Poppy Fascism?

[fred quimby]

So when was banning people from protesting and burning poppies on the ballot paper here then?

[fred quimby]

Yeah it is probably a different debate, but I had a similar argument on here 2 years ago. My view is that banning piss ants like the EDL will only disenfranchise more people from their "heartlands", and encourage them to "join". From what I have seen their numbers have never increased over the years at demos (but they don't sign up like for the party for the BNP, so total "members" is anyones guess) and all the demos remain about the same "standard", a bit of a rant and a rave and then hope for a fight with the UAF. I would say what is more dangerous is the attitude within some of the English press in showing, in a small part, sympathy for their Islamphobia.

[eFestivals]

Not sure I would ban, just give no platform, like we gave BNP on question Time

Eh? Putting the BNP on Question Time was a fantastic thing to happen. The result of that can be seen in the elections which have happened since.

By censoring them or treating them differently, it plants the idea that there's something about them that the govt don't want ordinary people to hear - and so (some stupid) people are sucked into supporting them.

By allowing them to expose themselves for what they really are, even most of those stupid people wise up.

Griffin was using them being (essentially) censored to his advantage. Him being allowed to speak for himself blew that away in an instant.

[Rufus Gwertigan]

Not sure I would ban, just give no platform, like we gave BNP on question Time

[fred quimby]

Nazi Germany deported millions of Jews to their deaths within the law. Was that only good too?

[eFestivals]

Only because people like you allowed his protests/rallies to happen, because it's their right.

Nothing to do with the collusion of so-called democrats wishing to do away with democracy then*. Glad we've cleared that up.

We can forget about the worries of peak oil now. After all, we have a world full of wrong history books that need disposing of.

(* the mirrors are rather striking. ).

[fred quimby]

Eh? Putting the BNP on Question Time was a fantastic thing to happen. The result of that can be seen in the elections which have happened since.

By censoring them or treating them differently, it plants the idea that there's something about them that the govt don't want ordinary people to hear - and so (some stupid) people are sucked into supporting them.

By allowing them to expose themselves for what they really are, even most of those stupid people wise up.

Griffin was using them being (essentially) censored to his advantage. Him being allowed to speak for himself blew that away in an instant.

Edited November 11, 2011 by fred quimby

[fred quimby]

After all, we have a world full of wrong history books that need disposing of.

[fred quimby]

Nothing to do with the collusion of so-called democrats wishing to do away with democracy then*. Glad we've cleared that up.

(* the mirrors are rather striking. ).

[fred quimby]

Give the public their due, not all of them are daft

Edited November 11, 2011 by fred quimby

[eFestivals]

I know where you are coming from but Tell that to the people that took a good kicking after his appearance, I'm sure when they were in hospital they saw the point. There was also a spike in interest in the BNP, I'm unsure how that translated to membership.

yes most people knew what a w*nker his is and this only confirmed it but there were others that felt it made his views legitimate and listened more.

If people were getting a kicking as a result of his appearance on QT, then that's a result. Because fewer would have been getting a kicking after he was on QT than before, because that's the indisputable reality.

There was no spike in any sort of interest that might have had people supporting or joining them, the exact opposite is true. Membership has fallen, and their support at the ballot box has fallen (and these can be fully pinned on the QT appearance too).

There might have been more general interest. For example, I read their website at around that time, to ensure that I was informed and current about them, and nothing to do with them having any chance of getting any support from me.

But yes, there were some listening closely, and who might have given the BNP their support before Griffin was on QT. Griffin's appearance on QT ensured that they didn't, not that they did. Any flirting-with-the-BNP types were repelled by seeing the reality as opposed to the more normal them remotely hearing the myth.

[fred quimby]

If people were getting a kicking as a result of his appearance on QT, then that's a result. Because fewer would have been getting a kicking after he was on QT than before, because that's the indisputable reality.

There was no spike in any sort of interest that might have had people supporting or joining them, the exact opposite is true. Membership has fallen, and their support at the ballot box has fallen (and these can be fully pinned on the QT appearance too).

There might have been more general interest. For example, I read their website at around that time, to ensure that I was informed and current about them, and nothing to do with them having any chance of getting any support from me.

But yes, there were some listening closely, and who might have given the BNP their support before Griffin was on QT. Griffin's appearance on QT ensured that they didn't, not that they did. Any flirting-with-the-BNP types were repelled by seeing the reality as opposed to the more normal them remotely hearing the myth.

[Rufus Gwertigan]

i do wonder when we look at the goverment we have

[eFestivals]

I did add to my post this

And what happens when they learn from this, get some economic policies behind them hiding their real views, get someone who is more to the publics liking. We have allowed them a foot in the door.

Nah. As things stand with our electoral system, if they did manage to start to get some significant support, you'd see one or more or the existing parties adopt a 'lite' version of the same policy, and fatally undermine that growing support by doing so.

There's actually a history of this, with the tory party swinging wildly to the right in the late 70s as a counterweight to the growing support for the NF at the time (dead a few years later as a result), and much the same at the last election with the tory promise to get tough on immigration.

