BNP

[Beefalow and the Consumer]

Stop the
Fascist
BNP

Why should we "stop" any party?  Don't they have a right to exist?  It's not like they're trying to kill anyone - just deport all the non-British, cut off all foreign aid, nationalize 80% of the economy, take over Ireland, end civil liberties, institute Singapore-esque caning of petty criminals, isolate the UK economically, teach racial supremacy in the schools, isolate the UK militarily, and reinstitute the draft.  Is that so bad?  If you don't like them, don't vote for them!

(Actually, given the choice between the BNP and the UK being a Muslim state in 10 years, I'd choose the BNP.)

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Stop the
Fascist
BNP

Why should we "stop" any party?  Don't they have a right to exist?  It's not like they're trying to kill anyone - just deport all the non-British, cut off all foreign aid, nationalize 80% of the economy, take over Ireland, end civil liberties, institute Singapore-esque caning of petty criminals, isolate the UK economically, teach racial supremacy in the schools, isolate the UK militarily, and reinstitute the draft.  Is that so bad?  If you don't like them, don't vote for them!

(Actually, given the choice between the BNP and the UK being a Muslim state in 10 years, I'd choose the BNP.)

By "stop" I mean stop them winning anything... not ban them... they are poisioning the politics of most of Cottonopolis.
ing Nazi's...
And yes they would kill people. A lot of people.

And I don't see how the U.K could become an Islamic state in 10 years time... the % of Muslims is the U.K remains very small.
And the BNP have been around a lot longer than 9-11.

[Beefalow and the Consumer]

Stop the
Fascist
BNP

Why should we "stop" any party?  Don't they have a right to exist?  It's not like they're trying to kill anyone - just deport all the non-British, cut off all foreign aid, nationalize 80% of the economy, take over Ireland, end civil liberties, institute Singapore-esque caning of petty criminals, isolate the UK economically, teach racial supremacy in the schools, isolate the UK militarily, and reinstitute the draft.  Is that so bad?  If you don't like them, don't vote for them!

(Actually, given the choice between the BNP and the UK being a Muslim state in 10 years, I'd choose the BNP.)

By "stop" I mean stop them winning anything... not ban them... they are poisioning the politics of most of Cottonopolis.
g Nazi's...
And yes they would kill people. A lot of people.

It's a testimony to the vibrant political fabric of Britain that a party with such unique and innovative ideas is able to flourish at all - while in the USA we're stuck with our two boring parties.

*removes tongue from cheek*

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Stop the
Fascist
BNP

Why should we "stop" any party?  Don't they have a right to exist?  It's not like they're trying to kill anyone - just deport all the non-British, cut off all foreign aid, nationalize 80% of the economy, take over Ireland, end civil liberties, institute Singapore-esque caning of petty criminals, isolate the UK economically, teach racial supremacy in the schools, isolate the UK militarily, and reinstitute the draft.  Is that so bad?  If you don't like them, don't vote for them!

(Actually, given the choice between the BNP and the UK being a Muslim state in 10 years, I'd choose the BNP.)

By "stop" I mean stop them winning anything... not ban them... they are poisioning the politics of most of Cottonopolis.
g Nazi's...
And yes they would kill people. A lot of people.

It's a testimony to the vibrant political fabric of Britain that a party with such unique and innovative ideas is able to flourish at all - while in the USA we're stuck with our two boring parties.

*removes tongue from cheek*

They aren't flourishing (unless a handful of councillers counts) if you want to see a flourishing ultra-right wing fascist party try France, but the problem is that just one counciller a council poisions the political climate in the area and makes ethnic minorites very, very afraid.

America's interesting in that it's never actually had a major far-right political party or politician.
David Duke is the obvious exception...

[Beefalow and the Consumer]

They aren't flourishing (unless a handful of councillers counts) if you want to see a flourishing ultra-right wing fascist party try France, but the problem is that just one counciller a council poisions the political climate in the area and makes ethnic minorites very, very afraid.

