The all encompassing BNP thread - keep all crap in here.

[Sankari]

Would you be in favour of another religion having the power over this country that the Church once had?

No, of course not. The very idea is abhorrent, as is the idea of Christianity returning to its former power.

Fortunately our present political system would not allow this to happen.

 

[D.P.]

Would it be possible for anyone to post something that was anti imigration and not favourable about the effects of having lots of different cultures in this country without you describing it as "racist" or "trash"?

yes, if what was posted was not racial trash. In all 100+ pages of posts I've not seen anything other than the aforementioned.

perhaps start a new thread in the SC with intelligently debated arguments.

 

[Stag]

He only felt misled because it impinged upon his religion.

You know this how? The poem was obviously written with the aid of hindsight and he could see how he had been fooled. It is a shining example of describing the dangers of political apathy, as it often begins with specific and targeted fear and hatred which soon escalates out of control. In his case it was against communists to begin with.

What if that religion tries to gain power and impose itself on politics and into law?

How is that going to happen? We have Muslim politicians, but that doesn't mean they have some Jihadist agenda.

What if that religion demands that it become a criminal offence to criticise it?

Has that happened? Or are you commenting on people inciting racial hatred?

At what point does that religion need to be put back in its box?

When we have a government that is pushing through laws saying that women have to wear headgear like in Iran then maybe I would see your point. But there has been no Islamification of our laws, unless you are worried about the Sharia law courts which are nothing more than a basis for mediation or other forms of alternative dispute resolution such as family feuds. Which is surely better than having underground style Sharia courts which result in honour killings at the extreme?

I think that if we could see figures nationally for the same demographic of mainly young male voters that the 10% seen here would be about the same on a national scale.

As a lot of young male voters are unemployed and see immigrants as a scapegoat you are probably right.

If there were more females and more middle aged people on the forum then it might be different. Perhaps women have different priorities rather than just more empathy. Perhaps they vote for more "positive" policies such as more spending on education, healthcare etc or green issues.

Personally I think that male upbringing and socialisation diminishes empathy which is a detriment to our society. Big boys don't cry is clear evidence of this, they are taught not to embrace their feelings.

And yet so many people here scoff at the notion of being "British" or "English" and consider our heritage and history as "nothing to be proud of".

Who is scoffing? I'm quite proud to be British, but I am sickened at some of the practices we used to do.

So many here are quite happy to see this old and liberal society mixed up with lots of very dissimilar cultures who are far from liberal. Surely that can only damage that which you are impressed by.

I think you will see the reverse actually, as a liberal society with "backward" cultures coming over here will only help to liberalise them. You only have to look at modern Iran and the campaigning for women's rights to see the spread of Liberalism. This week we are seeing elections there, fingers crossed Mousavi wins.

Perhaps that accounts for the 10% BNP vote here then. Younger people, who are newer to politics, might be less aware of alternatives and might be more prone to protest voting. It doesn't make this a "right wing" forum.

I never said it did, but the conservatives always do well on here.

Didn't the BNP blame their "low" vote on the Sun for demonising them? There does seem to be a lot of people being ever so quick to generalise about various media outlets and political parties whilst not being overly well versed in facts.

The BNP are such an easy target can you blame them? Is this where you talk about the Zionist conspiracy in the mass media?

You mean the Normans were a "mongrel nation"?

Yup.

Do you find it odd that we're quick to recognise "normans", "saxons", "celts", "germans", "dutch" etc as distinct peoples yet we seem to be determined to destroy any notion of there being a "british" people that has a history and ethnicity?

I don't think anyone is trying to destroy British History, we have one of the richest histories in the world.

British as an ethnicity is not being destroyed either but you have to realise that Britain is already a mongrel nation and has been for over 2000 years, get over it already. If you are born here, you are British; why is that such a terrible concept?

Mixing genes is a GOOD THING. Why do you think pedigree dogs have so many illnesses? It's because they are inbred. Why is it that mongrel dogs go on for years, because they have a good mix of genes.

Is your sister attractive?

 

[D.P.]

They do not seem to have anything about restoring balance to what has already occurred or about restoring social cohesion and national identity which is undeniably fractured as a result of becoming "multicultural".
They only seem to discuss future measures fro controlling further immigration into the UK but I could not see anything that would deal with the current issues that are causing people to feel discontentment.

