As every right-thinking person instinctively knows, one is not allowed to refer to the British National Party without such reference being accompanied by frenzied denunciations. As if the mere act of acknowledging the existence of that organisation is sufficient to brand the speaker with a mark of depravity that has to be warded off in advance.
I have decided to scratch my name off the cast list of that particular pantomime. The show has been running for far too long, everyone knows the script by heart and it all sounds to terribly, suffocatingly tedious and, if this article in the Times is any indication at all, then I am not the only person to have lost patience with the same old, same old.
What I find so interesting about the article is not so much in what is being said but in the manner in which it is being said. Gone is the fear and loathing, gone is the high moral indictment, gone are the blistering accusations. Instead, the rising popularity of the BNP (and its leader, Nick Griffin) is examined with a tone which is temperate, measured and, in some places, bordering on the sympathetic. That remarkable change of tone is, of itself, significant:
About 70 people are packed into a back room of the Golden Lion pub, with not a skinhead or pair of Doc Martens in sight and more tweeds than T-shirts. They are male and female, young and old, working class and middle class, ex-Labour and ex-Tory, several of them Daily Telegraph readers. They are mostly solid Yorkshire folk who have watched immigrants transform areas in which they grew up and believe – rightly or wrongly – that their way of life is under threat. They are bewildered more than hate-filled. They are fearful more than fear-inspiring, and feel gagged by political correctness. They do not come from sink estates. They are stakeholders, people with something to lose.
Throwing their lot in with the BNP may not be the wisest course of action but it would be a gross mistake to dismiss these people as knuckle-dragging bigots. They are unlikely to think of themselves in those terms. Indeed, they are people whose national character (or a part of it, at least) was forged in the fight against national socialism and while I might question the course of their political migration, I cannot find it in myself to blame them for their clear disenchantment with the status quo. They are, in my view, the excretions of a political establishment that resembles a rotting carcass dressed up in smelly old rags and made to dance. The political parties that they once voted for in droves are chained to ideas that were past their sell-by date half a century ago leaving them with nothing to do except split the atoms of a narcolepsy-inducing consensus and nothing to say outside of opinion-poll approved muckamuck. The current nomenklatura has power but nothing else. It is a carcinomatic, shuffling, preposterous demi-corpse which has sloughed off even the pretence of listening to or representing those solid Yorkshire folk.
It is in this kind stony desert that someone like Nick Griffin can seem like an oasis of sparkling common sense; a plain-speaking, down-to-earth principled man who boldly and publicly says the things that many people think but are too cowed to even whisper. That is not my view of him but it is clearly the perception among a small (but growing) minority for whom supporting and voting for “the extreme right” is no longer taboo. The BNP has already made material inroads into local government level and they are confident that they are going to improve on that position in the next round of local council elections next month. I am reluctant to bet against it.
The BNP is now the only political party in this country whose membership is actually growing along with their general professionalism. Despite (and maybe even because of) their pariah-status they have built a flourishing nationwide network of supporters, footsoldiers and sympathisers, particularly among the white working classes many of whom feel (not unreasonably) that they have been treated with contempt by the establishment.
I am not suggesting that the BNP is poised to take over the country. They are not even close. But they have already travelled the road from being a bunch of untouchable cranks into a serious (and for many, a worrying) political force. Who is to say that they cannot go further? They are organised, enthusiastic and they have a very clear vision which sounds very appealing to a lot of people, particularly when its pitted against the burbling, discredited party-lines of their bloodless, one-note opponents.
I am as sure as I can be that simply shouting the word ‘racist’ is not going to work any more. Indeed, the growth of the BNP thus far is pretty conclusive evidence that it has never worked at all. So what will work? Ignore them and hope that they just fade away or implode? Well, possibly, But I wouldn’t count on that. Persecute them? That’s been tried (boy, has it been tried) and has had the exact opposite of its intended effect. Outlaw them? May as well attach a booster-rocket to their bandwagon. Call them racists? See above. Classical liberal arguments? Much to my despair they appear to have no effect on anything.
