NationStates Jolt Archive

I've just finished watching a BBC Drama about the British National Party. It was called 'England Expects'. It raised a lot of questions. It made me think, what does England Expect?

What do the BNP really stand for? A modern, prosperous white Britain, or some pipe dream of a Whites-Only olden day land, of 'Ye Olde England'?

Those opposed to the BNP- what should they do to stop the BNP? No Platform Policies? Street Fighting? Is complete freedom of speech a good idea?

Have the BNP really changed (from their militant past)? Could there be a Black/White racist coalition against Asians?

What are the real causes of racial tension? As far as I can make out, its not problems of race- its problems of wealth. Britain is split rich-poor, but the poor see it split black (or rather Asian) and White. Are the white working class really angry with the poverty in Britain, and using immigration and race as a scapegoat subject?

Is the new battle of this century not going to be black/white, but Islam and West? How have the policies of New Labour and The Whitehouse changed race relations in Britain? What are we teaching our young people- harmonious multi-culturalism, harmonious ghettoisation or race-war?

How will the 'terror threat' affect us at home? Is really such a thing as 'Britishness' anymore? Isn't that a totally subjective category? Should cultures be forced to integrate? Should immigrants be forced to take citizenship tests?

I'm currently working on a Study of Fascism in Britain since WWII. And I have my own bleak personal opinion on it. I think its only going to get worse before it gets better. Britain is split all ways- Race, Religion and Wealth. I think personally if we sort out the wealth problems, race problems will sort themselves out. But Wealth isn't going to sort itself out. I think we are heading for a race war in this country, even if its only street level fighting. The drama seemed to show that peoples problems with wealth and status are deflected to race. I think thats true, and I think as peoples wealth problems grow, as more people hit poverty, more people will have nothing to lose.

We need to rethink our attitudes on race and immigration. What do you want our future Britain to look like? England Expects every man to do his duty- what is that duty?

Surburban homes used to be the epitome of genuine aspiration for most of the working class - now the vast majority of people are in a perfectly comfortable home with electricity and hot water. A large number of people "Hitting poverty" indicates a large wealth divide, but does not necessarily imply that the people who are hitting poverty are necessarily living a poor quality of life.

Racial issues are a problem borne of a lack of education (be it through schooling or home,) and propaganda aimed at fuelling hatred. The thing being - I'm curious as to what evidence that there is any significant growing anti-Islam feelings growing?

I don't think Muslim-everyone else relations are as bad as are occasionally made out - I mean heck, look at the reaction to Kilroy's pseudo-historical comments. Certainly the MCB hasn't whined about growing violence or anti-Islam feelings (...much, for them,) for a long time, and if anything any growing tension has forced Muslim organisations to outright condemn domestic acts of extremism that are professed to be done in the name of their religion, and this can only strengthen their position in our society. And I think it's quite blatant that any growing tensions would be due to the recent terrorist attacks being performed by Muslim extremists in various places.

Final important note: A dislike or intolerance for a religion is not racism and should never be regarded as such, although many of the same principles about generalisations can apply, as they do in this instance. The problem being that the BNP has never been able to understand the distinction.

Crap - I was meaning to watch that program, oh well never mind I suppose.

You've asked a lot of good questions and I'm not sure if anyone really has the answers, or if indeed there are any. For me the primary causes are ignorance and apathy, people are too ignorant to understand any alternative to the social norm and do not care enough about the issues to educate themselves otherwise.

You argued that wealth is the primary division in society but I believe that this division is merely an economic reflection of the level of education attained by them. For me the gap between the educated and the uneducated is the biggest one in society, and the most harmful, compare the Sun to the Guardian for example, the gulf in standard is enormous.

Anyway I'm not sure if I'm sticking to the point wholeheartedly so I'll answer a specific question: Should cultures be forced to integrate/should people be required to take citizenship tests? In my mind yes, if a person wishes to come into the UK, have access to its services, industry, welfare and so forth then I believe they ought to display some sense of allegiance to it and I believe to argue otherwise is to pander to a 'political correctness' that is already all too present in UK politics, stifles any rational debate concerning immigration and asylum (which in itself is another cause of the rise of the BNP).

