Who are the people who voted BNP last week?
Channel 4 have published a huge YouGov poll taken in the days before the European elections, intended largely to examine exactly what drove support for the BNP. The full tables are well worth a look here
Firstly, there is the question of whose vote the BNP takes. The demographics of people who voted BNP in the European elections show they are more likely to be C2DE social class, likely to read the Sun or Star and almost certainly not a broadsheet, they are likely to work in a manual occupation (they are also likely to be male and middle aged, though that has less of a partisan implication). They are also likely to come from a Labour supporting background – 47% of BNP voters say their parents voted Labour.
This fits with the pattern of where the BNP tend to do well – normally seats that were previously strongly Labour – and with other studies of where the BNP get their support.
If BNP supporters are traditional Labour, male working class voters therefore, the natural conclusion that it’s Labour they are taking support from. This falls down, however, on some other questions – asked if they’d rather have Cameron or Brown as PM, BNP voters opt for Cameron by 59% to 17%. Asked to place themselves on the political spectrum they put themselves right of centre, in roughly the same place as they do the Tories. 22% of them think the Tories care about people like themselves, only 6% say the same about Labour. In short, the people the BNP seem to appeal to are actually “working class Tories” – the sort of traditional working class voters who under other circumstances might shift over to the Conservatives.
Asked a series of satisfaction questions, as might be expected, BNP voters were the least content with their lot in life. They were most likely to be dissatisifed with their disposable income, most likely to feel unsafe in their local area, most likely to feel their family had few opportunities to prosper and – along with UKIP voters – were most pessimistic on the economy.
Unsurprisingly, the overwhelming majority of BNP supporters wanted all immigration stopped – 94% agreed with the statement. However, this doesn’t strongly differentiate them from the rest of the public, 61% of whom agreed with the statement. Only amongst Green party supporters were a plurality opposed to the statement. BNP supporters were also most likely to put immigration as the top issue facing the country. 87% picked it as a major issue, though again, amongst the public as a whole it was already the second most mentioned issue, chosen by 49% of people. (As an aside, it’s worth noting that UKIP supporters also named immigration as the most important issue. Only 39% of people who voted for UKIP put the issue of Europe as one of the top four facing the UK)
Looking at other statements on race or immigration however, BNP supporters tend to contrast far more strongly with supporters of other parties. The majority of every other party’s voters agreed with the statement that “Non-white British citizens who were born in this country are just as ‘British’ as white citizens born in this country”, only 35% of BNP voters did, with 44% disagreeing. Large majorities of every party’s supporters agreed that there was no difference in intelligence between black and white people…except for BNP supporters, where only 41% agreed. Almost half (49%) of BNP supporters thought employers should discriminate on grounds of race in favour of white people (compared to 11% in the general population), and 58% thought most crime was committed by immigrants (22% in the general population). 72% of BNP supporters wanted the government to encourage voluntary repatriation, compared to 27% of the country as a whole.
At the extremes of conspiracy theory, BNP voters are more likely to believe in a worldwide Jewish conspiracy, or that the Holocaust didn’t happen, but not to a great extent – the overwhelming majority reject them. 3% of British people apparently believe it completely true that “there is a major international conspiracy led by Jews and Communists to
undermine traditional Christian values in Britain”, compared to 9% of BNP supporters. 9% of British people think the Holocaust is exaggerated, with 1% denying it entirely – the figures amongst BNP supporters are 18% and 2%.
A final interesting point was the question of where people got their political news from. The vast majority of people get their news, as one would expect, from the TV, followed by newspapers, the radio and news websites. There was no great contrast between supporters of one political party or another on any of these. Where there was a contrast was the proportion of people who got their news from “political parties websites” – only 3% of people ticked this, but 12% of BNP voters did, suggesting the BNP have managed to communicate directly with their potential voters across the web.
(A note about comments. This is the sort of comment thread that risks rapidly descending into arguments about which parties are left or right, which parties are racist or not and so on. Please be aware of the comments policy, I’ll be moderating carefully and closing it if it gets out of hand)
Seems to me that the “BNP voters aren’t racist” argument is undermined by this research. It shows they are significantly more racist than the average and, along with the ‘life’s shit’ outlook, is the real defining characterisitc of BNP support.
This is very interesting. The findings with regards BNP voters are more or less as I’d expect but results such as 27% of the general population supporting voluntary repatriation of immigrants are fairly surprising.
Anthony – congratulations on a carefully thought out analysis, and well done to C4 for having the presence of mind to commission such a study.
The poll numbers are pretty much what we would expect, and may help to explain the politically odd observation that the BNP do better in traditional Labour areas. It also helps clarify the notion that BNP support is not necessarily based on rational analysis of issues, but then again is there any party that could claim that? Given the viewpoints among BNP supporters that this poll suggests, the biggest question is how/should they be tackled. Given their poll standing we could just ignore them and remove much of the disproportionate publicity they receive, at the risk of allowing issues to fester and help build more BNP support. Take them seriously and bring them into open debate and the risk is to legitimise the BNP and make them seem normal. Long term, the only answer to extreme viewpoints is to make the system we’ve got work and work well – keep unemployment down, reduce crime, provide good quality housing and BNP support will wither. The striking thing about the poll findings is just how fearful and agreived BNP supporters appear to be – remove the factors causing this and we might solve the problem.
If I have understood the analysis above correctly, what this is saying is that the BNP have picked up those voters who in previous decades would have frequented the Tory Working Men’s Clubs founded by Disraeli.
Could make an interesting subject for a PhD dissertation as to how that allegiance shifted between the parties over the decades. I suspect that newspaper readership may have been a major factor, but other key trends may have been the seismic shift to Labour in 1945, gradually eroded in the 60s-70s as the Labour party became dominated by socially liberal “progressives”.
Thatcher must have won a large portion of these voters, especially as she appealed to their “patriotic” instincts, but then lost them when economic reality hit them hard.
Since the inner cities had more or less become “no-go” zones for Tories from the late 80s, and Labour became increasingly focussed on the umbrella of minorities approach to build its activist base, it is not surprising that this demographic felt abandoned by the main parties, and so have turned to extremists offering “simple” solutions.
In effect, there may be a chunk of votes just waiting to be picked up by any party which can show that it addresses the basic concerns of this demographic, and can organise effectively in the areas where they are concentrated.
I don’t mean to seem patronising, but I think the idea that our woes (and BNP supporters do seem to have woes) are to be blamed on over-population by immigrants is a very simple idea.
Easy to get your head round.
That simplicity explains its popularity among people who enjoy a political debate but don’t have the intellectual energy to consider more than the very simple points.
It’s not a left/right issue. It’s a level of intellectual capacity issue. Stands to reason, eh?
Of course people are fearful and aggrieved. It shouldn’t mean that they should therefore flock to the most protectionist, isolationist parties. But it has, partly because of the expenses scandal, and partly because of the miserable lack of strong leadership.
Paul H – I wrote that before i read yours – clearly I agree, and I think that’s the message Brown was given last night – talk to the people in simple terms and give them a simple summary, lewaving out all the detail. Bit like Blair did.
6% of Labour voters (at the moment-by definition ‘core’ voters) read the Mail or Express!
Also 6% of Tories read the Mirror!
The idea that anyone with even the slightest semblance of political interest who considers themselves right or right of centre might read the Mirror is astonishing. I personally found it made me feel uncomfortable after just a couple of paragraphs when I picked it up once!
It goes to show that a fair chunk of the electorate must just vote on ‘autopilot’.
This is a very useful poll. I do wonder if some of the people polled were confused over “left” and “right” – did 2% of Labour voters really think that the Conservative Party is very left wing?
Good analysis. It also highlights that while other parties assert that the BNP is an extreme party, BNP supporters themselves feel that its view are mainstream.
A conclusion may be that for other parties to continue to attack the extremist nature of the BNP – rather than addressing specific policies with which they disagree – may simply tend to create a stronger feeling of identity within the BNP amongst its supporters. This point is reinforced by the effectiveness with which its activists engage with its supporters (a message which comes through from the poll).
Interestingly enough, quite a lot of intelligent and able people also believe in Jewish conspiracies for World domination – but they tend to be people who have mental health issues (not at all incompatible with high intelligence). This leads them to identify conspiracies where they don’t exist.
My 72 year old Dad votes Labour and likes the sport in the Express.
I tease him about buying a porn magnets’ publication frerquently to no avail.
I guess the key question for us is where will the BNP vote go at the GE.
It will be liuted by almost half due to turn out some will still vote BNP, some will abstain and much will be in safe labour seats.
Perhaps only 1% of meaningful BNP Eroe votes are available and trying to attract these may put off other potential vvotes
The borrowed vote could go either Labour or Cons.
Are there
Pressed button before finshing?
My closing question is does this report suggest where this 1% or so may go ?
- I reckon so disperse to make little difference.
Good effort by C4 though.
Very few Conservative Clubs can be traced back to Disraeli although many were founded in the last years of the 19th century (and some were called Beaconsfield Clubs in honour of the great man). The clubs were not is any recognisable way “working men’s clubs’ (other than that they had some working men as members). That being said, we have always reckoned that only a minority of current Conservative Club members are Tory voters.
The research suggests that the BNP voters are predominantly from tradiitonal Labour backgrounds (which doesn’t stop them being members of Con Clubs or racists).
Also the BNP voters do not seem to be associated with big connurbations. Looking at the Yorkshire support it is focused on smaller towns, mill and pit villages rather than on the largers urban areas. Thus Morley, Queensbury, Heckmondwike, Fizwilliam and Maltby are likely to generate higher levels of support than the urban areas of Bradford, Leeds, Huddersfield and Wakefield.
Finally, the comment about the Labour mesage in past times is very significant – Labour used to offer support, protection and a voice to working class communities: in the main articulated by powerful men from those communities. Today, as the Party of the middle-class public employee, Labour is definitely “them” rather than “us” for many of these people.
Looking further at YouGov’s actual figures I note that while 47% state that their parents voted Labour, a sizeable 25% said Conservative, and 10% don’t know. I suspect that Paul H-J has a point when he says these people may be the descendants of those who used to belong to Disraelian Working Men’s Clubs. Indeed, I remember in the early ’70s a goodly chunk of my local Conservative Club held these views. One such who did, prepared outrageous press releases for our candidate John Major, which he deftly laughed-off and rewrote without causing offence to the drafter. He mentions it obliquely in his Memoirs.
