Open 'Who Should You Vote For' Thread
Its that time again, we have local Elections coming up soon. UKIP locally will be standing some very strong candidates and I know they have high hopes, having finally learned to place local issues in their leaflets and having gotten a phenomenal 12% response rate and taken their membership to the level of one of the strongest branches in the country, ironically even higher than during UKIP's national peak after the 2004 European Elections. There may even be some BNP candidates turning up in Christchurch, I will enquire...there are certainly going to be some in neighbouring Bournemouth, where both parties will likely stand a strong swathe of candidates.
So here's an open thread for everybody to jump all over. Tell us who we should vote for whether or not there is a candidate standing locally, and why we should vote for them. I await your comments with interest.
So here's an open thread for everybody to jump all over. Tell us who we should vote for whether or not there is a candidate standing locally, and why we should vote for them. I await your comments with interest.
Labels: Key Issues, Local Elections 2007
posted by Dangerouslysubversivedad at 10:19 AM
12 Comments:
DSD,
This is off-topic for this, but I'm posting it here in the hope that you'll see this at least once. Re your comment on ATW on the 'Riots as defense?' post, I don't want to sound like I'm gratuitously after grisly details, but I do think these details have been very well supressed indeed For this reason, I'd like to make a request. Would you be able to put together some of the accounts that your neighbour gave for posting here, for the edification of our readers? Best of all would be sending me something (via ATW) to post so it doesn't get lost in the comments.
Thanks,
Mr Smith
Yeah with any luck DSD those UKIP candidates votes might actually get into double figures in May.
http://www.bnp.org.uk/reg_showarticle.php
You're only hope is the BNP and whilst I agree it might not be the perfect solution at the moment I have long been convinced it is the only and final solution
More scary stuff about what's going on in our schools: http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/global.php?id=807725
Interesting article on Islam as a meme/mind-virus/contagious mental illness at:
http://www.news.faithfreedom.org/index.php?name=News&file=article&sid=1079
Steve,
Merely slagging off UKIP isnt going to persuade anyone to vote BNP.
I read a comment on a site once that said words to the effect that when your house is on fire all you're bothered about is putting it out. Everything else can wait. That pretty much sums up my feelings about immigration. My own city has already changed beyond recognition and by any standards those changes haven't been for the best. At least not in my opinion. It's been a long and difficult journey from lefty Guardian reader to potential BNP supporter but they seem to be the only game in town. I have my concerns and doubts because I've read the smears like everybody else. I can't pretend that I wholeheartedly agree with everything in the BNP manifesto. For example, homesexuality doesn't greatly concern me because I feel it's a natural component of humanity. However for the same reason I don't feel comfortable with gay adoption and I think attempting to brainwash young school children with gay propaganda is a step too far, so maybe the BNP would be a welcome counter balance to the debate. I've noticed that there are quite a few people who are trouble with the BNP's economic policies. They consider them too 'left wing' and protectionist. I reserve judgement on that and take heart from an article on the BNP website that described their policy as 'playing the game' for Britains interest 'like most other countries do'. It's an area I need to research a little more. All in all I've been impressed by Nick Griffin. I actually like him which is more than I can say for any other party leader, Nigel Farage excepted, who I also quite like. I'd certainly vote UKIP as a next best if that was the only alternative.
Actually, there is one policy which I'm not too sure about which the bournemouth nationalist could possibly clarify for me. I'm comfortable with the BNP's distinction between indigenous Britains and those born to recent immigrants as British citizens, but when the BNP talk about putting Britains first, in matters such as housing, do they mean indigenous Britains specifically or British citizens? If it's the former I suspect they'll run into a brick wall where breaking through is concerned. I've got quite a few black friends and while I welcome a stop to immigration, see no harm in offering incentives for immigrants to return to their ancestral homelands, would welcome the shutting down or funding removal of all the whole 'equality/diversity' industry that this country is awash with, would also like to see all 'positive' discrimination legislation repealed and also to see British culture in all it's myriad forms welcomed and celebrated (let's rescue that word from the NeoLabourites), I wouldn't feel comfortable with replacing it with new forms of discrimination. We can rescue our culture and country without having to do that. I hope.
