« Tonight's event | Main | PMQs »

Comments

Extreme Left/ Extreme Right - what's the difference? I'm sure the public must find these labels confusing. Why not simply make the argument about the policy instead of all this name-calling?

Is is real bonkers stuff. If Winston Churchill didn't have a problem with seeing Nazis as the extreme right i don't see why Conservatives have to. The claim that the BNP is in some way similar to Labour or the Liberal Democrats is the sort of childish student politics that should offend every serious democrat. Nazis murder people, I don't think we are seriously claiming that is what Labour or the Lib Dems are about.

Why give them the oxygen of publicity?

I think there is merit in rebranding them as extreme left - they are very collectivist, treating people as members of groups not individuals.

Why do we need to defeat them - they're virtually irrelevant already? The main oxygen of publicity they recieve is the hand wringing that goes on from national politicians whenever they come second in a by-election. We will defeat them the same way we defeat any minority party - by better coverage, better policies and better campaigning - not by turning the spotlight on them.

Have you actually read Charles Walkers paper Tombstone Nutcase? I really doubt it.
He is in my opinion absolutely right that the major parties habit of ignoring the BNP is a serious and potentially dangerous mistake. He is also right that the BNP are very much a state interventionist party. How this can be countered 'though is the difficult bit and I'm not sure Charles really answers this. It is easy to call for 'action' or delivering more leaflets but what action? and more leaflets will only work if they address the concerns of the recipients.
I think the only way to successfully counter the threat of this party (which shouldn't be exaggerated is to 1) have a robust policy on immigration which quite patently is not the case at the moment from any of the major parties and 2) ensure that the claims of the BNP on the ground are publically exposed for the lies that they. often are

Oh for pity's sake - a rebranding exercise on the BNP, is there no-one left in the parliamentary party who understands anything other then spin and pr anymore?

The way to defeat the BNP is twofold; 1) expose their shallow policies for what they are, and yes a lot of them are very left wing in terms of their statism and collective view of people, and 2) address the issues which drive people to vote BNP, as Charles Walker is, sensibly, suggesting.Those issues are immigration, housing and Islamic militancy and since even that old leftie firebrand Maragret Hodge has had a road to Damascus moment on the allocation of public housing then it really must be time for the Conservatives to take a strong, principled and non politically correct stand on these questions.

BNP far left wing !! This is as stupid as Camerloon attacking grammar schools. P Davis the excellent MP for Shipley described BNP supporters as ordinary middle class people who had been failed by all the three main parties. Many right wing Tories and UKIP supporters now support BNP because it has a full spectrum of policies including opposition to Europe (and supports grammar schools). The fact it has won some Council seats in the North does not mean it is far left. Is everyone in the North far left including P Davis, D Maclean etc ? They have won Council seats in the Essex corridor, hardly a far left heartland. Some of the seats they have won in the North are seats that the Tories lost not Labour. In Bradford both the seats they have are in Queensbury (where I lived for 15 years). They were won by a local husband and wife team who won them both from local Conservatives who had performed badly as Councillors.

I think you're always going to get a rump of 5-15% of people who will vote for a racist party in most democracies. You find that in France for instance with Le Pen. It's a difficult issue to address though.

The seat I worked in during the District Council campiagn saw the BNP take 2 seats out of 5 they contested with a very well organised campiagn. That is a virtually all white Labour marginal. They took Labour seats with a mix of socialist and racist politics. I think many BNP voters are looking for someone to blame for their own life failures and immigrants are their easy target. Many will never vote Conservative because of their perception we're the party for the rich.

I believe the only way the only way the BNP can be stopped in their tracks is for Labour to move to the left again. I don't think there is much we can do about it.

I think the only way to successfully counter the threat of this party (which shouldn't be exaggerated is to 1) have a robust policy on immigration which quite patently is not the case at the moment from any of the major parties

That's simply not going to happen. The political system is impotent with regard to major issues which is why it finds such exciting diversions and red-herrings to amuse us all

Branding the BNP left wing is silly.

They have clearly found their most receptive audience is amoung the white working class, and oppotunistically stolen Old Labour policies purely to pad out a manifesto and keep up the prentence they have something to offer beyond racism and hate.

As they know full well they won't be forming the next government they can promise whatever they like- if they though their best chance was in stealing Cameron's policies, you can bet your bottom dollar that is what they would do.


Their economic collectivism places them on the Left. Their extreme social conservatism places them on the Right.

They can pick up votes from Conservatives unhappy about immigration and political correctness. At the same time, while I doubt that many socially conservative Labour supporters vote for them because of their economic policies, they're not a barrier to voting for them, in the way that Conservative economic policies would prevent us from gaining such supporters.

Their big opportunity comes in PR elections. They nearly got an AM elected in Wales, and are well placed to win seats in the London Assembly, and European Parliament. If we moved to PR for local elections, they'd probably have a few hundred councillors.

I agree with the premise of Charles Walker that to defeat the BNP you need to abandon political correctness. The problem is that he sees this political correctness as a solely left-wing thing - it isn't. There is such a thing as right-wing political correctness as well - for example, that we always need to roll out the barrel saying something tough and hardline about immigrants.

The real solution is to listen to what people's concerns and problems are, and then to go away and come up with solutions to them. For example, most BNP supporters don't hate immigrants and want to give them a good kicking. What they hate is being stuck half-way down the waiting list for social housing, and blame immigrants for this. Saying something 'tough' about immigration isn't going to actually help anyone, solving the problem of social housing shortages will. That is the real challenge that faces us.

