to think that people claiming that BNP voters aren't racists are being disingenuous?

[MrJustAbout]

I don't get the argument "that these people aren't racist, but they vote just BNP".

For me, If you vote BNP, you are a racist. I know this is guilt by association but I think it's fair. What's more, making excuses for those who choose to support these hatemongers makes it more acceptable for them to do so.

I know I wouldn't vote for a party when I didn't know their policies and if I did, I'd feel pretty ashamed that I voted without bothering to find out. To be honest, anyone who votes for the BNP and claims that didn't realise they'd just cosied up to facists needs to give up voting for good.

unfortunatly the vile BNP is tuning in to some of the issues in this country that a significant amount of voters feel are not being addressed by the main parties.

Its not good enough for them to simply shut the door on large swathes of voters and call them racist.. thats how the far right gets into power in the first place, they feed on a vaccume.

immigration is a huge issue where I live in Birmingham,and to call people who are worried about feeling overwhelmed by another culture racist, is lazy and dangerous politicians must listen and act or more of these far right thugs will get into power

Yes, you're right scarlet. I should have said the majority of the rise in immigration since about 2003...

yes the body, it would be intresting to have the discussion on mn -on immigration rather than sweeping statements, but i doubt whether anyone will

Anyone seen this?

"The huge increases in migrants over the last decade were partly due to a politically motivated attempt by ministers to radically change the country and "rub the Right's nose in diversity", according to Andrew Neather, a former adviser to Tony Blair, Jack Straw and David Blunkett.

He said Labour's relaxation of controls was a deliberate plan to "open up the UK to mass migration" but that ministers were nervous and reluctant to discuss such a move publicly for fear it would alienate its "core working class vote"."

The second paragaph seems to support the view that the BNP's recent rise in popularity is due in large part to Labour's immigration policy. Labour didn't want to discuss it openly for fear of alienating the core working class vote. And where are (some of)those voters now turning? BNP. I don't think they see any other party as supporting "their" interests.

This is precisely why I think immigration should be discussed openly. The only way to defeat racism is through reason - and reason needs to be based on facts, not just on how people wish things were/would like them to be.

scarlet...i'm just reading the DM on line..

here

i don't regret many things in life....but i will always regret giving those lying cheating bastards any power...

I find it incredible that people who are worried about immigration would turn to the BNP though. They are clearly a racist party not to mention a misogynistic one. Their attitudes towards some religions, races women should be enough for any reasonable and clear thinking person to reject them.

i don't find it incredible, i think scarlet is right re: vaccume. You can't ignore this question if it is a question that matters

Yeah, I suppose it's not that incredible. People are sometimes racist and so they vote for a racist party I guess.

Why does anyone not want a multicultural Britain?

So, because of the war in Iraq we should conclude that Labour is corrupt and the BNP are ok really because 2 wrongs make a right?

Sorry TSH but I fail to follow the thread of that argument...

i know TSH... oh the irony...

but at least the Labour party isn't racist. I can understand why people who aren't racist wouldn't consider voting for the bnp an much as I can understand why people who are racist would.

Also how ridiculous to compare someone who votes labour with a fascist, and suggest they are as unprincipled. It smacks of the kind of response BNP supporters give every time they are criticised - 'Hey, never mind me, look over there at that!!'(followed by an irrelevant statement) - NG included.

As a voter, if you're not keen on Tory policies, and don't want to see a return to thatcherite Britain you will tend to vote labour (not always, I know). I don't know many people who actually support the Iraq intervention anyway, whoever they vote for.

As an aside, I suspect the war would also have gone ahead under a Tory government without discussion and most likely by default and without all the discontent within New Labour which led for example to Robin Cook quitting.

People talk as though support for that war was something only Tony Blair would have given and I do think that is misguided.

www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/free-poster-with-the-independent-on-sunday-i-am-nick-griffins -brain-1808707.html/

• pretty much sums it up!

'Electra, no political party is abundant in virtue.'

I agree completely, but I think the BNP is a genuine threat to life as we know it if they gain enough support. I do not think it is in any way comparable to the other parties. At the moment they are playing to what they perceive as reasonable concerns (not very well!!) but would imo pull a whole other sinister agenda out of the bag if they ever gained power.

I'm sure I remember a representative of the conservative party saying words to the effect of we would have gone to war whatever, it was around the time the war started. Perhaps someone will correct me on this though - I'll see if I can find anything out about it.

People didn't vote Blair in on a platform of invading Iraq. People who vote for the BNP know they have a platform of negative intentions towards the rights of ethnic minorities, women and LGB people; the BNP have made their intentions known. So comparing Labour voters( who did not know what would happen) to BNP voters (who do know) is not a reasonable analogy.

I actually feel really sad that the BNP could be discussed as a plausible party; 20 years ago they were just seen as a bunch of thugs.

HArpy are you say if the Tories had been in opower we would not have gone to war in Iraq? Of course we would. At the time the conservative party was agreeing with the motions in Parliament. They supported the Govt.

Milly to be fair 30 yrs ago the National Front were getting votes and attention in the media so not alot has changed. maybe these things go in cycles.

Ok, William Hague says the conservative party 'supported the decision to remove Saddam' but they would have been more efficient in how they did it apparently. A war is a war though and people are going to get killed in any event.