[Magda1502]

(Original post by chefdave)
No, the only racists are those in government who want to 'blend' white working class folk out of existence with mass immigration and state multi-culturalism.

Do you actually have any evidence of that?

[whyumadtho]

(Original post by chefdave)
No, I'm suggesting that the BNP have been subject to a targeted campaign of hate and discrimination that wouldn't be tolerated if they were New Labour for example.

The overwhelming majority of the public disdain the BNP, so of course it will be ridiculed without reproach.

At every turn the courts and the media have attempted to deny the BNP a platform and these actions are bound to have a cumulative impact on party morale.

Nobody wants to see or hear their diatribe on the television or radio. They will just have to try harder to project their image.

No self respecting nationalist party would put up a South American candidate in an election for control over the country's capital, they chose to do this (imo) because they've had their hands tied and been forced to swallow a certain amount of multi-culturalist dogma.

And no nationalist would vote for this candidate. Evidently, they are stupid, racist or both.

[de_monies]

(Original post by chefdave)
No, I'm suggesting that the BNP have been subject to a targeted campaign of hate and discrimination that wouldn't be tolerated if they were New Labour for example. At every turn the courts

The courts have only said that they HAVE to accept non White members in to their party. You cry about if the BNP wasn't here, it wouldn't be democratic but the BNP weren't really democratic to begin with, when denying non White people a voice

[de_monies]

(Original post by chefdave)
No, the only racists are those in government who want to 'blend' white working class folk out of existence with mass immigration and state multi-culturalism. Standing up for your community's right to exist does not make you racist.

What's the need for someone to protest about their "community's right to exist" We don't exactly live in China...

Every one has a right to exist, thus your argument is nullified

[jumpingjesusholycow]

Meh, perhaps.

I suspect they're as popular now as they'll ever be and the most success they'll ever be able to enjoy is a smattering of councillors across the country.

Regardless of whether they're 'spent', I think their existence is so pitiful it's almost not worth registering.

[Llamageddon]

"spent" implies they were ever a political force to be reckoned with in the first place.

[chefdave]

(Original post by whyumadtho)
And no nationalist would vote for this candidate. Evidently, they are stupid, racist or both.

I know, imagine: a white Englishman in charge of England's capital. Oh the horror! Labour, the Tories and the Lib Dems are all massive racists for fielding white English candidates in the mayoral election.

[Bethan0x]

It's not like the BNP go as far as the EDL, they aren't this all surrounding evil. What's so wrong with wanting the original Englishman to have the rights he is meant to have in England? It appears that an immigrant or foreign settler has more rights to work, support and money in England than and Englishman himself. The BNP simply brings to light what is wrong with the country instead of tip toeing around.

[de_monies]

(Original post by chefdave)
I know, imagine: a white Englishman in charge of England's capital. Oh the horror! Labour, the Tories and the Lib Dems are all massive racists for fielding white English candidates in the mayoral election.

What exactly would be wrong with say if you had a party represented by say a British born Pakistani in charge of London? or a British born Black person? or a British born White English woman? etc...

[Dippy Dip]

(Original post by chefdave)
blah blah blah

I think you do a great job of justifying why nobody likes the BNP. You come onto the internet and preach about how your party serves as the voice for the white lower classes, and spit out recycled rhetoric (which obviously hasn't worked for the BNP, and therefore won't work for you) all the while. I'm white working class, and I would rather commit ritualistic suicide than have such a xenophobic party as my voice. The media's portrayal of the BNP has absolutely nothing to do with why the party is failing, because when people are disgusted, if not laughing, at entire unedited political speeches done by the BNP, you can't blame it on media bias.

[chefdave]

(Original post by de_monies)
The courts have only said that they HAVE to accept non White members in to their party. You cry about if the BNP wasn't here, it wouldn't be democratic but the BNP weren't really democratic to begin with, when denying non White people a voice

As long as the BNP weren't actively harming other people their membership and constitution had nothing to do with the state. In a free society we allow people to freely associate and disassociate according to whatever criteria they choose, you wouldn't brand the Women's Institute 'sexist' for only allowing females into the club, and you wouldn't label the Scouts 'ageist' for only allowing children, so what right do the courts have to tell the BNP they must accept anyone into the fold?

