The broader point is about labelling. Calling a radio station “an Asian station” is an act of self identity, a political (with a small p) act. Quite apart from the question of whether it’s approprtiate for a publicly funded organisation to be making overtly political statements, the question is why are there no publicly funded Black/Polish/Italian etc etc stations (and yes I would include white).

Er, no, I wouldn’t agree. Now, containerisation, well, you’d have had a point. You can’t just wish away the underlying economic realities.

I don’t think you can use them ‘properly’ because they are, firstly, so debased and secondly they cover spreads that are too large.

Worth remembering that ‘left wing’ as a term comes from where people sat in the Estates-General in France. I don’t believe that many issues from that period are now relevant.

xD.

>I object to is providing radio stations for anyone at all with my tax money

Okay, fair enough. But, given the monumental amounts of tax money that governments waste, you’d admit then that a few quid on fostering something that’s a “wonderful thing” is money (*relatively speaking*) well spent? Compared with export credit guarantees, corporate welfare and whatever the hell else the DTI exists for, say?

>They are words with no descriptive capacity

Not if you use them properly. But, generally, you’re right: most people’s idea of debate is somewhat attenuated on t’Internets.

>… Franco, Hitler and Mussolini…

Fair point, but I do think that in shorthand terms these 3 share *just about* enough to be bracketed together. Fascism and Falangism at least are comparable, and not discounting obvious local differences, map reasonably well on to each other. But, hey, we’re *way* off-topic now.

>I don’t intend to get into an ideological debate

There’s no need for much of a debate, though I’m amazed quite how often this fallacy crops up. (It’s a classic ‘libertarian’ meme, I know.) Left parties are generally class-based parties, often the party of organized labour, and usually emphasize a class allegiance *that crosses* national boundaries. Right parties go for other stuff: blood, soil, nation, ethnicity, conservation; fascists obsessively so, usually with a dose of victimhood and mysticism dolloped on top. As Gracchi says (#40), at its inception this manifested itself as defence of Church and nation (i.e. the traditional plutocracy). Today it translates better as an obsession with ‘culture’. The same themes of pollution, disgust, erosion etc. occur.

Which is why Blaney is correctly placed on the ‘far’ or ‘extreme’ right.

Of course, you’re right that both extreme left and extreme right ideologies of this type are statist and collectivist. And whether your assassin was of the right or left would perhaps be a moot point if you were up against the wall.

The words left, right, communist and fascist are essentially meaningless as they have become terms of abuse that are used to indicate ‘things we don’t like’ without making any distinction between them. Fascism, for instance, is variously used to describe Franco, Hitler and Mussolini – all very different forms of unpleasantness.

They are words with no descriptive capacity and, I feel, indicative of a rather poor level of descriptive discourse.

xD.

Is Fascism rightwing? Well it is in the sense that most of the people that backed the Fascists in the twenties backed them in order to stave off the socialist menace. Fascism was seen as a reinforcement to plutocracy and often a reinforcement to the Church and the nation. That was rightwing for its time and still is. It derived its thinking from counter enlightenment ideas which were very current in the early twentieth and late nineteenth centuries and were then considered reactionary.

Back to the main issue though- I don’t see what the problem is about an Asian network- its not like it broadcasts only to Asian people, and I’m sure many of its technicians are white, it just broadcasts about Indian music or Islam or whatever else it broadcasts about. Why is that a problem to anyone? I’m a white heterosexual male, I have to say that I don’t feel under seige particularly at all- I’m not sure why I should- I can go anywhere I want without threat, I never get abuse yelled at me on the streets, etc etc.

Furthermore underlying this is the argument that the world is zero-sum. It isn’t. A gain for women in terms of employment or education is a gain for men as well- and that’s true for ethnic minorities too. Ok its not as big a gain for those not directly effected- but its still a gain and I think the fact I’ve got good female friends- probably impossible for a middle class person 200 years ago- is a sign that the world is changing for the better and that the more prejudices come down, the more life is better not just for those directly in receipt of the prejudices but for all of us. Come on if the Asian network gets you into Asian music or into Asian cooking or makes you understand Islam- isn’t that a good thing? So why object….