I rather think that support for the BNP will continue to grow, at least for a while yet. We live in a time and place of political bankruptcy and the BNP is the only party that appears to have a bit of loose change jingling in its pockets. Nick Griffin has turned them into a credible (though not unstoppable) force and is savvy enough to have publicly convinced his supporters of the need to play the long-term game. Whether they will be able to sustain their momentum remains to be seen but, in the meantime, the very best weapon in their armoury is the habitual assumption that they cannot possibly succeed.
Scratch your name by all means but forgive me if I don’t join you. As the husband of a miscegenated wife and father of a miscegenated child I have nothing but contempt for anyone stupid enough to think that the problems of England will be ameliorated to any degree whatsoever by turning it into a whites only museum.
Multiculturalism is a fact of life. If you got rid of every non-white, non-protestant person in the country you would still have a multicultural society. The cultural divides between city and country, young and old, etc… would all still exist.
Knuckle dragging bigots they may not be. Fuck-wits looking for yet another politician to geive them a panacea for all their perceived ills they most certainly are.
Started a new route in South Yorkshire yesterday; never saw so many knuckle-draggers in my life.
Sorry, but you just have to believe your eyes and stop making excuses.
6 Million Jews can’t be wrong, unless they were in a minority, or attacked by an organised gang like the BNP..
The fact that the left calls anybody they dislike “racists” (in spite of the intense racialism of such people as Karl Marx) should not blind us to the fact that there are racialists about.
And many racialists are in the British National Party. And I am not talking about people who use racial language or who like some people more than others (almost everyone used to fit into that – including Winston Churchill), I mean really nasty people who want to do other people harm simply because they do not like the colour of their skin.
I am certainly not saying that everyone in the B.N.P. are like that – but enough of them are to make it very silly for anyone else to have anything to do with them.
If people dislike political correctness (and so on) they do not have to support the B.N.P.
What about supporting the U.K.I.P. – Independence party? There are non racialist options out there and this is one of them.
When people are besieged by violent crime and cultural intimidation from an alien population which has been settled in their midst, and their complaints about it are ignored by mainstream politics and denounced with name-calling by the mass media — they will learn to disregard mainstream politics and the mass media. This is human nature.
I’m American, but I have relatives in Yorkshire and I follow the news without preconceptions, and I know something of what is really going on there.
The issue preoccupying these people is Muslims. Not surveillance cameras. Not globalization. Not ID cards. Not the EU. Muslims. The mainstream parties have declared that issue off-limits to acceptable discussion, preferring to talk about trivia. Naturally people are turning to forces outside the mainstream parties.
The title “Weimar Britain” hints that Britain might be heading toward fascism. I don’t believe that. In a stable democracy, the function of fringe parties is to allow people to cast protest votes, to force mainstream politics to take up issues that the mainstream parties prefer to avoid.
Will the BNP form a government someday? The mainstream parties can easily prevent it — by addressing the issue the BNP has made its own. If they absolutely refuse to do so, the possibility of Prime Minister Griffin taking office someday can’t be ruled out.
The mainstream parties can easily prevent it — by addressing the issue the BNP has made its own.
The Labour Party has been playing up fear of foreigners as a central plank of its strategy for at least 3 years now. Here’s Blair last September:
Note the rhetorical elision of “immigration” and “foreigners” with crime and terrorism, and the offer of police-state measures as the solution.
In the 2005 election manifesto, the National Identity Scheme was mentioned just once, in the section on “immigration”.
The probable next deputy leader of the Labour Party, John Cruddas MP, is completely explicit about contesting the BNP’s appeal to the white working class, by offering to free them from competition for housing from immigrants, not so explicit that this creates another ethnicly defined political client group and implies segregation.
