Love it!
I’m sure the voters found that a highly relevant consideration in 2009.”

Not such a highly relevant consideration in 2009 – which probably explains why it wasn’t given prominence in their election manifesto – but they were saying it back in 1918 when maybe, just maybe, it was a rather important matter.

It’s a shame that not more people listened at the time. It could have been a different twentieth century for radical politics.

This is what leads people to post comments on The Daily Mail’s website which read:

[i]“Congratulations BNP! Nick Griffin is one of the best politicians Britain has offer!”[/i]

The PCC should have the power to make newspapers print retractions/apologies of the same size that the original article which caused the complaint, instead of them being hidden away on page 56.

UAF blundered right into their hands because they are primarily about effective activism- as an SWP front its about recruitment first and foremost.

Claude, the clearest answer to the questions you ask regarding the splintering of the left vote is contained in the sentence I’ve quoted. Honestly the left can’t pull together because it’s full of people who are intent on criticising each other and that criticism is sometimes based on ideology and sometimes on tactics used by organisations. In the UK the left is dominated by the SWP and various groups who have emerged from it, most importantly even a group that’s essentially a single issue oppositional group like Unite Against Fascism is viewed by some people as a recruiting ground for the SWP. Incidentally I don’t know if it is or not, I just think that sentence perfectly represents why there will be no unity in the left and why there’s no point trying to unite lefty groups. I mean, no one can even agree on whether to let Nick Griffin speak to the press or not so there’s no hope on bigger, more important issues.

What these former industrial areas need are large numbers of James Dysons supported by a large workforce trained in high tech skills to create a high tech manufacturing base.

One reason for the rise in BNP and Islamic extremism may be that white and asian people no longer work alongside each other. In addition, over the last 25 years ( since the collapse of the textile industry) the increase in the influence of the Wahabis has increased the ghetto mentality of many muslims- hijabs were not that common in the 80s. When people have to work together to achieve a common goal theuy share a commin identity.

The BNP are totally incapable of improving the skills and educational level of people and supporting the development of an advanced manufacturing capability anywhere in the UK. A vote for the BNP will only keep uneducated, unskilled, unemployed and poorly paid white Britons in a state of poverty.

They wanted UAF to attack them so they would get near the top of the news and play the victim card. UAF blundered right into their hands because they are primarily about effective activism- as an SWP front its about recruitment first and foremost.

http://action.hopenothate.org.uk/page/s/notinmyname

I don’t think the two seats signifies any seismic shift in the political landscape – perhaps there are a few more Enoch Powell diehards than we realised but most sane people recognise the BNP for what they are

I think we are saying the same thing. The B * P’s alleged “success” is being bigged up. I don’t see any seismic shift either. The amount of stuff that is being said about them outweighs by a mile their real significance in society.

Lest we have forgotten, although ugly and ridiculous, it still remains a fringe group full of socially inept weirdos with anger management issues. So let’s not give it more importance than it deserves.

The Greens scored a MUCH bigger result than the B * P but the press coverage they have received since the elections has been a fraction of Griffin’s & co.

This is what I mean.

The only real argument in favour of egging them is that it gets media coverage for the fact that most people hate the views of the BNP.

http://petespolitics.wordpress.com

But I don’t think an egg-based solution is the best approach either.

The way to winkle out the BNP is to simply provide voters with more attractive alternatives.

Lets face it there is always a certain amount of electoral apathy at the Euro’s?
I don’t think the two seats signifies any seismic shift in the political landscape – perhaps there are a few more Enoch Powell diehards than we realised but most sane people recognise the BNP for what they are.

Aside from the understandable personal satisfaction of the act itself, do you think pelting Griffin with eggs yesterday carried more benefits or negatives?

Like someone else pointed out elsewhere, courtesy of the egg throwers, what would have consisted in a simple squalid press conference in front of a few reporters, became an event seen by millions as it then made news bulletins and front pages giving extra publicity to the B * P.

Think about it.

It is still a problem that these resources are not joined up together to make a stronger case and ensure the BNP don’t get seats.