The thing that makes me very sad is that in European politics, for some reason issues of national sovereignty and independence get mixed up with racism and fascism.  Can't a nation be independent AND have racial tolerance and equality?  We Americans (the 0.01% who actually pay attention to world politics) scratch our heads at this.  

How many wars were fought to keep Germany and France separate from one another?  How many lives were lost in that cause, only to see a new Franco-German Empire organize peacefully and slowly swallow up Europe, and national distinction and independence?  What a waste.  We should have let Napoleon have his way.  Or Wilhelm II.  Save us a lot of trouble and lives in the end.  And yet the only people who stand up against this are Nazi bastards like Le Pen.

I'd like to see the UK out of the EU.  It's a shame the only people to take up that position are a bunch of bigots and hooligans.

America's interesting in that it's never actually had a major far-right political party or politician.
David Duke is the obvious exception...

Oh, we've had plenty.  The Know-Nothing party of the 19th Century is a great example.  As more people are added to our Melting Pot, there have always been those who wanted to exclude the new people.  First it was the Irish, then the Italians, then the Eastern Europeans and Jews... and we've always had the Black/White problem.  But I think what makes America distinct is that we have a national identity that has nothing to do with ethnicity, religion, or ancestry.

So... we can stand up for our independence and sovereignty without tying in racism.  You can come from any corner of the earth, and still be "American."  Maybe that's the crucial difference.

Another interesting difference in the USA is that the far-right tends to be economically (classically) liberal.  You wouldn't find a single right-winger in this country that would stomach any of the types of economic policies that the BNP supports.  Not even Pat Buchanan, which is the closest thing the US has to the BNP.

[they don't love you like i love you]

Stop the
Fascist
BNP

Why should we "stop" any party?  Don't they have a right to exist?  It's not like they're trying to kill anyone - just deport all the non-British, cut off all foreign aid, nationalize 80% of the economy, take over Ireland, end civil liberties, institute Singapore-esque caning of petty criminals, isolate the UK economically, teach racial supremacy in the schools, isolate the UK militarily, and reinstitute the draft.  Is that so bad?  If you don't like them, don't vote for them!

(Actually, given the choice between the BNP and the UK being a Muslim state in 10 years, I'd choose the BNP.)

By "stop" I mean stop them winning anything... not ban them... they are poisioning the politics of most of Cottonopolis.
g Nazi's...
And yes they would kill people. A lot of people.

It's a testimony to the vibrant political fabric of Britain that a party with such unique and innovative ideas is able to flourish at all - while in the USA we're stuck with our two boring parties.

*removes tongue from cheek*

They aren't flourishing (unless a handful of councillers counts) if you want to see a flourishing ultra-right wing fascist party try France, but the problem is that just one counciller a council poisions the political climate in the area and makes ethnic minorites very, very afraid.

America's interesting in that it's never actually had a major far-right political party or politician.
David Duke is the obvious exception...

actually I heard the Populists at the end of the 19th century were pretty racist, I'd probably mostly agree with their economic views, but they sound pretty horrible otherwise.

[they don't love you like i love you]

and just out of curiosity Al, who did you vote for?

[Filuwaúrdjan]

actually I heard the Populists at the end of the 19th century were pretty racist, I'd probably mostly agree with their economic views, but they sound pretty horrible otherwise.

Some of the leaders were (but this is the 1890's we're talking about...) but Populism was the first political movement that sharecroppers and Bubba's both supported.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Oh, we've had plenty.  The Know-Nothing party of the 19th Century is a great example.  As more people are added to our Melting Pot, there have always been those who wanted to exclude the new people.  First it was the Irish, then the Italians, then the Eastern Europeans and Jews... and we've always had the Black/White problem.  But I think what makes America distinct is that we have a national identity that has nothing to do with ethnicity, religion, or ancestry.