Does the Conservative Party have any policy on immigration?
Until it does the BNP will understandably flourish.

"the BNP is not the natural home of Conservative-minded voters"

Alas! Neither is today's Tory party...

If our only objection is that they are, in a strict sense, far-left statists, and not that they are racist scumbags, then I'm really very worried about our party and suggest that we examine ourselves thoroughly too.

I think it could be argued that the BNP are the opposite of left wing, because they encourage people to blame immigrants for their problems, rather than the rich.

The correct term is "national socialist" - I think the socialist bit tells the tale. Whether that be deemed extreme right or extreme left is almost irrelevant. How about "extremely immoral"?
If, however, the Nazis (german for national socialist) were extreme right, then so is the BNP. The similarities with communism (huge state control, dictator-like and extreme) are obvious - any extreme party is always going to be like that.
I understand the Ba'ath party in Iraq & Syria also national socialists. Religious extreme states (such as in Iran) are similar.
At the end of the day BNP supporter is a "neo-nazi" and a "national socialist" and should be termed as such by all including the media.


Extreme left, and extreme right, wing regimes tend to have quite a lot of similarities, even if their ideology is different.

The Conservative Party should concentrate on providing effective opposition to the increasingly extreme tax and spend policies of this shambolic Labour Government instead of heading off down a political cul de sac over minor parties.

Yet again the tories cant even get the name of the subject right. Last week you couldn't figure out what to politely call muslim terrorists without offending them and now you can't figure out if the BNP are left or right... I suppose it detracts from the lack of tory policies or the attempts to shoot yourselves in the foot over the ones you actually do have.

Haven't yet read Charles Walker's paper (will do so this evening) but my initial reaction would be:

Whether the BNP are left-wing or right-wing is a bit like trying to decide if the Black Death was a disease or a plague. Doesn't actually advance anything, and seems a bit silly. I'm not really convinced that the 'ugly truth' about the BNP is that they are - ugh! - left-wing.

Still, if it annoys "Vote Freedom" it must be a good thing...

The correct term is "national socialist" -

So Rachel can you explain the difference between National Socialism and Socialism In One Country ?


Adolf Hitler formulated a “Program” in München (Munich) in 1920 consisting initially of 25 very specific points of demands and beliefs.

The “Program” also demanded care for the elderly, forbid speculation in real estate, provided for capital punishment for those convicted of economic crimes and demanded that the Roman Law system then in use in Germany be replaced by German Common Law.

As in the case of the American Constitution, other provisions like the Bill of Rights and Amendments were added to the Nazi Party Program on a continuing basis. They were intended to salvage whatever could be salvaged of post-war Germany from chaos and communism, to strengthen the position of the NSDAP and its leaders, change the role of banks and banking in Germany, etc., etc.

The first complete edition of the Nazi Party Program appeared in booklet form after the Nazi Party Day in Weimar in 1926, and new editions were brought out as the party gained political strength in subsequent German parliamentary elections.

Programme

15. We demand the extensive development of insurance for old age.

16. We demand the creation and maintenance of a healthy middle class, the immediate communalizing of big department stores, and their lease at a cheap rate to small traders, and that the utmost consideration shall be shown to all small traders in the placing of State and municiple orders.

19. We demand that Roman Law, which serves a materialistic world order, be replaced by a German Common Law.

20. The State must consider a thorough reconstruction of our national system of education (with the aim of opening up to every able and hard-working German the possibility of higher education and of thus obtaining advancement). The curricula of all educational establishments must be brought into line with the requirements of practical life. The aim of the school must be to give the pupil, beginning with the first sign of intelligence, a grasp of the nation of the State (through the study of civic affairs). We demand the education of gifted children of poor parents, whatever their class or occupation, at the expense of the State.

21. The State must ensure that the nation's health standards are raised by protecting mothers and infants, by prohibiting child labor, by promoting physical strength through legislation providing for compulsory gymnastics and sports, and by the extensive support of clubs engaged in the physical training of youth.

24. We demand freedom for all religious denominations in the State, provided they do not threaten its existence not offend the moral feelings of the German race.

The Party, as such, stands for positive Christianity, but does not commit itself to any particular denomination. It combats the Jewish-materialistic spirit within and without us, and is convinced that our nation can achieve permanent health only from within on the basis of the principle: The common interest before self-interest.

italics off

Mr Norton,

I am not annoyed, it is just pitiful to see how poorly organised the Tory party is. That they pander to the muslim extremist fearing to offend a terrorist by labeling them wrongly. And now you ponder wether the BNP is left or right. To be honest you can do nothing but sit back and laugh at the Tory party.

You are very akin to the England Cricket team you have the very adept ability of grasping defeat from the jaws of victory.

Why waste time trying to 'defeat the far-left BNP'? They're a bunch of oiks going nowhere. The average IQ of a BNP thug must be almost as low as that of a Camerloon zombie.

Far more important that decent patriotic Conservatives unite with Cornerstone to defeat the far-left Cameron Mafia.

It's a far more dangerous menace.

TT

Nice to see the Tories have lost none of its infighting... Reminds you of the Major years. When will the mouse roar again?

Why waste time trying to 'defeat the far-left BNP'?

Because a party that has racism enshrined in its constitution should not be allowed any space on our political spectrum. I frankly don't care if they are on the Left or the Right in terms of abstract theory, and I am not sure why some people get so exercised about this. I do wonder if some Conservatives are responding to their revulsion at the BNP's ideas by trying to postion it as far away from themselves as they can. Be they left or right in an academic sense, I'm not sure that point helps us beat them.

