The Great Ukip Racism Debate - Debunking the Six Main Myths

[ttosca]

Is Ukip racist? Or is it merely a party that is especially attractive to what David Cameron once called "fruitcakes, loonies and closet racists"?

Or, perhaps, is it neither? Has it been unfairly smeared and demonised? On Sunday, Ukip leader Nigel Farage told the BBC's Andrew Marr he was "adamant that we're a non-racist party".

Guess what? Plenty of influential people on the liberal-left agree with him. Former Labour home secretary Jacqui Smith says she is "uneasy about the suggestions that they are racist and the implication that, therefore so are the likely Ukip voters". Liberal Conspiracy blogger Sunny Hundal attacks those on the left "offering up blanket accusations of racism" aimed at Ukip. "Do the majority of Ukip voters endorse racism and is Ukip an openly racist movement?" asks academic Matthew Goodwin, author of a new book on the anti-Europe party. "No."

In an attempt to shield Ukip from the charge of racism, these liberal-lefties have, wittingly or unwittingly, joined with both Farage and sections of the right-wing press to promulgate some pretty dodgy arguments, some pretty dangerous myths, that are worth tackling head on:

Continued...

www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/mehdi-hasan/ukip-racism-myths_b_5271986.html?utm_hp_ref=tw

Racism is not the only reason not to vote for UKIP. It's a pretty good reason, but no the only one.

As mum to a disabled child who will be dependant on benefits all his life, and will need care after I pass on, their comments on disability and benefits claimants would prevent my voting for them even if I were in any way inclined (which I am not).

Sometimes I wonder if focussing on the racism aspect stops people focussing on the other awful policies they peddle.

There is nothing good about UKIP.

I do worry as well that the press focus on them will allow other awful parties or combinations of parties to slip in almost unnoticed.

Racism is not the only reason not to vote for UKIP

Very much agreed.

I don't believe that all UKIP voters are necessarily racist (although some undobtedly are). I do however think UKIP voters are misguided, and their vote will be used badly.

I know 2 people that are openly going to vote UKIP. One is concerned about the 'amount' of immigration into the UK - she is herself an immigrant (and now naturalised Brit). She believes that UKIP will put a 'numbers cap' on immigration and that they will make the process more like Australia or Canada. She believes that immigration should be welcomed when the person coming in can 'prove' they have something to offer the UK, and have a job/sponsor to go to etc.

The other person thinks that the UK should come out of the EU. He believes that what we get out of our membership is 'not worth' the cost. He believes that UKIP will pull us out of it and we will be better off.

I truely don't believe that either is racist.

However, both of them have daughters. When I told them (separately) that as a female, as the mother of a daughter, and as the relative of a profoundly disabled person, I would NEVER vote for UKIP, and more importantly - why, both were horrified. They had never looked further than the one policy that they were basing their vote on.

I hope that explaining my views may have made them think twice, but in the end I won't be there in the voting booth.

Unfortunately it is attracting racists, homophobics, disabalists etc... and I cannot see what Nigel Farage is doing to stop that apart from reiterating after every ist comment made by UKIP councillors that they are not a racist party, perhaps he needs to ask why he thinks his party appeals to them. Thats one issue I have with them.

Another, I cannot see apart from imigration what they are exactly standing for? There seems very little on their Manefesto. So you have to presume that most people are voting purely on immigration. What about Health, Education the Economy etc?

Another, in the European Elections (where it seems they will do well) voters are voting in people who want to be out of Europe, so, from my understanding, UKIP MEPs are not voting in the European Parliment unless the votes are to do with leaving Europe, and are being paid how much? for doing effectively nothing.

As mum to a disabled child who will be dependant on benefits all his life, and will need care after I pass on, their comments on disability and benefits claimants would prevent my voting for them even if I were in any way inclined (which I am not).

What exactly do they say about disabled? we are in exactly same situation as you Peachy.

Another UKIP thread.

It proves they are now starting to worry the establishment.

I've just read their policies: (at least I think that's what they are?)

www.ukip.org/issues

peachy your comments are obviously of great concern - but can you tell me on what they are based? The Australian immigration model is in there and seems a good way of doing it.

also please what are their policies on support for the disabled?

these are serious questions, I want to vote but I DO NOT want to vote for racial discrimination or reduced support for those in need. So I really would welcome thoughts. Or ideas on where my vote would better be directed - it will not be for the BNP.

they are insisting they are not racist.

still waiting to hear about the disabled and what they say on that.

I can't see any racist policies, but it does seem that they attract politicians with racist views. Still investigating whether they throw them out.

also waiting update on the disabled issue.

Regarding Ukip, racism and their policies – the facts.

