There is a big difference between Cameron and the BNP on immigration
The BNP’s Simon Darby has claimed that David Cameron’s speech on immigration is “advocating BNP policy”. On the BNP website they also claimed that recent debate on multiculturalism is another milestone in the “Griffinisation” of British politics.
I oppose many of the things Cameron said in his speech, but we cannot forget that the BNP are opportunists, dressing themselves in populist clothing to score votes with people not typically inclined to fascist politics.
In fact, in comparing Cameron to Griffin, we risk forgetting exactly what the BNP’s opinions on immigration are. Namely:
- Griffin said last year that some UK residents should return to the country of their ethnic origin, and Muslim immigration should end entirely. He also once said that al-Qaeda is the real expression on Islam and that moderate Islam is false.
- In 2009 Griffin opined that The EU should sink boats carrying illegal immigrants to prevent them entering Europe.
- In 1996, Griffin told Wales on Sunday that “All black people will be repatriated, even if they were born here”
- When defending a leaked document explaining why BNP members should no longer use the words “British Asians,” Griffin argued that immigration has caused a “bloodless genocide”
- Richard Barnbrook, member of the London Assembly, now expelled from the BNP, once blamed tuberculosis on immigrants. According to Hope not Hate Barnbrook ranted: “Yes I have got TB. Immigration has caused this.”
- Though denying man-made climate change as “myth”, the BNP asserted in its 2010 election manifesto that the bulk of the environmental problems are caused by “mass immigration”, and that an end to immigration will relieve pressure on our green belts.
- The BNP, if elected to office, would offer £50,000 to anyone not defined “White British” as an incentive to return to their country of ethnic origin.
- In the BNP’s 2005 manifesto, it promised that a ”BNP government would accept no further immigration from any of the parts of the world which present the prospect of an almost limitless flow of immigration: Africa, Asia, China, Eastern and South Eastern Europe, the Middle East and South America would all be placed on an immediate ‘stop’ list.” The same policy as stated in their 1997 manifesto (which read as follows: 1 - Future immigration of non-whites must be stopped; 2 - Non-whites already here must be repatriated or otherwise resettled overseas and Britain made once again a white country), only with fewer overtly racist references.
- British National Party (BNP) member Adam Walker, who taught at Houghton Kepier Sports College near Sunderland, posted comments online describing immigrants as “savage animals”. According to the Socialist Worker, he also claimed that parts of Britain were a “dumping ground” for the Third World.
You see my point. Cameron’s electioneering should be condemned in the strongest terms – but we should not forget just how extreme the BNP’s policies and opinions on immigration are (and that’s in public!).
Sources:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/8639097.stm
http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=1066780
http://www.zen26144.zen.co.uk/resources/The%20BNP%20Uncovered.pdf
http://www.pickledpolitics.com/archives/4366
http://www.hopenothate.org.uk/news/article/599/BNP-chief-blames-immigrants-for-TB
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/blog/2010/apr/23/climate-sceptic-bnp
http://1millionunited.org/blogs/blog/2000/01/01/the-the-bnp-is-an-anti-immigration-party-myth/
http://www.socialistworker.co.uk/art.php?id=21367
“blamed tuberculosis on immigrants.”
That dangerously close to actually being true which would be a first for the BNP. The cause of TB is of course the bacterium, but the rise in the rate of TB infection in the UK can honestly be associated with increased immigration.
Probably not the only cause (drug resistant is rising everywhere) but certainly an association between the two.
Yeah cheers Tim, but movement and holidaying, not immigration, is probably more to blame. And plus, using TB as a political tool against immigration seems a tad desperate – makes him sound slightly obsessed.
I say if it weren’t for immigration, Barnbrook’s BNP ballerina ex-gf wouldn’t have been able to kop off with that Greek bloke. Why should TB threaten foreign partners for racists.
Well, “movement” and “immigration” are rather flip sides of the same coin, aren’t they? And while I wouldn’t want to have to prove this I do dimly recall that TB incidence does seem to map over areas of recent high immigration: East End London for example. Obviously, there are confounding factors: poverty the most obvious of them.
Barnbrook is obsessed of course. And a racist.
By movement I literally being able to travel abroad, and at relatively cheap prices. My reason for including it in the list was to show the obsessiveness and depth that stupid people will go to in order to make their stupid opinions. It’s like the conspiracy theorist who finds in all things a secret code to prove the power of the illuminati. When he lied about the murder figures in Barking my first thought was ‘typical rubbernecker – lying was invented in the Congo.
Tim, think you’ll find that ultimately TB is associated with poverty – high density and less than great nutrition.
I can’t abide Cameron or most of the things he stands for, but I’m more than happy to acknowldge that he’s a million miles from the tinpot master-racists of the BNP.