PS. DSD, I'd still like to read the article you wrote about why you couldn't support the BNP if you could link to it.
GA,
The previous threads are here:
http://dangerouslysubversivedad.blogspot.com/2006/10/thats-it-you-lost-me-right-there.html
and here:
http://dangerouslysubversivedad.blogspot.com/2006/10/new-thread-for-why-i-wont-vote-bnp.html
Regarding the BNP POlicy you are dubious about is called 'Sons and Daughters' and it is intended to apply to the 'indigenous' population, by which the BNP mean of the Anglo-Saxon kind. I'm sure Gareth can tell you more.
I remember the last time you did this, I pitched my flag with the Conservative party. Now I'm undecided, I'd say I'm 60% likely to vote UKIP, 40% likely to vote Con.
Hey DSD, further to the german (part) home tutored girl who was taken from her family, compare that to the way muslims are treated there.
http://www.spiegel.de/international/0,1518,467360,00.html
Well the BNP does put emphasis on housing and employing the native people before the descendants of immigrants. Now I personally think that would be wrong - though i can see both sides - when it comes to government and state interference. I think that's one of the differences in-between people who come to the BNP from the Tories and UKIP as opposed to Labour. But one doesn't have to agree entirely with a party to support its thrust.
Besides, as we will also remove all so called positive discrimination laws, if the people truly want to employ only native British people then so be it. If that happened the natives would get richer and the unemployed immigrant descendants poorer without any state interference, thus making the homeward bound grant more appealing. I suppose its like our policy of having to make law what a successful citizens referenda declares for, in that it makes more sense to remove the state so as to let the people do as they actually wish, rather than trying to enforce the will of the government - which at its very best is the presumed will of the people - on the rest of us. Again, you will get different views on this depending on where the person you speak to is on the left/right spectrum. With all of this though, you must remember that we are a loooong way from government, and all these ideas are thrown into the mix without any direct effect at this stage. I think the point is whether the thrust of the BNP is something people approve of or not, and if so the details will, as you say, have to be ironed out before we are voted in government.
But we are a young party coming from authoritarian roots. I think the legal preference we propose towards our own indigenous kin is as mild as you could expect. Infact i think its a good and healthy bias, just not for government. But even after re-reading that paragraph i dont quite agree with myself. For how could a nation operate without the interests of its people at heart?
Its just the only way to square the circle that i can see. It would be far better if they had not come, of course, but now they are we have to draw some sort of line. And what better line is there than that they were born here? Its clean and consistent. I do not see how any other policy and therefore law could work. No, that's the only way. So while i find the BNP's ethos of helping the indigenous people first to be really quite laudable, i don't think a united country could work that way.
God, what a mess we are in. What an unprincipled mess Great Britain's leaders have gotten us into. It needn't have been like this though.
I don't think it's just a matter of whether or not the state should intervene or not. I suspect some form of social housing provision will be with us for a while yet. If anything it's a matter of being able to show the present discriminatiory laws up for what they are and at the same time taking the moral high ground. By all means have some criteria where priority is given to those bought up in the local community, even going back a generation or two. That's acceptable. It would, however, obviously include non indigenous people. It's such an obvious weakspot at the moment that will be easily highlighted by the opposition for essentially minimal gains with regards to the bigger picture.
Removing discrimination laws is also sensible in a free society. I'm sure it's rarely adhered to by ethnic immigrant employers anyway. I doubt Ken Livingstone refuses to eat in certain Indian restaurants because there aren't enough white English (or black Afro-Caribbean) waiters. I'm not so sure that it would result in only native Britains being employed. The facts are that many indigenous whites are to happy to employ ethnic workers, particularly those anglophiles who have assimilated into our culture. However that employment should be on the basis of ability and not quotas. There will of course be others who would prefer native Brits but I suspect this would be counter balanced by ethnic employers doing the same.