[chefdave]

(Original post by Dippy Dip)
I think you do a great job of justifying why nobody likes the BNP. You come onto the internet and preach about how your party serves as the voice for the white lower classes, and spit out recycled rhetoric (which obviously hasn't worked for the BNP, and therefore won't work for you) all the while. I'm white working class, and I would rather commit ritualistic suicide than have such a xenophobic party as my voice. The media's portrayal of the BNP has absolutely nothing to do with why the party is failing, because when people are disgusted, if not laughing, at entire unedited political speeches done by the BNP, you can't blame it on media bias.

FYI I'm a UKIP supporter, I just don't agree with the way the BNP are demonised because 65 years ago a certain Austrian dictator gassed 6 million jews. It's ridiculous. Everyone should be able to have their say without fear of retaliation because in a grown up democracy we tolerate the views of others even if we happen to disagree with them.

[chefdave]

(Original post by de_monies)
What exactly would be wrong with say if you had a party represented by say a British born Pakistani in charge of London? or a British born Black person? or a British born White English woman? etc...

Nothing, what's wrong with an all white political party representing the interests of white working class people in a country like England?

[ProudEuropean88]

The BNP isnt even a proper white nationalist party and no real white nationalists support it I personally dont think a true far right political party could win in Britain but just remember the ballot is not the only way for power especially in these fragile times.

[de_monies]

(Original post by chefdave)
Nothing, what's wrong with an all white political party representing the interests of white working class people in a country like England?

Nothing. And I'm not the one that said it. White working class people are being represented by whoever they voted for in the last elections

(Original post by chefdave)
As long as the BNP weren't actively harming other people their membership and constitution had nothing to do with the state. In a free society we allow people to freely associate and disassociate according to whatever criteria they choose, you wouldn't brand the Women's Institute 'sexist' for only allowing females into the club, and you wouldn't label the Scouts 'ageist' for only allowing children, so what right does anyone have to tell the BNP they must accept anyone the court tells them to?

OK, if you make that argument, then consider that the BNP stands for British National Party. It isn't ENP(English national party) or WNP (White nationalist party) It's called BNP,so then surely they should accept Britons, regardless of their race...

[chefdave]

(Original post by de_monies)
OK, if you make that argument, then consider that the BNP stands for British National Party. It isn't ENP(English national party) or WNP (White nationalist party) It's called BNP,so then surely they should accept Britons, regardless of their race...

Maybe they should, but the point is they shouldn't be forced to accept non-whites just as we wouldn't force the W.I to accept men. For what it's worth I think the BNP were wrong to apply a whites only membership, but I totally understand why they did it. They wanted to see whether we live in a true tolerant democracy or whether we grant ethnic minorities rights (freedom of association) that we systematically deny the white majority: therefore justifying their cause. The court's decision was unnacceptable imo, just as should be unnacceptable to anyone else who believes in the concept of universal democratic rights.

[de_monies]

(Original post by chefdave)
Maybe they should, but the point is they shouldn't be forced to accept non-whites just as we wouldn't force the W.I to accept men.

Why not? Black people can be British too. It's not like men can be women

(Original post by chefdave)
For what it's worth I think the BNP were wrong to apply a whites only membership, but I totally understand why they did it. They wanted to see whether we live in a true tolerant democracy

Yeah, it's real tolerant not allowing people in to your group, just because they are a different race. You go on about the WI, but what about the Black police association (or something like that), where they allow White members in as well? - when it was more about the rights of Black people within the police.

I'd imagine that the WI wouldn't turn away men as well - it's not like they've exclusively said "We don't want men" Nick Griffin really loves democracy



Whilst before, Nick Griffin would have blamed all immigrants, he now focuses on Muslims for the most part, and Jews sometimes as well - all you have to do is look at his twitter account

(Original post by chefdave)
or whether we grant ethnic minorities rights (freedom of association) that we systematically deny the white majority: therefore justifying their cause.

How is allowing non White people in to your party, denying the White majority?

(Original post by chefdave)
The court's decision was unnacceptable imo, just as should be unnacceptable to anyone else who believes in the concept of universal democratic rights.

If you believe in the concept of "universal democratic rights" then you'd be a hypocrite to give reasons why you believe that the BNP is OK for denying people their democratic rights

[chefdave]

(Original post by de_monies)
Why not? Black people can be British too. It's not like men can be women

That's not the argument and you know it. The issue is whether it's ok in principle to allow people to form private members' clubs, as I believe exclusive clubs and political parties harm nobody else (even if they deny others membership) they should be allowed to grow without interference from the state.