It is tragic that the trendy middle classes who now socially dominate all three major parties, have marginalized working class voters to the extent that they often feel uncomfortable or unwelcome in the mainstream parties. All parties must tackle this, as Mrs.Thatcher did for the Conservatives briefly in the late ’70s without adopting quasi-racist posturing. I am sure all three could if there was a concerted effort.
I don’t in any way endorse the views of the BNP, but I think it’s worth acknowledging that this country is suffering various ailments associated with overpopulation. Loss of greenfield land, lack of housing, traffic delays, problems with health and education provision. The wealthy middle classes are far more insulated from these problems than the traditional working class voters we are talking about. Given that the “indigenous” population (whatever that means.. my family were originally Danish) is not increasing in number, the source of this population growth is undoubtedly immigration. So in a roundabout way perhaps the working class are not far from the mark in identifying immigration as the root cause of some of their disadvantages. Nothing to do with Race. It’s more about Space. The BNP is not the only political force to identify this and exploit, but they are unique in wrapping it in naked prejudice.
It’s long been my view that there are always going to be a few nazi types voting for the BNP or similar, but the problem in this case is that there’s a feeling that the main political parties go too far in their diversity seeking…boasting about having black/asian candidates etc….to the extent that it discriminates against white people.
It’s been mentioned in stand up comedy for a long while that straight white males 20-50 are at a disadvantage by not being part of a ‘minority’, the BNP does well by being the party of the ‘white minority’…
I can’t see the BNP being effectively ‘delt with’ as long as this perception exists. I’ve seen Griffin make the point several times when accused of racism that the national black police assocition is a blacks only group, and that’s not racist.
Personally I’d say that both the BNP and NBPA are definitely racist, but his point stands….huge swathes of the population….and especially the political elite, would not dream of describing NBPA as racist, but hold the BNP to be Hitler incarnate.
I can’t see the BNP going away as long as they remain indisputably correct on the issues of these double standards.
Where I am, there are (or were) plenty of ‘[race/religion] only’ groups (except no white only, cos that’d be racist), but, with the exception of Muslim groups who’re getting their own victim feeling boost from the war on terror, they’re mostly dying off….it’s seen as old fashioned by those who were born here….give it 20 years, and the BNPs main rallying call will be gone and they’ll be back down to their core nutters.
That’s my, rather longwinded, opinion anyways…..it’s complicated somewhat by the immigration issue that the main parties steer well clear of…
My guess is that in ordinary times, we probably have about 10% of the population with extreme rightwing views and another 10% with extreme leftwing views. Every now and then the system affords an apparent “breakthrough” by a politician or two from those fringes – eg the BNP, Respect. This seems normal to me and I don’t get all the hysteria about it, especially when elsewhere in Europe there are far right parties that are much more sophisticated than the BNP and have much larger shares of the vote.
It’s interesting/odd that views on the desirability or non-desirability of immigration are seen by the media as a bellwether for left versus right. If seems to me that many of the fears expressed are common to both left and right.
The politically-correct position to take appears to be to welcome immigration while paying lip-service to the need for controls. Any concerns for the pressures on local jobs, schools, housing etc, are regarded with suspicion as being a cover for racist attitudes. While this suspicion may be justified – and many of the BNP supporters views fall into this category – there are many other groups, including otherwise Labour-leaning working-class communities and socially-conservative immigrant communities who share these concerns and who bear the bruint of the problems.
Undoubtedly there is also a large element of inchoate fear of the “other” changing the indigenous culture, especially where the incomers seek to avoid integration. But when the political class and the media refuse even to acknowledge the problems that population movements cause, and the pressures they place on local services, they are simply fuelling the rise of extremist parties with simplistic solutions that blame the immigrants for the problems that ought to be laid at the feet of the governing classes.
Anthony, did you spot that BNP voters uniquely place their party significantly away from their personal political position? I ran a few different ways of counting it, and each one came out with the same result: Liberal Democrats were the ‘best fit’, and BNP the ‘worst fit’.
Your results on racism suggest there is a core of genuinely nasty support, but I would suggest that a large element of the BNP support *is* protest vote by people who would sooner not vote for the BNP if they felt they had a better option. This is not least illustrated by the fact that the BNP voters placed not only the Tories but also UKIP near to their own views.
““Non-white British citizens who were born in this country are just as ‘British’ as white citizens born in this country”, only 35% of BNP voters did”
Only 35%? Personally I’m astonished that as many as one in three BNP voters have that attitude to race. What do these 35% think the BNP stands for? (That’s not meant to be sarcasm, that’s a genuine question.)
“talk to the people in simple terms and give them a simple summary, lewaving out all the detail. Bit like Blair did.”
Very interesting point. Arguably that is what immortalises any politician, if they’re able to present complex ideas in straightforward and memorable terms. And like you say, simplicity is key to picking up votes from people who can’t or won’t listen to anything complicated.
Churchill was possibly the greatest master of this keep-it-simple approach, he wrote very intelligently (he even won the Nobel prize for Literature) but no one could possibly say that his speeches were aimed at intellectuals. Everyone found it easy to understand what he said and be inspired by what he said.
Maybe we need another Churchill to inspire voters away from extremes, someone who can speak simply without being simple-minded.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/table/2009/jun/09/european-elections-elections-2009 ha an excellent breakdown of how parties voted by counting areas.
Immigration; it’s amazing how people forget that according to the OECD only Mexico has more of its citizens living in other countries than Britain…
A similar study of UKIP voters would be very helpful in interpteting predictions of the GE.This has had too little attention in discussions about the implications of the Local and Euro results. From interviews after the Labour Party meeting, it is clear that MPs expect that dissident voters will return to the fold, without any consideration of the possible collapse of UKIP in a General Election.
If many BNP or possibly UKIP voters are working Class tories then it may well be that it is Cameron rather than Brown who will benefit from them going to the polls or staying at home.
If we were to take what appened with UKIP and the BNP in Scotland as an indicator for the next general election then I’d suspect that the main beneficaries of UKIP and the BNP falling back would be the main opposition not the government.
Peter.
“Immigration; it’s amazing how people forget that according to the OECD only Mexico has more of its citizens living in other countries than Britain…”
Absolutely. Surely if we do what the majority of the population seems to want and stop immigration, the response of Spain and all the other countries with lots of British immigrants will be to “send them home” to give us a taste of our own medicine? Or perhaps they will be more just than we are?
The problem is, as people have mentioned in the comments, that it is politically correct to avoid discussing immigration and deny that there are any problems – this gives the Daily Mail-Migrationwatch UK axis a monopoly of the “debate”. Instead those of us (such as myself) who support the free movement of people should speak up for it, while also dealing with the problems of integration seriously. The Swedish Liberal Party is a good example of this attitude.
@Collin: the poll covers supporters of all parties, and has a column for UKIP. Have a look at the tables (see Anthony Wells’ link). An excellent (if somewhat scary) poll, good work from YouGov and Channel 4.
A lot of the Brits living in Spain are doing so on the proceeds of criminal enterprises in the UK. If the Spanish sent them home, the rozzers would be waiting with open arms no doubt..
I think the sort of demonstrations that took place both today in Westminster and on Sunday night as Griffin arrived at Manchester Town Hall are extremely counterproductive for the anti-BNP campaigners. Griffin is once again the main item on the news today as a result of his press conference being disrupted and cancelled. If the press conference had taken place without incident I doubt if that would be the case.
Rather interesting that BNP voters might substantially be the working class tory.
I wonder whether this is at all true for the Scottish case? After all the BNP barely ever get above 5% in Scotland; so might the lost working class tory going BNP be particularly north England than true for the outer regions of the UK?
@ Andy Stidwall..
Agreed. This is why I don’t protest against the BNP loudly!
To correct a point above, white UK Police Officers *can* join the National Black Police Association (as can Asian, or Chinese coppers). It says so on their website.
I support immigration. The immigration of highly educated, and preferably independantly wealthy, persons from anywhere in the world!
For purely selfish reasons these people would take preference over unskilled immigrants and the ‘places’ available for asylum seekers would be severely restricted.
I realise my views are not held by the PC elite in power but they would keep my tiny islands population small enough to cope with while allowing the kind of cultural and financial influx that our nations were built on to continue.
My impression is that this is along the lines of Tory policy so most BNP supporters (barring the ones who have a problem with ‘race’) should switch their allegance immediately!
So much for Anthony’s “careful” moderation, allowing that “Sean Fear” comment to remain…
I find John TT’s notion that voting BNP is an “intellectual capacity” idea slightly Ad Hominem (circumstantial… i.e. you perhaps define intellectual capacity by academic achievement, whilst ignoring the cultural and economic barriers to such acheivement), and “poisoning the well”, in that only someone who is a. stupid; or b. (according to “Sean Fear”), mentally ill; otherwise the implicit c. “evil” (like a cartoon character), would vote for the BNP.
I would argue that this very (prejudicial) approach to the whole question is part of the problem, and that the stereotypical BNP voter is partly a creation (both conceptually as a bogeyman; and in apparent reality from results), of the mock-liberal cult (e.g.: new Labour).
This becomes even more evident when you see how an “ex-BNP” member can apparently have all sins washed away in their baptism into mock-liberalism; i.e.: that when someone like 60-something Mr Brons is discussed, his “crimes” of youth (in his late teens so I read), are fresh and perpetual, because his is “in the BNP”; yet they suddenly become obliterated should he merely renounce the BNP and all its works, and join the happy flock.
If you step back from that, and just objectively analyse the information as presented in manifestos, speeches, activities, and other reasonably current stuff, and evaluate it for what it is in a truly objective way, you cannot come to the same conclusions that their hysterical opponents seem to.
That kind of hysteria is something alarmingly redolent of the kind of stuff that went on in the cultural revolution in China; and institutionalised the “normal” behaviours of truly fascist states such as Burma, North Korea, Turkmenistan, Mugabe’s Zimbabwe, Pinochet’s Chile, Talibanised Afghanistan… from a purely behavioual POV I see little difference between the way Chinese people, inculcated with a particular world view by the state, react to things like Falungong, Tibetan or Taiwanese secession (or even the way Vietnamese react to aspersions cast against Ho Chi Minh) and the way this kind of cult responds to the BNP.
…I mean it’s one thing to reject a POV or an argument… but the hysteria… that is what is disturbing; and it’s also what makes it possible for people who are neither stupid nor mentally ill (nor evil), suspect that maybe there is some need to see the BNP elected to some extent.
I also wonder whether the sorts of people who feel real enmity towards the BNP have actually ever lived in the rough parts of places like Burnley, Beeston, and Bradford …it’s easy to pontificate from a safe distance.
