Hadn’t we already discussed that the BNP’s policies were *not* republican? As for the other things I don’t think the BNP mean “nationalisation” in the old-fashioned Labour sense, they mean Strasserism, which means keeping the profits private, but among their cabal rather than a free-for-all-(wealthy folk). Protectionism? One of the most protectionist nations in the world is the US, and they’re pretty conservative politically. And as for the media, well the Tory press regualrly self-censor in favour of the Tory position without any direct interventinon from the party or the government (when the Tories are in power).

Vulgar libertarianism has a lot to answer for for getting your head so mixed up over these issues. Free markets, let alone freedom itself, are not exclusively right-wing concepts.

bullshit. for it to rightly assume their policies taken to the extreme would result in the bnp’s agenda, the right wing parties would have to support nationaisation, republicanism, protectionism, and censor the media. none of those are remotely right wing. in fact, taken to the extreme, a right wing party would do the exact opposite, although the left don’t like that, and as such, without researching policies, try to damage the right by labelling a far left organisation far-right……………………..why the hell do you think alot of bnp voters formerly voted labour? would a supporter of a left-wing party really turn far-right over night?

I also recall seeing a poll recently which suggested that more than three times as many BNP supporters identified the party as right wing than said it was left wing, though I can’t remember where.

“Political Compass” did indeed plot the BNP to the economic centre-left (and off the scale authoritarian, of course). Labour, meanwhile, was in the authoritarian-right quadrant.

Although I’d like to discuss how the state exploits the workers (I bloody love that conversation – it occupied 2 and 4-fifths of my time at uni) the topic of conversation here is how to define the BNP on the political compass.

The issue is exploitation: exploiting of the working class by the state is no different from exploitation by any other group.

The reason the BNP can adopt a similar looking economical outlook to a leftist, and be far-right, is because it appropriates this with social policies such as foreign person repatriation, gender inequality (they haven’t mentioned it too much – to my knowledge – but the FN in France – close allies – will pay women to stay at home and not be employed), homophobia, antisemitism and/or holocaust denial.

Any attempt to define the BNP as far left, is to suddenly forget that the party is not the sum of its economic policies, which just happens to have parallels with some leftist measures.

Incidentally, the whole debate illustrates the difficulty that liberals on the left or right have. We aren’t really that welcome in either of the big parties, in the US or in the UK.

I’m frightened to visit the BNP site in case my name ends up on ze list!!!

I think we can give Sunny more than twelve hours to get around to doing it. After all, Tim Montogmerie has been working on his for years.

Don’t think that letter’s getting written now somehow.

Though I see Unity has written a 1000000 word essay instead!

Was it before or after he said:
“[T]he intellectual elite in Parliament are trying [...] to take out the pomp and the circumstance of the British tradition. [They are trying] to use us and the British National Party to further their ends, particularly by potentially embarrasing the Queen and the institution of the monarchy. [...] Because we have no wish to embarrass the Queen and allow the liberal-left to do more damage to our institutions, I have withdrawn from the idea of going myself.”

I know that around election time there was a major Tory effort to dredge up examples of BNP scumbags’ anti-monarchism to smear them in the eyes of bigots-who-like-the-Queen (ie potential Tory voters), but that doesn’t mean it’s true. And if you’re going to tell lies to further your argument, then of course I’m going to give you abuse.

And I refer you again to point b @107