Personally I do not think Farage is racist and although he tends to sensationalise the issue of our EU membership and immigration for headlines, there are two ways to PRACTICALLY deal with those issues but Ukip offers the UK electorate, neither (which I will shortly explain).

Within the party there clearly are racist overtones that goes back to their early days/support, and so much so their Founder has disowned them, as they did not have credible UK domestic policies.
“Ukip Founder Alan Sked Says The Party Is 'Morally Dodgy' And 'Extraordinarily Right-Wing'”

www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2012/11/26/ukip-founder-alan-sked-morally-dodgy_n_2190987.html

Regarding Ukip’s domestic policies, the “right wing” label above was very apparent within their 2010 General Election manifesto, but Farage has since disowned the WHOLE manifesto as “drivel”, when having gathered enough Conservative votes in 2010, he went gunning for Labour and Lib Dem voters – so cynically Ukip wiped all record of that manifesto off their website – and since made ‘populist’ policies up on the hoof for votes. So while most political parties ‘update’ their manifesto’s, Ukip tried to erase the lot for their new electoral campaign ‘target’ voters.
news.sky.com/story/1200525/nigel-farage-disowns-ukip-manifesto-as-drivel
“UKIP leader Nigel Farage has disowned the party's entire general election manifesto - which he helped launch - branding it "drivel”.”

www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-11-15/u-k-parties-prepare-for-2015-by-erasing-web-histories.html
“UKIP spokesman Michael Heaver confirmed that the party’s 2010 election manifesto had been removed. While the party now opposes the planned high-speed north-south rail line, the 2010 document advocated building three new routes. “We’re in the process of updating everything,” Heaver said by telephone. “We’re going through a policy review.”

news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/election_2010/8617187.stm
For anyone wishing to see Ukip’s 2010 General Election manifesto, above is the BBC’s summary.

Regarding the EU’s main issues and immigration, there are two ways to handle both and Ukip have no interest in the first and HAS NO CONTROL OVER IMMIGRATION, no matter what they disingenuously tell voters.

Ukip’s MEP’s have no interest in representing the UK on UK issues, as they don’t think the EU should exist, so go to the EU parliament as protesters, which achieves nothing, but they are happy to carry on, receiving from the taxpayers the following remuneration package.
MEP salary of £78,000 annual salary + Daily attendance Allowance + Staff Costs + £3,500 a month allowance.

On UK immigration, the issue here is the levels of EU citizens that can come here to live and work without permission, and NON EU citizens that we CAN. The rise of Ukip (and the BNP) can be directly attributed to our immigration policies in the 2000’s, when TWICE as many NON EU citizens were ALLOWED to enter the UK to live and work here, as EU citizens.

Since 2010 the UK has already controlled/lowered the NON EU citizens arriving, but the ONLY ways to solve the open door EU citizens arriving, is either through the leaders of the EU agreeing to border controls (where belligerent Ukip’s MEP’s are worse than useless and have no access to the leaders of other EU countries) OR the UK, through a referendum, leaves the EU, which was enshrined in British law up to the Lisbon Treaty Brown signed, so can only be done through the Westminster parliament changing British law.

As Ukip can not change British law, even if Ukip had every UK MEP seat in the European parliament, they can change NOTHING repeat NOTHING of the current EU free movement of citizens situation – so when they tell the electorate what they would do, they are fooling the electorate into believing Ukip have powers they do not have – and in the meantime pocketing a nice taxpayer salary and allowances to, by their very existence, stand in the way of a UK referendum in 2017.

So there we have it, UNLESS there is a UK referendum in 2017 asking ‘the people’ whether we stay in the EU or not, there is unlikely to be ANY change in EU immigration UNLESS the leaders of nations meet in a constructive way and allow controls – and £78k MEP ‘protester’s’ being rude in the EU parliament, only makes them dig their heels in against UK demands.

who the hell do we vote for? DEFINATELY not the scary tories/leb dems.

between Labour and Ukip?

The current Gov has done so much damage regarding THEIR policies with the disabled, particularly with the bedroom tax amongst other things.

MakeMineaMartina ... FYI "the scary Tories/Lib Dems" were trying to release hundreds of thousands of bedrooms not being used - a blunt policy to help in a housing crisis, not of their making.

May I suggest you blame the government that despite being warned there would be a huge gap in housing stock in 2004, via the Barker Report Mr Brown commissioned in 2003 when we apparently had £trillions to borrow/spend - left the following legacy in 2009.

england.shelter.org.uk/campaigns/why_we_campaign/the_housing_crisis/what_is_the_housing_crisis

Now personally I'd call the Shelter report above "scary", please read it and weep for those on waiting lists.