As Anthony might expect, I don’t see this as issue of left/right (it comes as little surprise to me that the Tories might be regarded as left-wing, and Labour right-wing though!)… it’s an issue about denial by an urban establishment that still thinks it’s the revolution!
Denial of reasoned objective debate; denial of challenging their own prejudices; and denial of conceding that some of what they have fought for was wrong.
Projecting all this angst onto the otherwise irrelevant BNP is naught but displacement… they only represent a small part of the failure.
Nevertheless, the growing unemployment and discord offer them opportunity to undermine the reputation that is projected upon them; but they really aren’t the problem. …the biggest problem (in tems of politics) is the 60% of people who won’t vote… many of whom, if compelled to vote by law, would arguably vote BNP in numbers that would more than alarm Labour.
@Neil A – I thought your points were very well put. It’s odd that this argument is one that the Greens broadly back – ie overpopulation – but obviously with a different political approach and policy prognosis.
I actually think the increased profile for BNP, UKIP and Greens can only help democracy in general. I’ve mentioned before my frustration that our system targets a very few swing voters in swing seats, and all policies are tailored to these people, who tend to be middle class voters. As a result, the main parties are scared off so many difficult and controversial subjects with the result that democracy itself becomes stale and ineffective at dealing with real issues – ‘managerial politics’. If the BNP help shake up the debate, then they might yet have done a great service to the nation.
Sadly Anthony’s moderation ‘threat’ which was I understood as a plea for self moderation has gone unheaded.
Any thoughts anyone on how this 6.2% BNP will divide at a GE, surely this is the issue for us?
If 60% turnout it goes down to under 4% if we accept that all molst BNP voters came out last Thursday.
Assume most of the core support is in safe Labour seats is there much left for the main parties to fight over.
Of course, long term they all need to address the disaffection felt by most BNP voters but not enough time before the GE.
Sorry to repeat my earlier question but trying to get us back to polls and votes.
@ MGC, my mistake…..guess I shouldn’t believe what Nick Griffin says
Nevertheless, I reckon everything I said stands even if that specific example is incorrect.
Can’t get the link to the tables, but Anthony’s comment about “male middle aged” being well represented is interesting. Aren’t they just the group all three main parties have taken for granted and ignored in their anxiety to be be “inclusive”? Not a “minority” of any kind, but perhaps the biggest one of all. Might it be worth their while re-thinking?
first of all i never have and never will vote BNP, but some of the policy’s they put across do tempt people to vote for them, one of thoes is a stop to the open door poliey of the labour party and this can in some areas give them alot of votes, the other is the harvisting of peoples fears about imigration in the the united kingdom and being over run by people who try to come in by ileagel means.
on the other hand the perception that other big three parties do not stand up for the view of (joe soap) the worker, the cleaner, the grass cutter and the shop floor manager and this can also play into there hands, through not listern to what people want.
the other big factor has been that since 2001 the conservative brand has beacome less right wing in its view moving more to the center of politics th ground that labour held for at least 8 years, now they have gone to the left more so and the tories have gone to the middle this leaves a gap for smaller right wing and very right wing parties to get votes.
the only way the BNP will lose votes is by the tories putting in law should they be elected a hard limet of inward migration to this country i.e a yearly limet and make sure that the number of unwanteds i.e ilegal’s falls, this would stop the bnp in its tracks.
but most of all we have to remember that we still have a low number of non EU residents in the UK and a higher preportion of EU residents and that could be addressed by a hard cap lower than that of people applying from outside of the EU area and EEA area.
but a strong move to the left must be matched by a strong move to the right or a gap will be left for small fring parties to get in such as the BNP.
As long as you continue to marginalise the BNP and call them extremist, you will not win back our votes.
I voted for them on Thursday, not because of the race issue, as I do feel that an all white britain would be boring.
I voted for them, because I feel they are the only party who stick up for me.
A friend told me “They are just telling you what you want to hear”
Which immediately puts them ahead of other parties who don’t know what I want to hear.
So what do I want to hear?
I want to be able to be patriotic, have a UK and English flag flying outside my house without the police telling me to take it down as it offends my neighbours opposite the road.
I feel that is where a lot of the hatred comes from. I don’t hate my neighbours opposite the road, but others would.
They are black people, who emigrated to this country and claim benefits, and complain about my british and english flags, people find that wrong.
I have no problem with black people, or any colour, but at the moment, it feels like they are ruling over me, and I have no say, and I am trapped in my own country.
I’m thinking of moving to Australia, where they are sensible over there, Australia allows in all ethinicities and religions but they don’t take over
I want to live in a country with many different ethnicities and cultures, but I don’t want them taking over and making me feel scared to be patriotic.
That is why the BNP won 2 seats on Sunday, people are fed up.
The point Nick Griffin makes is a good one,
Why is the Black Police Association allowed to exist?
I feel they should be banned, just as a white only group is currently banned.
When people like myself are made to feel isolated, you can’t blame us and try to shame us when we vote for a party that stands up for us, and knows what we think.
And British jobs for British workers is a statement made by Gordon Brown, no one called him racist.
Sorry-posted this on wrong thread :-
943,000 people voted BNP in the 2009 UK EU Parliament elections. ( 6.2% of 15million voters out of a 45million electorate)
193,000 people voted BNP in the 2005 UK General election.( 0.7% of 27 million voters out of a 44million electorate)
If , from cosy comfortable & secure communities, we go on telling the former group that the answer to their problems of housing, jobs & ethnic & cultural ghettos is more “intellectual rigour” they just might start voting BNP at the next UK GE as well.
Then we will have turned a local response to social exclusion amongst working class whites, by a bunch of demagogues, into a national movement.
Just another point.
After looking around and researching there are only 2 policies with which I do not agree with the BNP.
There views on gays, I am Bi so I hope they don’t win a General Election as I would be thrown out of the country probaly.
And I’m not sure on their policies on race, some argue they are like nazis, who will kill all the blacks, others say they will just chuck them all out. The BNP says voluntary repatriation.
I’m not quite sure what this is, but the word “voluntary” makes me think it is up to the person whether they leave or not, which is a good point isnt it? People leaving on their own free will?
Another point.
People who are fed up with Europe will also vote BNP as lets be honest, the political elite dont care about UKIP.
So the only way to send them a good shock, and make them listen to “GET OUT OF EUROPE” is to vote BNP.
I hope they got the message. I dont really want the BNP to win, I think it’d be bad if they did. But I want them to do well enough so the elite get scared, and start listening to why we might vote for them.
Because, we are not all racist, we are not all uneducated.
We are people with feelings, who feel upset that we are being ignored.
If there was only 2 parties you felt didnt ignore you, one of them was the joke that is UKIP, the other was the BNP, you’d vote for the non-joke.
I guess many of you have political parties you support, if you are of an ethnic minority, or white working class, or socialist liberal person you vote Labour.
Extreme Labour vote lib dems.
Posh people vote Tory.
More liberals, this time tree huggers vote for Greens,
People with a one track mind vote UKIP.
There really isnt that much left for a guy like me to vote for.
Sorry for the Triple post.
If I tell you some of my views, you suggest an alternative to the BNP.
Please ask me questions so as to get a better idea of what party I would fit best in.
I feel I am right wing, I don’t like the liberal do gooder thing, I don’t know what socialism is. Sorry about being a newb.
Oppose unlimited immigration.
Help for hard working people who arent extremely poor. I tend to feel Labour helps only the very poor, if you work hard and are doing ok your on your own.
I want to keep Royal mail, under the UK GOV.
I believe in people being treated fairly.
Care about the environment, but its not my main concern.
You see, I agree a lot with Labour on stuff, but feel they have ruined this country, and set us to the brink of poor.
Also, I dont like Europe so disagree with labour their.
Can anyone help me find a party besides BNP to vote for.
Anthony,
Any explaination why the BNP don’t do as well in Scotland? Do we have less working class tories?
Equally why don’t UKIP do well either. Is it that the are viewed as an essentially English party?
I am interested if anyone has looked at either.
Peter.
@Cllr Peter
In Scotland they love Europe, as it is their only chance of getting independancy, by piggy backing off the Eu, so of course they dont vote anti eu parties.
Maybe a certain section of the potential BNP vote in Scotland goes to the SNP even though the SNP have nothing in common with the BNP.
I would think it obvious why the BNP and UKIP do not do well in Scotland (and NI ; Sinn Fein topped the EU result); when Nationalists are in power and their vote increasing, the tags of Britain and UK are fairly meaningless. The element of anti-Labour protest votes as well have a comfortable home.
I’d view both parties as essentially England only parties.
I dont think even BNP people would confuse BNP with SNP!
The BNP only put up candidates in 113 constituencies at the last GE. If they stood in every constituency in the next GE they could well top 1 million votes with only a modest increase in their underlying level of support from the last GE. The fact that for most people the European elections are the only opportunity to choose from a full slate of parties on an equal footing means that we shouldn’t just dismiss the results as protest votes.
I’m not at all convinced that the BNP take Labour votes. Many BNP supporters I have canvassed ceased to vote Labour many years ago.
I have seen several interviews with people who voted BNP last week. Many blamed foreign workers and immigrants for taking jobs they wanted. However, given the lack of knowledge they displayed, their poor social and dreadful communication skills, I would suggest that they are making foreign workers the scapegoat for their own inadequacies.
So perhaps we should relabel the BNP the British Nobodies Party – supported by losers.
Tony – I don’t think that’s a good way of reducing their vote at future elections.
None of you offer an alternative to the BNP.
As someone who voted for them on Thursday for the first time ever, tell me who else I was supposed to vote for?
No one takes Ukip or Lib Dems that seriously, Labour and Conservatives are the same corrupt people.
I’m not in Scotland or Wales, so SNP or PC are unavailable. English Dems are unlikely to get any seats.
There is no credible alternative in my mind to the BNP at the moment. I stress I am not racist, but when someone knows what you are going through, and want to stick up for me, and help me keep my job, I’m going to vote for them guys.
On voluntary repatriation: ask yourself who are the people wishing to be voluntarily repatriated and what are the barriers to them being repatriated at present? Are these the people the BNP is hoping to attract to its party?
This is very dangerous territory – at what point does voluntary become encouraged, and encouraged become enforced? This is not a benign policy.
Dean Thomson
“Rather interesting that BNP voters might substantially be the working class tory.
I wonder whether this is at all true for the Scottish case? After all the BNP barely ever get above 5% in Scotland;”
Andy Stidwell
“Maybe a certain section of the potential BNP vote in Scotland goes to the SNP even though the SNP have nothing in common with the BNP.”