Ehh??
Immigration is to do with the movement of people from other countries into the UK, not about people all ready living in the UK, or any other social policy. The conservatives are currently not in power so of course they can only talk about the future policies they would make.

And I posted this merely as an example that other mainstream non-racist parties have immigration policies.

 

[vee70]

Do we need to stop multiculturalism? No. We should be increasing multiculturalism to improve inter-racial relations!

Why? Are race and culture inseperable? Can't we have people from all over the world here without having lots of different feuding cultures as well? How does lots of different cultures being imported to the UK make it a better place than it was before?

 

[vee70]

No, of course not. The very idea is abhorrent, as is the idea of Christianity returning to its former power.

Fortunately our present political system would not allow this to happen.

Yes it would. If there were sufficient people of a given religion, a low voter turnout and general apathy towards the election. What would stop a religious party being elected?

 

[vee70]

yes, if what was posted was not racial trash. In all 100+ pages of posts I've not seen anything other than the aforementioned.

perhaps start a new thread in the SC with intelligently debated arguments.

Have you ever seen a post on these forums that was against immigration and multiculturalism that you feel was not racist (racial) trash?

 

[Ross1234]

Why? Are race and culture inseperable? Can't we have people from all over the world here without having lots of different feuding cultures as well? How does lots of different cultures being imported to the UK make it a better place than it was before?

Do you like indian food? I do. Its tasty
Do you like mexican food? I do
Do you like fish and chips? A lot of chippies were made by italians.

None of these would be in britain without multiculturalism.

 

[Stag]

I think it is unlikely that I do but it is highly probable that all of my traceable ancestry is from Northern Europe.

Watch 100% English.

I think, might be wrong of course, that they are entitled to call themselves a "British Citizen" and that "British" is a description of ethnic origins. People can be one or the other or both.

They're still British if they're born here though, the BNP would offer to repatriate them even though this is the only country they've called home.

It has always had one over-riding culture though and at times where there were more than one there have been wars to establish one. Whilst it has been "multi-racial" it has always been from a small group of European tribes who are all vastly similar in culture.

What utter nonsense, we used to be a Pagan nation run by warring tribes. Each migration of people brought a totally different culture to the one that preceded it.

We have seen constant changes to our culture with invention and technology changing things at an ever quickening rate. Even 500 years ago we were a very different culture, we had a state religion still; there was no secular society. Then the Monarchy lost it's power, we lost our Empire. Human rights improvements, women's suffrage, free market policies completely changing the makeup of our workforce.

Even the culture from 50 years ago is almost unrecognisable from our own. We now get our information from TV and the Internet, we can be altered by what someone is saying on the other side of the world. We are now an almost totally secular society, with huge amounts of sexual freedom. How can you say the culture hasn't changed?

At what time was the UK as diverse as it is now? At what point were there so many diverse cultures or races?

Obviously never as we are constantly evolving, but that is a good thing.

You only need to go back to the 50's to see an entirely different Britain and a Britain that had been largely unchanged for 1000 years.

Are you deluded?

Culture is a slow moving social program that evolves under its own steam, it is not something that has ever taken well to having forced changes thrust upon it by completely alien cultures. At any other time in history alien cultures would have been violently destroyed in the UK.

Slow moving? This countries culture is almost unrecognisable from 50 years ago, let alone 1000 years ago. Alien cultures have come in the past and have integrated, and that is all that is happening now.

Would you wish to live under a Islamic government? I thought you wanted seperation of state and religion.

No, but I live in one of the most free countries in the world; with one of the best democratic systems. It will never happen unless there is a civil war, and yes I know about the BNP and their training camps.

Can you think of any "muslim" countries where state and religion are seperated?

Depends how you define a muslim country?

Why do you describe someone not wanting change forced upon them as being "afraid"? Why can't someone simply not want change? Why does it have to be described as a "fear"?

Change is going to happen if it is forced on you or not, as I've said before culture is a transient social program. You don't want change because you think Islam will take over, which it won't.

By what you have previously said you do not want religion to control the state. Yet you would not necesarily describe yourself as having an irrational fear of religion would you? You assume that your reasons are valid and intelligent and reasoned. Why would you not afford the same to someone who has different opinions to you?

