Heartland

I wasn't trying to p*ss you off - I was trying to explain something to you. I used to think like you did when I was younger, but after seeing the reality of what the BNP do over the years I've changed my mind. I'm sorry, I know that sounds patronising, but I can't phrase it any other way.

We could debate this forever - you'll never agree until you experience how the BNP operate. Again, I know that sounds patronising - it's not meant to but I know it does.

By the way, I'm not "old" thankyouverymuch - I'm only 39. And I don't read the Guardian - you can drop that stereotype!

Maybe I am not clued up on how the BNP really operates. I shall investigate.

Are they forcing people to vote for them?

Are they preventing people from voting against them?

Intolerant people should be hung publicly and have their entrails served to dogs! (am i doing this right? guys?)

sultan2075 wrote:Intolerant people should be hung publicly and have their entrails served to dogs!

...which would take care of the whole issue, inasmuch as they'd no longer be around to be voted for.

There certainly would be some well-fed hounds, though.

Sunny Hundal puts it better than I ever could as do several of the commenters.

the_inescapable_truth wrote:I don't like that at all.

I did

I can understand (disagree with, but understand) the anti-immigration feelings of some people, given the hateful anti-immigrant lies stirred up by the tabloid press. I can accept that a large number of BNP voters are genuinely unaware of what exactly they have voted for. I think the no-platform policy is partly to blame for this as it happens; I think the real political parties have failed in their attempts to downplay the seriousness of the BNP; in many ways this has merely played into their hands.

However, that does not excuse the BNP themselves.

IMO the best way to combat the BNP is not to silence their voices, on the contrary, those of us opposed to them should highlight some of the vile and hateful things Griffin has written and said:

Nick Griffin wrote:I am well aware that the orthodox opinion is that six million Jews were gassed and cremated and turned into lampshades. Orthodox opinion also once held that the world is flat ... I have reached the conclusion that the 'extermination' tale is a mixture of Allied wartime propaganda, extremely profitable lie, and latter witch-hysteria.

Nick Griffin wrote:There is no doubt that hundreds, probably thousands of Jews were shot to death in Eastern Europe, because they were rightly or wrongly seen as communists or potential partisan supporters. That was awful. But this nonsense about gas chambers is exposed as a total lie.

Nick Griffin wrote:You can't possibly separate the hard drugs trade from the question of Islam and particularly Pakistani immigration. Any working class area of Britain - in a multiracial area - the hard drugs problem is related to Islam and Pakistan.

Nick Griffin wrote:We bang on about Islam. Why? Because to the ordinary public out there it's the thing they can understand. It's the thing the newspaper editors sell newspapers with. If we were to attack some other ethnic group — some people say we should attack the Jews … But … we've got to get to power. And if that was an issue we chose to bang on about when the press don't talk about it … the public would just think we were barking mad. They'd just think oh, you're attacking Jews just because you want to attack Jews. You're attacking this group of powerful Zionists just because you want to take poor Manny Cohen the tailor and shove him in a gas chamber. That's what the public would think. It wouldn't get us anywhere other than stepping backwards. It would lock us in a little box; the public would think "extremist crank lunatics, nothing to do with me." And we wouldn't get power.

Nick Griffin wrote:The electors of Millwall did not back a postmodernist rightist party, but what they perceived to be a strong, disciplined organisation with the ability to back up its slogan 'Defend Rights for Whites' with well-directed boots and fists. When the crunch comes, power is the product of force and will, not of rational debate.

The BNP are fundamentally opposed to democratic ideals at their very core: "power is the product of force and will, not of rational debate" is as profoundly undemocratic a statement as I can imagine.

just stick shoes in their mouths to shut them up.

Other than the xenophobia, and apparently the thuggishness, what do you guys dislike about them? What else is problematic in their platform? Incidentally, these are legitimate questions. I know a little--not much at all--about them.

Holocaust deniers should be roasted in gas ovens! How about now? Am I doing it right now?

I can't help noticing how a thread without a single BNP supporter on it has managed to become rather acrimonious.

I would say the election of their members has proved that the old way of dealing with them has not worked. "No Platform" has been rendered useless by the internet, and political correction and multiculturalism are in their death throes.

The problem with this is that some of their opponents, in the media, and in politics are themselves unsavoury. Searchlight has strong Communist links, and I hasten to remind you that Stalin murdered many, many people.
It's like an alcoholic lecturing you about the dangers of smoking listening to them, and the various political and media figures.

