To timidly suggest that Nigel Farage is not a racist

[Millyonthefloss]

Can I just start by saying that I am not a racist. Thanks.

This is my AIBU.

Lots of people on mumsnet say Farage is a racist.

But this is what I think.

He is a geezer. He is a city boy. He smokes. He wears dodgy coats. He looks weird. He says non PC things, like my FIL does. He doesn't like overcrowding and change.

But I am beginning to think that he is not a racist.

What he is in fact is a man with an absolute obsession with British parliamentary democracy and an absolute hatred of EU waste, extravagance and unaccountability. He is totally obsessed with getting the UK out of the EU and independent again.

He is enraged and infuriated by the wasteful things the EU does like moving the EU Parliament from Strasbourg to Brussels all the time and wasting millions and millions of British taxpayers money that could be spent in his beloved UK.

I don't even think he is that interested in immigration.

But he is so obsessed with his aim of UK independence that he will work with anyone. So when free movement of labour became the big issue - years after he started his campaigns - he was willing to embrace it. And there have therefore been racists in UKIP. He is not choosy.

But I don't think Farage himself is a racist.

He seems to be genuinely delighted now that he can stand on a platform with Kwasi Kwateng or Frank Field.

He does his weird grin when he is with people like them.

All he wants is UK independence.

What do you think? AIBU?

We could invest money in public services instead of wasting £24 billion (at least) on Trident.

But we don't.

(and we're not going to get a referendum on Trident)

LightstepPeter0 I dont believe the EU equates to Fascism.
Or that being the 51st State is any better. The USA is becoming a more openly fascist society.
When it was formed, the remit of the CIA was to oppose the enemies of fascism. Which it did by promoting McCarthyism and attacking supposed communists. The USA still openly loathes the Left.

Imagine that the vote on the 23rd is the other way around: Whether we should join the EU - with the EU crisis, the migration crisis, and new countries like Turkey and Serbia being lined up as new member states regardless of how many years down the line that may be.

Would you still vote to Remain?

edit: vote to join the EU

No it's not about numbers. The myth that are about to be swamped by migrants is a lie promoted by the right wing tabloids. The tabloids that have written the headlines in this photo.

If we take the average of the last five years migration, then the difference in our population after ten years would be only 790,000 or 1 in 82.

Not actually a numbers problem at all.

BlackRiver

I would not vote to join the EU.

And to answer the OP, YANBU.

I used to think Nigel Farage was a racist but I used to like Jimmy Saville. So I'm clearly not a very good judge.

In the Andrew Neil interview this week Farage just seems sensible:

www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b07gbl55/the-andrew-neil-interviews-leave-or-remain-3-nigel-farage-mep

He does look a bit toady.
But I like frogs and toads and newts so I won't hold that against him.

Where I live is very badly overcrowded now both with EU economic migrants (lovely people btw) and also people moving out from places like London. There are just too many people in this country in my opinion.

I have been heartened to see more Labour MPs coming out for Brexit.

Rhi - You are a magician with numbers - you should work for the Treasury.

The average GB birth rate has been low for white Brits for a long time now, something like 1.4 per family, even lower in Italy, which is odd considering how much they love bambinos! I'm afraid it is all about numbers, and do not forget to factor in that a woman migrant from outside the EU or an *ethnic woman from the EU tends to produce not less than 3 children per family.

Non-European immigrants to, say, Sweden or Holland, are also referred to as 'EU migrants' once they receive their new nationality and relocate to UK. This obviously confuses, so I am making it clear that the large jump in the UK birth rate is from all women not born in the UK*.

MigrationWatch says:

Mass migration is the major cause of our rapid population increase.

It is estimated that net migration plus births to foreign-born parents has accounted for 85% of UK population growth since 2000.

Under the official ‘high’ migration scenario the population is projected to rise by around 500,000 a year – the equivalent to a new city the size of Liverpool every year.

75% of this increase will be down to future migrants and their children.

Is British a race then, eatsleep?

In that case, you're going to have to define race for me as I'm genuinely confused as to what it means to be British as a race as opposed to a nationality.

www.migrationwatchuk.org/press-release/453

"Between 240,000 and 480,000 of the refugees who have already arrived in the EU, together with the dependants who will join them, could move to the UK once they acquire EU citizenship.