One of the risks in creating a truly multicultural society is that you run the risk of eroding established values in that nation which in my mind are necessary for a successful democracy to run. This is not to say that people ought to conform entirely to a countries set of values but that their links to these values and to society in general should be maintained. It is impossible to retain any semblance of a social contract if society evolves to the individualistic state where nobody feels a moral or contractual responsibility for their fellow citizens.

What does it mean to be British??? This is the key question and I think many people no longer know what indeed makes them British when British society entertains many different religions, races and cultures. My contention is that whilst aspects of multi-culturalism have a lot to offer it is important to restablish an underlying set of values and beliefs that can be assigned to the UK thus strengthening social links and embodying a sense of collectivism that has been absent since the Thatcher government. Britain is a society that entertains many different cultures and beliefs and of this it should be proud, yet the key word here is 'society' and it should continue to have one rather than devolve any further into individualism.

Crap - I was meaning to watch that program, oh well never mind I suppose.

You've asked a lot of good questions and I'm not sure if anyone really has the answers, or if indeed there are any. For me the primary causes are ignorance and apathy, people are too ignorant to understand any alternative to the social norm and do not care enough about the issues to educate themselves otherwise.

I pretty much agree. Having to think and work stuff out is much harder than just wallowing in racism.


You argued that wealth is the primary division in society but I believe that this division is merely an economic reflection of the level of education attained by them. For me the gap between the educated and the uneducated is the biggest one in society, and the most harmful, compare the Sun to the Guardian for example, the gulf in standard is enormous.

I think you could be right.... Isn't education levels just an indication of economic levels?


Anyway I'm not sure if I'm sticking to the point wholeheartedly so I'll answer a specific question: Should cultures be forced to integrate/should people be required to take citizenship tests? In my mind yes, if a person wishes to come into the UK, have access to its services, industry, welfare and so forth then I believe they ought to display some sense of allegiance to it

What exactly do they pledge allegiance too? Because many people born and bred in Britain wouldn't pledge allegiance to the Queen.

and I believe to argue otherwise is to pander to a 'political correctness' that is already all too present in UK politics, stifles any rational debate concerning immigration and asylum (which in itself is another cause of the rise of the BNP).

I'm not so sure you can blame political correctness for stifling debate. I think the biggest debate stifler (if thats the correct terminology) is scare-mongering. Very few people actually relate their arguments to the facts. I think a lot of the left pander to the right in not wanting to appear to want to 'let them all in'. The facts are often different to the percieved realities- Immigrants put £1 Billion more into the economy percentage wise than residents. The net immigration/emigration figures since WWII actually show that its net 1 million emigrating. So people who say 'they' are 'flooding' the country are misleading the facts. The country isn't becoming overcrowded due to immigration, and if its talking of 'cultural flooding'- perhaps thats because 'natives' are emigrating so much.


One of the risks in creating a truly multicultural society is that you run the risk of eroding established values in that nation which in my mind are necessary for a successful democracy to run.

I can't really see the logic there. People come to Britain because they admire the democratic traditions and value them, and because they don't have them in their countries of origin. Why would they then try and destroy them? If it does happen, I agree we should fight that. However, look at France- when immigrants tried to change the traditions there hte French hit back, and were accused of racism. I think if you move to a country you should respect that country's traditions that made you want to move there in the first place.

This is not to say that people ought to conform entirely to a countries set of values but that their links to these values and to society in general should be maintained. It is impossible to retain any semblance of a social contract if society evolves to the individualistic state where nobody feels a moral or contractual responsibility for their fellow citizens.

Ahh. We agree then.


What does it mean to be British??? This is the key question and I think many people no longer know what indeed makes them British when British society entertains many different religions, races and cultures. My contention is that whilst aspects of multi-culturalism have a lot to offer it is important to restablish an underlying set of values and beliefs that can be assigned to the UK
I don't regard multi-culturalism as a threat to our traditional values and beliefs...

thus strengthening social links and embodying a sense of collectivism that has been absent since the Thatcher government.