Yeah, the Know Nothings were unpleasant bastards, but the U.S has *never* had a far right party in the way we do in Europe... there is no American Le Pen. All you've got are lots of Enoch Powells.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

The BNP's economic policies are: Replace the State with the Party. The Party then takes everything over. Unions are banned and jobs go to Party supporters only. And so on.

Not many people over here would support that either.

[Beefalow and the Consumer]

actually I heard the Populists at the end of the 19th century were pretty racist, I'd probably mostly agree with their economic views, but they sound pretty horrible otherwise.

Some of the leaders were (but this is the 1890's we're talking about...) but Populism was the first political movement that sharecroppers and Bubba's both supported.

I would think that the Democrats of the Guilded Age would be more akin to the European Far-Right.  But outside of the South, I'm not sure they were all that racist.  (Although racism is, after all, not the ONLY defining feature of the European Far-Right.)

[Filuwaúrdjan]

actually I heard the Populists at the end of the 19th century were pretty racist, I'd probably mostly agree with their economic views, but they sound pretty horrible otherwise.

Some of the leaders were (but this is the 1890's we're talking about...) but Populism was the first political movement that sharecroppers and Bubba's both supported.

I would think that the Democrats of the Guilded Age would be more akin to the European Far-Right.  But outside of the South, I'm not sure they were all that racist.  (Although racism is, after all, not the ONLY defining feature of the European Far-Right.)

No... America has never had a real fascist movement... except for the KKK perhaps...

[English]

The BNP will dissapear before long, they're just a flash in the pan. In the late 70s, Britain experienced similar problems with the far right don't forget.

[Gustaf]

Very good post Beef.

I agree with your points, it is a horrible waste. In Sweden nationalist, racist, fascist and national socialist are pretty much synonymous, which is very sad.

There is a trend towards more reasonable EU-scepticism arising though, so there's some hope at least.

[Beefalow and the Consumer]

Very good post Beef.

I agree with your points, it is a horrible waste. In Sweden nationalist, racist, fascist and national socialist are pretty much synonymous, which is very sad.

There is a trend towards more reasonable EU-scepticism arising though, so there's some hope at least.

From what I understand, your neighbor to the west has it right.  Very enlightened, forward-thinking, and tolerant, while at the same time maintaining their independence and national identity.  Although I've heard Norway is moving towards EU integration

I have a Norwegian grandmother who wears her Norwegianness on her sleeve (she's also a right-wing nutjob, but that's another story for another day...) so I tend to be very pro-Norway.

They also have one of the most enlightened approaches to copyright law in the world.

[AuH2O]

Well, Gov. Bilbo was fairly far right on some issues, though actually- along with a number of early 20th century Southern politicians- he was somewhat sympathetic to the women's rights movement. The Republican Party, during and after the Civil War, was probably the closest thing... a number of members of Congress and state officials called for genocide after the South had surrendered, as well of course as depriving whites the right to vote. That is the only time US states have been run by military governors, so regardless of the circumstances that wins the comparison test.

Pat Buchanan isn't anything close to being fascist, he's just a conservative that doesn't have to get elected.

The BNP is fairly stupid, I don't think they really understand politics very well. They don't represent English tradition in policy terms (though I guess no one else does either, but they're even worse) and have no real rationale for their existence. In reality, they are a good thing for the mainstream parties: they occupy the space a legitimate rightist party could.

Le Pen, on the other hand, has a clear nationalist ideology that takes into account modern economy and government... though he doesn't have much to say in terms of detailed domestic policy proscriptions.

[Michael Z]

They aren't flourishing (unless a handful of councillers counts) if you want to see a flourishing ultra-right wing fascist party try France, but the problem is that just one counciller a council poisions the political climate in the area and makes ethnic minorites very, very afraid.

The thing that makes me very sad is that in European politics, for some reason issues of national sovereignty and independence get mixed up with racism and fascism.  Can't a nation be independent AND have racial tolerance and equality?  We Americans (the 0.01% who actually pay attention to world politics) scratch our heads at this.