The profile of the BNP voter so far as age, gender, class, and parent alliegence is the similar to the group of Scottish voters most in favour of independence.
So far as the other attributes go, (satisfaction etc), I am not aware of any similarities or differences.
I have been taken to task on these pages for describing English tourists in the Canaries in very similar terms to Anthony’s piece and caused offence by describing them as English rather than British thus implying that Scotland was relatively free of these people.
Without the votes of English C2’s Margaret Thatcher would never have been PM. They were willing to vote for TB because he was perceived as a strong leader, John Major (wimp, underpants) may have been a Conservative, but his politics wasn’t the issue.
GB won’t rate highly either will he?
Perhaps the answer to Dean’s question is that Tories are so thin on the ground in Scotland that the subset of working-class Tory is too small to be sampled,
The SNP is far from being socialist, but that doesn’t mean that it isn’t well to the left of NewLabour on many issues so it suits dissatisfied Labour voters.
Could there be a better positioning at this time than as a pragmatic party which is clearly “Not the NewLabour Party”?
Almost as good as “None of the above”
current polling gives others in england a number of seats and this could mean BNP in some cases if this is so a fall in the center right vote would help the bnp but a rise could also help them by vertue of labour and the lefts vote falling to the others.
Tom : there are many other options such as socialist parties or NOtoEu. Why do you say the BNP are the only option?
Why do these people vote for a party just to scare the elites? What will it scare the elites into doing?
That is surely an immature irrational reason to vote for someone.
If you are a socialist why not vote for a socialist party, not people who spent their youth in gangs that burnt Jewish buildings.
I do not think these BNP people seem decent, intelligent people they voted for a man who belonged to a Neo Nazi group and a man who denied the holocaust. There is no defence for that. There were many other options to vote for.
There is a difference between respecting their right to vote and respecting their choice. Once we start respecting people who burn buildings down out of religious hatred we have lost all humanity.
You can only look on BNP voters as immoral or as too stupid to understand who they are voting for, or both.
Why can you not see how angry decent people are at neo NAZIs getting elected.
When we lose our jobs we do not burn down houses and turn racist. What is so special about you?
Could there be a correlation between BNP support in Burnley being somewhat earlier (2002 to 2004) – although some remains,
and Lib Dem support there now?
The protest votes shifting to another vehicle perhaps.
I noptice that no-one has bothered to address Tom’s question. Given his views, which seem to me to be sensible and moderate, who can he vote for except BNP (in England)? Well I can’t think of anyone.
Like many of the posters above, I agree that the middle-class liberals (which means the 3 main parties) have lost touch with the views of the ordinary man in the street. They are demonising the BNP because they know the BNP do represent a large swathe of opinion.
It is a fact that 23% of live births in this country in 2007 were to foreign-born mothers. Add to that the births to first and second-generation immigrants, and you are probably looking at 50%. Whatever the colour or religion of these people, this means that the country will have a huge proportion of recent immigrant-descended people before long, and that’s even if immigration is stopped completely now. The whole culture of the country will change. It is one thing to welcome refugees from genuine tyranny, but quite another to commit cultural suicide.
The BNP also have other policies which resonate with ordinary people on other subjects which are all but ignored by the main parties. For instance, they want to bring back the death penalty for certain crimes – e.g. child murder. You don’t have to go far to find people who would agree with this, but do the main parties even mention it? They are anti-’gay’ as well. Again, whatever the politically correct position is on this, many ordinary people agree. Most people are tolerant of aberrations, but don’t want their children taught that it is simply a lifestyle choice.
So in answer to the question, the people who vote BNP would have been considered mainstream not very long ago, and now feel that they are being ignored.
It is true that some current BNP leaders held even more extreme views in their youth, but many members of the Labour party used to be Communists, and that is rarely mentioned.
Like most posters, I would not like the BNP to be in government, but I do feel that they represent a perfectly valid strand of opinion that should not be vilified.
Firstly, I have to say I’m not a BNP supporter and actually a proud owner of a World Citizen’s Passport. (http://www.worldgovernment.org/docpass.html)
I should probably mention now
However, Being Anti-Zionist, is not the same as being Anti-Semitic.
There is a very real, openly discussed Jewish political movement known as Zionism and its effects, initially benign in the 19th century, have become a knee-jerk and terrible legacy in the aftermath of WW2.
The awful actions of the fledgling Jewish state since 1948 are often pushed aside and ignored by the mainstream media. Uptil that point, a steady stream of migrants throughout the 19th century had settled in that area. Jews, Christians and Muslims lived side by side in relative harmony, but the drive to force an actual Jewish state on the region changed that situation forever.
If the world powers at the time had only simply tried to ensure that there was no religious bias in the law of the region, things may have been different.
Actually, the term ‘Anti-Semitic’ is a misnomer, as most of the people of the Middle East, including the highly-prolific Arab lineage, are a Semitic people. The bulk of Jewish people in Israel are actually Ashkenazic Jews (the prime group in Europe since Medieval times) and as such have been so interbred with Europeans of other stock for so long, that they are technically barely Semitic. Only the shared language of Hebrew unifies them with other people of the Jewish faith.
Of course, I’m just mincing words now, really…
@ Pete B
But you’ve NOT adressed mine.
Why don’t you so eloquently explain WHY the British EMPIRE spent such a long, long time colonising countries etc and why Winston Churchill is half American Jew??
What is the issue?
Black looking people…or foreigners??
Me say, people just don’e like em blacks, despite what we’ve done to them and sheer fact we FORCED them to know US….
Zulu anyone??
There is NOTHING valid in what the represent!! Answer MY response, should we then STOP eating chocolate cause black people pick cocoa in West Africa??
Are you such a pr*ck that you would sit there eating Cadbury’s with your BNP panflet telling that ethnic minorities are the reason for the recession???????!
I’m stumped by either the really not bright people or what I suspect, nasty peaces of work who’ve invented their concept of history.
That to me is more sad then any deluded BNP working class supporter….jeez jus be honest….you don’t care, you want to rip off moer ethnic minorities with trade and you want them rid BUT you want the luxury to live abroad because lol, with the gun and bible, you DID wipe out the indigenous people!
@RantersParadise
Well, I’ll try to reply to what I can understand of your post. Firstly, the British Empire did not, by and large, colonise countries, if by that you mean mass emigration from here. The Empire was all about trade, and usually a small bureaucracy was put in place.
I’m not sure of the relevance of your point about Churchill. I was aware that he was half-American (and hence British stock), but not that he was half-Jewish. It doesn’t concern me, even if true.
I don’t really understand the rest of your post, except to get a general sense that you seem to resent the fact that my ancestors were good at trade.
If you study history, you will see that though of course it was not perfect, the British Empire was the most benevolent of the various European empires at the time. The alternative to countries being part of the British Empire at the time would have been to have been part of another empire – perhaps Spanish or Belgian, neither of which were especially benevolent.
I think its funny how people are suprised at the level of racism this poll indicates. I live in an average midlands town and have found that a sizeable minority of people, and even close to a majority of young people, either dislike or dispise non white people. (this is not my view by the way) many blame them for ‘taking british jobs’, causing crime, but more still just dislike them simply because they are not white. It reminds me of when Shilpa Shetty was a victim of racism on Big Brother and the Indian media was outraged. I remember thinking ‘God they’re in for a shock if they ever actually came over here’. I think, once again, the ‘political elite’ in this country has no idea what is going on in the country.
On the BBC Euro election coverage the panalists seemed unable to accept that 6% of the electorate could be racist. I personally believe that number is much higher.
please dont think im trying to say the majority of people are racist in this country or that Im trying to justify it, I just think people need to realise that to defeat the ideology of the BNP is a much greater task than many think
RantersParadise:
It’s interesting how some people say that white British people shouldn’t complain no matter how much immigration there is to this country because of the way colonialists behaved in previous centuries. That’s clearly a snub to the “two wrongs don’t make a right” argument. But then the same people are usually against capital punishment, when they often do employ the “two wrongs don’t make a right” argument. So they employ the argument when it suits their views and shun it when it doesn’t suit their views. None of that says anything about my opinions on either subject but I’m just pointing out the contradiction.
The Zulus of course conquered many other indigenous peoples in Africa to establish their homeland. But that probably doesn’t count.
@ Mike Hobday – I don’t think canvassing is a very useful way of assessing BNP support or the reasons for it. Because canvassing is face-to-face, the people who admit to voting BNP are more likely to be the diehards. Newer converts are likely to be a lot shyer about admitting it.
Thread has become debate on BNP policies sadly and I can no longer stay quiet.
Whatever peolpe think of reality TV and Talent shows they are watched by millions of people in this country.
Non – white acts regularly get voted (the last 2 on X factor last year – 4 of this years last 8 on BGT, including the winners where non anglo-saxon)
There is no widespread racism in this country anymore.
What we have is a nasty Islamaphobia dressed up as a fear of cultural swamping (remember Thatcher) and a lot of losers blaming non-whites for their lack of success.
THe BNP has expolited of course the failure of local and national Governments to adequately adjust services to cope with the EU workers who have recently arrived.
The EU workers who will do the jobs that, dare I say, lazy BNP supporters won’t.
Ranters is right of ofcourse the educated BNP supporter is more reprehensible.
Rantersparadise,
Is my Italian mother in some way responsible for the modern day troubles experienced by those in Europe because of oppression by the Romans against Germanic tribes 2000 years ago?
I do wish people would stick to the argument in the here and now.
“despite what *WE’VE* done to them and sheer fact we FORCED them to know US….
I refuse to be made to feel guilty for the ’sins’ (they’re only sins now- perhaps universally though reasonable practice at the time) of my forefathers.
I would suggest that public utterances such as yours that encourage people to view their own culture and sense of identity in a negative light can only feed a desire in some to assert themselves in ways even more negative.
Anthony, are you saying that a BNP voter today was possibly one of the working class-Thatcher supporters through the 80’s? If so does that mean that Cameron has failed to capitalise on them? And if that’s the case does it imply that the presumed fall of the BNP back to a percent or so of the votes in a general election will benefit the Tories or Labour more?
Interesting piece, thanks for putting it up.
Oh just a side note, has anyone got any idea what has happened to political betting? The sites just frozen for me since the weekend.
“There is no widespread racism in this country anymore.”
I agree entirely Jim Jam.