Interesting article, but even when aggregated, the numbers for the centre-left and left aren’t that clever:

in Italy, the Liga Nord got 10%, Berlusconi + the right is comfortably ahead of all the left put together.

Maybe.
But a) at least it’s more of a level plain field as opposed to a slaughter.
b) In Germany a colaition FDP/CDU is not at all to be taken for granted
c) I disagree about Italy. Add those votes up again. Berlusconi and Lega Nord reach 45-46% of the votes. The combined left around 44-46%, depending on who you include. Either way I wouldn’t call it “comfortably ahead”.
d) In France Sarkozy would have been destroyed.
—
Other points.

You shouldn’t just look at NO2EU or SLP or any of them purely in terms of the tiny percentages they got.

This is the thing: in certain areas, had most of their votes gone to the Greens instead (forget that cesspit called New Labour), it may have been enough to grant them a 3rd MEP- or to reach a national 10%.

I insist, what was their bloody point? There was already a party clearly to the left of Labour, anti-war, pro-environment, new to Westminster, clearly “anti-old politics” so to speak: the Green Party.
—
The incapability of so-called “Socialist Parties” in Britain to finally shelve sectarianism and to stop looking back is staggering.

Lol, I was just explaining why the SPGB nutters won’t co-operate with the other nutters. However, am unsure why the SLP and NO2EU don’t combined forces.

Can anyone explain, for instance, the tactical differences between Arthur Scargill’s Socialist Labour Party (1.1% of the vote), Bob Crowe’s NO2EU (1%) and the Socialist Party of Great Britain (0.3%)?

Scargill’s party is Stalinist. I think the SPGB is Trotskyite. And I’d say No2EU is an unfocused expression of discontent.

With the exception of the SLP (where large numbers of people got confused between the Labour Party and the Socialist Labour Party, thus losing Labour votes), I don’t believe the votes for the smaller far-left parties would have gone to Labour (or gone anywhere, necessarily) if they hadn’t stood. It’s also likely that No2EU took some right-wing eurosceptic votes (including possibly off the BNP) based on the name, and Green votes clearly don’t come solely from the left.

I think it might be a bit flat though.

Merkel’s party was the only party to lose seats in Germany – and how – they lost seven seats to the liberals, the left and the greens.

I don’t think it was a happy night for them somehow.

Interesting article, but even when aggregated, the numbers for the centre-left and left aren’t that clever:

In Germany, SPD/Green/Linke is about 44%, behind CDU/CSU/FDP on 49%.

in Italy, the Liga Nord got 10%, Berlusconi + the right is comfortably ahead of all the left put together.

In the UK, Labour/Lib Dem/Green/Socialist/SNP/PC all combined got less than Tory/UKIP/BNP

There is YouGov research out there which suggests that BNP voters are more racist than the electorate as whole (no surprise there) but that they are not actually all that much more racist. It also suggests that BNP voters tend to substantially more pessimistic about the future than the electorate as a whole and tend to be more dissatisfied with their lives than the electorate as whole. I would suggest that this is tentative evidence for my claim that BNP voting is more a product of deprivation than of racism.*

*I am, however, sceptical about how appropriate YouGov’s online survey method is for analysing the views of the poorest in society, given that these people will be less likely to own computers. Here is the YouGov research:

http://www.channel4.com/news/media/2009/06/day08/yougovpoll_080609.pdf

http://petespolitics.wordpress.com

DISCLAIMER

I’m afraid, headlines/titles can really change the angle to a story or an article.

Like I pointed out in #3, at no point, did I make an analysis of the B*P vote. I didn;t choose the title Blame-The-Infighting-Left-For-The-B*P.

I merely took an objective picture of the left’s split vote in Western Europe based on the European elections. Mine wasn;t meant to be an Anglo-centric analysis anyway.

Above all, the last thing I wanted was for another debate to be centred around the B * P. I maintain. WE SHOULD STOP TALKING ABOUT THEM.

Their publicity-levels are currently above Cheryl Cole’s and that’s the problem , in my opinion.