As to being a long way from government, well surely this is about getting into government. As I see it the BNP should have a manifesto for a first term that steadies the ship and sets a course for a greater sanity where immigration is concerned. This should be an end to immigration (if for no other reason than this is a small island and space is limited); repatriation of all illegal immigrants; an end to positive discrimination and 'equality' laws and the publicly funded bodies that support them; deportation of all foreign criminals and the end of the multicultural experiment and it's bastard off-spring forced integration with the reassertion of British culture. All of this with a benign offer of a financial enducement to any immigrant who wants to return to his homeland. Something like the above could be sold to both the indigenous population and also those immigrants of goodwill who have assimilated into British culture. Believe me there are plenty of black people who I know who despair at what's going on. They moved to Britain not the nightmare that is beginning to develop. These people can be appealed to, I'm sure. They're not all deranged, lunatic lefties.
I agree it's a mess but if it's going to be rescued it needs dealing with carefully. Any successful policy is going to have to carry a large majority of the electorate with it. The BNP are going to have to work hard and be very clever to pull that off. I'd love to think that they, or someone, could.
First of all, there is not a chance that I would vote for any of the main parties.
There are, for me, three alternatives. UKIP, English Democrats and BNP.
UKIP are quite probably the most annoying political party around. Just as they start to move forward - as with the recent defection of two Tory peers to their cause - they completely lose the momentum. I was a member of UKIP briefly - before the 2004 election. I leafleted on their behalf prior to that election. I was sent hundreds of cardboard leaflets and given an area to leaflet - the only contact I had from them that they initiated. I realised that area was not good ground for UKIP and tried to contact the area organiser to let them know and to suggest an area which I believed would be more lucrative. I thought my local knowledge would be uesful - I was told to do as I was told. I delivered the leaflets as requested, but - to be honest - I'd decided then that UKIP wasn't for me.
I like the English Democrats - and they are the only party I have seen that have mentioned something very close to my heart - aesthetics. But they are terribly unambitious and dont appear to have any political ambitions beyond an English parliament.
That leaves the BNP. I recently came across Nick Griffin's personal blog and I was impressed. It's a good read - not particularly political, just nicely written and easy going. He writes in a way that is easy to understand and avoids the failings of the major party leaders who often just come across as condescending, preachy, sanctimonious twats. I've started looking at the BNP web site and it is very, very good. I particularly enjoyed reading through the back issues of their Freedom newspaper.
There are still aspects of the BNP which I do not like and which prevent me from joining - but would not prevent me from voting for them. They impress me with their professionalism and,unlike UKIP, I get the feeling that, if I were to join, I would be listened to and supported.
I'mnow firmly of the opinion that the only chance we have is by supporting the BNP and that is where my vote would go - if they had a candidate standing in my area (which they don't).
I also had a long journey from Conservative to BNP, but there isn't any choice really as I feel there is "something of the night" about UKIP.
I think they are a Lib/Con sop to dilute the right wing vote.
I have no hatred of homosexuals or individuals of other races per se, I just feel noisy minority groups now have us in the situation where the tail wags the dog.
Like another poster mentioned I actually like Nick griffin, I've met him and there is an ease and honesty plus a refreshing lack of spin I find very appealing.
He never prevaricates, answers questions honestly and doesn't care if you dont agree.
There will be plenty of time for debate re the nitty of individual policies as the BNP grows and matures. I'm just not sure Britain has the luxury of waiting for another four years to iron things out.
I am sorry to be cynical about UKIP but the time for radical treatment of the state of Britain is upon us, a party like UKIP could be manipulated by its masters (in my opinion) in the Lab/Con alliance.
Post a Comment
<< Home