NationStates Jolt Archive

Yes. This thread is about the aforesaid interesting conversation that I had with a colleague of mine at work a couple of days ago. I'd been on the BBC News website reading the latest on the Democratic primaries that had taken place on Tuesday, and got into a discussion with him about American politics. Naturally, as we're in the UK, the conversation turned to politics this side of the pond.

And now a little background. My colleague is around 60 (i.e. approaching retirement age). He is originally from Kenya, although I believe he holds a UK passport. The same is true of his wife. He is, from what I've gathered from previous conversations with him, moderately right-wing.

Enough background. What made this interesting is the following extract from the BNP's manifesto for the 2005 General Election:

...the introduction of a system of voluntary resettlement whereby those immigrants and their descendants who are legally here are afforded the opportunity to return to their lands of ethnic origin assisted by a generous financial incentives both for individuals and for the countries in question...
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/bsp/hi/pdfs/BNP_uk_manifesto.pdf

Basically my colleague said that, purely because of the above, he would vote for the BNP, a party that has pretty much categorically stated they do not want him here. I was mildly surprised, to be honest, but he does seem to have an excellent case. Effectively the BNP would pay him to move back to Kenya - not including the amount he'd get for selling his house. And for £250,000 + compensation, who could blame him?

So, firstly, does anyone think this is a bad reason to vote for a political party, and secondly, who'd do the same in his position?

So, firstly, does anyone think this is a bad reason to vote for a political party
Yes, seeing as they also want to clamp down on the rights of homosexuals, bring back national service and generally make the populace as stupid as Griffin by cutting the education budget so they can give everyone a rifle. Taking one issue is such a stupid reason to vote for a party.
and secondly, who'd do the same in his position?
Nah.

I'd laugh if the B'N P win but don't pay him any compensation because he holds a British passport or something

then I would overthrow democracy:)

then I would overthrow democracy:)
Correct. If people vote in the BNP, they are too stupid to deserve to vote. Simple as.

Correct. If people vote in the BNP, they are too stupid to deserve to vote. Simple as.

I for one think that a few years of military junta would go down smashingly (naturally it would abruptly end as soon as Lizzy dies:p)

I for one think that a few years of military junta would go down smashingly (naturally it would abruptly end as soon as Lizzy dies:p)
I would simply prefer to drag the leadership of the BNP into the street and hang them, and then have the previous government lead for 4 years before a new vote is called.

So, firstly, does anyone think this is a bad reason to vote for a political party, and secondly, who'd do the same in his position?
Well, sure, it's to his advantage, in a rather cackhanded way. On the other hand, I would much rather not be lumbered with and BNP government, and it seems pretty selfish to (potentially) unleash a homophobic, racist and anti-semitic government on the rest of us and for this guy to not suffer the result of his vote at the same time.

Reading the BNP Manifesto is best done to Die Fahne Hoch. It improves the effect.

I admire the... shall we say... creativity of a fascist's use of language.

I didn't realise the BNP had managed to get someone onto the London Assembly. They sneaked in one member by just 0.2% of the vote. I think it's time to cull 5.2% of London voters. Bah! All the other parties and City Hall civil servants have said they will refuse to work with the BNP Assembly member.

I admire the... shall we say... creativity of a fascist's use of language.
I'd personally like to point out at this point that they're more simply a racist party than a fascist one.

I'd consider myself a bit of a fascist, but a part of that is clamping down on racism as far as possible, essentially because it has no benefit to the nation at all.

I didn't realise the BNP had managed to get someone onto the London Assembly. They sneaked in one member by just 0.2% of the vote. I think it's time to cull 5.2% of London voters. Bah! All the other parties and City Hall civil servants have said they will refuse to work with the BNP Assembly member.
Well, it's only a glorified county council, and Boris is getting all the limelight anyway. (I think, I don't get London TV any more.)

So, firstly, does anyone think this is a bad reason to vote for a political party, and secondly, who'd do the same in his position?It's a silly reason and here's why: He ain't gettin any. He'll find the BNP will be a lot less interested in keeping its promises once they can ensure you won't have the chance to vote against them the next time.

:cool: Still listening to Die Fahne Hoch for the effect. :cool:

I'd personally like to point out at this point that they're more simply a racist party than a fascist one.

They like to disguise a lot of what they advocate in anti-authoritarian language. Nevertheless, I call bullshit.


I'd consider myself a bit of a fascist,

Just what the heck do you mean by "fascist" then? If you take fascism to be anything close to what I take it to be, then we have nothing to say to each other.


but a part of that is clamping down on racism as far as possible, essentially because it has no benefit to the nation at all.