"According to leaked estimates from the German authorities, each person granted asylum is likely to be followed by between four and eight family members. Migration Watch took the lower estimate that only four family members would follow. This suggests that the total inflow to Europe could amount to 4.8 million over a period of years - without taking account of any future arrivals who might successfully claim asylum.

According to leaked estimates from the German authorities, each person granted asylum is likely to be followed by between 4 and 8 family members. Migration Watch took the lower estimate that only four family members would follow. This suggests that the total inflow to Europe could amount to 4.8 million over a period of years - without taking account of any future arrivals who might successfully claim asylum.

Factors which could draw migrants from the EU to the UK. Low skilled entry-level work requiring little local knowledge is often easy to find. The English language, existing migrant communities and a reputation for tolerance and fairness are particular draws. Between a third and half of the Somalis granted asylum in the Netherlands have relocated to the UK, demonstrating that migrants move even from wealthier EU nations. "

Rhi No it's not about numbers. The myth that are about to be swamped by migrants is a lie promoted by the right wing tabloids.

So why are these Labour MPs concerned enough to join vote Leave?

John Mann Labour MP: “"It is not sustainable to have 300,000 new people added to the population every year. It has created two kinds of people in this country: the people who gain from this and the people who lose out."

Frank Field Labour MP: “It is the poorest in our communities whose standard of living is most adversely affected by the arrival of a record number of newcomers.”

I can't help thinking do we need more people to wash cars

So why are these Labour MPs concerned enough to join vote Leave?

Because it's not the overall numbers that are the problem, it's the number of additional low-pay workers coming in that is causing strain; it's a particular demographic that is struggling.

There are of course plenty of Labour people who are Remainers. The Kinnocks for example. Could it be that they are not very interested in the impact of migration on poor people but very interested in gravy:

"Former Labour leader Lord Kinnock has an EU pension of around £96,000 a year after his spell as Transport Commissioner in Brussels. His wife, former Euro-MP Baroness Kinnock, receives a £67,000 EU pension.

This of course is in addition to the Kinnocks’ four OTHER pensions amounting in all to around £250,000 per annum. This pension income does not include any from the some £10,000,000 amassed in salaries, perks and allowances while actually “working” for the EU. (Anyone notice any particular benefits from this “work”?)"

eurevealed.wordpress.com/2015/06/21/the-eu-gravy-train-rolls-on-and-on/

If we're going to talk about gravy the hypocrite Farage is happy enough to claim an income from EU meetings he rarely attends.

It's a good point about John Mann makes about those who benefit and those who don't.

For all the posturing about how the EU protects workers rights, this is totally undermined by high levels of migration from people who will accept poor working conditions.

My DH works in construction, it's become almost entirely staffed by temporary workers, especially in the lower ranks, investment in training is almost non-existent because they just import someone fully trained. Opting out of the working time directive is universal, because so many people are prepared to do it you just wouldn't get work if you wouldn't. Hours are long, welfare conditions are poor, working very late with no notice a regular thing. And you have to accept it because if you won't do it there are plenty of Eastern Europeans who will.

It just seems a bit pointless to me to say that the EU protects workers rights when on the other hand freedom of movement takes them away. I think generally what people mean is 'I have a permanent job in a nice office or the public sector and they protect my rights'.

This is something we are personally struggling with at the moment because I am heavily pregnant with twins and have a four year old and am really struggling but am often left struggling well into the evening because there's just no choice if DH wants to stay in a job. And time off for scans or appointments forget it, laughable.

It just seems a bit pointless to me to say that the EU protects workers rights when on the other hand freedom of movement takes them away. I think generally what people mean is 'I have a permanent job in a nice office or the public sector and they protect my rights

Also one is true and has deeply affected the poorest in our communities in so many ways, the other claim that the Tories will strip away all workers rights and put us back in the dark ages, is simply not true.

Gisela Stuart, Labour MP, on jobs and the EU

www.walesonline.co.uk/news/politics/labour-mp-gisela-stuart-argues-11417578
Labour MP Gisela Stuart argues that we must leave the EU to protect jobs in Wales

"We should remember just how difficult the European Union makes it for Britain to intervene for the sake of jobs and communities under threat.

By giving away our ability to decide our own trade policy to the EU, we lost the right, under the World Trade Organisation’s rules, to apply anti-dumping measures against cheap imports.

But it’s not just trade. Any programme of assistance, even in an emergency, is subject to an approval process from the unelected European Commission.