And as things currently stand with the BNP, it's just about bankrupt and unable to paper over the financial cracks for much longer, and its membership has fallen hugely after factional in-fighting. I'll be quite surprised if it exists at all in 5 years time.

They'll of course be a successor party, just as the BNP was the successor to the NF. But that successor will take years and perhaps decades to build itself up to any significant level, giving plenty of time for reactionary politics within our bigger parties.

The situation changes if we ever get PR, but the chance of that is at least 20 years away now.

The people getting a kicking were from ethnic minorities after his appearance so not sure on your comment, I maybe reading it wrong.

I was saying that if any got a kicking after QT, there would have been more getting a kicking before QT - because there was a greater number of active racists before Griffin was on QT.

So QT was good and not bad for those ethnic minorities - not because some got a kicking, but because fewer did.

but I have come down on no platform for them.

It's a view I held at one time, and still do at one level - for the almost off the scale low support extreme parties.

But once a nationwide party starts to win council seats as it had and have a not insignificant proportion of the vote in the bigger elections too I think that within a democracy it's time to stop trying to pretend it doesn't exist and instead take it on in the open.

If the ideas you and I support are good enough then they will win the argument.

If the fascists have the right ideas and can sway over enough of the public to wield some meaningful power, then it's time for me to give up on human beings altogether and throw myself off the nearest bridge.

Our electorate are often very very stupid (the polls which showed that those disgusted by the Libs voting for high Uni fees switching support to the tories instead proves that) but I don't think they're quite that stupid. I'd say we're at one level (Barry Fish's, for example ) a right-minded bunch, and while people might have to be led to the right ideas at times (abortion, gender & race & sexuality equality, etc ... we might even manage that with EU one day), they can be led there and shown the better way and not the wrong way.

Edited November 11, 2011 by eFestivals

[fred quimby]

Off topic, and quite seriously, I do worry about what position the BNP/EDL could get if we had full Proportional Representation in Government. However the lifespan of BNP councillors is usually a term (that is in office not life ). People use Nazi Germany as indicators, but that was a different time and a different audience. These organisations are never going to totally disappear, and I think we need them to realise that many people are not happy and we are not in some liberal Utopia. People will always get angry at someone. Total equality and indiscrimination are generations away. I am not condoning them by the way. I guess I am just been pragmatic about the situation. When I go to rallies I try to engage and challenge them, which unbelievably other people don't, they just rant and rave at them.

Sorry I am rambling now

[5co77ie]

http://www.guardian....e?newsfeed=true

looks like the police are back at their best:

As the morning progressed, however, there was no sign of anyone from Muslims against Crusades – the group which was proscribed by the home secretary, Theresa May, on Thursday.

Instead police moved in on a large group of EDL supporters and made arrests to prevent a breach of the peace, in the belief they were going to cause trouble with protesters outside St Paul's.

Edited November 11, 2011 by 5co77ie

[fred quimby]

Nah. As things stand with our electoral system, if they did manage to start to get some significant support, you'd see one or more or the existing parties adopt a 'lite' version of the same policy, and fatally undermine that growing support by doing so.

[Rufus Gwertigan]

The wonderfulness of forums is going off topic .

I understand that Nazi Germany is a different time, but we do fall into the same traps time and time again so we should be on the look out. lest we forget and all (back on topic .

"When I go to rallies I try to engage and challenge them" - and how do you get on?

[eFestivals]

True but sadly we then have to take on these views even if it is "lite". Which means the main parties come closer to their views and therefore they can come closer to the middle and appear more establishment

nah, it doesn't happen like that with the polarised electoral system we operate.

I believe that didn't happen and directly after the show there were many attacks, with people in hospital.

every week since the year dot there's many. The trend is clearly downwards tho.

Or we fight, as our fore fathers did.

then that's not democracy. Using violence against the democraticly powerful is not the way to achieve democracy.

In fact, that's the exact method of power of a certain historical leader whose name began with ... can you guess?

You don't become better than them by being one of them. Democracy is an ideal that should never be abandoned. If the people are that stupid to vote them in then so be it.

As you say I can't see it happening but I never really saw the markets having such power as they do now (I understand that it has been there for years but not the extent they do now) when I was younger

Oh, that's all been clear as day. It's not like it wasn't picked up on when it started in the 80s or hasn't been reported all the way thru. It was there to be seen, at least for those who weren't chasing its vanishing glitter.

[fred quimby]

Mind you I get so much hassle from the UAF and even been grabbed.

[fred quimby]

then that's not democracy. Using violence against the democraticly powerful is not the way to achieve democracy.

In fact, that's the exact method of power of a certain historical leader whose name began with ... can you guess?

You don't become better than them by being one of them. Democracy is an ideal that should never be abandoned. If the people are that stupid to vote them in then so be it.

[Rufus Gwertigan]

that's cus you are too damn handsome

[kaosmark2]

http://www.guardian....e?newsfeed=true

looks like the police are back at their best:

What's the bet this is the new mantra for making arrests at protests:

...and this is just worrying:

[Rufus Gwertigan]

Sigh. Fuck that shit.

[kaosmark2]

I just get the feeling that the Met yet again think they are a law to themselves.