Move to ban BNP policy on ‘whites only’
The British National party’s “whites-only” membership policy would be made illegal under new equality legislation being pushed through parliament, Harriet Harman, the deputy Labour leader and equality minister, said on Thursday.
Ms Harman’s decision to include a clause related to political party membership in the Equality Act is the first government attempt to confront the BNP directly after its capture this week of two European parliament seats, representing north-west England and Yorkshire and Humberside.
The BNP claims it is not a racist party, although it is openly “anti-Islam” and only allows “indigenous Caucasians” to become members.
I would rather that the BNP became a banned organisation and entered on the proscribed list of terrorist threats.
A mixture of law, politics, autobiography and humour. Once described as "The Devilish Advocate" (Guardian), I do have the ability to provoke a response. Sometimes it comes from someone who uses a thought process, and sometimes from jerks usually associated with the knee.
5 comments:
Interesting point about whether a group has a right to set its own rules or not.
"I would rather that the BNP became a banned organisation and entered on the proscribed list of terrorist threats."
Well, considering they are not terrorists but a legitimate political party, that makes you rather a fascist.
JailHouseLawyer,
I know you got to learn the lesson for yourself... and years ago.. I thought the same thing...
But one day you gonna wake up and England ain't gonna have any English values yet.. and let me tell you, YOU THINK THE BNP ARE 'FASCISTS' FOR STANDING UP FOR SOME VALUES....
wait for England to be a Muslim nation..., and then you gonna wish you had woken up to the message the BNP are trying to tell you!!
Wait for all that rage, and let me tell you, they dont give a shit, you a 'jailhouselawyer' and you stood up for 'their muslim/poor rights'.....
The BNP have more concern for YOUR RIGHTS, THAN ANY OF THOSE WHOM YOU ARE FIGHTING FOR......
I hope for your sake, you and your fellow white guilt liberals with your heads in the sand wake up before it is too late for the future of your children....
Interesting thoughts here, most people seem to have lost the plot.
We are talking about freedom of speech and any attempt to have that freedom cornered off will be by description a fascist act. It would appear that most people love to bang on about a free society but would then in the next breath seek to deprive another of their right to the same because their point of view differs from their own.
I have no time for the BNP but I recently wrote to UNITE explaining that the actions of their activists against the BNP were in effect doing exactly what they had accused the BNP of, namely acting in a fascist manner. I got this back by way of a reply:
Dear Colleague,
Thank you for your comments and observations on the recent incident involving the BNP. The actions of individuals does not detract from the fact that the BNP are fascists and should be exposed as such.
Regards
Nigel Hadfield
Divisional Officer
Unite the Union,
Unit 2, Pride Point Drive,
Pride Park, Derby, DE24 8BX
SO what dear Nigel was in fact saying is that he believes whole heartedly in freedom of speech, as long as it goes along with his way of thinking, after which he or his activists will seek to deprive those others of their freedom.
Just WHO are the fascists here?
Ron,
Good points. The term 'fascist' -- of course -- is an abstract concept, and as a result there are a multitude of intepretations and definitions.
As your experience so well shows, it is often used by those with aspirations to power, as a tactic to denigrate the opposition, by application of an easy abstract derogatory term: fascist/racist, etc.
The result being that anyone hearing these allegations from this 'authority', who consider themselves 'do gooders' or 'anti-fascists' or 'anti-racists', very very seldom ask this 'authority' to clarify exactly how, they define the term 'fascist' or 'racist', when applied to their opposition 'authority'. Most people simply blindly go along and like good proles do not want to be 'fascists' or 'racists', so the authority that PRETENDS to be 'anti-fascist', or 'anti-racist', gets their support.
This support however, is incredibly shallow, it relies on fake and shallow tactics to malign other 'authorities', instead of standing for some difficult policies, based upon realities, most people prefer to deny.
As, I said, I cannot recall ever being banned or censored on any 'BNP' related site, even when I disagreed. I was debated, often hotly debated (which I don't mind at all); but never censored.
Compare that to -- for example -- the Leninology blog, whom absolutely HATE, and I mean HATE the BNP. I was censored there, after two comments, no debate, no interest in debate; and still they rant and rant about what 'fascists' the BNP are....
Anyway.... so when it comes to liberal dishing out the term 'fascist' or 'racist'; I ask if they can please define exactly how they mean it; and how they apply it to the alleged 'fascist/racist'. You will be surprised how many different and how vague and ambiguous and arbitrarey and unthought out, their definitions are; and the conclusion reached is it is simply a quick fix 'label' they attach to opposition, in their addiction for more devotees in their particular fanclub.
An excellent documentary, on how abstract and vague people's defintions are of 'racists', is A Conversation About Racism: Does Racism Exist?....
Lara Johnstone
Post a Comment