There is, though, some very good stuff in the Cornerstone paper on this. I agree very strongly that we shouldn't directly fight the BNP on their own "policy" turf - I wouldn't advocate it with any other opponent, why this one? Of course immigration systems are a political issue along with many others, but we certainly should continue to make the case for the enormous benefits of immigration under a robust, fair, properly-managed system. We should also, in immigration policy, be careful (as the COnservative Party has done in its policy development so far) to draw the correct lines between the different classes of immigration.

Moderate, mainstream politicians and activists have a responsibility to "shut down" the gaps where the BNP flourish. Not by doing anything special, but by doing what we should be doing anyway - working hard to represent people's concerns, maintaining a high profile and keeping levels of communication high and clear. Sounds like what you'd do in any other target ward? Exactly.

Far more important that decent patriotic Conservatives unite with Cornerstone to defeat the far-left Cameron Mafia.

Good to know that you've got such a firm grasp of priorities, TT. You'd prefer to let local residents in a ward be "represented" (I use the word loosely) by a useless BNP councillor on a racist manifesto, then, while you expend your energy on your petty (and pointless) vendetta against your own leadership? I'm really not sure what's either decent or patriotic about that... Give it a rest, would you?

I have yet to see anyone make a posting that would suggest they have any real knowledge of any BNP member.
I have met many and they are completely average and completely disillusioned with what has happened to their country, not extremists. The Tories are largely to blame due to their loss of confidence in their core values and i as a core Tory supporter will now support them until I see the changes I seek. You are welcome to Darfur Dave, I certainly wont be voting for him though. What would be the point ?

I have met many and they are completely average and completely disillusioned with what has happened to their country, not extremists.

If that were really the case and your friends in the BNP so moderate, you might think they would insist their party removes the words

"...is wholly opposed to any form of racial integration between British and non-European peoples...to restoring, by legal changes, negotiation and consent, the overwhelmingly white makeup of the British population that existed in Britain prior to 1948."

from S1, para 2(b) of their constitution, wouldn't you?

Please do me a favour, don't make apologies for them here, let's just focus on beating these people.

Is Richard Carey a member of the Socialist Workers Party? He seems intent on turning this thread into the usual posturing bilge that goes on at the fringes of politics between the BNP and the SWP/UAF.

The Conservative Party should concentrate on the real enemy: the statist, anti-market, anti-free-speech, tax and spend fanatics of New Labour, about to get far worse under the deranged control-freak Brown.

I have seen the BNP close up in a number of elections in Barking and Dagenham and a few weeks ago in Thurrock.

When they have to face re-election, voters get the full picture and vote them out.

The activistsare almost always mindless, weird, social cripples and thuggish. Griffin and one or two others appear articulate, but the rest......

At Thurrock in May they arrived in a large group at the count and walked in together. They were mainly oddly dressed, often wearing long coats. I had not seen so many West Ham tattoos outside of Upton Park, and that was on the arms of their women activists.

When it was clear they were all defeated they melted away.

Frankly, membership of the BNP is hardly a move towards a larger social circle.

A glance at their literature indicates that they are racist and wnat control over everything else, including the economy.

Is Richard Carey a member of the Socialist Workers Party?

Probably, yes. He's another of these PC leftists who sees racists under every bed. God alone knows what he's doing in our party.

Probably young Richard is not old enough to remember that it was Enoch Powell, a truly great Conservative, who correctly predicted the mayhem that mass immigration would bring to our once green and pleasant land.

It would be interesting to poll the party membership on their views on the immigration problem. From my own personal knowledge of rank-and-file members I'm guessing their views will be a lot closer to Enoch's than Richard's!

I have no time for the BNP. They are antisemitic yobs with a brainpower and command of English equalled only by the likes of Jack Stone.

I can understand why some of our beleaguered fellow-Britons feel like voting for them though.

In December 2006, Charles Walker was one of twenty-one MPs who signed an Early Day Motion asking the government to stop promoting political correctness. (Np New Labour and no Lib Dems signed up to this EDM)

And yet, here we have him promoting the PC project. There really isn't anything more PC than the easy, fashionable and gleeful demonisation of a group of people whom the PC world, in which this Conservative MP flourishes, does not allow a right of reply.

Mr Walker says: "Those who dare criticise it will often find their names posted on websites such as Red Watch and Stormfront and become the subject of fevered online discussions between white supremacists."

Well, I regularly post on Stormfront Britain and I'm not a white Supremacist. And I can assure you that anyone who came across as such would soon find himself in the sin bin. Mr Walker has, obviously, not bothered to spend much time at SFB. I shouldn't imagine he'd want to as the facts of the matter would destroy this crafty chap's argument at a stroke.

"The BNP continues to be the legitimate political wing of the 'skinhead' faction".

So says our PC champion sagely. Once again, I have to demur. This 57-year-old English gent is not and never has been a skinhead.

There are certainly one or two who were skinheads in their time and, now and again, some of these speak of their skinhead youth with nostalgia. However, they are all grown up now with families to take care of and they are concerned, nowadays, with the same things that worry the rest of us.

Mr Walker got one thing right. When he describes the BNP as another Party of the left, I should imagine he's right about this. Certainly the British contributors at Stormfront are almost all pretty socialistic. They are, to a man, for the savagely disenfranchised and unconsidered British underclass, from which quite a few of them hail.