I’m less inclined to cut him any slack when you say that ‘we cannot forget that the BNP are opportunists.’ Cameron may not share the BNP’s racism, but his speech was nothing if not opportunism. With local elections coming up, he’s reassuring his illiberal grass foots that he’s not sold out to the sandal-wearing bleeding-heart liberals in the coalition whilst deftly resurrecting an emotive issue to move the agenda away from cuts, the floundering NHS reforms and the numerous other miseries of Austerity Britain. He’s not a racist, but he’s not above poking the hornets’ nest of racism, in order to distract people for short-term political advantage. Not just an opportunist, but a cynical and manipulative one, if you ask me…
My main worry is that this type of electioneering – which I acknowledged by the way – is necessary for the Tories. It has parallels with what some are calling conservative epistemic closure in the US.
I like how David Mitchell characterised it last night on C4 – “I’m not racist, but if you are you can still vote for me”.
The main association is between TB and housing overcrowding.
That would explain the East London context
Indeed. It’s also an important part of the evidence to dispel the myth about immigrants and preferential treatment on housing. In fact the fact are the opposite. See John Rex’s work in the 70s and 80s on (astonishingly) racist housing policy in urban areas of England, which has clear knock on consequences today.
I represented Adam Walker at his GTC hearing.
If you read the GTC judgement regarding Adam Walker you will see that he was talking about immigrants who raped or murdered not about immigrants in general. Hi point was that this particular group was abusing the hospitality of our country. The press have consistently sought to suggest that he was talking about all immigrants which was not the case. Doubtless you have followed press reports rather than look at original sources.
Since you work for the far right “trade union” do you have copies of those original reports? Why was your client singling out immigrant rapists and murderers? I tend to view such people, wherever they are from, with suspicion.
According to wikipedia:
This true?
To judge a crime, eg rape or murder on the basis of who did it eg were they or were they not ‘one of us’ is the very essence of toxic prejudice and discrimination. If you lot ever came to power, I doubt you’d draw the line at discriminating against immigrants.
It is true enough that Mr Cameron has not really found his tribal feet yet. Some say he has no intention of finding them, but it hardly matters because there isn’t time to wait and see whether he is sincere or not – already 1 in 8 people in the UK share no History or Heritage or Tradition or Culture with native Britons. The BNP Constitution states the aims of Britons (and all ethnic groups come to that, if they wish to keep their identity). “We are pledged to the continued creation, fostering, maintenance and existence of a unity and of the integrity of the Indigenous British . . . We are pledged to stemming and reversing the immigration and migration of peoples into our British Homeland that has, without the express consent of the Indigenous British, taken place since 1948, and to restoring and maintaining, by legal changes, negotiation and consent, the Indigenous British as the overwhelming majority in the make up of the population of and expression of culture in each part of our British Homeland.”
These pledges are perfectly legal, but after October 2010 it was no longer legal to make them a condition of membership of a political party (though it remained legal to make them a condition of membership of some other form of Association). The pledges remain in the Constitution, they just aren’t a condition of membership any longer. One reason the pledges are fully legal, is that they echo the leading legal definition of “ethnic group” made by Lord Fraser of Tullybelton in the House of Lords.
“For a group to constitute an ethnic group in the sense of the 1976 Act, it must, in my opinion, regard itself, and be regarded by others, as a distinct community by virtue of certain characteristics. Some of these characteristics are essential; others are not essential but one or more of them will commonly be found and will help to distinguish the group from the surrounding community. The conditions which appear to me to be essential are these:
(1) a long shared history, of which the group is conscious as distinguishing it from other groups, and the memory of which it keeps alive;
(2) a cultural tradition of its own, including family and social customs and manners, often but not necessarily associated with religious observance.”
Ethnic groups have every right to protest if their distinct existence is threatened in any way on their own ancestral homelands, e.g. the Amazon tribes in Brazil – and the Welsh, Irish, Scots and English in Britain.
I find Labour “far right”. Our Union is open to everyone of all political persuasions and none. I don’t think that opposing cuts, calling for re-nationalisation of key services or questioing large-scale off-shoring and migrant labour is right wing. Most of the work our Union does is very bread and butter and differs little from what other Unions do: disputes over holiday pay, grievances and disciplinaries etc.
I did visit Libya in the 80s. It was fascinating. I find all attempts to construct an alternative to both Capitalism and State Socialism of interest. The Dispatches programme was edited to a ridiculous level. The savaged interview was not representative of my views. I made my opposition to the IRA clear. I have supported a non-Sectarian, independent Ulster since 1985 – hardly an Irish Republican position! I beleive there are two Rebel traditions in the Island of Ireland.