Can't you come up with a better criticism of racism? Like, I don't know, that it's anti-human, arbitrary, cruel and corrupting of society?

Who cares about "the Nation"? :rolleyes:

They like to disguise a lot of what they advocate in anti-authoritarian language. Nevertheless, I call bullshit.
The BNP is just generally a bullshit party that needs to be removed from politics.
Just what the heck do you mean by "fascist" then? If you take fascism to be anything close to what I take it to be, then we have nothing to say to each other.
Fascism is essentially telling people what's right and what's wrong... but as a system of government.
Can't you come up with a better criticism of racism? Like, I don't know, that it's anti-human, arbitrary, cruel and corrupting of society?

Who cares about "the Nation"? :rolleyes:
It's all of those things and more. Which is why it's a Bad Thing. And business cares about "the Nation". You cannot have a successful state without the economic support of big business, after all.

I would simply prefer to drag the leadership of the BNP into the street and hang them, and then have the previous government lead for 4 years before a new vote is called.

so thats how Brown intends to win the next election :p

I would much rather not be lumbered with and BNP government

duude its £250,000 for that kind of cash I'd vote for a black man!

All the other parties and City Hall civil servants have said they will refuse to work with the BNP Assembly member.

thats just mean :(

so thats how Brown intends to win the next election :p
I'd probably let him stay in charge if he got New Labour together for that one. Might also repair the poor relations between New and Old Labour supporters.

You're probably right, but it's still scary to think that 1 in 40 people in London could actually be physically bothered to walk to a polling station and put an X in the BNP box.
1 in 20-ish, no?

thats just mean :(Yeah... you're right, you could even consider it bigoted. How dare those bigots not work with the BNP?! :mad:

edit: Sweet... I just timewarped myself...

IF you accept that immigrants should "go home" -- I don't -- then an incentive is the best way to do that. If it's still their choice.

Hmm, why not offer it to everyone, homeborn citizens too? If you'd sell your nationality for a one-time grant, you can sling your hook eh.

If the BNP were to become elected and give white British people the assualt rifles they promised then they probably wouldn't have much trouble 'convincing' recent immigrants to partake in 'voluntary' repatriation.

1 in 20-ish, no?But there was only a ~50% turnout. I'm taking it in good faith that being apathetic and supporting the BNP tend not to go hand in hand.

As far as I understand it, the BNP only gets votes because Labour fucked up badly. BNP voters tend to be the people Labour was suppose to represent (100 years ago) and who have been literally left behind with New Labour.

Edit: FFS not time-warping again :-L

I'd probably let him stay in charge if he got New Labour together for that one. Might also repair the poor relations between New and Old Labour supporters.

confess you just don't want to hassle

Yeah... you're right, you could even consider it bigoted. How dare those bigots not work with the BNP?! :mad:

racism is one thing but I will not tolerate rudeness!

IF you accept that immigrants should "go home" -- I don't -- then an incentive is the best way to do that. If it's still their choice.

I think the policy of making Britain and shit hole might have a better effect ;)

If the BNP were to become elected and give white British people the assualt rifles they promised then they probably wouldn't have much trouble 'convincing' recent immigrants to partake in 'voluntary' repatriation.
Would make it a shitload easier to take out the BNP. Which is why they won't back this claim up.

Edit: FFS not time-warping again :-LTell me about it. I somehow managed to post an hour in the future. I originally posted the 9:20 post at 8:20 (by my computer's clock that is).

Tell me about it. I somehow managed to post an hour in the future. I originally posted the 9:20 post at 8:20 (by my computer's clock that is).

I got a one-hour timewarp into the past (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=13682813)! It was right after logging in tho, it seems to have settled down now.

You're probably right, but it's still scary to think that 1 in 40 people in London could actually be physically bothered to walk to a polling station and put an X in the BNP box.
Well, the BNP are pretty string where I used to live, so I'm kind of used to it, or to put it another way, in my ward back home it's more than one in ten.

Now that's fucking scary.

Well, it's only a glorified county council, and Boris is getting all the limelight anyway. (I think, I don't get London TV any more.)You're probably right, but it's still scary to think that 1 in 40 people in London could actually be physically bothered to walk to a polling station and put an X in the BNP box.

Yes. This thread is about the aforesaid interesting conversation that I had with a colleague of mine at work a couple of days ago. I'd been on the BBC News website reading the latest on the Democratic primaries that had taken place on Tuesday, and got into a discussion with him about American politics. Naturally, as we're in the UK, the conversation turned to politics this side of the pond.