When the Charles Walkers of this world talk about "white supremacism" I should imagine the average Iraqi who has managed to survive thus far would have a view on this.

Mr Walker ought to have a bit of think about the fact that all but 16 Tories voted to go slaughter the poor, long-suffering Iraqi people in March 2003, whereas the WHOLE of British nationalism was against the war a long time before the Lib Dems fell off the fence.

If anyone at this website takes issue with my use of the term "slaughter", I have to say that only the dimmest would not have forseen what would be likely to happen given the blood-curdling pronouncements of some of the US Neocons after 9/11 gave their imperialistic visions some phoney street cred.

Anyway, as regards "white supremacism", I think Mr Iraq would be likely to point a very long finger at those who signed up to the non-stop devastation of their country over the last 16 years. Particularly in light of the fact that the dreadful Saddam was, until he was given the green light to invade Kuwait by the US Ambassador, April Glaspie, the secular bulwark against fundamentalist Iran in Western eyes.

As for the BNP or those who post on Stormfront, what would the average Iraqi have to say about them? Perhaps he might say something like this:

"If they would speak out against the oppressor and speak up for their own people in the land where all their ancestors are buried, Sallal-lahu 'alayhi wa-alihi wa-Sallam". (Blessings and peace of God be with him and his household)

but we certainly should continue to make the case for the enormous benefits of immigration under a robust, fair, properly-managed system.

Funny that. When the Conservatives stood for election in 1997 they were going to help us save energy by imposing 17.5% VAT on gas and electricity......I don't know if that is a future pledge or not.

We have an EU imposition of energy audits and I heard Jimmy Goldenballs son on Radio 4 telling us we should cut energy usage etc etc........but I know there is far more energy expended in building a new house than is ever lost in an old one.

I also know that taking green spaces - gardens etc - and concreting them for housing lowers the water table, diverts the flood plain, and raises the earth temperature....and since most UK water is surface water it can force us to drill aquifers if things progress or use desalination plants - which require energy.

The more incomers we host the more demands on transport, their desire for cars, the congestion, the imported goods, and the infrastructure load - yet noone comments on this aspect of our huge increase in carbon emissions or energy consumption

I find it strange how in 1973 we were tauht to turn off lights and conserve resources but now there is seemingly no limit to how much energy we can consume, nor how many people can live in BRitain to consume it. There seems to be a world of unlimited abundance and just paying more taxes will create unlimited supply.

I wonder about those micro-organisms that died millions of years ago so we could have oil, and those trees from the forests we eradicated across the Midlands around Sheffield - Sherwood Forest - and the coal deposits left from millions of years ago.

Apparently so long as we pay road tolls,VAT on energy, pay for energy audits, and save our food waste and recycle plastic; there is no limit to how many people we can accommodate and no limit to how many most of the Third World can export to us to populate those empty green spaces and farmers' fields.

He seems intent on turning this thread into the usual posturing bilge that goes on at the fringes of politics between the BNP and the SWP/UAF.

I'm obviously violating this site's comments policy in some way I wasn't aware of by posting on the topic of the thread! I can reassure you, "frustrated tory", that I'm well capable of turning my fire on Labour and LibDem opponents. By the way, what element of the campaigning that I wrote about doesn't primarily help us against our mainstream opponents anyway?

Is Richard Carey a member of the Socialist Workers Party?

Probably, yes. He's another of these PC leftists who sees racists under every bed. God alone knows what he's doing in our party.

Winning elections, usually...

Calling the BNP antisemitic these days is another example of lack of understanding of what they are about these days. If only, if only the Tories could expend as much energy trying to challenge the Labour Party then they might rescue the country from the toilet it has become, unfortunately you have sold your soul to compensate for your lack of self belief. Maybe it irks you that the average 15% vote the BNP commands represents the difference between a dramatic win or lose in the next GE. What can you do to draw those voters out without upsetting your new best friends ?

You are welcome to Darfur Dave

I know that I am now completely off-topic and apologise for that, but this comment, sad to say, rang loudly in my mind just now - is anyone else watching the package from the Congo on Newsnight, as the situation there threatens to disintegrate along the same ethnic lines that afflicted neighbouring Rwanda?

Yes, it's a different part of that stricken continent, but it just led me to wonder if some of my fellow contributors here don't reserve their most vitriolic anger for the right situations...

The BNP is not a 'leftwing' or socialist party. It has some less than liberal economic policies which really amount to a form of selective economic protectionism. This has been suggested by past Tory figures such as Joseph Chamberlain and Stanley Baldwin. Also, isn't this what Japan did after WW2? Not many people would call the Japanese Liberal Democratic Party a 'left-wing or 'socialist' party more a Japanese nationalist one.

The BNP has some hardline 'Right-wing' views on crime and its punishment, the EU and most notably of all immigration and asylum. It also supports selection in education and will encourage the growth of grammar schoools so there is not much sign of left-wing thinking there.


In short, the BNP is a nationalist party and that can mean traditionally 'Right-wing' stances on law and order, immigration, social mores, national sovereignty whilst at the same time having a less than economically liberal stance.

Richard Carey @ 19.23

Would you please enumerate the “enormous benefits” of immigration that you mention – they seem to have escaped me.

Most studies here and in other countries show that the effect of immigration on per capita GDP is marginal if not negative. Bringing in large numbers of workers to work at lower rates than the home population are willing to accept, must, mathematically, reduce both the average and the median wage.