I really, really, really hope you're not claiming that Thatcher encouraged Social Links and Collectivism? The woman who said 'There is no such thing as society'?
I regard Margaret Thatcher as the woman who destroyed our society and sense of community. She systematically destroyed our communities, made us hate each other with racist and homophobic laws, stripped our schools and community resources, raped our industries which gave us our sense of belonging. I know its different from the South, but as a Northerner I am confronted every day by Thatchers destruction of my nation. Our social problems of today can all be traced back to her destroying community spirit and giving Britain the 'Greed is Good' American Philosophy. She is the direct cause of the vast majority of selfish attitudes we know.


Britain is a society that entertains many different cultures and beliefs and of this it should be proud, yet the key word here is 'society' and it should continue to have one rather than devolve any further into individualism.

Indeed. I think a collective appreciation for all our cultures. Keep them seperate, mix them, add and take away. Britain is multi-cultural. We should be proud of it, and everything it gives us, from The Summer Fair to The Curry House.

Crap - I was meaning to watch that program, oh well never mind I suppose.

You've asked a lot of good questions and I'm not sure if anyone really has the answers, or if indeed there are any. For me the primary causes are ignorance and apathy, people are too ignorant to understand any alternative to the social norm and do not care enough about the issues to educate themselves otherwise.

I pretty much agree. Having to think and work stuff out is much harder than just wallowing in racism.


You argued that wealth is the primary division in society but I believe that this division is merely an economic reflection of the level of education attained by them. For me the gap between the educated and the uneducated is the biggest one in society, and the most harmful, compare the Sun to the Guardian for example, the gulf in standard is enormous.

I think you could be right.... Isn't education levels just an indication of economic levels?


Anyway I'm not sure if I'm sticking to the point wholeheartedly so I'll answer a specific question: Should cultures be forced to integrate/should people be required to take citizenship tests? In my mind yes, if a person wishes to come into the UK, have access to its services, industry, welfare and so forth then I believe they ought to display some sense of allegiance to it

What exactly do they pledge allegiance too? Because many people born and bred in Britain wouldn't pledge allegiance to the Queen.

and I believe to argue otherwise is to pander to a 'political correctness' that is already all too present in UK politics, stifles any rational debate concerning immigration and asylum (which in itself is another cause of the rise of the BNP).

I'm not so sure you can blame political correctness for stifling debate. I think the biggest debate stifler (if thats the correct terminology) is scare-mongering. Very few people actually relate their arguments to the facts. I think a lot of the left pander to the right in not wanting to appear to want to 'let them all in'. The facts are often different to the percieved realities- Immigrants put £1 Billion more into the economy percentage wise than residents. The net immigration/emigration figures since WWII actually show that its net 1 million emigrating. So people who say 'they' are 'flooding' the country are misleading the facts. The country isn't becoming overcrowded due to immigration, and if its talking of 'cultural flooding'- perhaps thats because 'natives' are emigrating so much.


One of the risks in creating a truly multicultural society is that you run the risk of eroding established values in that nation which in my mind are necessary for a successful democracy to run.

I can't really see the logic there. People come to Britain because they admire the democratic traditions and value them, and because they don't have them in their countries of origin. Why would they then try and destroy them? If it does happen, I agree we should fight that. However, look at France- when immigrants tried to change the traditions there hte French hit back, and were accused of racism. I think if you move to a country you should respect that country's traditions that made you want to move there in the first place.

This is not to say that people ought to conform entirely to a countries set of values but that their links to these values and to society in general should be maintained. It is impossible to retain any semblance of a social contract if society evolves to the individualistic state where nobody feels a moral or contractual responsibility for their fellow citizens.

Ahh. We agree then.