Farage has always openly said he is campaigning to be made redundant.

Kinnocks want their cushy life to continue.

Two of the highest ranking positions in the EU have gone to Mandelson and Kinnock - not forgetting to mention Blair sniffing round for presidency position - after Iraq and all the lies. They have no shame these particular Labour types , they do not speak on behalf of low paid - but pretend to.

Blair was wafting around implying the best way to correct the democratic deficit would be to have someone just like him, lying to people.

Sometimes he speaks truths though in 2012 Blair said : "that the path towards deeper integration was opening up a “democratic deficit”, namely a gap between European-wide decisions and the accountability of the European institutions making them".
www.euractiv.com/section/uk-europe/news/blair-calls-for-directly-elected-european-president-referendum/

Bill - exactly. I've said that on other threads - no training for British workers and certainly poorer quality of life. Profits are great at the top of the tree and shows great GDP etc - is that it? What happened to looking after poor when the business was doing well? No need as always new arrivals biting at heels of staff, so they don't have to treat current staff particularly well do they?

It's the biggest sham to have Labour supporting the EU in this referendum.

I think the future Labour leader will be someone that comes out before now and the referendum for leave. The traditional voters won't vote for any of them as leader, if they've supported remain.

when they are going to wake up and smell the roses ...?

All they've got to say is "workers rights" . No one is falling for that in our poor areas.

leave, exactly. But I have a grudging respect for Corbyn who is apparently refusing to tell Labour voters they should vote remain as they'd be better off in. Apparently he is privately anti-EU and I suspect he knows full well most poor people wouldn't be and he's just too honest to lie.

But you know, where is the EU with 0 hour contracts (very common with EU migrants) or the terrible things that have gone on in large depots staffed by largely E European staff like Sports Direct and Amazon? Always in the kinds of places poorer people worked.

LeavetheRoundabout said "Farage has always openly said he is campaigning to be made redundant. Kinnocks want their cushy life to continue. Two of the highest ranking positions in the EU have gone to Mandelson and Kinnock. They have no shame these particular Labour types, they do not speak on behalf of low paid - but pretend to."

Exactly so. Farage has always said he's in EU in order to get us out.
The Kinnocks - well, I just spit their names out, Mandelson too. These are the typical apparatchiks of the Kremlin: do what I say, not what I do. They're the ones who never go hungry and have their dachas at the lake. People, nothing is changed except the same anti-democracy is now modern, slick and hidden in full view.

In my opinion, he will espouse any idea that lends to his argument of the time. I also think he will use any idea or pander to people's prejudice, whether true or false, as a means to his end.

On the Andrew Neil Interview, he keeps attributing a quote to a head Interpol guy. The Interpol guy had told him to stop misquoting him. He blagged on saying he had said it, but couldn't say where or when or refer to a source. Just vaguely that he had 'documentation'. It doesn't seem to me that he appears to be too straight. Lie/truth? What ever is utile. Most stuff will get through without being found out and if it is it can be brazened through and the falsehood's impact will have been transmitted.

It was interesting on that interview when AN said the WTO's own analytical survey said that if UK traded on WTO rules basis, it would face 9 billion pounds more on tariffs. This was about the same on the cost of net membership of EU that Leave maintain. Not a penny left for the NHS or other things it was 'promised' this money would be spent on. That is before the effects of all the other fallout.

NF then said you could just take away tariffs on Japanese cars and Vietnamese shoes. He must have said this before because AN had a paper in front of him that said the singling out like this was against WTO rules. So will confidently deliver bulls*t as if it is true.

Unfortunately, he probably gets away with lots of falsifications/lies/made-up stuff that he uses to influence people with. So many figures being shot out that are fabricated or spun, but he gets away with them because you'd need an expert on the panel all the time to expose him.

He doesn't answer a lot of questions, because he has no real argument. He diverts into his stock shocks, strawmen and falsies. 'You know what'.

There must be a meme somewhere with the continual pulling out of the passport.

So, if the truth is such a moveable feast, I believe he would use anything to further his cause and influence people. Racism included, if utile. I haven't seen much evidence of what I regard as integrity, decency or honesty in the large amount of coverage of NF. Quite a bit on the contrary.

As for EU waste. Is there verification that NF returns any wages, allowances or emoluments to the UK? No different to any other MEP then. Feathered his own nest, I presume.