If we then look at the costs imposed in terms of public services: health, housing, education and roads etc, the overall effect is negative. And don’t argue, please, that the poor mass immigrant makes a contribution through income tax and and national insurance. People on the minimum wage pay little tax and what they do pay goes nowhere to cover the structural costs that they impose.

Of course any healthy society benefits from a degree of interchange. But the question is and always has been one of scale. Talking of enormous benefits without a shred of evidence just looks naïve and just plays into the hands of the BNP (and UKIP with its zero net immigration policy). If we returned to a sensible, firm but fair policy as we once had, the BNP wouldn't get any votes at all (except for a few hard core nutters).

Peter Golds
"I had not seen so many West Ham tattoos outside of Upton Park, and that was on the arms of their women activists."
Priceless! I don't know how Iain Dale will feel about that, though.

You are welcome to Darfur Dave

Yes exactly what did happen to Dave's much-trumpeted concern for the Third World?

Oh sorry! That was part of last year's charade. Slap on wrist; silly me.

Martin,

Please don't try and stitch me up by selectively quoting me - it's really not very clever, and I'm not falling for it.

What I wrote was that we should not be put off "[making] the case for the enormous benefits of immigration under a robust, fair, properly-managed system."

You yourself in your final paragraph advocate the (presumably beneficial) case for a "sensible, firm but fair policy". I'm not entirely clear how you envisage that these two positions should differ.

Britain is full. Period.

The argument that immigration is 'good' for Britain comes from the far left.

Looks like we've sussed you, Richard.

The trouble is neither Labour nor the Conservatives have had a properly firm policy with regard to immigration. We have at least about 800,000 illegals in this country and that is why we now have ghettoes in our towns and cities. The British people were never properly consulted about this subject and that is why parties such as the BNP exist and will continue to thrive. If this had been dealt with properly by both Tory and Labour governments and the first immigration controls had been enacted in the 1950's then we wouldn't be having this discussion.

The argument that immigration is 'good' for Britain comes from the far left. Looks like we've sussed you, Richard.

Hardly, "Traditional Tory". However, if you feel so strongly that I've expressed opinions here that are at odds with the aims and objectives of the Party, you are of course free to lodge a written complaint with my local association.

Alternatively, you could just can it. None of this bile will help us campaign against Labour, LibDems or indeed minority parties like the BNP. Let's get back to the point and get on with the job.

Richard,

Sorry, but I have heard the same phrase "enormous benefits" used so often in this context by politicians that I feared I was reading a cliché. Those politicians ( ranging from Barbara Roche, through Damien green to david cameron)never produce the evidence to back up their claims. But they feel they have to make these unsubstantiated, grovelling nods to the BBC/Guardian/mass immigration lobby before they are permitted to even broach the subject.I suspect the phrase is on a prompt card handed out by the CRE to Tory politicians in return for exemption from the usual cries of "racist".

You haven't yet answered my question. I'd be very interested in reading your "balanced scorecard" or cost benefit analysis of the levels of immigration since 1997 in response to my admittedly very compressed summary.

I suspect that our positions might not be too different but you say "I'm not entirely clear how you envisage that these two positions should differ". I think the difference is that I would like an objective, rational and rigorous analysis of the advantages and disadvantages (social as well as economic) of immigration at various annual levels of arrival. Your presentation undermines the prospect of objectivity by introducing the phrase "enormous benefits" before the research has even begun. That doesn't leave open the possibility that the researchers might come up with a neutral or evan a negative conclusion.


Incidentally, in the interim I have read the Cornerstone paper which contained many good points. One point in it that I entirely agree with is that the issue isn't purely about economics, although of course those are an important factor. And it does highlight that while employers do benefit from cheap labour (did you hear Radio 4 about the conditions at the banana packing plant in Luton?), the structural and social costs (in economic terms, externalities) can be high.

haha, talk about the pot calling the kettle black......In case this bloke hasnt realised his party is being run by a muesli munching lefty. Who even licks up to Polly Toynbee, a real lefty babyboomer journo and wants to hug hoodies.

The BNP supports grammar schools, wants the return of capital punishment, banning the promotion of homosexuality in schools, withdrawal from the EU superstate, against id cards and mass cctv and the nanny state and political correctness.

If this Walker man thinks this is 'far left' he must be to the right of Attila Hun and far to right wing for the Blue Labour party.

The only left wing aspect about them is they dont approve of selling out our manufacturing industry and handing over national assets to crazed globalists.....

Oh, and one other left wing aspect is they frown on fat cats using the excuse that british people are lazy and incompetent compared to migrant workers to cover the fact they prefer immigrants so they can pay them lower wages.

Oh, and one other left wing aspect is they frown on fat cats using the excuse that british people are lazy and incompetent compared to migrant workers to cover the fact they prefer immigrants so they can pay them lower wages.

Martin,

I don't have any easy headline figures from quantitative research to trot off to you, but there is a good and balanced view of economic migration taken in our policy paper on the subject, with a large amount of evidence. Yes, perhaps some of it conflicts, and yes, I have never denied that population movements bring issues with them, but I don't apologise for making it a primarily political matter in my earlier posts.

It is political, and if I can present our messages in such a way as to shut down an obnoxious minority opponent while positioning us about a million miles away, you'd better believe I'm going to do it!