As for the disabled, who is to say what Labour would have done.

www.theguardian.com/politics/2010/mar/25/alistair-darling-cut-deeper-margaret-thatcher

“Labour to substantially cut benefits bill if it wins power in 2015”
www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/aug/21/labour-to-cut-benefits-bill-2015

"Labour will cut the benefits bill "quite substantially" and more effectively than the Tories if it wins power in 2015, the shadow work and pensions secretary said on Tuesday."

Labour raising Council Tax around 110% from 1997 to 2010 hardly helped the poor, the Council Tax freeze suggested by the coalitions might have helped a bit.

again, this thing about disabled people needing the room for equipment/overnight carers/if special needs child cannot share a room with siblings due to their disability etc etc.

rooms specially adapted for disabilities.......

Here's one for ukip- on QI last night they said English is NOT the official language of England! didn't say what is though.

Specialsubject, I believe the 'disability issue' was that of congregate communities of those with disabilities/special needs. It was quite prominent during the last GenElec but as UKIP (and the other parties) have been busy wiping their Internet histories you need to rely on someone who saved it when it was published - there is a MNer that did, which is how I saw it, but I'm afraid I can't remember who it was. It also showed their original plans to scrap Maternity Allowance and lower Maternity Leave.

Then there was that horrible man (now expelled I believe) who last month suggested forced abortion after the 20 week scan if it showed anomalies like Downs Syndrome.

how very interesting. I was living abroad for the last general election in 2010 so missed all this.

thank you very much, everybody. Well, well, well...

will I find anyone that I can vote for with a clear conscience?

May I make a few points on the above posts.

Firstly those needing spare rooms for medical or other reasons, from what I’ve heard at PMQT, can be exempt from paying extra for ‘spare’ rooms via a special government contingency fund (£200 million rings a bell) that local authorities can claim from – so it is possible that some problems for those affected may come from the failure to claim from the fund, for some reason or another.

Lets not forget that the Cameron’s had their own ‘special needs’ child who sadly passed away, so they are aware more than most of the need for support at home (and via the NHS), so accusation that the government is purposely making things difficult for individuals, when local authorities handle the individual cases, seems both unlikely and a tad wide of the mark. IMO

Regarding the wiping of political party histories, I think you’ll find that generally speaking in the case of the Coalition, both parties had policies in their 2010 manifesto’s that were for a single party government.

However a hung parliament meant they had to work together for the good of the country and formulate a Coalition Agreement made up key policies from both, to be implemented within this parliament, which amazingly they managed in days before major volatility in markets/interest rates. So various policies they had to jettison and speeches tearing pieces out of each others parties that would be an embarrassment, should be deleted – but in fairness to the Lib Dems, when that link above was written, they had deleted less than any other party.

I think that looking forward to 2015, when looking at all social services etc, as this country will still have an annual budget deficit not far south of £100 billion and a national debt of £1,500,000,000,000 (£1.5 trillion), I would therefore argue strongly that the UK will need a strong economy just to continue funding what we are, especially as the needs/costs of the old aged will multiply.

‘Conscience’ doesn’t pay the bills; the country will have a choice between one of two leaders to form the 2015 administration, to both efficiently run the country and manage our debt and services – based on their 2015 manifesto’s, records in power and voters choice on the day.

To my mind a vote for an alternate political party that after 20-years flip flops ALL their policies on a populist whim and would have trouble running bath water in a pub, never mind an economy that pays for our social services - it is a wasted vote when our future prosperity and services are at stake.

Lets not forget that the Cameron’s had their own ‘special needs’ child who sadly passed away, so they are aware more than most of the need for support at home (and via the NHS), so accusation that the government is purposely making things difficult for individuals, when local authorities handle the individual cases, seems both unlikely and a tad wide of the mark. IMO

with nannies and carers and nurses etc all paid for by the taxpayer

yes you'd think hed be understanding with disabled but hes not. NONE of them are.

Another UKIP thread.

It proves they are now starting to worry the establishment.

Racism should worry everybody.

I followed the link to their website, alarmingly simple and unsophisticated rhetoric, everything hinges on keeping out foreigners, terrifying that so many people see things in such black and white terms.

Surely this 'Prioritise social housing for people whose parents and grandparents were born locally'

is just bonkers
I mean people move all over the place for work, do they seriously want to discourage people from leaving the towns and cites they were born in?

What is it, some kind of 'lets go back to the 1800's' policy

The only kind of wasted vote is the one that doesn't get cast.

Nigel Farage Taken Apart in Landmark LBC Radio Interview with James O’Brien

www.scriptonitedaily.com/2014/05/16/nigel-farage-taken-apart-in-landmark-lbc-radio-interview-with-james-obrien/

Nice one James!