And here is the Home Secretary, John Reid, just last month:
Why not an alternative to the mainstream parties – and the BNP, Greens, etc.
How about a real credible UK Libertarian Party?
My girlfriend was involved with the free speech society at Leeds Univerity, as was a certian Mark Collet the rising star of the BNP, due to the student unions ‘no platform’ policy.
He sent her various emails ranging from those with dubious content through to out right rascit material untill she sent him a strongly worded email infoming him exactly what she thought of him and his views.
Fast forward a few years, i saw him on TV being exposed by a documentery film maker for what he really is. He even stated that he could SMELL jews, unfortunatly for him the film maker was jewish.
He must have a had a cold that week, hey!
Also i don’t think posters on this website would approve of the BNPs econmic policies either – truly they are National Socialists and we all know what that really means
I have been a supporter of the B.N.P. now for many, many years and have found everyone of them I have ever met to be fairly decent people.
I have served my country for 12 years, I have contributed to the system via the taxes my business paid and I have worked for charity in various parts of the world.
The B.N.P. will triumph because of people like me, some of the ones, I started with are now dead because of age. But I have met our replacements – the organisers who are just 27 and angry.
The B.N.P. is here to stay.
I have been a supporter of the B.N.P. now for many, many years and have found everyone of them I have ever met to be fairly decent people.
I have served my country for 12 years, I have contributed to the system via the taxes my business paid and I have worked for charity in various parts of the world.
The B.N.P. will triumph because of people like me, some of the ones, I started with are now dead because of age. But I have met our replacements – the organisers who are just 27 and just as dedicated.
The B.N.P. is here to stay.
not the Alex above is absolutely right to draw attention to the BNP’s insane economic policies. They would ruin the UK in very short order.
I’ve checked out the BNP’s website a couple of times and they have seriously toned down the racial rhetoric (including some utterly bonkers thing about deporting everyone who wasn’t three generations white British – ie half the population). They can do this because they can shift the focus away from race and onto Islam.
But, if you scrape away just a little at the surface of their website you will discover the same old racial buffoonery, Thor’s hammer pendants, a record label called “Great White” and all manner of assorted tomfoolery and appalling spelling.
Green Arrow, I have no idea what part of the multiverse you come from but don’t you find the BNP just a little sinister and ever so slightly bonkers? I thinking they’re raving mad, myself.
Anyway, especially fro you… catsthatlooklikehitler.com
I cannot help but feel that Eamon Brennan is confusing race and culture. They are two different things. And the right to discriminate against either of them – as long as it is peaceful and done through non-association or avoidance – should be available to any person.
Multi-culturalism is a flawed mindset that explicitly gives equal standing to those cultures that themselves do not embrace multi-culturalism. Therefore, as history has taught us repeatedly, it is not “here to stay” but merely here until something stronger and more aggressive (be it a more evangelical meme or a whole new culture to replace the current British one) replaces it. Multi-culturalism cannot function as the lynch-pin of a societies beliefs or standards, because it permits other beliefs or standards to be its equal.
The BNP is a curious beast. I used to read its website (as I read the websites of all the political parties) and it had interviews with Sikhs and other things. I won’t pretend to understand where the BNP draws the line between races/cultures that are “desirable” and those that are not “desirable”, but I do understand that it is almost as left-wing as the pre-war Nazi Party in terms of economic values.
Brett makes the case over at Harry’s Place that PR is helping the BNP gain more ground. Will be interesting to see how the BNP in May. I fear they will do rather well.
The MSM are, yet again, trying to stamp out a couple of pesky rats while avoiding the elephant, on purpose.
There is a fascist party with:
An MP.
Who gained their seat in parliament via vile anti-semitic campaigning.
Who are regularly given airtime on the BBC.
Who cheered for Hezb’allah.
Who would like to see Israel “wiped off the face of the map”.
Of course, because the “respect” party is made up from an unholy alliance between the far-left SWP and extremist muslims they’ll never be properly tackled by the wet London press.