I think prejudice still exists but mostly in a cultural sense. One or two of my black colleagues despair at Gangsta’ rap images in the media and the lifestyle it represents to impressionable minds.
Indeed, even among the white middle class, if it were possible to replace indiginous so called ‘chavs’ with alledgedly ‘hard working’ Polish emmigres a large section would doubtless jump at the chance!
Anonymous – doesn’t have to be literally the same people, but the same sort of section of society, yes. When the BNP fall back, those people are clearly far more likely to vote Conservative than Labour looking at their responses in the poll, though obviously it’s not a zero-sum game, they don’t have to vote Labour OR Tory, they could vote for another other or not vote at all.
Politicalbetting have been switching servers. If you type in www2.politicalbetting.com (note the 2) it’ll bring up the current site.
Tom,
I note that few posters have even attempted to address your cri de coeur or the questions you raise. If time permitted, I would be happy to engage in a dialogue as I firmly believe that you have highlighted the crucial point – which is that politicians need to engage with the issues leaving you feeling aggrieved and abandoned, rather than castigating you for your choice.
You can reach me via my council’s website (Hertsmere), but in the meantime, may I suggest that you have a look at the work undertaken by Iain Duncan-Smith and his Centre for Social Justice.
Paul H-J
I was listening to BBC Radio 4 today and there was a trailer for a program about people who bear the surname Patel. On the trailer a woman stated that many Patels marry other Patels because they share the same values which is precisely what a program on Channel 4 found about members of the BNP.
“Non – white acts regularly get voted (the last 2 on X factor last year – 4 of this years last 8 on BGT, including the winners where non anglo-saxon)
There is no widespread racism in this country anymore.”
That depends on your definition of widespread – and on your definition of racism. Clearly there are many, many people who are not racists, and not only are there black people winning reality TV shows, but there are (some) black people being elected as MPs, and succeeding in any walk of life you care to name.
But that doesn’t mean that there aren’t a significant number of people who do hold extreme racist views, as this poll suggests – if a relatively small percentage of people would never vote for a black politician, it may mean that they are slightly less likely to be elected, but it certainly doesn’t mean that they can’t win by taking sufficient votes from the majority.
Even if someone does hold racist views, that doesn’t neccessarily mean an irrational hatred of all non-white people – they might not have a problem with a black person winning a talent show, even if they believe that because of their skin colour or ethnic background they aren’t really British, or that they are unintelligent, or whatever other predjudiced view they might hold.
There is certainly prejudice – even non-racist have this, due to the country we grew up in, and need to challenge ourselves appropriately.
In 1997 I recall a study that there were 5-6 seats that had a Black or Asian Labour candidate in predominantly ‘white electorate’ seats The average swing to Labour in these seats was around 1% less suggesting perhaps 1% of otherwise labour voters could not bring themselves to vote for a Black or Asian canididate.
The numbers are rough as the sample size is small and there may have been a higher turnout amonst the non-white voters (even if a mainly white Electorate) but the message is clear the out and out racists are are small part of the population even if it has grown in recent years.
I seem to recall also that Ben Bradshaw as the first openly gay man standing for the first time (others stood for re-election after coming out) also achieved a 1% or so lower swing.
I am sure sadly that there are many more anti-gay electors but it demonstrates few allow their prejudice to over-ride other factors when deciding how to vote.
Same applies to Race.
I hope I am unjustified in getting concerned about the pattern of events recently. A massive loss of confidence in mainstream politicians arising from relatively trivial misdemeanors for the most part (not that I am defending the expenses scams but compared to what is considered normal in some of our European partners it’s pretty small beer). Result is a rise in support for extreme and single-issue (not necessarily the same thing) parties. And that’s before savage public spending cuts have even started.
Am I alone in feeling that the next 5 years could test to its limits the ability of our liberal democracy and civic society to deal with a perfect storm of economic weakness, low confidence in mainstream politics, a society where social cohesion is weakening and the growing self-confidence of far-left and far-right demagogues?
Judging by the European results and the general mood it appears the recession has caused a shift to more conservative values.
People become less willing to put up with graffitti and mess in their streets when they’re short of a few bob. Less willing to ’share’ what they have with ‘the poor’ and, yes, ‘foreign people’.
During an economic boom ‘progressive’ politics is easy to accomodate. If my house is worth loads and I can afford to eat out I don’t mind that a few million spongers are feeding off me. I don’t notice the fact that criminals are no longer punished for their crimes or that promiscuity has become rife among the young or that education standards have fallen.
Hard times harden the mind though. The ‘left’ across Europe will have a difficult time for the next few years until prosperity returns and allows a blind eye once again to be turned on poor quality governance.
Leslie
No, you are not alone. Indeed, historically, it has always been at times such as these that extremists of whatever nature have emerged with their simplistic responses to complex problems and led their respective countries to ever greater disasters.
The 20th century may have presented some grave and global examples, but it was by no means unique – these things eventually led to the fall of Empires from all continents and centuries.
It’s far more to do with fear Ivan. They think the tories will protect British jobs by clamping down on immigration – stopping people coming over here nicking our jobs whilst overlooking the fact that more of us go over there and nick theirs.
“a few million spongers are feeding off me”
So you are personally worth how much???? You satirise yourself.
Ivan, well, the facts of life are generally right wing ones.
It’s only in times of easy prosperity that this is forgotten.
Anthony, others
Are there any Westminster polls due in the next few days ?
Any news on a new ICM or BPIX poll?
Sean
The facts of life are generally apolitical. Get a sxlife old stick!
Ivan and Sean
‘Judging by the European results and the general mood it appears the recession has caused a shift to more conservative values.’
Sorry, I think your analyses are simplistic. On one level of course this has always been so in depressions; in such times history has shown the growth of extreme right wing parties (and growth of communism I might add).
Why? Quite simple analysis suggests that when people are under stress / unemployed they want to blame someone as we are always incapable of blaming ourselves at such times.
With rightwing groups such as the BNP / BUF / Nazis / KKK/ that extreme Dutch party the result is to blame ‘other’ people or religions. For those who take the left view it’s to blame ‘big banks’ etc.
Don’t forget that that in the 1930s the world – the western world- had massive communist parties.
Hard times bring extremes of both sides. One fact your easy generalisation avoided was the decrease of support for elected parliament; you only looked at the result from those who voted. It would be quite valid to argue that the key issue from the EU vote is the growth in those who do not support elected democracy at all; find no reason to vote. This was occurring in the UK any way. This disbelief in the system is a far more important issue than your generalisation and is certainly not a return to right wing values. All that can be said of the EU results was that of those who voted, more supporters of right wing did.
And I note that Sinn Fein topped the poll in NI and the SNP scored easily the top in Scotland). Those two facts also do not fit in with your analysis.
Jack,
Well put and mainly very true !
“And I note that Sinn Fein topped the poll in NI and the SNP scored easily the top in Scotland). Those two facts also do not fit in with your analysis”
Not sure most people vote SNP for it’s Leftist views do they really? They are technically a single issue party to be honest. Also Labour (the true left wing party in Scotland) were WELL down.
SF topped the poll but you neglect to mention that they got only 1 of the 3 seats. The other two going to DUP and the Cons!
Total ‘left’ vote; Green,SF, SDLP you get 45.5%
Total ‘right’; DUP, UNCUNF and TUV you get 49%.
Frankly I think “those two facts” fit in perfectly with my analysis thanks.
In Europe overall we have;
Green;50
Socialists;183
Left;34
Total ‘left’; 267
EPP;264
UEN;28
IND;21
No Group (Tories and various right wing nuts);72
Total ‘Right’;385!
That IS a shift to the Right. Clear as day.
(Analysis! very funny.) I suspect SNP is rather left of centre in its policies.
@Sean fear “..well, the facts of life are generally right wing ones.”
Not sure where you get this from. I assume its based on the repeated misreading of Darwinian theory and the oft displayed misunderstanding of the ’survival of the fittest’ concept. If it is, you would find it interesting to read On the Origin Of Species – one of the greatest books ever written, if not the greatest. Certainly Darwin, and many subsequent biologists, saw competition as one of the driving forces in nature, but evolutionary theory also shows clear evidence of cooperation and mutual benefit, both within and between species. Symbiotic relationships, herding, communal roosting etc – all show than cooperative values are highly beneficial in the animal kingdom.
In human society, we’ve found this to be the case also. It’s why we build schools and hospitals and have police, and indeed, democracy. As with nature, balancing competition and cooperation gives us the best of worlds, and for this reason I see no cause to claim the ‘facts of life’ for the right wing.
Alec – I take issue with the notion that “cometition” is a right idea and that co-operation is a left one.
I think Premiership football is a very good example of strong, competitive, yet co-operative activity that is almost completely employee-facing, and probably proof that neither one nor the other nor a blend of competition and co-operation is ever perfect.
It runs at the expense of shareholders and customers, all of whom (perhaps apart from Bill Kenwright) are in total financial thrall to the requirements of the star players.
In Europe overall we have;
Green;50
Social.ists;183
Left;34
Total ‘left’; 267
EPP;264
UEN;28
IND;21
No Group (Tories and various right-ists);72
Total ‘Right’;385
That IS a shift to the Right. Clear as day.
Jack,
I think you may be confusing two separate issues.
Difficult times encourage extremist positions with simplistic solutions. Thus the rise of fascism and Communism in the 20th century.
Conservative / traditional values of self-reliance and respect are more enduring than so-called “progressive” attitudes of centralised state provision, and hence are resorted to when needs must.
As for low turnout for the Euros, that is not an indictment of elective democracy, but of the EU. MEPs may be elected, but neither the Parliament in which they sit nor the enterprise of which they form a part can be described as “democratic”. Indeed, there are many who would argue that the entire EU construct is the antithesis of democracy. Ironically, such people were among the most likely to have voted last week.
If in any doubt on that point, just ask why it is that turnout was much higher in those areas which also had elections for local council (notwithstanding the policy emasculations they have suffered under a decade of statist centralised controls) than those where only members of the Brussels/Strasbourg Merry-go-Round were being elected.
People are very much in favour of local democracy where they can identify with their local representative.
Elections for party appointed members of an impotent (incompetent?) talking shop in a distant land elected under an incomprehensible alien system that gives them no say in who their remote representative actually is have little attraction.
The first result (NE) on Sunday evening summed up the problem with the euro-elections. Lab-Con swing 5.1 %. Result – no change.
PR = people robbed.
(re-posted to omit the dreaded “s” word).
Anthony, you may delete my comment from 2:50 pm as I have re-posted minus the offending phrase.