And now a little background. My colleague is around 60 (i.e. approaching retirement age). He is originally from Kenya, although I believe he holds a UK passport. The same is true of his wife. He is, from what I've gathered from previous conversations with him, moderately right-wing.

Enough background. What made this interesting is the following extract from the BNP's manifesto for the 2005 General Election:


http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/bsp/hi/pdfs/BNP_uk_manifesto.pdf

Basically my colleague said that, purely because of the above, he would vote for the BNP, a party that has pretty much categorically stated they do not want him here. I was mildly surprised, to be honest, but he does seem to have an excellent case. Effectively the BNP would pay him to move back to Kenya - not including the amount he'd get for selling his house. And for £250,000 + compensation, who could blame him?

So, firstly, does anyone think this is a bad reason to vote for a political party, and secondly, who'd do the same in his position?

Sure, good reason if you want the money. But first you ship them out, then you take care of the one's that didn't leave (And I mean 'take care' of them)

you take care of the one's that didn't leave (And I mean 'take care' of them)

awww the BNP is so nice :)

maybe all this talk about them being racist loonies is folly and actually they represent the policy's of kittens, puppies and rainbows

awww the BNP is so nice :)

maybe all this talk about them being racist loonies is folly and actually they represent the policy's of kittens, puppies and rainbows

thats my political platform...doen't work to well

thats my political platform...doen't work to well

Let me guess. The kitties and the puppies fight ... and people keep asking to see the pot of gold.

Yep, I'm made out of spam today.

Correct. If people vote in the BNP, they are too stupid to deserve to vote. Simple as.

They are anyway. Any electorate that is swayed more by the Sun than anything more abstract or noble deserves anything they get.

They are anyway. Any electorate that is swayed more by the Sun than anything more abstract or noble deserves anything they get.What about the if they were swayed by the Evening Standard? Maybe we can get Boris' election annulled.

They are anyway. Any electorate that is swayed more by the Sun than anything more abstract or noble deserves anything they get.
As opposed to the Telegraph?

I would simply prefer to drag the leadership of the BNP into the street and hang them, and then have the previous government lead for 4 years before a new vote is called.

This from someone who thinks Americans are barbarians becuase we execute killers? Niiiice.....

Fascism is essentially telling people what's right and what's wrong... but as a system of government.


In a perfect world, that system might actually work.

They are anyway. Any electorate that is swayed more by the Sun than anything more abstract or noble deserves anything they get.
Quite, see Major getting into power.
This from someone who thinks Americans are barbarians becuase we execute killers? Niiiice.....
I prefer preventative measures to reactive ones.

This from someone who thinks Americans are barbarians becuase we execute killers? Niiiice.....

he never said anything about the BNP being guilty having politicians hung is more a euphemism these days (unless of course you actually believe communist believe the tats they say?)

also you have plenty more reasons to be barbarians why would we just act snooty to you over one issue?

In a perfect world, that system might actually work.

in a perfect world democracy would work so its clear comparing things by the work done won't...work

Basically my colleague said that, purely because of the above, he would vote for the BNP, a party that has pretty much categorically stated they do not want him here. I was mildly surprised, to be honest, but he does seem to have an excellent case. Effectively the BNP would pay him to move back to Kenya - not including the amount he'd get for selling his house. And for £250,000 + compensation, who could blame him?

So, firstly, does anyone think this is a bad reason to vote for a political party, and secondly, who'd do the same in his position?

when you say he WOULD do you mean he WILL or that he "would but"?

its a stupid reason to vote for the BNP since they cannot deliver on the promise.

The BNP is just generally a bullshit party that needs to be removed from politics.

Why? They don't really do anything, right? Maybe get a seat in the House of Commons every now and again and just get subsumed by the Tories. And then just masturbate about how women and queers suck and how we need to send all the Niggers (as opposed to Britons) back to Where They Came From. Correct me if I'm wrong.


Fascism is essentially telling people what's right and what's wrong... but as a system of government.

Elaborate more? Because I still don't know what you mean.


It's all of those things and more. Which is why it's a Bad Thing. And business cares about "the Nation". You cannot have a successful state without the economic support of big business, after all.
How does a fascist state cause big business to stay ethical? How does the fascist state cause itself to stay ethical?


In a perfect world, that system might actually work.
In a perfect world, any such system would be totally unnecessary.

Because you're British?
Racist. lol

Because you're British?

British = cynical

know your stereotypes!