Before every local election we get the same scare stories about the BNP and they never do as well as the hyperbolic copy warns.
Andrew,
I am curious, why do you ‘fear they will do rather well’ ???
Eamonn: The anger that the BNP appears to draw its support from is alienation. The foreign culture(s) that have implanted themselves in parts of Britain with active assistance from the state /political elite. The culture is so different it does not even have the same historical roots from which could give a vague sense of familiarity and or kinship. Your notion that there are differences within a society – young, old, town, country, working class, middle class is of course true but for society to function it needs to at least rub along together rather than effectively operate within different worlds. I think your point about fuck-witdom is a wider point that simply the BNP alone.
Guy: Indeed NuLab have talked a good fight – but surely this (i) trying to shore up the leaking support the Old white working class Labour base with sounds bites and (ii) a mechanism to take away everyones liberty. Their multicult-gramscian under pinnings remain and continue apace.
You clearly do not understand what multicultural means. An adaptive and wide range of tolerant views is the very essence of English culture. City, country, old, young are NOT an expression of multiculturalism (i.e. you are making a semantic category error). It also has nothing whatsoever to do with race.
The PC have brought all this on, themselves.
It’s the pendulam swinging back
Hey, not the Alex.
I stood against Collett twice in the locals.
He’s a lippy little bastard, with a nice line in heavies to save him from himself.
The title is a bit misleading, or at least I thought it was going to go in a slightly other direction.
The similarities are not just the populist discontent that fuels such parties, but the fact that, just as the Weimer Republic did, was to create (or foster and grow) the Statist infrastructure, the Leviathan, but not hang on to it strongly enough, allowing zealots to move right on in, legally, if slightly unethically.
Cultures have, and likely will always have, xenophobes, or racists, or whatever. It is pleasant to ignore them, as one would and should with any societal margin. They may even gain and lose membership. One may even fear less a substantial growth in membership as long as one perceives that they have no real political power.
The existence of such as thr BNP or the American Nazi Party (or their left equivalents) is much less concerning if we in the US and UK did not have in place far reaching, invasive infrastructures, helmed at present by somewhat less malignant folk. But as long as we allow the relatively passive form of Statism to flourish, there is always much greater fear of these marginal mentalities.
I think the main point of your article is quite valid. There is no better way to strengthen a political movement than to make them underdogs who are being actively attacked by the power of the state.
it is also a valid point that if the needs of ordinary people to life and property in lands where their ancestors have lived for millennia are ignored or forced underground, then those ideas will resurface in a more virulent form.
There is also the issue of ‘multiculturalism’. It does not really exist other than as a transition state unless held up by outside forces and funding. Otherwise people just get on with becoming a part of the mainstream culture and the history of that culture and its values become those of their children and grandchildren.
How many people know that there were black immigrants to the UK some centuries ago? They simply merged in with and intermarried and long ago vanished as a ‘separate’ group.
The same will happen, if allowed and if the numbers are kept at a reasonable level, to immigrants of today. If the government did its job of dealing with the borders and kept its nose out of everything else, those people will disappear as identifiable ‘different culture/races’ within a century or two and all that remains will be British.
A good approach is to treat them like everyone else and let them make fools of themselves if they so desire. I remember a Rivera show on TV in the US 20 years or so ago when he got his nose broken: he put neo-Nazi’s and black separatists on the show at the same time for a debate… and a riot broke out.
Scratch all credibility of the causes of either group… for decades.
…deporting everyone who wasn’t three generations white British…
Really? Now that is utterly bonkers. Apart from the difficulty of determing what those criteria mean at the margins, it is almost everyone I know in London except me. And most of the Echt-Brits are married to foreigners.
What do you do with empty major cities? Let the grass grow (no foreign fescues permitted)?
