Skip to main content

Vote!

Comments

Anonymous said…
Rather than perpetuate the 'BNP are the evil bogeymen and should be ignored' message, isn't it time those on the liberal-left address the issues that the BNP and UKIP raise (albeit with different responses) and in turn, are gaining votes for.

It is clear from the recent European elections that there is a debate over national identity, immigration and state / constitutional issues that needs to take place.
11:53 am
Anonymous said…
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/edwest/blog/2009/06/08/the_only_way_to_beat_the_bnp_is_an_open_debate_about_immigration
12:32 pm
Anonymous said…
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/james_delingpole/blog/2009/06/09/enough_drivel_about_the_bnp_already
12:41 pm
Stephen Lingwood said…
The BNP did not gain votes in the North West, where I live. In 2004 the BNP got 134,959 votes. In 2009 the BNP got 132,094. They got an MEP because people did not turn out to vote. Most people stayed at home. I posted that video on election day to encourage people who disagree with the BNP to go out and vote. It didn't work.
2:16 pm
Anonymous said…
This is a flawed and misleading argument perpetuated by the media (and left activists) to try downplay the significance of this development - and in turn silence the debate over why it happened, what the solutions may be etc.

Turnout was lower across the political spectrum (down from 40% to 30% I think) - therefore, whilst it is to be acknowledge that research shows loyalist BNP voters are more likely to turnout, it still has to be recognised that the BNP's electoral performace was maintained and arguably improved slightly.

There are two big agendas coming into play here - a general fear from the political / media establishment over radical parties breaking through and specifically, a refusal to acknowledge the nationalist sentiments of a large swathe of the British public.

These sentiments - expressing themselves in votes for anti-immigration and anti-European integration parties - strengthen the argument that we need a national debate over future policies in relation to national identity, multiculturalism, immigration and the nature of the political system in light of European integration.

If the political-media elites and the left continue to act like ostriches on these issues by putting their head in the sands, the frustrations of the public will eventually manifest itself as a destructive beast (i.e more votes for the extreme right / left).
1:20 pm
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Swords into Ploughshares

  "They shall beat their swords into ploughshares, and their spears into pruning hooks; nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more." Isaiah 2:4 Palestine Action are doing just this: beating swords into ploughshares i.e. putting weapons out of use. In doing so they are fulfilling this biblical mandate. They are expressing God's peace as expressed in the Jewish tradition and the Christian tradition. God desires that our swords shall be beaten into ploughshares, that we should unlearn war. That the government wants to make this action illegal has to be confronted in the strongest terms. To rush to condemn attacks on weapons but not attacks on children is perverse. To call attacks on weapons terrorism but not attacks on children is perverse. When government comes to such an extreme position - legislating that peace is war, that weapons need more protection than children - then they have fundamentally gone wrong. This is the definitio...
Post a Comment
Read more

Art Lester

  I've just heard the extremely sad and shocking news of the death of Unitarian Minister Art Lester. It shocked me even more as I was emailing him a few days ago as he spontaneously emailed me thanking me for my book and offering to send me a copy of his latest one (pictured above).  I already feel like I've missed the opportunity to get to know him better, as he's the kind of person I would really have liked to have been a mentor as he always seemed wise and spiritually rooted, in a mischievous, not-taking-himself-too-seriously way (which is a good sign of spiritual maturity I think).  He ended his email with, "I attach a portion of a sermon I’ll be giving at the Paris Fellowship next month.  It’s my 29th service over the past 27 years and possibly my last.  I wouldn’t normally bore a colleague with my scribbles, but I think you might like this one."  I do. I do like this one. And as he now won't deliver this at Paris Fellowship I thought it was worth shar...
1 comment
Read more

Is humanism theologically tolerant?

OK, well this might be controversial, but I feel the need to say it. Is humanist tolerant? Please note I'm not asking about humanism within society. Clearly humanism certainly believes in tolerance within society and I'm forever glad they are often the only people in the media calling for a separation of church and state. No, what I'm talking about is descriptions of Unitarianism like this and adverts like this , discussed at Peacebang here , which say that humanism is one option, Christianity is another, God is one option among many. The trouble is, humanism, by definition is theologically opposed to theism. This is very different from the relationship between Christianity and Buddhism. These two traditions may be vastly different, but Buddhism, by definition , is not opposed to Christianity, and Christianity, by definition , is not opposed to Buddhism. But humanism is consciously defined in opposition to Christianity and theism. So to say that humanism and theism can bot...
14 comments
Read more