Thanks
John TT,
Fair enough, not analysis perhaps, more of a rant against all the ills of 12 years of Labour governance I will concede!
The main point about conservative values coming to the fore recently is valid though.
Jack,
It’s pretty clear that most EU countries shifted rightwards, including the UK. You may not want to believe it, but it is so.
WRT Northern Ireland, there was no leftward shift. 2 Unionists were elected to 1 Nationalist. Indeed, the overall gap in vote share between Unionists and Nationalists has remained unchanged since 1999.
Alec, I’m not really thinking about evolutionary theories. It’s more that Conservative policies on things like the economy, family structures, immigration, crime etc. tend to be pragmatic, and based on what works, rather than what idealists would like to see working.
Of course in times of extreme distress e.g War, famine etc the collective view is stronger.
I don’t think self reliance and respect are exclusively right wing ideals but are also part of left wing philosophy that demands responsibilities as well as giving inaliable rights.
I acknowledge that well meaning left wing policies can have the effect of giving disincentives, the dependency culture.
@Sean Fear
- “I’m not really thinking about evolutionary theories. It’s more that Conservative policies on things like the economy, family structures, immigration, crime etc. tend to be pragmatic, and based on what works, rather than what idealists would like to see working.”
I accept we’re not talking about evolutionary theory, but I think many would disagree with this Sean. Tories have traditionally been pretty dogmatic free marketeers and in general hold some pretty rigid ideological positions on the relative merits of state vs private provision of services. There was once a time when they were more genuinely pragmatic, but since the 1980’s this historic element of Conservatsm has declined. We still don’t know where Cameron really sits in ideological terms, but there are signs that Osborne is shifting his ground to a more interventionist position on economic management. I hope so, as much of recent Tory policy has had little basis in what works and much more to do with idealistic dogma.
[...] The second is an analysis of the BNP vote from UK Polling which is fascinating: Who are the people who voted BNP last week? [...]
@ Paul H-J – “Difficult times encourage extremist positions with simplistic solutions.”
Historically, I think that’s debatable to say the least. Certain combinations of difficulty within particular socio-cultural contexts may give rise to “extremist positions with simplistic solutions” but they can also give rise to complex and nuanced political philosophies and actions – and indeed some “extremist positions with simplistic solutions” can also have complex and nuanced dimensions (the French Revolution, for example, or indeed the Labour Movement in the UK).
@ Alec – in my experience, most people’s politics are a combination of “right wing” and “left wing” ideas. We categorise people as “right wing” or “left wing” because it’s convenient, not because it’s accurate. I’m sure you know, too, that far right movements are also often emphatically collectivist and even cooperative, and – equally – that far left movements are usually in practice every bit as militaristic and authoritarian as far right movements.
As for the weekend’s elections: the winner was self-evidently the centre right, with far right movements making a few gains in a few places. I think a very distorted lens would be required to read the results any other way.
http://www.euprofiler.eu/
The link above is interesting. By answering a few questions (it takes about 5 minutes) the site shows you where you are on the political spectrum.
I obviously don’t know exactly how they calculate it, but there are two axes – one showing Euroscepticism/Europhilia, and one showing Left/right socioeconomically. It shows results which I don’t think many people in this country would recognise, but it’s an interesting outsider’s perspective.
For instance, both the Tories and BNP are exactly in the middle on the left/right axis, whereas Labour are slightly to the right! The most ‘left-wing’ party is the Greens, followed by the Liberals. UKIP are the most right-wing. BNP are seen as the most Euro-sceptic, much more than UKIP.
Very interesting.
Ivan – I do hope Osborne and Cameron buy your theory and continue to provide anti-EU (ie anti-federalist, no offence!), and “cut till the blood stops flowing” policies. If they did, the Tories will be in trouble.
I see no marches with banners saying “We Want Cuts”.
Although it seems some cuts will be unavoidable, to do so with relish and as though cutting spending were writ into your party’s constitution risks losing the argument over ideology versus pragmatism.
Cuts whilst giving big tax cuts to the wealthy is dangerous.
@John TT – I think you are slightly misrepresenting the Tory line, but there is a valid point there. Brown has manouvered the next election debate onto ground he is most comfortable, and Andrew Lansley yesterday found how tricky this can be for the Tories. It doesn’t stack up to logical analysis, as we all know cuts will come whoever wins, but right now ‘Tory cuts’ may resonate more with voters than ‘Labour tax rises’. Cameron has faced tricky strategic decisions, and I don’t think his approach has been thought through well enough. The somewhat knee jerk inheritance tax cut, slapped in at short notice as a headline grabber, now looks like something of an albatross for them – why reward a small % of wealthy people while talking of major spending cuts? Likewise the current stern words on spending may (repeat may) cause him problems next year. The early signs are that the recession is proving less severe in the UK than expected (see today’s Independent) and it might be the case that Darling, far from being in cloud cuckoo land, was in fact rather on the pessimistic side. I’m not at all sure about this yet, as it’s too early to tell, but if this is the case and the deficit does not climb to the worrying heights forecast the Tories could have been flushed out in some people’s minds as savage cutters again.
Historically its been easier for oppositions to win against an optimistic backdrop, but this has generally been in terms of less fear of left of centre tax rises. I think the same could be true next year, with the fear of old fashioned ‘Tory cuts’ swinging a few votes. I’ve said for a long time I thought the economic scenario would not be as bad as some predicted, and this might alter the election dynamics. I still doubt its enough for a full Labour recovery, but it could be much closer than polls currently suggest.
“we all know cuts will come whoever wins, but right now ‘Tory cuts’ may resonate more with voters than ‘Labour tax rises’”
That just about sums it up (apart from the fact that Cameron yesterday didn’t mention Labour tax rises, but insisted instead that Labour’s planned cuts will amount to the same as his.)
Even if the figures came out as roughly the same, Labour will say they will cut because they have to, whereas the Conservatives will cut because they want to.
On the IHT, the announcement served its purpose and was heralded as a big turning point. I disagree entirely with the policy, but I do recognise it had a big effect. I doubt the effect would be entirely reversed if the policy were shelved.
The phrase “we opposed the fiscal stimulus” might just come to haunt Cameron, as he only uttered it when it was being reported that the tax cuts were having no effect.
No-one knows where the economy will go next, but I can imagine the Conservatives thinking their best moment for a landslide might have just passed by.
James,
What exactly was “nuanced” about the French revolution ?
The harvest failed.
The poor had not enough to eat.
The solution was to massacre those who owned the land.
The old aristocracy were replaced by a new kleptocracy, who assumed similar titles and the same estates.
This did not boost production, but caused over 20 years of war and internal strife, with thousands fleeing their homes in terror.
Self sufficiency in food was regained because the population had been decimated.
(All a bit like Zimbabwe)
Order was eventually restored, but the country’s global position was actually much weakened and its historic enemy was now indisputably the stronger.
The original problem (harvest failure) led to another revolution in 1848.
Re the Labour movement in UK, are you saying that the founding fathers in the Fabian society were extremeists, or that their solutions were simplistic ?
@ Paul H-J – in addition to the things you describe, the French Revolution followed the Enlightenment and was accompanied and shaped by an enormous depth of philosophical and political thought that has continued to profoundly influence Western society ever since.
No. I’m saying the exact opposite and using it as an example to undermine your suggestion that difficult times always give rise to extreme and simplistic responses. In fact, sometimes they do and sometimes they don’t and sometimes extreme and simplistic responses are accompanied by sophisticated and nuanced ones.
The equation “difficult times = kneejerk reactionary responses” simply isn’t correct.
Block quotes don’t seem to work here. The above should read:
You: “Re the Labour movement in UK, are you saying that the founding fathers in the Fabian society were extremeists, or that their solutions were simplistic ?”
Me: No. I’m saying the exact opposite and using it as an example to undermine your suggestion that difficult times always give rise to extreme and simplistic responses. In fact, sometimes they do and sometimes they don’t and sometimes extreme and simplistic responses are accompanied by sophisticated and nuanced ones.
blah blah
It’s the ‘fat’ that needs cutting.
Thankfully apart from a few die hard lefties most people realise there is huge waste in the system.
If, and I know they will, the Tories explain that not one teacher, nurse, doctor or policeman will lose their job then Labours accusations will fall on deaf ears.
Various nations around the world opposed the use of fiscal stimulus (in fact hardly anyone spent quite the sums we have) and their economies will improve just as quickly as ours.
Why have we ended up so much greater in debt some will ask? The answer; poor management.
With the Labour machine currently a laughing stock anyway such arguments should be easy to make stick.
“their economies will improve just as quickly as ours.”
You should know that you can’t know that. Indeed the opposite is possible. It won’t be easy to claim that cutting spending in the last budget would have led to quicker recovery.
James,
It can be argued that the French revolution actually derailed the enlightenment that had flourished under Louis XV. The revolution did not occur because of enlightened philosophy, and in its implementation was anything but enlightened.
In comparison, England, which had not suffered from starvation, embarked on a long period of both agricultural and idustrial development, during which expanding output led to increased wealth which in turn enabled the philanthropic movement to deliver improved conditions for all levels of society.
That does not mean that conditions in England were uniformly better (or egalitarian) than in France, but it remains the case today that Britain is the only major country which has managed the evolution from rural agrarian economy to fully developed industrial economy without violent revolution or war (civil or external) .
FWIW – I was not arguing that difficult times always lead to extremist movements taking power, or even that such movements are inevitable in such times. Merely that difficult times create an atmosphere in which extremism can flourish if rational leadership is not provided by the establishment to address the needs of the hour.
It is not the existence of economic conditions enabling extremism to emerge which allows it to succeed, but the failure of the establishment to deal with those conditions.
@Ivan – “If, and I know they will, the Tories explain that not one teacher, nurse, doctor or policeman will lose their job then Labours accusations will fall on deaf ears.”
I’m not sure you’re right. It’s perception, not reality that matters, and Cameron has to swim against a tide of public perception in some quarters that Tories want to cut as a philisophical position.
“Various nations around the world opposed the use of fiscal stimulus (in fact hardly anyone spent quite the sums we have) and their economies will improve just as quickly as ours.” – Very few majr nations opposed the stimulus – Germany did, saw the damage, and then backtracked, but not before a forecast 6.4% GDP contraction, much bigger than the UK forecast, and Merkel is now in some trouble for the September GE. Your point about these other nations recovering as fast as the UK is also not borne out by the facts as they stand today – it is possible that the UK is already out of recesssion, which if true would be utterly remarkable. Among major western economies I think only Australia, that has technically avoided recession so far, would be better placed than the UK if this was the case, although France has also fared reasonably well to date.