I don't have any easy headline figures from quantitative research to trot off to you,

Don't bother finding any either....it is usually produced on the fortune-teller principle.... Cross my palm with silver and I'll tell you what you want to know

No Economist can tell you the benefits of illegal, sub-minimum wage, non-taxpaying labour so he adds in a few New York Investment Bankers because they are documented as living in Holland Park even if they pay taxes in the British Virgin Islands

if you feel so strongly that I've expressed opinions here that are at odds with the aims and objectives of the Party, you are of course free to lodge a written complaint with my local association.

Richard, your far-left opinions on immigration are at odds with the good of our country.

They also closely resemble with those of Nulabour, the far left, and of course those who profit from sweated labour.

So what do you suppose your association could do about it in the event that someone 'complained' about your unpatriotic views? We do still permit free speech in this country...

...just.

Politics is more of a clock than a line and it is probably the case that Stalin and Hitler met at midnight.

You beat the BNP the same way you beat the Lib-Dems and the Labour Party.

You knock on every door in every street in every polling district in every ward in every constituency and you listen to people and do something about their everyday concerns.

However, it is the Welfare State which is the root cause of this problem, until it is completely reconfigured, we won't solve it with any amount of "controlled immigration". It is the "turn up and get taught/treated/handed cash" society that is the driver which sucks in many of the migrant workers and illegals.

The B&D victory for the BNP was gained mainly by arguing that "they" had taken all the houses/GP places/school places. They didn't campaign on "immigration" policy, they did so on its effects.

If we had vouchers for schools and social insurance for healthcare, only legal migrants gaining citizenship would be eligible. Migrant workers would have to pay and illegal immigration would be vastly discouraged.


I did propose elsewhere that a special Immigrant Assimiliation Levy be introduced say 10% on all incomes > £250.000 and all wealth > £2 million to provide a centralised fund for asylum seekers and immigrants which local authorities could draw upon.

It would be important also to levy this Contribution on non-domiciled individuals so they could make a contribution.

Truly Cameron has all you sycophantic Tories under his thumb.

Why should people vote for another left wing party when we have Labour and the Lib-Dems?

My vote may as well stay with the Labour party. If all the parties are left wing it's better the devil you know.

"A party that has racism enshrined in its constitution should not be allowed any space on our political spectrum."

Hmm. As I’ve already mentioned in this blog, I should imagine the ghosts of 500,000 or so Iraqis, their families and those still living who have no arms and legs would have a view on this racism thing.

I think such folk would be of a mind to support the quasi-mythical racism of the BNP, that Richard speaks of here, (the supposed proponents of which would not have invaded their lands) than the very actual racism that ushers you into your grave, practiced by all of those who voted to go a-slaughtering in March 2003.

There are various other another kinds of racism I’ll bet our anti-BNP, left-winger would never speak of. I bet he wouldn’t brook a conversation that pointed out the racism endemic in the world’s largest democracy, India, where the caste system has institutionalised the “I was better than you when I was born” thing for more than two thousand years. And I’m guessing that Richard would be even more annoyed if I were to point out that, in one of the world’s smallest democracies, democracy does exist but not for most Palestinians.

And what about the racism practiced against the majority population of Britain in recent times? How many working and middle-class Brits have been ethnically cleansed (white flight) out of their own ancient stamping grounds by the overt/covert racism and general lack of consideration of a variety of culturally intransigent colonisers?

It’s funny, you know, parliamentarians of every hue have been wont to mention the phrase "ethnic cleansing" when it pertains to the foreigner in a foreign land but NOT ONE MP has ever used it in the House of Commons to describe what mass immigration has done to the British.

And then there are those who have died at the hands of the immigrant, and those who have been raped, gang-raped, mugged, burgled and otherwise upset by those who were imposed upon us by the know-better, see-further social engineers of the treacherous political establishment in this country.

Hey Richard, we’ve all heard of Stephen Lawrence, our politicians, the PC Crowd and the media darlings have seen to that. But can you tell me the name of just a couple of the thousand or so British people who have been murdered in this country by first or second-generation immigrants since Stephen died?

Didn’t think so.

"We certainly should continue to make the case for the enormous benefits of immigration under a robust, fair, properly-managed system."

I notice you get a bit hot under the collar when you got pulled up over this remark, Richard. Now, why is that? If this isn’t what you really think, why did you say it?

"The enormous benefits". Hmm. Benefits to whom? The big businessman? The small businessman from the immigrant communities? The race relations industry? (Which currently employs around 55,000 people) The Global Villagers? The PC Crowd? What exactly would you say mass immigration has done for Joe and Jennifer Average, Richard? When their child gets to school age and they feel the need to move further out of the big city so that little Johnny doesn’t have to be educated alongside half a classroom full of children who can’t speak English, that is?

You know, Richard, if you were to extrapolate the stats in the 2001 census with those in the 2005 British Crime Survey, you would find that, in Britain, an individual black person is 110 times more likely to murder an individual white person than the other way around. An individual Asian is 20.5 times more likely. And the facts and figures in the 2005 BCS were compiled before one black man and three Asians blew up 52 people in London.

I think you would have to agree that these British dead could not possibly figure in your “enormous benefits of immigration” equation.

If anyone here wants to check out a fraction of those whose presence, according to Richard, has been so "enormously beneficial" to our society in the last 14 PC years, go check out the Rogues Gallery at the iamanenglishman website.

"Moderate, mainstream politicians and activists have a responsibility to "shut down" the gaps where the BNP flourish."