Why? They don't really do anything, right? Maybe get a seat in the House of Commons every now and again and just get subsumed by the Tories. And then just masturbate about how women and queers suck and how we need to send all the Niggers (as opposed to Britons) back to Where They Came From. Correct me if I'm wrong.
They're gaining political power with the poor, mostly because New Labour have completely screwed them over. Don't want that to escalate. Oh no.
Elaborate more? Because I still don't know what you mean.
What more is there to say? I've basically summed it up for you.

If something is going wrong, it will be resolved by legislation and the enforcement thereof. If things are going Really Very Wrong in spite of what's been said to you time, after time, after time, then you will go to prison. Big Brother is essentially the embodiment of fascism.

Yeah, fine, you can have a dystopian type affair with that, but then you can also get a benevolent dictatorship, which I don't think anyone can really argue against.
How does a fascist state cause big business to stay ethical? How does the fascist state cause itself to stay ethical?
It causes big business to stay ethical by imposing limits on what it can and can't do. The fascist state cannot cause itself to stay ethical by any more means than the moral fibre of its administrators. Just like every other kind of government.

Although that's not what I was really discussing, but heh.
Because you're British?
We're not snooty. We're just smarter and more cynical than you.

What more is there to say? I've basically summed it up for you.

If something is going wrong, it will be resolved by legislation and the enforcement thereof. If things are going Really Very Wrong in spite of what's been said to you time, after time, after time, then you will go to prison. Big Brother is essentially the embodiment of fascism.

Except I don't see any difference between your explanation of the fascist state and any other state. Fascism, as I have always understood it, involves belligerent nationalism, racism, and dictatorship.


Yeah, fine, you can have a dystopian type affair with that,

Like every fascist state that has popped up, to my knowledge.


but then you can also get a benevolent dictatorship, which I don't think anyone can really argue against.

Except on the grounds of its nonexistence historically?


The fascist state cannot cause itself to stay ethical by any more means than the moral fibre of its administrators. Just like every other kind of government.

I appreciate your honesty. Many American "checks and balances" people like to claim that the State somehow "checks itself," but I find it refreshing that you don't pretend it can. I would just ask this question: given the massive centralization of power necessary for fascism and fascism's historical record, are you sure that you would want the fascist state to rely on the "moral fibre of its administrators"?

why would we just act snooty to you over one issue?



Because you're British?

Goodness no. I'm sure British fascism will be a quite different cup of tea!
You're kidding, right?

EDIT: Nevermind. I figured out that you were kidding. And damn and blast the timewarps!!! Garrr.

British = cynical

know your stereotypes!No! The British are jovial and kind to their fellow Brits, especially when being bombed by Germans. I saw it in an American information film produced by the Department of War, and they would never lie!

the reason people are voting for the BNP because people are desperate and so are moving either left (towards RESPECT, the SSP or Plaid Cymru) or right (BNP, Ukip, Veritas) rather then to the mainstream parties (liberals/conservatives/labour). It must be noted however despite massive publicity and also scaremongering about immigrants and the left the far right is still doing relatively poorly compared to elsewhere in Europe and also when compared to the left wing (RESPECT, SSP and Plaid Cymru all having representation in national assemblies (Scotish Parliament/Welsh Assembly) or in the houses of commons).

Except I don't see any difference between your explanation of the fascist state and any other state. Fascism, as I have always understood it, involves belligerent nationalism, racism, and dictatorship.
Dictatorship is, I'll be frank, a part of the structure of the fascist state, I can't just wish that one away. I personally don't really mind that, but some may disagree, and since we're talking bullshit hypothetical politics here, disagree all you like.

Belligerent nationalism - not really any more than any other system of government. When things are bad, the government sometimes goes to war to try to cheer people up, or holds massive rallies or whatever, but then that's true of almost any state - see the unnecessary war in Grenada, the Russians in Chechnya, and all of those wars involving Israel in the last 60 years.

Racism - eh, not really. Again, this all depends on who's in charge and their personal views. Mussolini (until 1938, *sighs*) was pretty much anti-racist, and some of the leaders of the fascist party in Italy were Jewish. Then he chummed up with Hitler. And then it all went a bit wrong.
Like every fascist state that has popped up, to my knowledge.
Italy was pretty alright.
Except on the grounds of its nonexistence historically?
See any other form of perfect government...
I appreciate your honesty. Many American "checks and balances" people like to claim that the State somehow "checks itself," but I find it refreshing that you don't pretend it can.
Quite.
I would just ask this question: given the massive centralization of power necessary for fascism and fascism's historical record, are you sure that you would want the fascist state to rely on the "moral fibre of its administrators"?
Why not have any less trust in it than with any other form of government?