So everyone who lobbys for the introduction of particular laws which affect other people is a fascist? That’s a pretty, um, inclusive definition of fascism. Other groups which lobby for and obtain legislation telling us how to live, travel and other things include the Labour Party, the Liberal Democrats, the Conservative Party, the TUC, the CBI, every national newspaper and most local newspapers as well. No wonder you libertarians feel so put upon, when confronted with the scale of what you think is fascist in Britain today.

The only thing I object to is providing radio stations for anyone at all with my tax money.

Yeah, you’re not wrong. Still, the relentless misdirection in this post is very entertaining.

You’re correct that “fascists and their ilk” are usually referred to as far right, but not by all, and not by me. I don’t intend to get into an ideological debate, I just point out that the governments of the extreme left (Stalin, Mao etc) where as crushingly dictatorial as those of the fascist regimes in the 1930’s, and if you where a humble citizen living in any of these societies, you would have noticed little difference between those of the left and those of the right. All specialised in telling you what to do, what to think, and what to say, and taxing you until the pips squeaked for the privilege.

Rather than a straight line, Left – Right, it is far more practical to see this line folded upon itself to form a circle. Extreme right and extreme left then take up their correct positions, side by side, opposed on the far side of the circle by anarchy and libertarianism.

Feel free to continue thinking this is bollocks, you are in the majority, and the current left – right fallacy is sure to increasingly dominate a sterile debate over who is going to rule you and tell you how to live your life, so you have massive uninformed opinion on your side.

Oh, and as to my rather abrupt response to Sunny, I apologise. It was 2:31am, and I’d not long returned from the pub, so my debating skills were somewhat impaired.

Let me reply to your question, “Who said they (supporters of the green movement) advocated compulsion?”

It would take me far too long to list all of the green parties of Europe, all of the green pressure groups and charities, and all of the green politicians who lobby for, and increasingly obtain, intrusive legislation telling us how to live, how to travel, how much energy we can use etc.
Would it not be quicker for you to list those members of the green movement who advocate the implementation of their agenda on a voluntary basis?
Anyway, what’s your problem with this? If one accepts the urgent need to tackle climate change, all of us on the planet must pull together or we will all suffer, and surely no one doubts that compulsion is the only way to achieve the necessary outcome.

Erm, so that’s why fascists and their ilk are collectively referred to as the “Far Right”? Must be the fanatically left-wing BBC piping delicious piping-hot propaganda into my screaming brain-sponge that is causing both myself and the majority of rational human beings on this planet to say as one:

“You’re talking bollocks, mate.”

There is no homogenous white culture in this country. Fact. You wanna know why? It’s because White British people are by far the single largest ethnic group in the UK, and – wait for it – people tend to identify themselves as belonging to one or more cultural minorities.

I.e., I may identify myself as being a fan of alternative music (a minority in terms of overall musical taste), a Spurs supporter (a minority in terms of overall football support), a socialist (a minority in terms of overall political allegiance), a… well, you get the picture. I don’t identify as being a White Hetrosexual Male, not because I’m not one (I am) but because it is not a cultural minority.

Simple, really.

Ever heard of demographic transition models? No, I didn’t think so.

Who said they advocated compulsion?

Fascism, like Marxism, is an extreme left wing ideology defined in Wiki as, “… an authoritarian political ideology (generally tied to a mass movement) that considers the individual subordinate to the interests of the state, party or society as a whole.”

How does the green movement, in which all individuals must be forced to conform to the diktats of the green ideology (if the planet is to be saved) differ in its approach to that of fascism? Don’t get me wrong, the greens may be correct, and their actions may well be justified if the human race is to survive, but it is still no different to fascism.

A “Green” Britain and a “BNP” Britain would look exactly the same — that’s something the BBC should really be concerned with. Look at:

Vote Green – go blackshirt

http://www.samizdata.net/blog/archives/2008/02/vote_green_go_b.html

And the comparison with South Africa is quite extraordinary. Because an ethnic minority has dominated the UK majority by force for years now. Will we ever see a white Prime Minister in his country…