I’ll tell you what, Richard, why don’t do try something really radical? Why don’t you just put the British people first for a change? You know, those who made this a nation that everyone else on the planet wants to come to. Those that made all the sacrifices, worked so damn hard and died all the deaths in all the wars so that THEIR descendants could have a fair crack of the whip?

If you stop advocating policies that only truly benefit a select few (apart from the immigrant colonial that is) you might just find that the “mainstream politician” might improve his image a tad in the eyes of Joe, Jennifer and little Johnny Average.

Think it's just better to ignore them.

Belatedly, I agree!

TomTom is always extremely well informed - I take my hat off to him.

SHOW me where the BNP are racist. Show me where people have been FORCED to vote BNP. Revenge vote? "Ooh, I'll vote BNP just to annoy the whole government." This is stupid. They are coming up with idiotic reasons as to why the left are failing. Any source for all this slew of rubbish? Just the Left putting down the Right to make them look better after Iraq.

People don’t want empty left wing policies anymore. That’s why there is a huge increase in the right.

The first page of their website Chris. To join, the following condition applies

'Membership of the British National Party is open to those of British or kindred European ethnic descent.'

For non Whites

'we ask them to respect our right to an organisation of our own, for our own'

People don't look into it anymore. As soon as the Left wingers call the Right racist and Neo-Nazi. They accept it, belive them and don't look into it! Give the BNP website a quick look over and see for yourself!

People don't look into it anymore. As soon as the Left wingers call the Right racist and Neo-Nazi. They accept it, believe them and don't look into it! Give the BNP website a quick look over and see for yourself!

Richard @ 01.18

Thanks for the link to the policy paper, which I’ll read as time permits over the next few days.

Just skimming the first couple of pages I’ve noticed this key sentence: “The central argument of this paper is that Britain does benefit from some immigration, but not from any or all immigration.” So far, so good – that seems a self evident truth.

I hate to say this, but that is far more measured and objective than your formulation of “enormous benefits”. You refer to your political stance, but does it not occur to you that you might put off or even antagonise potential voters by talking about “enormous benefits”, when the evidence from their own lives suggests otherwise?


Is there any difference, morally, between the membership qualification of the BNP, and that of the National Black Police Officers' Association.

They want a voice for people of the UK and people of the same race. They don't put other races down. Other races should have a nationalist party! They should be proud of their race and culture as we are! The Israelis do! Are the Jews evil racists and Nazi’s? Why isn't there a big fuss about the nationalist party in Israel? Because it would be absurd to come out with some of the stuff people do over here. If the BNP is racist sow are the people who voted Israelis nationalist party. Why can’t left-winger accept that to show interest in your race and culture isn’t raciest? There are White nationalists, Black nationalists, Asian nationalists, Arab nationalists and so on. Are they evil racists as well?

Chris, I'm got going to carry on this debate but the membership guideline as quite clear in what they apply. White yes, and other colour no. Why is kindred European ethnic descent ok but say Indian no matter how far back not?

Sean i agree with you. I don't agree with any organisation splitting itself off by race.

Ok. Well thank you for you reply. But in closing;

The BNP accepting members on their race isn't a bad thing. It ISN'T "I want this nationality and no other 'cause we hate 'em". It's "This nationality make up the British people and we're just carrying on and supporting the British culture and way of life."
An Indian like you described is Indian with his own culture and religion that he should be proud of. He should do everything he can to keep his culture and religion ALIVE in India.

Say this Indian was a doctor in Britain. I mean how do you justify taking all the skilled workers away from India, a third world country? Quite a few people believe in black magic in India, because there is a serious lack of doctors their. The government brought these people over for cheap labour just because the doctors here demanded pay that was fair because of the work they're doing. Now look at the NHS!

"The BNP accepting members on their race isn't a bad thing. It ISN'T "I want this nationality and no other 'cause we hate 'em"."

I don't want to demonise all BNP members, but clearly quite a high proportion of the membership *do* hate members of other races. Remember the outrage caused by the selection of Sharif Gawaz as a council candidate in Bradford, when it was thought (incorrectly as it turned out) that he wasn't white.

"Why is kindred European ethnic descent ok but say Indian no matter how far back not?"

Because people from Northern Europe make up the same race as the original people in Britain. An Indian person's different from us, EVERYONE should be proud of these differences!!!

I mean look at Burnley. The whole town is divided! People just want to be with people like themselves that share their own culture and religion and so on. That's not racist.

"Remember the outrage caused by the selection of Sharif Gawaz as a council candidate in Bradford"

I know you're not demonizing all the BNP supporters. I don't think it was a high proportion of people that "hate" others. But there was outrage because she was foreign to Briton. A foreign person isn't going to have strong nationalist agenda, is she? Because that's what people voted for. A strong nationalist country, of course they would've been upset buy someone who's more left than right speaking for them. Because that isn't what they wanted.

Oh for gods sake listen to yourselves. Virtaully everyone is an immigrant to this country at some point. Tyler thinks you can't be English unless you have a white skin and Chris thinks you can't be patriotic if you have a non anglo saxon name. How anyone can be so bigotted and narrow minded is beyond me.

End of comments about this for me.

With regards to the BNP restricting membership to white Europeans, is it not the case that after pandering to minorities Cameron finds they suddenly start stomping their feet and taking him to race tribunals when they don't get what they want. This in itself would justify the BNP's position otherwise they would end up dominated by the few minorities that joined and policy decisions would go the same way as the Tories have done.
I feel if immigration had been dealt with properly ten years ago we would all be more at ease with each other, it wasn't and we aren't. It might not have been an issue.