What does it mean to be British??? This is the key question and I think many people no longer know what indeed makes them British when British society entertains many different religions, races and cultures. My contention is that whilst aspects of multi-culturalism have a lot to offer it is important to restablish an underlying set of values and beliefs that can be assigned to the UK
I don't regard multi-culturalism as a threat to our traditional values and beliefs...

thus strengthening social links and embodying a sense of collectivism that has been absent since the Thatcher government.

I really, really, really hope you're not claiming that Thatcher encouraged Social Links and Collectivism? The woman who said 'There is no such thing as society'?
I regard Margaret Thatcher as the woman who destroyed our society and sense of community. She systematically destroyed our communities, made us hate each other with racist and homophobic laws, stripped our schools and community resources, raped our industries which gave us our sense of belonging. I know its different from the South, but as a Northerner I am confronted every day by Thatchers destruction of my nation. Our social problems of today can all be traced back to her destroying community spirit and giving Britain the 'Greed is Good' American Philosophy. She is the direct cause of the vast majority of selfish attitudes we know.


Britain is a society that entertains many different cultures and beliefs and of this it should be proud, yet the key word here is 'society' and it should continue to have one rather than devolve any further into individualism.

Indeed. I think a collective appreciation for all our cultures. Keep them seperate, mix them, add and take away. Britain is multi-cultural. We should be proud of it, and everything it gives us, from The Summer Fair to The Curry House.

Regarding Thatcher what I meant was that social links and collectivism were absent since the Thatcher government as a result of the Thatcher government rather than any failings by subsequent governments. To argue that she some how fostered a sense of community would be stupid and I'm sorry if I gave the impression that I thought otherwise. Yet at the same time I think to argue that she is the primary cause of the "greed is good" philosophy is a little unfair. I'd be more tempted to say that the growth of consumerism and materialism and the economic and political failures of Labour/socialist governments and values around the 1980s brought about a set of conditions which Thatcher merely reflected rather than created.

I would simply ask them to pledge allegiance to the country or the flag or something like that rather than the queen. I have no particular fondness for the monarchy, nor do I see them as embodying anything particularly great about this country. Perhaps you could rope together a load of abstract nouns - freedom, justice or whatever, but for me that wouldn't be necessary. All I'd ask for would be some symbolic commitment of allegiance to the country they are living in, which in my mind isn't a lot to ask.

I would argue that most people who decide to come to Britain do so for more practical reasons such as career prospects, living conditions, job security, public services etc rather than any deeper admiration for the country and its traditions. That is not to say that they have no such admiration but rather than is not the reason for their choice.

I would define a multicultural society as a society which incorporates many different cultures without having a central uniting one. In a truly multicultural society there would be no such things as traditional values and beliefs since such a thing would be incompatible with the idea that the country has more than one culture. If by multiculturalism you mean a society that embodies many different cultures in addition to an underlying central one then I agree with you, if you would define it as the former then I do not.

BNP:

British
n00b
Policies

Regarding Thatcher what I meant was that social links and collectivism were absent since the Thatcher government as a result of the Thatcher government rather than any failings by subsequent governments. To argue that she some how fostered a sense of community would be stupid and I'm sorry if I gave the impression that I thought otherwise. Yet at the same time I think to argue that she is the primary cause of the "greed is good" philosophy is a little unfair. I'd be more tempted to say that the growth of consumerism and materialism and the economic and political failures of Labour/socialist governments and values around the 1980s brought about a set of conditions which Thatcher merely reflected rather than created.


I agree that Greed is Good came about htrough the general social climate, but Thatcher fostered that with here 'no such thing as society', closing community industries like coal and steel and encouraging people to value themselveson what they own rather than who they are (council house sales etc).

I almost becided to join their party, the others are all blighted by political correctness gone too far and all have cut the british army back to the bone and are cutting some of the finest regiments ever to grace this world.

They are however rather unthinking in their anti-immigration policies and total cutting of foreign aid, besides, they are the party of the uneducated classesand are not very respectable so i'm sticking to my true blue roots.

Vote conservative, uncommonly good sense.