If that someone can prove to me that Islam is trying to take over our government and adopt Sharia, but I've yet to see any rational evidence for that.

Race on its own should not but very often culture is determined by race. I see no logical reason not to consider someone's culture when assessing them.

So because culture and race have a strong correlation, you make assumptions about their culture because of their race?

After all has Shaid Malik not just said that the reason that he has no receipts is because of norms within the Muslim community.....

He's just another slimy politician, doesn't matter what colour he is or what excuses he uses.

I believe that you are right and that there are elements within the BNP that put it all down to skin colour. I think that there are also elements in the BNP that don't and who simply oppose forced cultural change.

The question is how large is that element and how high up the chain it goes.

 

[D.P.]

Have you ever seen a post on these forums that was against immigration and multiculturalism that you feel was not racist (racial) trash?

A select few well argued intelligent opinions, yes.

 

[D.P.]

Why? Are race and culture inseperable? Can't we have people from all over the world here without having lots of different feuding cultures as well? How does lots of different cultures being imported to the UK make it a better place than it was before?

Because a vast majority of people like different cultures. Indeed, it is a major reason people go on holiday to foreign countries - to get emmersed in the cultures of other peoples. Thats why I love the work place I'm at now, 14 diverse cultures in 18/20 people.

Different languages, different cuisine, different music, arts, movies, different traditions. Its all fascinating. Besides which I love eating pizza or curries!

 

[vee70]

You know this how? The poem was obviously written with the aid of hindsight and he could see how he had been fooled. It is a shining example of describing the dangers of political apathy, as it often begins with specific and targeted fear and hatred which soon escalates out of control. In his case it was against communists to begin with.

Like you I can only surmise based upon evidence available to me, such as the wiki article. It is noticeable that the attributed author is not even sure that he said it in the first place Going with the wiki article the alleged author was very much anti communist and fell out with Hitler when the religious seperation became apparent. Not before.

How is that going to happen? We have Muslim politicians, but that doesn't mean they have some Jihadist agenda.

It equally does not mean that they don't or won't have in the future.
However my post doesn't mention specific religions with regard to the possibility of a religion attempting to gain political control. Is Islam however not a "complete system" of which politics is very much a part? Is it not a logical extension of Islamic faith to extend itself into UK culture, education law and politics?

Has that happened? Or are you commenting on people inciting racial hatred?

A certain religion has asked for it to be a crime for ANYONE to criticise it at an international level. However my post asks what we should or should not do if a religion tries to gain control of the UK. As for "incitement to religious hatred" I think that there is a thin line between being able to say "Islam is a religion that promotes anti semitisim, mysogyny and intolerance" which *could* be someones legitimate and reasoned opinion which they can back up with examples and a potential Muslims reaction to the statement claiming it to be "religious hatred".
When people hear things that they don't like it doesn't take a huge leap for them to claim some sort of discrimination. I wonder how easy it will be to express a sentiment that is opposed to religion without being accused of being filled with hatred. Perhaps we only have to look at the way in which people opposed to immigration get accused of fascism and racism to see the answer. However I would much rather not use specific religions as examples as it could be any religion and using specific examples is likely to bog it down into a very different debate.

When we have a government that is pushing through laws saying that women have to wear headgear like in Iran then maybe I would see your point.

My post is about possible futures rather than the here and now. However if 30%, of those who voted, voted for a hardline islamic political party would they not be in power and be able to push such laws through?

But there has been no Islamification of our laws, unless you are worried about the Sharia law courts which are nothing more than a basis for mediation or other forms of alternative dispute resolution such as family feuds. Which is surely better than having underground style Sharia courts which result in honour killings at the extreme?

Do you think sharia courts will in any way change the number of honour killings?

Personally I think that male upbringing and socialisation diminishes empathy which is a detriment to our society. Big boys don't cry is clear evidence of this, they are taught not to embrace their feelings.

And yet it still managed to create this old and liberal country with the values of which you are so proud?

Who is scoffing? I'm quite proud to be British, but I am sickened at some of the practices we used to do.

There seem ot be plenty of posters in the last 100 pages ready to scoff at the concept of Britishness.

I think you will see the reverse actually, as a liberal society with "backward" cultures coming over here will only help to liberalise them. You only have to look at modern Iran and the campaigning for women's rights to see the spread of Liberalism. This week we are seeing elections there, fingers crossed Mousavi wins.