No! The British are jovial and kind to their fellow Brits, especially when being bombed by Germans. I saw it in an American information film produced by the Department of War, and they would never lie!
We're jovial and kind to everyone, regardless of how inappropriate it is to be polite and funny. Tough love it may be, but love nonetheless :p

Fascism is essentially telling people what's right and what's wrong... but as a system of government.


And since there is no right or wrong, right is whatever the fuck the state wants it to be, I.E we're fucked. How about that.

And since there is no right or wrong, right is whatever the fuck the state wants it to be, I.E we're fucked. How about that.
Culture dictates what's right and wrong in society, and Fascism merely reflects that.

Culture dictates what's right and wrong in society, and Fascism merely reflects that.

Fascism almost always only reflects a niche reactionary part of culture, which generally is not good in any practical sense.

Fascism almost always only reflects a niche reactionary part of culture, which generally is not good in any practical sense.
And I'd agree with that entirely. Which is why for fascism to be even remotely successful it needs to be anti-racist and pretty socialist.

Culture dictates what's right and wrong in society, and Fascism merely reflects that.

And here I was thinking fascism was an economic/political model merging state political and corporate economical power at centre, leading to an authoritarian power distribution and stringent social stratification, emphasising the collective rather than individual well being (i.e. the well being of the ruling classes).

And here I was thinking fascism was an economic/political model merging state political and corporate economical power at centre, leading to an authoritarian power distribution and stringent social stratification, emphasising the collective rather than individual well being (i.e. the well being of the ruling classes).
Fascism is little more than authoritarianism as a form of government, with whichever flavour of capitalism and class relations you want sprinkled on top.

So it could be applied to a dictatorship which helps the wealthiest and nobody else, or to one which does quite the opposite, really.

Well no doubt, but by it's anti-democratic character, power is never derived from the masses and thus government has no need or inclination to tend to those masses, beyond reasonable necessity. However, reasonable necessity != fairness.

Well no doubt, but by it's anti-democratic character, power is never derived from the masses and thus government has no need or inclination to tend to those masses, beyond reasonable necessity. However, reasonable necessity != fairness.
I'm sorry, but no system other than direct democracy will ever actually represent everyone properly. Were I to be the MP for York, I'd be representing about 200,000 people and their various interests. This is a ridiculously large number for one person, but you can't have referenda for every decision of government, and even if you did, not everyone would turn up, leading to a lack of representation that way.

I'm sorry, but no system other than direct democracy will ever actually represent everyone properly. Were I to be the MP for York, I'd be representing about 200,000 people and their various interests. This is a ridiculously large number for one person, but you can't have referenda for every decision of government, and even if you did, not everyone would turn up, leading to a lack of representation that way.

The issue is accountability.:) Where complete representation is impractical you get parliamentary representation, which, imperfect as it is, still keeps Parliament and Government accountable to the public, which is why this system works. Anything less tends to end up ruling/ruled class divisions that are irreparable through legal means.

The issue is accountability.:) Where complete representation is impractical you get parliamentary representation, which, imperfect as it is, still keeps Parliament and Government accountable to the public, which is why this system works. Anything less tends to end up ruling/ruled class divisions that are irreparable through legal means.
And what exactly stops Fascism from being accountable in its very nature? Nothing.

I didn't realise the BNP had managed to get someone onto the London Assembly. They sneaked in one member by just 0.2% of the vote. I think it's time to cull 5.2% of London voters.
no need to be so harsh. Culling just 0.3% would be enough.

And what exactly stops Fascism from being accountable in its very nature? Nothing.

Everything. There is no cycle of power. Power does not come from below to be exercised from above. It is simply exersised, from above for above. Whoever sets the rules answeres to nobody. And is motivated by nothing but his whim.

Everything. There is no cycle of power. Power does not come from below to be exercised from above. It is simply exersised, from above for above. Whoever sets the rules answeres to nobody. And is motivated by nothing but his whim.
Simply untrue. Without support from below, the regime will collapse. That simple. You can ask your questions, make your points, and in a properly led society, they will be answered.

Simply untrue. Without support from below, the regime will collapse. That simple. You can ask your questions, make your points, and in a properly led society, they will be answered.

Look: The interests of any regime extend only as far as its power base. Your ideal populist tyranny != actual fascism. Actual fascism is not benevolent. It is oppresive to anyone outside its power base.

no need to be so harsh. Culling just 0.3% would be enough.Yes, but how would you decide who to cull? I say at least be egalitarian about it and cull the whole lot.

Yes, but how would you decide who to cull? I say at least be egalitarian about it and cull the whole lot.
More to the point, you'll just create martyrs for the other 4.9%. Might as well take them all out so they're not particularly missed.