Thanks to those who have helpfully pointed out my lack of understanding. I should have made it clear that my post referred to the BNPs own conflation of race and culture. It is they who wish to solve the problem of multiculturalism by paid repatriation based on race.
Perry you are quite wrong in your assertion that the various divides in this country are not an expression of mutl-culturalism. This is based on your own narrow definition of the term. There are plenty of white anglo-saxon people with whom you don’t share a culture. I agree that it culture has nothing to do with race, but try telling the BNP that. They are happy to equate the two things.
By the way, if your definition of multiculturalism were correct, then you can rest easy, because it has never been practiced in this country. I see no Sharia courts here, no Halakha being used in the courts. I see no acceptance of honour killings. There are no imams in the house of lords and no canine options in restaurants.
What do you want exactly? Monoculturalism? I am not English. I don’t share your cultural values although many of them co-incide. But I obey the law, resepct my neighbours and I pull my weight. As far as I am concerned the people of this country have no right to ask any more of me.
“not the Alex above is absolutely right to draw attention to the BNP’s insane economic policies. They would ruin the UK in very short order.”
The same can be said for NuLabor economic policies, except for the timeline.
Check out the National Front site. I read it for the “Gardening Page”. You should find a lot you agree with, although they could be a little Liberal for some of you. The jokes are worth a read: How do you get a Black to wear a condom? Print a Nike logo on it. Substitute “teenager” and it’s perfectly acceptable.
Oh no, don’t tell me I’m going to be banned… again.
It is not ‘my’ definition, it is the correct definition. Multi-culturalism is about ethnic identity politics and nothing else.
It is not about ‘gay’ culture or ‘home counties’ culture or ‘sailing’ culture or ‘S&M’ culture or ‘ladies-that-lunch’ culture or ‘boozer’ culture. Those are all things that happen within the broader context of English or British or even post-enlightenment European culture. Multi-culturalism is not about any of those things.
Another Wrist job then
Terry?
I see Perry
The “correct definition” is happily the one that you choose to accept.
I supose this is what allows the following statements in successive posts.
“It (multculturalism) also has nothing whatsoever to do with race.”
and
“Multi-culturalism is about ethnic identity politics and nothing else.”
Perry, on another post you made a comment to the effect that most people who oppose immigration are racist. I cannot speak for the English, but I imagine that if I were one I would be in favor of limiting immigration to some degree out of concern for the preservation of my culture. I truly don’t have a problem with the color of someone’s skin, what I often do have a problem with is the way people behave, which very often is a direct result of their cultural background. It just so happens, unfortunately, that dark skin often coincides with being a Muslim. As I do have a problem with many important aspects of the Muslim culture, I could easily be mistaken for a racist.
Eamon,
Why do you think outfits like the MCB conflate religion and race so much?
Is it not because hitherto they haven’t managed to get Islam on the protected minority bandwagon because race is protected while religion isn’t?
The “sub-cultures” Perry points out have rubbed along together for decades or centuries (pretty much). We’ve had race-riots but we haven’t had riots over which is better – cricket or football.
Multi-culturalism is about ethnic identity. In the modern UK the only thing considered lower than a racist is a kiddy-fiddler. MC is basically the tribal rights wing of the PC crowd. It is collectivism on the oldest, most obvious lines.
The “race thing” has simply been blown several orders of magnitude greater by the grievance industry than any of the other divisions in society. It’s deeply patronising. and it’s deeply stupid.
Picture the scene. Four white guys are kicking the bejesus out of a black fella in the street. The default thought is “hate crime / Steven Lawrence etc.”. Odds are it isn’t. There are so many other reasons for such brutality to occur because all five actors here are individuals. How do you know that the black fella isn’t gay and the white lads are indulging in a bit of queer-bashing? But that isn’t your initial reaction is it?