UK debt is greater than some (not by any means all) not due to the stimulus, but earlier spending – this is where your poor management arguement has more merit.
The “debate” between Hammond & Byrne this morning on Today was eye-opening.
Byrne refused to acknowledge :-
a) That Brown’s PMQs list of “Cash “Public Spending increases, represented a reduction when inflation & other factors exposed by IFS are taken into account.
b) That Brown’s carefull use of the adjective “Current” , was neccessary because Labour’s cuts will be in “Capital” spending ( cf NHS & Colleges)
He got short shrift from Humphries, & the Press today have slated Brown/Byrne for trying to conceal the facts about their own plans.They won’t get away with this nonsense.
But Cameron may yet come to regret allowing Lansley ( job guaranteed) to ring fence NHS spending increases. Other departmental heads in a Conservative Government may have words to say & he cannot know how how the profile of the upturn & tax revenues will turnout.
As evidence of some re-stocking appears, Darlings forecast of “up-turn” by end 09 may just possibly come to pass.
Of course this will allow Brown considerable potential credit-but it will then focus attention well & truly on Policy for the Public Finances in the Recovery.
This should play to Cameron if he sticks to honesty,& realism-neither of which will feature in Brown’s ridiculous mangling of the truth & desperation to say Cons will cut & he won’t.
I predict that due to what has happened over the passed few weeks we will see in the coming few weeks an average polling of Cons 41, Lab 20, Lib Dems 20.
@ Paul H-J – a great many things can be argued. Certainly the long-term significance of the Enlightenment was not dependent on the French Revolution but that does not mean that Enlightenment ideals didn’t shape aspects of the French Revolution or its aftermath.
“In comparison, England, which had not suffered from starvation, embarked on a long period of both agricultural and idustrial development, during which expanding output led to increased wealth which in turn enabled the philanthropic movement to deliver improved conditions for all levels of society.”
Yes, I know. I don’t see how that negates my point. Life for most people in Britain in the 18th and 19th Centuries was very difficult indeed but this did not give rise to any dominant extreme and simplistic reaction.
“It is not the existence of economic conditions enabling extremism to emerge which allows it to succeed, but the failure of the establishment to deal with those conditions.”
In part, but if you look at the prehistory of, say, Nazi Germany what you find is a perfect storm of factors coming together at once, some of which have fairly long histories. This isn’t an exhaustive list by any means but if you consider the preconditions for Nazi success in Germany, they include:
- the popularity from at least the 19th Century onwards of various forms of mystical nationalism, from the Wandervogel movement to pan-Germanism
- a virulent strain of anti-Semistism (common to much of Europe at the time)
- the humiliation of defeat in WWI, exacerbated by the humiliating conditions imposed by the Treaty of Versailles
- economic collapse
- the perceived Communist threat, which the centre parties focused on so much that they overlooked the Nazi threat until it was too late
- the cleverness of the Nazis. It’s fashionable to dismiss them as buffoons these days, but they were adept at finding and exploiting weaknesses, at using the media (particularly radio and cinema), at PR in general (the symbology, the uniforms, the well choreographed rallies)
Essentially, the success of extremist movements is not attributable to any single factor – not even one as significant as economic collapse – but rather to the coming together of a range of circumstances, trends, events, and even personalities, within a particular cultural context.
James,
From my post:
“It is not the existence of economic conditions enabling extremism to emerge which allows it to succeed, but the failure of the establishment to deal with those conditions”
From your post on the rise of Nazis:
” the perceived Communist threat, which the centre parties focused on so much that they overlooked the Nazi threat until it was too late”
QED ?
@Colin – I think you are right. Both parties have a careful line to tread if they are to keep credibility. Brown clearly has a problem here, but Cameron also. The Labour line that they can cut capital spending ‘as you only build hospitals once’ is true, but the figures still present problems. Hiding behind ‘efficiency savings’ is a regular trick of many parties.
The key however, is perception. If Brown/Darling recover some credibility from a surprise strengthening of the economy voters are more likely to be swayed by the Labour claims
You know some of these questions on racial issues are subjective and the ones on Jews and Communists is a classic research mistake – I may think communists are undermining the West, but if I put yes, that does not mean I think Jews are.
Your report on the intelligence of black and white people surprised me, until I read the question. It is asking about views on the average intelligence of black people and white people in Britian – not race in general. That is a very different quesion.
Someone may feel that intelligence is not a factor of race, but may feel that Britain has imported many uneducated coloured people to the country. So on average they would truthfully answer that white people in Britain are on average more intelligent – but that does not mean they think that is the case because of genetics.
I actually think that as many people will read your report and not look at the question you ought to change the wording to reflect the real question – otherwise this is a misleading report.
I also think people should try and be more objective in the ” are people born here just as British question”. To take out the effects of propoganda, it needs questions that ask if British people born in Spain are Spanish, or if Joannah Lumley (born in India) is Indian or British !!
Added to that, it is question on it’s own that is difficult to answer truthfully. Are people born here that live in the Muslim parts of Bradford, speaking English as a second language and dressing as they would in Pakistan, just as British as someone whose family has been here for centuries and has a strong senes of British culture and wants to improve British society. My answer would be no.
However, if you asked about friends I have who were born in Uganda, but have settled here and integrated into British culture with their families, contributing to society as a whole – then I would say yes.
So the question is playing to bigotry and not understanding real attitudes, or even why people vote as they do. That is why we need an open debate on the whole issue.
Alec:-
Robert Chote was just on TV explaining it all.
Brown quoted figures at PMQs to demonstrate “increases”. These figures include , Inflation, Debt interest ( increasing) , and Recession driven Welfare payments. What is left therefore-normal Departmental Spending -will fall.
Apparently Andy Burnham has just said the Labour will continue to increase spending in real terms on NHS too !!!!………….so both parties have the same plans.
Only the Prime Minister tries to conceal these truths from the voters. He will come a cropper if he persists.
Your last sentence is , in my view, now likely to be the key to the GE outcome.
I hope Pollsters now start asking questions which tease out preferences for a post GE Government, in the event of some degree of pre GE recovery .
I guess the problem will be -what do the public accept as “recovery”-and remember that unemployment is a lagging indicator.
@ Paul H-J – my point is that your own analysis is “simplistic”
There is no SINGLE factor that leads to the success of extremist movements. Rather, there are perfect storms of many factors. The failures of established powers are only one of those and, arguably, where extremism is on the rise such powers are already weak.
And, finally. The question on voting Labour or Conservatie is actually asking people whether they would rather vote at this time for David Cameron’s Conservatives or Gordon Brown’s Labour. It is not asking if they have voted Labour or Conservative in the past.
Given that many BNP people feel that Labour have not treated them well, I would have thought that even if they have voted Labour in the past, they are much less likely to vote Labour now. So letting peopel run away with the conclusion they are really ‘working class Tories’ is not worthy of a good analyst. If you look at the Labour vote, they look to be Labour’s very, very core vote – the ones often charcteristed by the fact they would vote for a monkey with a red rosette. Not the ones who voted so overwhelmingly for Tony Blair in 1997.
And the same could be said for the left wing/right wing question. The media have constantly screamed right-wing extremeists at the BNP, so is it any wonder that is where they are viewed by supporters?
This is a questionnaire that has reinforced sterotypes for a news channel. It is not a piece of research I would set much store by for understanding BNP voters. However, there is one question of hope. And that is who a Government should be helping – apart from the Greens, there is very little differences between groups. Which shows that at heart most people, even the BNP, have the greater good in mind. It is just how we get there that is the arguement.
Alec-two other thoughts:-
One can detect a public mood in favour of the Public Sector payroll being curtailed. The rates of pay, the “job for life” culture, the privileged pension rights,…the lack of “accountability” all feed into this at a time when the Private Sector Payroll is losing jobs & pension rights.
If Brown persists in giving the impression that Public Sector Payroll is sacrosanct under Labour , this may have the reverse effect on voter attitudes of the one he is so clearly thinks will pertain.
More Polling questions on attitudes to Public Sector Jobs & Benefits after the “up-turn” please!
@Colin – again, I think we agree. Brown has relied one smoke and mirrors far too often – people expect this and tire of it. He needs to recognise this and be fundamentally more honest. There are opportunities for Labour though – I think all parties see the major anomaly of public sector pensions and would like to crack these, even the Tories have hinted about Trident not being replaced, and things like switching the money spent on 40% tax relief on pensions contributions into a substantial rise in basic state pensions create an opportunity for Brown to cut taxes in less painful ways while appearing radical. I doubt this will happen, as Brown is a calculator, not a radical.
I wonder what the impact of a faster-than-expected return to economic growth would be? On the one hand, Darling would be vindicated and his position strengthened. However, the definition of a recession is a technical one and for many people, their companies will have been in difficulties for a year or more even thought the recession only got labelled as such in the last quarter of 2008. House prices have also been falling for longer. So when the indicators turn upward, but people’s circumstances have not changed, will they recognise the end of the recession and – more importantly – give Labout the credit?
I also wonder if – even if the economy is seen to grow again this summer – whether this will automatically benefit Labour? It is conceivable that the reaction might be “If things weren’t so bad after all, why on earth did you panic last year and run up such huge debts?”. If other countries emerge from the recession over the next year, but with much less structural debt, our government may not look so clever.
I expect that Labour will gain some credit from an early end to the recession, but not to a very great extent for the reasons above. Maybe 2-3 percentage points. Whether this is decisive in terms of the next GE will depend on how the Tories play their hand and the timing of the election. A post-recession bounce would provide a great temptation for an early GE.
“I wonder what the impact of a faster-than-expected return to economic growth would be?”
The impact on room for spending would be the same for all parties-leaving choices & preferences as the dividing lines-though Brown seems intent on avoiding this truth .
But the interesting thing about your thought Leslie , is-what assumptions will the parties make about the future economy -it is unseeable forward conditions which will affect the voters, and not those on the day of the GE. (unless a quite miraculous recovery occurs by next May)
Track record says Brown will be as bullish as possible, and common sense says Cameron will be cautious.
Who will the punters believe.
Leslie,
Technical point. It is too late for an “early” GE as this Parliament has already passed its fourth anniversary. Perhaps by early you mean a GE any time before May next year ?
Even so, don’t hold your breath. Any “recovery” is not going to become evident until the tail end of the year even it has already started, and you still need to overcome Brown’s innate caution (indecisiveness / cowardice – take your pick).