I think people better get used to the idea of dealing with them in a different way, as you'll only see more of them from now on. Wait untill the economic sh*t really hits the fan in a few years time (when the UK's faced with the choice of service cuts or the IMF), and when the public realise the Tory Party are more of the same.

markfiend: If it's true that Griffin said that, can't he be arrested for Holocaust denial under certain countries law? With the new E.U warrant, surely they can have him extradited and charged?

Are the thuggishness, xenophobia, and holocaust denial not enough?

OK, more things to dislike about the BNP:

* the suggestion that women enjoy rape:

BNP candidate wrote:Rape is simply sex. Women enjoy sex, so rape cannot be such a terrible physical ordeal.

* open adoration of Hitler and Nazi Germany:

Mark Collett wrote:National Socialism was the best solution for the German people in the 1930s. I honestly can't understand how a man who's seen the inner city hell of Britain today can't look back on that era [Hitler's Germany] with a certain nostalgia

Collett is a full-time party worker and Yorkshire Regional Organiser.

Will that do? Anyone else?

DeWinter wrote:markfiend: If it's true that Griffin said that, can't he be arrested for Holocaust denial under certain countries law? With the new E.U warrant, surely they can have him extradited and charged?

Cross-posted.

I guess he could be arrested in Germany or Austria. I'm personally uneasy with laws criminalising holocaust denial; David Irving's jail sentence in Austria in 2006 simply served to make him a martyr in the eyes of the far right.

markfiend wrote:OK, more things to dislike about the BNP:

* the suggestion that women enjoy rape:

BNP candidate wrote:Rape is simply sex. Women enjoy sex, so rape cannot be such a terrible physical ordeal.

Bl00dy hell! It gets better and better, doesn't it?

The way to handle the BNP is to give them more exposure,not less.Publicise every one of their absurd,ridiculous,disgusting statements-drag every moronic comment out of the slime and into the brilliant light of day

markfiend wrote:Are the thuggishness, xenophobia, and holocaust denial not enough?

You don't win elections on a platform of "Joos bad, Muzlims bad, rape good." What else is there? What are their positions on economics? Capitalism? Foreign policy? The welfare state? The surveillance society? The EU (I can hazard a guess here)? It's very easy to say "ooooooh racists" but that's not really a sufficient rebuttal, is it?

I don't have a dog in this fight. I'm legitimately curious.

Also, I didn't think this thread was becoming acrimonious. Perhaps my sarcasm fell flat?

Not only are they racists, they are also socialists! God help us...

Let's do away with the whole left-right distinction, because well it's useless really.

As I said earlier the BNP are the Old Labour party with a racist bent. They want as big a state as possible. They're collectivist authoritarians.

But yes, I think you are driving at the same point I was at least trying to make earlier. We need to find a real way to confront these guys, because the current approach just isn't working. Exposing what they say isn't even enough, it must and always must be backed by arguments.

(And banning Holocaust denial is evil to the core. And I don't say this lightly, for obvious reasons. But without liberty, we don't have squat.)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Na ... y#Policies

Weird thing is, I can't actually find out a whole great deal about their (other, non-racially-motivated) policies (forgive me if I don't actually look at their own site from work...)

sultan2075 wrote: You don't win elections on a platform of "Joos bad, Muzlims bad, rape good." What else is there? What are their positions on economics? Capitalism? Foreign policy? The welfare state? The surveillance society? The EU (I can hazard a guess here)? It's very easy to say "ooooooh racists" but that's not really a sufficient rebuttal, is it?

I don't have a dog in this fight. I'm legitimately curious.

Also, I didn't think this thread was becoming acrimonious. Perhaps my sarcasm fell flat?

I was referring to the earlier comments, not yours.

In order of asking, and from a quick rummage on their website:

Economics: Socialist
Capitalism: Against the global form at least.
Foreign policy: Non-interventionist/Isolationist
Welfare State: For, but restricted to British citizens
Surveillance society: No real mention
EU: Withdrawal

Some of their more shall we say odd policies include re-uniting Ireland in the United Kingdom (because we all know how well that worked last time).

Their policy on race is to apparently offer financial incentives to leave the country to those not of Western European stock. According to Griffin "six figure sums". My Estonian girlfriend thinks it's a brilliant idea and suggests we take advantage of it and leave for Finland again and buy a house there!
Of course no-one believes for a minute that it will be voluntary, it will very quickly become encouraged, then compulsory.

DeWinter wrote: Some of their more shall we say odd policies include re-uniting Ireland in the United Kingdom (because we all know how well that worked last time).

That made me lol. Why stop there eh? Next stop, the beaches of Normandy!

silentNate, you're an insensitive douche, and seemingly an idiot who can't read.

That's really not an image to be thrown around forums instead whether erm, well I'm not even sure what you were thinking when you it. No one has suggested the Holocaust didn't happen. But yeah, free speech I guess. You're still a douche though.