Yet we are seeing radicalisation of young muslims here to the extent that some blow themselves up on the tube? Not something that we saw before. Change that is occurring within Iran is happening internally, it is a change that a large number of people want. It is not a forced change created by mass immigration, for that reason it might be successful and painless.

I never said it did, but the conservatives always do well on here.

Are there not also plenty of left wing students here?

The BNP are such an easy target can you blame them? Is this where you talk about the Zionist conspiracy in the mass media?

No, but we could talk about the easy way in which people are happy to generalise and make sweeping comments on various newspapers and voters whilst simultaneously berating those who appear to judge people on something as arbitary as race.

British as an ethnicity is not being destroyed either but you have to realise that Britain is already a mongrel nation and has been for over 2000 years, get over it already. If you are born here, you are British; why is that such a terrible concept?

Aren't ALL nationalities mongrel nationalities that have become something in their own rights. You considered Normans to have done just that and to have become a distinct group of people. Why is it so important for British people to consider themselves mongrels but not for other peoples to do the same? I think that the amount of mixing within the UK was probably lower than across Europe because of the natural boundaries to travel that being an island presents.

Mixing genes is a GOOD THING. Why do you think pedigree dogs have so many illnesses? It's because they are inbred. Why is it that mongrel dogs go on for years, because they have a good mix of genes.

So why are the Japanese doing so well in so many ways? The British as a distinct people ruled a large percentage of the world, they did not need to become more ethnically diverse to do that. Perhaps sickle cell anemia is something the British people need in their genes as a GOOD thing?

Is your sister attractive?

What a bizarre question. She certainly was considered to be so.

 

[vee70]

Ehh??
Immigration is to do with the movement of people from other countries into the UK, not about people all ready living in the UK, or any other social policy. The conservatives are currently not in power so of course they can only talk about the future policies they would make.

And I posted this merely as an example that other mainstream non-racist parties have immigration policies.

Immigration can be past, present and future. Do you think all the BNP protest votes were about future immigration only?

 

[vee70]

Do you like indian food? I do. Its tasty
Do you like mexican food? I do
Do you like fish and chips? A lot of chippies were made by italians.

None of these would be in britain without multiculturalism.

Yes they would. We've been trading around the world for centuries and bringing back new foods. How did the potato get here, a rather important part of a chip is it not?

Is food the only positive that you associate with multiculturalism?

 

[D.P.]

Immigration can be past, present and future. Do you think all the BNP protest vos were about future immigration only?

No, they were mostly about racist ideologies. Immigration concerns people crossing the country border. Yes, the British Nazi Party want to kick out everyone who is not part of the master race ideology - but that is not an immigration policy but an ethnic cleansing policy

 

[scorza]

Do you like indian food? I do. Its tasty
Do you like mexican food? I do
Do you like fish and chips? A lot of chippies were made by italians.

None of these would be in britain without multiculturalism.

We have Mexican restaurants in this country without a large Mexican population. You've kind of disproved your own point there.

 

[Hatter The Mad]

We have Mexican restaurants in this country without a large Mexican population. You've kind of disproved your own point there.

You've proved it - we have a small Mexican population, a small number of Mexican restaurants. We have a large Indian, Pakistani, Chinese, Italian etc population, we have a much, much larger number of respective restaurants - which wouldn't exist if there wasn't a market for them, whic hthere is

 

[vee70]

Watch 100% English.

I've never heard of it.

They're still British if they're born here though, the BNP would offer to repatriate them even though this is the only country they've called home.

The question is are they British or are they British Citizens. I think there is a difference in meaning between the two terms.

What utter nonsense, we used to be a Pagan nation run by warring tribes. Each migration of people brought a totally different culture to the one that preceded it.

Warring tribes? When? There were battles during various invasions but warring tribes is quite misleading. After the Norman invasion of 1066 I think you'll find the UK was a pretty settled place. Before you declare something as "utter nonsense" it might make sense to define your time period otherwise your post becomes "utter nonsense" too.

We have seen constant changes to our culture with invention and technology changing things at an ever quickening rate. Even 500 years ago we were a very different culture, we had a state religion still; there was no secular society. Then the Monarchy lost it's power, we lost our Empire. Human rights improvements, women's suffrage, free market policies completely changing the makeup of our workforce.