The GTC judgement is on their website. I too would oppose all murderers and rapists but I can understand why some are particularly angry when immigrants travel to this country and then commit crimes here. My point was that the media should report the facts and not misrepresent them. You are perfectly entitled to criticise Adam Walker but do so on the basis of a full and accurate account of his views.
You’re a libertarian then are you, Pat? How differently are the Third Way’s politics to the BNPs? I see what your organisation, Solidarity, is doing – it is trying to hold a mirror to the supposed left wing bias in the union movement, but your organisation isn’t a blank slate is it? It’s nationalist and patriotic, you’ve not tried to hide this, and nor should you, but these are opinions and, to your mind, solutions to certain problems. So where do you stand on ethno-nationalism? What kind of cases would you refuse? What would a worker have to do in order for you to refuse to reprsent him or her? If there are some things you wouldn’t touch with a bargepole, then you’re making a considered choice on instances where a person should be represented. And if you feel “patriots” and “nationalists” are being picked on, you have made value judgements on what it is fair play to represent.
I must say on first take, I don’t buy that your organisation simply feels sorry for people who have unpopular politics. Under your predecessor, I’d have been dubious on the grounds that he was a BNP activist, heading up an “independent” organisation that sought to represent people such as BNP member workers. In short, it could be a “front” organisation. Perhaps not, since you’re in another political outfit (though obviously have long term links with Nick Griffin). I’ll have to find out more about Third Way, but I’m sceptical about Solidarity.
Third Way is just a think-tank now. The Party I am a member of are the National Liberals. They take an economic and cultural Nationalist position and are open to all.
I would like to represent non-BNP people who suffer political or religious discrimination at work. It is something I feel very passionate about. The offer is there!
The “confusion” over your support for the IRA came from your support for Civil Liberty and Kevin Scott, who in turn sympathised with IRA gunman Gerry McGeough right? He, McGeough, then went on to kill a UDR soldier. Is this the sort of rebel tradition you speak of? You received a lot of criticism from your old NF colleagues for that episode didn’t you.
In February 2010 you welcomed Mr Scott to your conference, didn’t you Pat? What is the conversation like backstage between you, David Kerr (who thinks Ulster should be independent of GB and ROI) and Mr Scott?
I support Civil Liberty insofar as they promote Civil Liberties! Their view of Gerry McGeough is their own. I don’t like his politics – he is far too right-wing for me! The rebel traditions (plural) I was speaking of were Irish Republicanism and Covenanter. I support the peace process btw so I think we need to accept that bad things have been done on both sides.
We always encourage debate at our meetings!
God Pat, you sound positively left wing. Are you happy to discuss here payment details, namely whether you are the beneficiary of BNP pay? For my sins I was speaking to an ex-BNP member (as a hack, not as a friend, I hasten to add) who told me he asked you to represent him after he was fired – he said, and I quote “I joked with them that I could have [asked for representation] and they squirmed when I said it.”
Why is it when someone wants to claim against the BNP you “squirm”? Is it because they are your paymasters?
you are too understanding pat harrington. Why on earth should a rape committed by a Briton in Nigeria be considered any worse than a rape committed by a Briton in Britain? By implication you’re suggesting we think of this hypothetical scenario that way.
Pat wasn’t altogether open about his proximity to Adam Walker. Yes he have represented him, but Adam is the President of the Solidarity Union, for which Pat is the General Secretary. Might this be why he is sticking up for him?
Didn’t say that a rape by a Briton in Nigeria wasn’t as bad as a rape by a Nigerian in Britain. They are, of course, equally bad. What I said was that I could understand why crimes committed by immigrants to a country particularly upset some people. In addition to revulsion at the crime some people (whether British or Nigerian) take umbrage at what they perceive to be an abuse of hospitality.
Haven’t you got better things to do with your time Pat, like run the BNP into the ground? Anti-fascists like myself have had our feet up since you and Adam Walker took charged. You couldn’t run a bath!
This is Cameron all over £50 fine for Muslims burning poppies on remembrance day and this…
Prison for ex soldier who burnt the koran
Ex Soldier Andrew Ryan [Carlisle EDL] who burnt the koran in retaliation of the poppy burning has been sent to prison for 70 days !
Not a word from Cameron eh…?
Well it’s the BNP for me !
I think you might be confusing this blog post as saying Cameron is too soft and the BNP have it right. The BNP pretty much get to say what they want about mainstream politicians, because they know they’ll never put their words into action, just seek the moral high ground. I’m not suggesting the mainstream are perfect, far from it, but the fascist fringe are no alternative. Don’t vote for the BNP.
I represent any Union member who asks me to if I can.