be reflective of his attitudes during the 1940s.

 

According to The Guardian;

 

Sir Winston Churchill and his cabinet colleagues, concerned at the number of "coloured people" they thought were moving to Britain to take advantage of the welfare state, considered introducing immigration controls more than 50 years ago, according to records released yesterday from the National Archives.

 

In hand-written notebooks, the cabinet secretary, Sir Norman Brook, noted that the then home secretary thought there was a good case for excluding "riff-raff".

 

Brook stated that controls were discussed at a cabinet meeting on February 3 1954, six years after the ship the Empire Windrush docked at Tilbury with 492 immigrants from Jamaica.

 

Churchill commented: "Wd lke also to study possibility of a 'quota' - [number] not to be exceeded."

 

The prime minister began the discussion, saying: "Problems will arise if many coloured people settle here. Are we to saddle ourselves with colour problems in UK? Attracted by Welfare State. Public opinion in UK won't tolerate it once it gets beyond certain limits."

 

Florence Horsbrugh, the minister of education, added that the problem was becoming "serious" in Manchester. David Maxwell-Fyfe, the home secretary, reported that the total of "coloured people" in Britain had risen from 7,000 before the second world war to 40,000 at the time of writing, with 3,666 of those unemployed, and 1,870 on national assistance, or benefits.

 

He referred to those "living on immoral earnings". Of 62 people convicted the previous year in the Metropolitan police area, 24 were "coloured". He added: "All administrative measures to discourage have been taken. Only further step would be immigration control over admittance to the UK. We would have to admit in Parliament that purpose of legislation was to control [admission] of coloured. There is a case on merits for excluding riff-raff. But politically it would be represented & discussed on basis of a colour limitation. That would offend the floating vote, and the old Liberals. We should be reversing age-long tradition that British [subjects] have right of entry to mother-country of Empire. We should offend Liberals, also sentimentalists."

 

But fearing public feeling, he said the risk of introducing controls should not be taken "today". He warned: "The colored populations are resented in Lpl, Paddington & other areas By those who come into contact with them. But those who don't are apt to take Liberal view."

 

The idea that Griffin believes Churchill would join his party is completely irrelevant to be honest. The guy died nearly 50 years ago, so we won't ever know.

 

I agree with you that he would likely have been more suited to UKIP though.

 

What i'm interested in is the way this information was just completely ignored in favour of the rose-tinted view we are usually given about Churchill.

 

The BNP isn't needing to force that debate on Question Time. Immigration is regularly discussed. EU gets talked about a lot, and they regularly have anti-EU people, including UKIP the previous week. And as far as I remember, somebody in the audience (and often people in the panel) have questioned and attacked the government over the Iraq war on every episode of Question Time for the past six years.

 

I won't disagree that we have seen numerous tough questions on all matters posed to representatives of the Government on Question Throughout the years.

 

The difference is, none of the issues have ever been brought up in front of such a huge or diverse audience.

 

This show and the media circus beforehand attracted record numbers, with a lot of those numbers being people who never usually take an interest in politics.

 

I'd be willing to bet that most of these people have only a basic understanding at best of what is actually happening in this country with regards to "boring" issues like the EU and immigration.

 

This show brought more eyes and ears to these topics in a way which was compelling. Thats not what the Labour party wanted in my opinion.

 

I have no fear that this show, or anything that follows will do anything for the BNP.

 

Sure, it may have made them a more legit political party, but thats not a big deal really, as they aren't ever going to be more than a fringe party, regardless of their legit status.

 

Even (the few) people who agree with their policies will know that voting for them is akin to voting Green or Respect.

 

They will have councillors come and go in local elections, with numbers going up slightly in some places, and down in others depending on how restless the voters in that area are.

 

They won't make any breakthroughs though.

 

I can't help but feel that the media and the other parties know this is the case, but make a lot of noise about "banning" or "destroying" simply to move attention away from the pressing issues of the day, and more importantly, issues where the current lot are failing.