Regards éternal,

TNE

The problem is that thanks to newspapers the working class plebs now have their say and rule the country by way of complaining. Things were much better when your good old fashioned English working class chap knew his place, and was openly happy to do what their betters told them.

I'm afraid I don't have time to make a long posting here so I'll just drop a couple of my opinions in.

Regarding freedom of speech: it's my personal view that the BNP should be allowed to say what they have to say. Keep them in the open and use their public statements against them.

We have a real problem with the media in this country. The political skew is enormous: all national newspapers with a significant readership are right or centre-right, with the exceptions of The Guardian/Observer (centre-left), The Mirror (centre-left but frequently moronic) and The Independent (centre). I know race doesn't have to be a left/right issue; however, the right-wing papers tend to be the ones painting appalling, misrepresentative pictures of asylum seekers. And people read this crap every day - even if they don't immediately believe it, the 'facts' reported sink in on a subconscious level.

I've recently got involved (on a low level) with a London-based campaigning group for asylum seekers and it's just served to open my eyes on this issue. It seems every society must have its demons. The Jews have been the victims in western nations in the past (and still are in much of the Islamic world). Now they seem to have been replaced in the UK by asylum seekers (particularly Roma and Muslim). The US has al-Qaeda, Russia has the Chechens, the Czechs and Slovaks have the Roma (again), the Baltic states have the Russians and so on ad nauseum.

Sad, dispiriting, pathetic.

The problem is that thanks to newspapers the working class plebs now have their say and rule the country by way of complaining. Things were much better when your good old fashioned English working class chap knew his place, and was openly happy to do what their betters told them.

Quite right that man.

The Daily Mail's portrayal of Asylum Seekers is sickening. I honestly would not mind if they were able to back up their wild claims with statistics and facts.

For example, the Daily Mail's fanatical columnists claim that our roads are 'awash with incompetant asylum seekers who post a grave danger to [i]your average law abiding Briton[i]' - not an actual quote but if you've read the paper you know what I mean.

So, 2 or 3 asylum seekers have been prosecuted for driving without a license and insurance, and one of them killed a girl, which is terrible, but it doesn't mean that every single asylum seeker is out there trying to run people over does it?

Hate to say it and sound elitist and intellectual, but- when less intelligent, less educated or less worldly people read things like this, they are influenced.

The media, especially the newspapers, should show more responsibility. Not just with regards to sensitive issues but in general.. look at The Sun's hounding of poor Prince William!

The BNP should not be outlawed but rather turned into an object of derision.

The BNP should not be outlawed but rather turned into an object of derision.

Indeed. Hug a Nazi today.

If it were up to me I'd have ever member of that vile party executed.

I'd just be doing my bit for genetics. Stopping that sort of moronic prejudice from spreading to other generations.

Did you know more people emigrate from britain each year than immigrate?
That the Irish are the largest minority?
or even that it is thought that black people intermarried with native Brits in around 200 AD?

lets see if the daily mail print any of those facts...

Did you know more people emigrate from britain each year than immigrate?
That the Irish are the largest minority?
or even that it is thought that black people intermarried with native Brits in around 200 AD?

lets see if the daily mail print any of those facts...

Stop! You're ruining their little racial purity fantasy, you, you, you race mixing traitor! :?

I know the Mail is bad but the Express is far worse in terms of painting a disturbing picture regarding immigrants.

Pyrenees, you make every bad thing in the world sound like it's Anglo-American. Wake up! It's happening everywhere. But I must say that the majority of the planet has made great strides in race relations.
Also, you make it sound like it should be the government's responsibility. To some degree, yes. Segregation in the US only ended because of fierce government intervention. But they couldn't stop what came after intergration: throughout the late 60s-early 70s (and even recently), there were race riots, racial inspired crime, etc. But blacks and whites are generally used to seeing eachother around. Same with Asians. So unless it is law in the UK that different races can't attend the same schools and such, I wouldn't worry about it. Society gets over it, provided that the government or some celebrity doesn't help fan the flames.