With regards to the BNP restricting membership to white Europeans, is it not the case that after pandering to minorities Cameron finds they suddenly start stomping their feet and taking him to race tribunals when they don't get what they want. This in itself would justify the BNP's position otherwise they would end up dominated by the few minorities that joined and policy decisions would go the same way as the Tories have done.
I feel if immigration had been dealt with properly ten years ago we would all be more at ease with each other, it wasn't and we aren't. It might not have been an issue.

"SHOW me where the BNP are racist."

Oh, OK then.


Dictionary:
rac·ism (rā'sĭz'əm) Pronunciation Key
n.

1. The belief that race accounts for differences in human character or ability and that a particular race is superior to others.
2. Discrimination or prejudice based on race.

BNP Constitution:

..is wholly opposed to any form of racial integration between British and non-European peoples. It is therefore committed to stemming and reversinf the tide of non-white immigration and to restoring, by legal changes, negotiation and consent, thr overwhelmingly white makeup of the British population that existed in Britain prior to 1948.

In short, kick out the black and brown people.

It isn't about her name. It's about her race and culture. She's not going to stand for a Nationalist party in Britain. She isn't standing for true British people; she isn't listening to the people that want a nationalist country. Because she isn't British. She’s just carrying on running for a lefty party. People are fed up with the Left. Stop trying to draw up crazy conclusions that won't stick.

I hate to say this, but that is far more measured and objective than your formulation of “enormous benefits”.

Martin,

If you object to my use of the adjective to push my point earlier, then fine, we can agree to differ on my drafting prowess if you like! It's remarkable how many peopole here have attempted to fit me with a black hat on the basis of what I believe was a moderate and tangential point in a post primarily about campaigning! I'm sure we'll come back to the policy substance on immigration in other threads in future, this one was supposed to be about beating the BNP but seems to have got stuck in a bit of a rut.

Let's give it one more go, though:

I don't move an inch in believeing that immigration, under a properly-managed system, can bring real benefits to Britain. I would certainly not like to live in the kind of Britain the likes of the BNP have in mind! What I don't think that either of us would argue with is that the system has not been properly managed for a number of years now, and that certainly doesn't make it any easier to make my case.

Right, I'll just go and look for my tin helmet now before they all kick off again...

Richard
Thanks. We are in broad agreement, I believe,that some immigration can bring some benefits. The questions, as ever, are how much and what sort of people and how do you avoid negative impacts outweighing any benefits?

The thing that really provoked me is what I saw as your over-optimistic presentation. I'm just hoping that some mainstream politicians will at last be candid about the issue, without feeling the need to grovel, en passant, to the mass-immigration lobby.

If grassroots supporters challenge, it will minimise the dangers of "groupthink". I hope that will be of some use.

Point of information from the front line in Bradford - Sharif is male. Several correspondents knew so little about the subject they made this obvious by calling him 'she'

I agree entirely with Mr Walker and have been saying most of this for some time.

The key is to emphasise the clearly un-Conservative policies in their manifestos when we campaign against them. If we discredit the veneer of policy they have drawn up than the real motives behind the organisation will be laid bare.

It's important that they are not seen as right wing because it makes "right wing" a byword for evil.

I admit to having thought of voting for them myself - I was put off when I read their manifesto and realised they were not an Enoch Powell-era right wing party, but really just a populist party with one motive - like the SNP (but obviously vastly worse).

It should also be noted that by attacking them on these policies we don't seem to be appeasing them and their agenda á la Margaret Hodge.

As for those who think the BNP are not a threat and should have no publicity - the BNP represent a force which has risen and receded again and again through history, and a good deal of vigilance is required to ensure they don't come back unbeknownst to us. Cornerstone group publications do not get wide publicity, and we would (or should) attack them in this way only in local campaigning. Normally I agree that they should not have unnecessary publicity like those court cases.

Ok so if this is just about opposing an openly racist political party then when can we expect to see the same level of debate and activity against Respect (in particular) and, to a lesser extent, the Welsh and Scottish Nationalists who have all, in their own different ways, racist agendas.

In my limited experience there are two types of racists: The ignorant ones and the ones who have know that racism is daft but use the race card to secure popularity.
The former are often good people and can be enlightened, the latter are just plain wicked. Is Margaret Hodge ignorant?

Andrew Woodman - Oh for gods sake listen to yourselves. Virtaully everyone is an immigrant to this country at some point.

Speak for yourself Andy, or is it André?

Mind you, I had worked out that numerous Camerloonies on this site were refugees from the Planet Tharg.

Send them back!

Mr Davis - we fight a limited number of seats against Respect, a party who will surely crumble as the memory of the dodgy dossier et al recedes into memory. The SNP and Plaid can and should be and even are sometimes attacked in exactly the same way.

I was watching BBC question time last night.And in it an identikit five man panel called for more immigration whilst a carefully selected BBC audience applauded rapturously.

I thought- what about the opinion polls which show 75% of the public concerned about immigration?

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been saved. Comments are moderated and will not appear until approved by the author. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

Comments are moderated, and will not appear until the author has approved them.

#####here####

Categories

ConHome on Twitter

    follow me on Twitter

    Conservative blogs

    Today's public spending saving

    New on other blogs

    • Receive our daily email
      Enter your details below:
      Name:
      Email:
      Subscribe    
      Unsubscribe 

    • Tracker 2
    • Extreme Tracker