The crucial difference is that, whereas America is united by one domineering national identity, Europe consists of roughly 40-50 different nations which all have unique different histories lasting back several centuries. So if one nation decides to be 'indepedent' it de facto becomes unaccepting and therefore intolerant of its next door neighbours.

In other words, we're all too closely crammed in next to each other to adopt some kind of nationalist ideology. The last big nationalistic experiment conducted by a European nation resulted in the bloodiest war the world had ever seen.

[Gustaf]

They aren't flourishing (unless a handful of councillers counts) if you want to see a flourishing ultra-right wing fascist party try France, but the problem is that just one counciller a council poisions the political climate in the area and makes ethnic minorites very, very afraid.

The thing that makes me very sad is that in European politics, for some reason issues of national sovereignty and independence get mixed up with racism and fascism.  Can't a nation be independent AND have racial tolerance and equality?  We Americans (the 0.01% who actually pay attention to world politics) scratch our heads at this.

The crucial difference is that, whereas America is united by one domineering national identity, Europe consists of roughly 40-50 different nations which all have unique different histories lasting back several centuries. So if one nation decides to be 'indepedent' it de facto becomes unaccepting and therefore intolerant of its next door neighbours.

In other words, we're all too closely crammed in next to each other to adopt some kind of nationalist ideology. The last big nationalistic experiment conducted by a European nation resulted in the bloodiest war the world had ever seen.

It wasn't all that nationalist really. Hitler wanted a strong Europe, using rethoric very similar to those of modern pro-Europe integrationists. That is, fo course, not to say that the latter are nazis or anything like that, but Hitler wasn't really a champion of the soverign nation. Racism is also fundamentally contrary to nationalism.

I also like Norway. And we'll see, they rejected EU-membership twice already there's reasonable hope they'll do so again...

[cwelsch]

Most of the BNPers on councils act like Greens and Laborites - stop sprawl, stop Wal-Mart-like mega-stores, protect historical sites, etc.  They also want to cut taxes, I think, but they're pretty center-left on a lot of local issues.

[cwelsch]

The Populists - pretty much everybody was some shade of racist, even Yankees weren't too pleased with black people (unfortunately).  They didn't really have any platform on black people, but then nobody really did anything then except the Democrats, who focused on Jim Crow.  The Populists were dominated by two issues, economics and identity.  They represented the identity of farmers and miners, and they wanted free silver inflationism.  In other words, basically they WERE their economic beliefs, very little beyond that.

The KKK - not fascist in that their rhetoric was very constitutional, they want to conform to their racist view of the Constitution.  They also have a very religious view, where the Fascists were more pragmatic or scattered on religion (at least outside Croatia).

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Most of the BNPers on councils act like Greens and Laborites - stop sprawl, stop Wal-Mart-like mega-stores, protect historical sites, etc.  They also want to cut taxes, I think, but they're pretty center-left on a lot of local issues.

Actually most don't even bother to turn up to council meetings

[cwelsch]

Well, they run on anti-development platforms.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Well, they run on anti-development platforms.

As a rule they run on race+any local issue that can get them elected.
Anti-development platforms are usually very good for that...

[Michael Z]

Well, they run on anti-development platforms.

As a rule they run on race+any local issue that can get them elected.
Anti-development platforms are usually very good for that...

Exactly. The BNP are basically trying to mask their extreme agenda behind a veil of Populism, which is more or less what the Nazis did in Germany. They adopted a highly populist platform because they knew it would get them elected - not all Germans who voted for Hitler did so because of his anti-Semitic views, they did so because they thought it would get them a job.

(This is actually one of the reasons the Nazis are sometimes mistaken for a Socialist party, since they adopted partly socialist policies in order to pander to left-leaning parts of the electorate.)

The BNP are hoping they can have the same effect by talking about whatever's "popular" right now, and effectively trying to divert attention from their real goals.