MC institutionalises the difference on racial lines. It excludes ethnic minorities from many things. I once had a Jewish (non-practising) girlfriend. She told me about how terrible it was when just before Christmas the teacher at her primary school announced that the class would make pictures of Christmas trees with sparkles and such. The Teacher then told my ex that she and the other Jew in the class weren’t to participate. She was 7 at the time. Can you imagine how she felt? Can you imagine kids at that age being forced into having a fun activity with glitter and the like turned into a statement of cultural and ethnic “diversity”?
Guy Herbert rightly points out that the Labour party says a lot about dealing with the concerns of the population. However, they are not believed.
I do not know about Scotland (I have not been there for years), but in every part of England I know (north and south, east and west) people have either never heard of “tough guy John Reid” (who seems to be the Labour point man on such things) I do not believe a word he says – and that includes long time Labour party members. Although, of course, the Labour party has lost of its membership over the last few years (not just because of Iraq, but because of a number of things “they are a bunch of liars” being the most important).
However, (in the interests of fairness) the Conservative party is no more trusted (again north and south, east and west). Again even long time members of the Conservative party do not trust the leadership (with a few exceptions – for example David Davis seems to be trusted).
It is a moot point whether the major parties (Conservative, Labour and Liberal Democrat) can regain the trust of the British people, or whether something like the U.K.I.P. – Independence party will have to take their place.
By the way “dealing with the concerns of the people” does not mean kicking out everyone who has the “wrong” colour skin.
Alisa, I did say ‘most’, not all.
And I admit that whilst I am confident that western cultures can naturally induce people from other cultures to either assimilate (not that important) or integrate on a functional level (very important as that ‘simply’ means accepting the values of the Enlightenment our very civilisation is based on), a high proportion of Muslims do seem on the face of it to be something of an exception.
As ‘Islamophobia’ is clearly not racism (Islam is a choice, not a race), wanting to restrict immigration by Muslims for distaste for Islamic beliefs and the consequent cultural tendencies that seem to be widely held amongst Muslim communities, cannot therefore be racist if their beliefs and culture really are the reason for wanting to excluded them.
It is just that so very very often, I find people who oppose immigration, when you actually hear their reasons ‘down the pub’, it is really just a manifestation of their underpinning racism. Intellectually it does not have to be as there are many non-racist arguments that make perfect sense against unrestricted immigration… but in my experience it usually is based on racism. That is simply my repeatedly validated observation.
Eamon, there us nothing contradictory about those two statements whatsoever.
Multi-culturalism is about identity politics based on the notion that all cultures are equal (preposterous) and that by using the state to keep minority cultures assimilating (via anti-discrimination laws and state funded non-English speaking education and services for example), that can produce political blocks that can be advantageous to some politicians.
A minority ethnicity is usually associated with a culture until the members of that ethnic group are integrated within the host culture. This is transitory unless the state prevents the natural process of integration. In 2007, not many intelligent people would describe a person who is Polish American as belonging to a separate culture from mainstream America in any but the most trivial way. Yet 75 to 100 years ago, Polish immigrants did indeed have a separate immigrant ethnic culture.
Race is not the issue. The whiteness of Polish Americans is not the issue. Similarly the race of African-Americans is actually not the issue either. To quote something a (black) American I knew used to say “I am an American, due to an accident of parentage my American parents just happen to be black. As I know nothing of African culture or history, stop calling me an African American.” To him his race was a fact but irrelevant to his culture…but more importantly, he was not ‘ethnic’ African in any way whatsoever.
Perry: .. but in my experience it usually is based on racism. That is simply my repeatedly validated observation. I find it hard to believe, and still think that much of it is various forms of “culturalism”, rather than racism, but I may indeed be naive. I just think that what often comes across as racism, like off-color jokes, and derogatory terms when referring to certain people, is really based on cultural intolerance, if you will, rather than racism. Of course, it does not help matters that many of the people who talk this way just happen to be morons anyway, but I still think that it is important to make the distinction. BTW, personally I do object to name-calling, because it is not funny and generally pointless, but I do enjoy jokes that accurately describe a cultural phenomenon. I liked the one about condoms with the Nike logo someone brought up here recently. On the other hand, if someone made a joke about Condi Rice, solely based on her being black, I don’t think I would find it funny.