As to whether the economy will recover in 2009:- The NIESR figures quoted in today’s FT suggest that some parts of the economy may indeed be levelling off, or even resuming growth, but this is neither uniform nor the whole economy. Even the NIESR has not predicted a positive outcome for Q2 of 2009. Moreover, I would counsel caution, even if we have indeed passed a low point. The graph which accompanied the FT article showed that there had been an equivalent up-tick at this stage in both the previous two recessions, and there remains a real risk of a double dip as occurred in 1979-83 and 1929-34. Moreover, the path to date is far closer to the trajectories in the latter two than in the far shallower recesion of early 1990s.
Finally, as noted by Alec and Colin, the political impact of any economic recovery will be driven by perceptions ratehr than dry statistics, and even then, may not benefit the government.
9% of British people think the Holocaust is exaggerated
———
what a shocking and depressing statistic.
my grandfather (who was RAF on attachment to the RE) saw one of the camps and, believe me, he never forgot what he saw.
there is no exaggeration.
@ David – I wouldn’t worry about that 9% stat too much. There will always be a section of society that is hardline anti-Semitic – neo-Nazis, some Muslims. We’ll never be completely free of these loons but, so long as their numbers remain in single digits, we can live with them.
@Paul H-J
Interesting – I didn’t know that a GE is only counted as early if it takes place within the first four years. As you say, I was referring to an election earlier than next June – indeed this autumn. However we all know Gordon’s track record on going for autumn elections!
@James
*I* worry about the 9% figure. That’s more than 5 million people. Even allowing that not all of them are classic antisemites, it is worrying that the myth of Holocaust exaggeration pushed by “revisionist” historians and eagerly latched onto by those who seek a stick by which to beat Israel has found such a receptive hearing. Clearly, our education system , which can hardly be said to ignore the Holocaust, is not up to resisting the prejudices of old-Right, new-Left and the more fascist elements of Islamism.
The reason white males from traditional Labour backgrounds vote bnp is simple in my view. It seems that the perception is that Labour policy is driven by a lot of ‘white male’ bashing – too much concern for womens rights, ‘positive’ discrimination in favour of women and ethnic minorities in the workplace and lack of any meaningful action in child access/custody – In a generally more equitable world this hasn’t moved on at all with custody always assumed to be automatically with the mother. Round canteen tables in the workplace, these are the sort of issues that the bnp thrive on, and offer solutions to white males who feel treated unjustly on these matters. There is a genuine believe that all other groups are treated better than them, and that today’s males are paying for the ’sins of the past’. I do not need feel the average bnp voter is overtly racist, but believes that the bnp ‘goes in to bat’ for them.
Leslie,
“early” is a relative rather than an absolute term.
In general, we have had elections at approx four year intervals for most of the post-war period, the main exceptions being those which were either shorter due to a lack of working majority (1951, 1966, Oct 1974), or longer as the incumbent hung on to the bitter end (1979, 1992 and 1997) – note 1979 was actually 4 yrs and 7 months, but timing was not determined by the PM who had lost a motion of no confidence.
Had Brown gone to the country in October 2007, just 2 1/2 years into the Parliament, that would have counted as an “early” election. An election in May / June this year would have been par for the course.
Of course, now that everyone expects Brown to go to the wire (technically 10 June 2010), anything before May would be seen as “early” – but only relative to expectations.
@ Leslie – well, when you put it like that … though I still think no matter what we do, we’ll always have a loon contingent which believes in any amount of conspiracist nonsense, including Holocaust denial.
More scary, IMO, are the people who know the Holocaust happened but think it was a good thing. There are a worrying number of those types on the fringes of both the left and the right.
I have no empirical proof of this but I suspect that these days the majority of “Jewish conspiracy/Holocaust denier” extremists are Muslims rather than old fashioned white racists. I don’t see much sign of anti-Semitism amongst ordinary white people. Can you really imagine the British public hating Jerry Springer, Zac Efron, Esther Rantzen etc?
First of all, may I say that this has been a very interesting read through the article itself, and many of the responses posted.
What I would like to focus on though is the concept of Britain no longer suffering widespread racism.
I am interested in how one might calculate that. Certainly, I dont think non-white contestants winning talent competitions or reallity-tv shows means a great deal. Those people win because they have talent, and because they have a significant minority of people from similar backgrounds voting for them. It would be unusual for the white population of britain to unite and vote for the one remaining white contestant just because they were the one remaining white contestant I feel, whereas people from other social groups and ethnic minorities would arguably be more likely to do so. Nevertheless, I do not think this can give us much of an idea of whether or not Britain is racist.
Certainly, when I often talk to friends from back home in the Midlands, and others from further afield in the north of England, I do get the impression that there is an overwhelming sense of inherrant racism in these areas. And not just in more rural areas either. Indeed I would say that there are very few white people in certain areas of the midlands and the north who could not be easily engaged in racist-type conversations or anti-immigrant conversations.
The difference I think is that most of these people would still never vote for the BNP, solely because of the stigma attached to it. They would also steer well clear of such conversations in company which they do not know well enough to trust with their views. With people they know, they will say things like, “I’m not racist…but…”, when clearly the words that follow are inherrantly racist.
My parents, I am sad to say, are exactly like this, as are most of my family members. They are a good Christian family, who would never consider themselves to be racist, and would go to great lengths to ensure that they would not be badged as such, but these kind of conversations give the game away.
Another friend of mine is planning to emigrate to Spain, in his own words “to escape all the immigrants who steal our jobs”. Yet he would also state that he was not racist, and would not vote for the BNP.
My point then is that the issues of racism and support for the BNP, whilst of course linked, are not mutally exclusive, and that there is a widespread racism in large parts of the UK, both in rural areas and in cosmopilitan areas. No poll will show this, as a majority of these people, like my parents, will declare that they are not racist, and would not indicate racist views in a poll as a result. They certainly would not say it in a face-to-face poll. The same goes for homophobia, perhaps even more so, amongst many of these people.
The overwhelming majority of these people do not vote BNP, and would not do so, unless the BNP was to become “more acceptable”. Instead they will vote for one of the big two, if they vote at all, but it is this group of voters that would make a great deal of difference should the views of the BNP become more acceptable in the media, at which point we should expect them to swing.
For my own part, I am happy to say that I live and work in a cosmopilitan inner-city area, working with children often from black caribbean, black african or other ethnic backgrounds, and despite being brought up in a family where there is obvious yet publically hidden racism, am vehemently opposed to such views. I dislike the stance of the BNP immensely, and I worry that it’s numbers will continue to grow as more of these kind of people decide that it has become more acceptable to vote for this party and thus clamber out of the closet.
Mickey,
Scroll up and see the bit I posted on the 1997 Election – few people willl vote differently because the candidate is ‘Black’ or Gay.
Plus another stat ,the UK has more mixed race marriages than any other country.
Also, there is prejudice right through society but racism is, in my view, not widespread.
Hitler was a Christian by the way and the Dutch Reform Church (SA branch) found some way to back apartheid.
My experience is that secular people have less prejudice than so called ‘good christian families’.
Securalist have never killed anyone in the name of God!
It’s the utter naivety of Jim Jam who seems to live in some kind of multiracial paradise that needs to be addressed if we’re to stop the BNP.
As Mickey (and I’m sure anyone who has any kind of day to day contact with working class England) knows the vast majority of such people are undeniably proud of white England and amongst their own will have views in respect of non-white Britain far from those of the middle class media and broadly in line of what the BNP are saying. But as Mickey said whilst the BNP has connotations of fascism and is beset by the kind of characters with their extremely chequered pasts that are currently found in its ranks they would never vote for it. In fact amongst the working class people I meet every day in my community job across West Yorkshire you’d find it hard to find many people who do conform in any way to those surveyed who give the enlightened answers about race connoted in that survey at the top of this thread. As MIckey says what people give as answers to pollsters and what they really think amongst their own on such issues are two completely different things. And this isnt just confined to Yorkshire etc as part of my family come from that most ignored sector of society the usually hidden working class sector of the South East and the views of similar people I meet when visiting are exactly the same.
And i’m flabbergasted that black people winning pop idol has been mentioned hasnt JImJam heard of minstrelsy which I believe some of the KKK were quite keen on.
As Mickey says we’re not saying that the white working-class are “fascists” and a large proportion would never admit to racism just that their views are broadly supportive of what they see as the “indigenous white majority” and theyd rather live amongst those they perceive as ethnically similar.
That’s why its vital that the other parties step out from their middle class cocoon and realise just how downtrodden and ignored the whire working and lower middle class think they are. And while theyre at it distance themselves from the UAF who are surely the biggest recruiting device that the BNP could wish for.
ie could you imagine anything more likely to turn off white working-class voters than what theyd perceive as some scrawny middle class students trying to tell them how to vote if anything its more likely to make them think “if these people are against them maybe the BNP have a point…”
PS although I don’t know why Jim Jam went off on a tangent at the end of his post about secularism – but I think the gist of it was pretty ill thought out eg “no-one has been killed by secularism in the name of God” probably true but a few millions have been killed by secularism in the name of Stalin, Hitler (who in his writings/speeches defined himself as an atheist with occasional “pretend” leanings to a pre-Christian paganism). Mao. Lenin etc etc.
Fido – you may not get this as the thread is old but my remarks about religion were in response to the notion that a good christian family could be racist from Mickey.
I feel you are confusing prejudice with racism and would ask you to address why having ‘Black’ candidiates in seats with mainly white Electorates (e.g. Ashok Kumar in Lanbaurgh/South Middlesbrough) only cost labour around 1% off the average swing in 1997.
Of course the issues of poor people of whatever race need to be addressed.
Of course I want to see and end to prejudice as well but this will take centuries and I will settle for now for conscious racism to be in decline and marginal.
I agree withy you aboiut the UAF but please don’t assume that I am middle class – I make no assumptions about other posters.
We will just have to disagree about votes by mainly young people in TV shows
Whatever has been said (and I haven’t bothered to read it since my last post), I can’t see how you will ever get useful or reliable information on the BNP.
They are an issue that the establishment simply don’t understand, and as long as any association with them is treated with the irrational cult-like vitriol and pariah/taboo status that it is: I don’t see how you will ever get honest answers about who votes for them and why; as long as you never get honest questions about them.
Jim Jam – yes yes youre right i shouldnt have assumed that i’ll blame it on trying to get post finished before shift started!
[...] argument that is being put is that BNP are gaining support from at the expense of the Tories, not Labour. Evidence cited [...]