All changes from within, all a result of internal natural change. None a result of forced immigration.

Even the culture from 50 years ago is almost unrecognisable from our own. We now get our information from TV and the Internet, we can be altered by what someone is saying on the other side of the world. We are now an almost totally secular society, with huge amounts of sexual freedom. How can you say the culture hasn't changed?

Where did I say that culture "had not changed"?
I actually said "It has always had one over-riding culture though and at times where there were more than one there have been wars to establish one. Whilst it has been "multi-racial" it has always been from a small group of European tribes who are all vastly similar in culture."
Can you point out where I have claimed that culture has not changed? You appear to be having an argument with yourself over things that have never been posted.

Obviously never as we are constantly evolving, but that is a good thing.

Is all evolution good? Is the discovery of biological and nuclear weapons good? It is part of evolution after all. Or are you saying that being more diverse is good? If it is the latter perhaps you can explain why it is good.

Are you deluded?

IS there a need to be hostile? This is simply an exchange of ideas. Why do you feel the need to be aggressive? Are you sure that the make up of the population of britain 50 years ago is not more similar to the make up of the population of Britain 1000 years ago than it is now? Are you absolutely sure that a greater percentage of the people living in Britian have their roots in the britain of 1000 years ago than they did 50 years ago?

Slow moving? This countries culture is almost unrecognisable from 50 years ago, let alone 1000 years ago. Alien cultures have come in the past and have integrated, and that is all that is happening now.

Unrecogniseable? What has changed exactly in the last 50 years? Technology has moved on but that is not the be all and end all of culture, neither is food for that matter.

No, but I live in one of the most free countries in the world; with one of the best democratic systems. It will never happen unless there is a civil war, and yes I know about the BNP and their training camps.

Why not? If sufficient people want to vote for a religious party then why would it result in civil war? Why not simply import sufficient people to vite in an unchangeable relgious system? Being such a free country is precisely why it could happen.

Depends how you define a muslim country?

A country that has a majority muslim population. How would you define it?

Change is going to happen if it is forced on you or not, as I've said before culture is a transient social program. You don't want change because you think Islam will take over, which it won't.

Do I? You are the one who continues to mention Islam not me. You are ascribing motives and beliefs to me when I have not expressed any. I am simply questioning your arguments. Why should people NOT want forced change? Why are people "wrong" to want to opt for natural evolution of culture rather than imported culture? Why do you use terms like "fear" to describe those who like things the way that they are and who do not want change? It is highly emotive argument and not necessary if your logic stands up.

If that someone can prove to me that Islam is trying to take over our government and adopt Sharia, but I've yet to see any rational evidence for that.

It applies to any religion. Is Islam not a complete system of life incoprorating politics and rule? Perhaps you could ask a muslim. Why would a muslim not want an Islamic UK? Why would muslims not enter politics to make the UK more islamic?

So because culture and race have a strong correlation, you make assumptions about their culture because of their race?

If you comprehend the differences between "assumptions" and "considerations and assessments" then you'll have answered your own question. Do you completely ignore peoples cultures when talking to them then? Do you offer muslims alcohol for example? Or do you make an assumption that they might drink after all?

He's just another slimy politician, doesn't matter what colour he is or what excuses he uses.

Of course it matters. The reasons given always matter. Or are you just assuming that he is guilty because of his profession?

The question is how large is that element and how high up the chain it goes.

I've no idea, I am more interested in the reasons people voted for them than what the party might really stand for.

 

[blix]

vee70 who were you before the ban?

 

[vee70]

No, they were mostly about racist ideologies. Immigration concerns people crossing the country border. Yes, the British Nazi Party want to kick out everyone who is not part of the master race ideology - but that is not an immigration policy but an ethnic cleansing policy

Sorry I think you've misunderstood my question because of my typo.

Here it is again:
Immigration can be past, present and future. Do you think all the BNP protest votes were about future immigration only?

Odd- the cut and paste shows "votes" not "vos".

If I rephrase, do you think that all the people who voted for BNP voted that way because they were angry about possible future immigration only?
The conservative are only looking at future controls. Indeed I don't think any parties barring the BNP have any manifesto pledges about resolving the current state of immigration.
Which brings me back to "who should those who are angry about immigration (past, present and future) vote for?