I can only guess it was a reaction to what I said earlier about banning holocaust denial to be a crime. I stand by what I said. It is evil in a very real sense. Free speech means and must always mean free speech for all. You cannot get into a situation in which you have an authority who decides what is and what is not okay to say. It's not always nice, but it's the only way. And I say this as a Jew[1] whose immediate family were a step away from the ovens. But also as a Libertarian, who believes free speech to be fundamental to individual sovereignty.

Give me liberty or give me death as they say.

[1] Not that should make any difference whatsoever.

Ahhh... if you are going down the personal being political argument...

My grandfather was a member of an Aryan Nationalist group. These people lie. They cannot be trusted. You are willing to give them a voice when they would deny it to another race and would willingly use force against those they oppose and distribute persecutory literature. As someone who is Jewish surely you wouldn't defend those who aim to persecute others (though I guess you might be a Zionist but then I digress). My wife worked in Romania and saw the persecution of the Roma people whilst I went out with a woman whose grandfather helped liberate Dachau, the stories he told would deeply upset you...

Should it matter that you are Jewish? Yes, sorry but it should.

lazarus corporation wrote:Hitler said that the only time he could have been stopped in his rise to power was if people confronted his thugs in the streets with direct action

But he was wrong. The Nazis' Sturmabteilung were frequently opposed by the Communists' Rotfrontkämpferbund in violent clashes that have been described as bringing the country close to civil war. Hitler still got elected. The sad truth is that Hitler was popular. He was a compelling public speaker who captured the public's imagination on nationalist issues after Germany's post WWI humiliation and on economic issues in the wake of the Great Depression.

An economic crisis and using ethnic groups as scapegoats for the country's problems. Sound familiar?

markfiend wrote:OK, more things to dislike about the BNP:

* the suggestion that women enjoy rape: [quote="[url=http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard- ... -23470426-

Ironic that he uses the term "feminazi".

This story is startlingly apropos to this discussion. Crap.

Right. The only legitimate restriction to free speech is when it poses a direct threat to individuals. That is to say if someone is encouraging people to violence. Yet, even then I am not happy with this distinction. I suspect that it's mostly unenforceable until someone actually does something. Otherwise any attempt to silence the opinion of someone else no matter how untruthful, hurtful, or annoying, is nothing less than fiendishly illiberal. I wish people thought differently. I wish they'd change their minds. But that's not for me to say really. By protecting their freedoms, ultimately we protect our own.

It should go without saying, but I emphatically do not subscribe any sort of half-baked, epistemic relativism that says a truth is merely matter of interpretation. That's nonsense, and undermines what we mean we talk about truth. But anyway, shall we move swiftly on...

I should point out at this juncture I am only Jewish, insomuch in that my family is Jewish, and I grew up in a secular Jewish household, perennially longing for a Xmas tree. I am atheist, who doesn't like creeds, fashions, nationalism, or any other sort of herd instinct, that robs the individual of his sovereignty. It's not something important to me anyway. The only thing it gives me I think is a degree of freedom to talk about these things a bit more candidly (and I suspect honestly) when things like the Holocaust are concerned without trodding on anyone's toes.

Why are you banging the "free speech" drum? I, and others, have said that the best way to counter the lies of the BNP is to bring them out into the light of day, expose them for the evil that they are. Silencing them only helps them appear as martyrs.

the_inescapable_truth wrote:They want as big a state as possible. They're collectivist authoritarians.

I would go further, in that it seems to me that to fascists, the state is god. (In the same way that to Friedman-esque libertarians, the market is god. But that's another topic.)

the_inescapable_truth wrote:Not only are they racists, they are also socialists! God help us...

And what's so wrong with socialism? Our socialised health system, while far from perfect (and the "free market" reforms foisted on it haven't helped) is far better than the insurance-driven system in the USA for example. Countries with socialist-leaning governments (Sweden, etc.) regularly top the charts in national happiness surveys.

the_inescapable_truth wrote:Exposing what they say isn't even enough, it must and always must be backed by arguments.

(And banning Holocaust denial is evil to the core. And I don't say this lightly, for obvious reasons. But without liberty, we don't have squat.)

Like I say, I agree with you here. Banning holocaust denial is a cure worse than the disease. Unfortunately (like with so many kinds of denialism) the true believer cannot be convinced of his error, but presenting the facts can (hopefully) sway those "on the fence".

Edit to add:

the_inescapable_truth wrote:This story is startlingly apropos to this discussion. Crap.

The shooter's website is now offline but still available at archive.org: Clicky