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

Drop the Free Christian!

Let me preface what I'm going to say by first saying this: I am a Christian. It's taken me a long time to be able to say that, and to know what I mean by that, and I'm very lucky that in the Unitarian church I have been given the space to come to that decision in my own time, on my own terms. But I am a Christian, I'm more Christian now than I have been for years. Now: I want us to drop this "Free Christian" from our title. It's a silly phrase that we need to get rid of. Why? "The General Assembly of Unitarian and Free Christian Churches" is a long and unwieldy title. It would be much better if we traded under something like "Unitarians in Britain." It gives the impression that there are two separate and distinct groups: "Unitarians" and "Free Christians," this is not the case. It's not that there are Unitarians (who are not Christians) and "Free Christians" who are not Unitarians. There are not two dif...
21 comments
Read more

Clergy-wear during protests

OK, I'm wandering into the territory of Beauty Tips for Ministers here, but a couple of recent conversations have brought up the issue of what clergy should wear for protests. I know a number of Ministers who only wear clerical collars for protests. The logic is that it's important to identify as a Minister when you're supporting something society doesn't expect clergy to. So Ministers will wear a collar at gay prides or pro-choice rallies to make this point. Now I could understand this if it you wore a collar going about your general business, and also did during a protest, but I'm quite uncomfortable with the idea of wearing clerical wear ONLY for protests. The seems to be something worth exploring. I have said before that I'm not in favour of special titles or clothing for religious leadership, mainly because Jesus explicitly said this was a lot of nonsense. Religious leaders should not need these articial crutches. I have no problem with certain liturgical c...
11 comments
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