I’m with the MSM today as far as all these people are concerned when creeping up by slim degrees on being overt racialists.
As for which, I’m going to have to think seriously about a clear-out of my blog roll.
To better understand the meaning of ‘multiculturalism’:
It is being correctly used by those who advocate for it. When attempting to understand the logical meaning of the word, its use of ‘multi’ equates with ‘multiple’ or even more closely, ‘multiplex’.
Much as a multiplex radio channel is two or more entirely different conversations occuring on the same channel, or a multiplex theatre is different theaters showing different movies under the same marquee, ‘multicultural’ is the presence of discrete and segregated cultures in one general geography.
Its opposite method of interaction is not ‘monoculturalism’ which is by definition the presence of only one culture, but rather interaction by ‘integrationalism’. Integration. The assimilation of cultures into a new and unprecedented culture.
Integrationalism has been, practically speaking, the British norm since prehistoric times. Cultural divides between Celts, Vikings, Angles, Saxons, Normans, etc began to break down almost as soon as each arrived. Each new culture brought itself into the existing culture and merged. Our language is a Germanic one and yet probably better than 50% of its words are of Romance origin. Here is an article with a lot of interesting information.
My opinion is that ‘multiculturalism’ is nothing more than modern-fascist, back-of-the-bus segregationism in a PC wrapper.
Alisa makes a valid point about Condi Rice. The “man in the pub” does not think that there is anything wrong with her being black – in fact does not really take much note of her skin colour at all.
Even in the American South (once an area of extreme racialism) I do not think that a black conservative Republican would get any less votes than a white conservative Republican.
A lot of people pointed at the defeat of Harold Ford jr in Tennessee to claim that the South has not changed – but they forgot that Harold Ford Jr was a Democrat indeed his father controls the corrupt Democrat machine in Memphis.
In fact the voters of Tennessee were proved correct in their doubts about so called “conservative” or “blue dog” Democrats – the voting stats show that such people (elected in other parts of the United States in November) vote like other Democrats in the House and Senate. In short the blue dog Democrats (at least in terms of candidates for House and Senate, not at the State Governor level) are mythical creatures (or rather they are media spin).
If Harold Ford Jr had been a conservative Republican he would have won (regardless of his skin colour) in Tennessee.
As for Britain.
Conservatives (and I mean conservatives not just “Conservative party members”, which is not the same thing at all) will vote for a conservative – regardless of his skin colour.
This is quite different from voting for some leftist that David Cameron demands people vote for. Someone who goes about “racism” and “social justice” can bugger off – regardless of what colour their skin is.
People are not going to vote for someone just because they are black. It is the beliefs that matter – not the colour of their skin.
I think it’s probably worth mentioning that the middle class Brits joining the BNP nowadays probably aren’t bothered by multiculturalism either, in the sense of their neighbours operating to a different culture. (Within quite broad limits, anyway.) What they’re bothered about is the changes they are being told they have to make in their own culture, laws, traditions, and practices to accomodate them. It’s not the fact that somebody else has a different culture, but that it is they who are expected to change to fit in with it. It is the demand that the British integrate into the foreign cultures that gets up the collective British nose.
Now we have had a long and beneficial history of borrowing large chunks of other people’s cultures, where we see something we like, but in the past the process has been mostly voluntary. Chicken Tikka Masala is now our national dish, for example. But having let the unfortunate of the world move into our own home, they are now intent on redecorating and moving the furniture around and switching channels on the TV.
The BNP are not a serious issue yet, and probably never will be. But they are a symptom of the direction public opinion is moving in. The multiculturalists had best take note.
But enough about Labor supporters, what do you think of people who vote BNP?