[Carbomb]

On a side note, I think Churchill was a cunt, but that doesn't mean I'm pro-BNP. Anyone who breaks up strikes by getting troops to fire on and kill strikers is a piece of shit.

[kjh]

Deporting the two million who are currently here illegally is essential.

 

Is this really a feasible policy? Ask yourself these questions: How would you find all these illegal immigrants, who don't want to be found? Having found them, where would we deport them to, if they refuse to tell us where they are from? Who would implement this policy, as the police and army are already stretched thin as it is? How much would this policy cost? Given our huge budget deficit, how would we go about paying for it? Saying deport them all is simple, but if you stop and think about it implementing such a policy without infringing on the civil liberties of the people in this country who are here legally would be impossible.

[David]

Is this really a feasible policy? Ask yourself these questions: How would you find all these illegal immigrants, who don't want to be found? Having found them, where would we deport them to, if they refuse to tell us where they are from? Who would implement this policy, as the police and army are already stretched thin as it is? How much would this policy cost? Given our huge budget deficit, how would we go about paying for it? Saying deport them all is simple, but if you stop and think about it implementing such a policy without infringing on the civil liberties of the people in this country who are here legally would be impossible.

 

How would you like to see it solved?

[children of bodom]

i don't know much about politics but i over heard someone on the bus talking about the BNP

 

what i gathered was that ages a go every europen country signed something that we where all welcome in others countrys so i could go live in france or germany and a german could come live in england?

than some places (france and germany these people named) wouldn't let other europeans in?

now nearly every europen country in europen apart from england has banned people coming in?

so the BNP want us to ban it too?

 

if this is true i m with the BNP. its getting stupid the amount of foregins who come into england, get free health care,free student loans, and take all are jobs. its about time we stopped being so british and saying "welcome to britain" and tell them to fuck off back to their own country.

 

i don't know how right these two people where they where old people i say 70's

[BionicRedneck]

i don't know much about politics but i over heard someone on the bus talking about the BNP

 

what i gathered was that ages a go every europen country signed something that we where all welcome in others countrys so i could go live in france or germany and a german could come live in england?

than some places (france and germany these people named) wouldn't let other europeans in?

now nearly every europen country in europen apart from england has banned people coming in?

so the BNP want us to ban it too?

 

if this is true i m with the BNP. its getting stupid the amount of foregins who come into england, get free health care,free student loans, and take all are jobs. its about time we stopped being so british and saying "welcome to britain" and tell them to fuck off back to their own country.

 

i don't know how right these two people where they where old people i say 70's

 

No shit.

[kjh]

i don't know much about politics but i over heard someone on the bus talking about the BNP

 

what i gathered was that ages a go every europen country signed something that we where all welcome in others countrys so i could go live in france or germany and a german could come live in england?

than some places (france and germany these people named) wouldn't let other europeans in?

now nearly every europen country in europen apart from england has banned people coming in?

so the BNP want us to ban it too?

 

if this is true i m with the BNP. its getting stupid the amount of foregins who come into england, get free health care,free student loans, and take all are jobs. its about time we stopped being so british and saying "welcome to britain" and tell them to fuck off back to their own country.

 

i don't know how right these two people where they where old people i say 70's

 

I knew this was blatantly untrue when I read it, but I did a quick google search to get the correct details about EU migration policy:

 

FREE MOVEMENT AND ENLARGEMENT. The EU has admitted 12 new member-states since 2004: eight Central and East European countries, plus Cyprus and Malta, joined in 2004, followed by Bulgaria and Romania in 2007

[Rob Lowe]

Getting your politics/history lesson from elderly people on the bus is one of the most frightening things Ive read on here.

 

More frightening than any horror story you could ever write Bodom.

[children of bodom]

can someone tell me what the BNP do want then and why everyone hates them

[Ronnie]

Read the last few pages.

 

Read the BNP's Wikipedia page.

 

Maybe consider reading the thread Would You Support The BNP?

[children of bodom]

BNP are committed to stemming and reversing the tide of non-white immigration

 

so basically getting rid of blacks that are not english?? i think i might join