Yeah, it's real tolerant not allowing people in to your group, just because they are a different race. You go on about the WI, but what about the Black police association (or something like that), where they allow White members in as well? - when it was more about the rights of Black people within the police.

I'd imagine that the WI wouldn't turn away men as well - it's not like they've exclusively said "We don't want men" Nick Griffin really loves democracy

No, the W.I are an organisation open exclusively to women. I suppose we should shut this century old sexist institution down because they're discriminating against men?

Whilst before, Nick Griffin would have blamed all immigrants, he now focuses on Muslims for the most part, and Jews sometimes as well - all you have to do is look at his twitter account

So what? Muslims are responsible for some of the crimes perpetrated in the UK so he has the right to bring these difficult issues to the public's attention. The fact is he was warning about Muslim rape gangs long before it became mainstream news and the lefties who wrote him off are now having to eat their words.

How is allowing non White people in to your party, denying the White majority?

Because the authorities are denying whites the opportunity to form private clubs along racial lines. Ironically this alone is enough to justify the existence of parties like the BNP. White people are fed up with being treated as 2nd class citizens in their own country.

If you believe in the concept of "universal democratic rights" then you'd be a hypocrite to give reasons why you believe that the BNP is OK for denying people their democratic rights

You still havn't got the hang of this. The BNP would only be denying others their rights if they obtained state backing and then went around threatening ethnic minority groups with violence merely for existing. Just setting up another club doesn't disenfranchise anyone.

[de_monies]

(Original post by chefdave)
That's not the argument and you know it. The issue is whether it's ok in principle to allow people to form private members' clubs, as I believe exclusive clubs and political parties harm nobody else (even if they deny others membership) they should be allowed to grow without interference from the state.

That IS the argument. Exclusive clubs and political parties CAN harm others, especially as initially the BNP said they wish to deport any one non White who hasn't been here since the 1850's

(Original post by chefdave)
No, the W.I are an organisation open exclusively to women. I suppose we should shut this century old sexist institution down because they're discriminating against men?

Whilst I believe that they should have men as members, because it is sexist otherwise, they do have a male secretary
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...r-history.html

(Original post by chefdave)
So what? Muslims are responsible for some of the crimes perpetrated in the UK so he has the right to bring these difficult issues to the public's attention.

So are some Christians, so are some Sikhs etc... It makes much bigger news if you happen to mention Muslim throughout the article. Take the DM for example. There was an article about a husband who supposedly raped his wife, and he was White. No where in the article did it mention his nationality or religion. If a Pakistani Muslim was to do the same thing, it would have been plastered throughout the entire article

I also mentioned that he does occasionally target Jews as well, and he occasionally targets Black people. What are your excuses for them?

(Original post by chefdave)
The fact is he was warning about Muslim rape gangs long before it became mainstream news and the lefties who wrote him off are now having to eat their words.

There are going to be rape gangs, consisting of "Christians" as well y'know....

(Original post by chefdave)
Because the authorities are denying whites the opportunity to form private clubs along racial lines.

The BNP have only been told to accept non Whites. The Black police association does not discriminate against non Blacks and nor should the BNP

(Original post by chefdave)
Ironically this alone is enough to justify the existence of parties like the BNP. White people are fed up with being treated as 2nd class citizens in their own country.

That'll be why the BNP have been so successful recently

(Original post by chefdave)
You still havn't got the hang of this. The BNP would only be denying others their rights if they obtained state backing

They already denied people's rights by refusing them to join a party, purely on the basis of their skin colour.

(Original post by chefdave)
and then went around threatening ethnic minority groups with violence merely for existing. Just setting up another club doesn't disenfranchise anyone.

Nah, but threatening to deport every one who isn't White is fine

[frankieboy]

(Original post by chefdave)
No, the only racists are those in government who want to 'blend' white working class folk out of existence with mass immigration and state multi-culturalism. Standing up for your community's right to exist does not make you racist.

How does immigration and multi-culturalism have anything to do with "blending" white people out of existence? That's the typical twisted fallacy we always hear from misguided BNP supporters.

They only "blend" out of existence if they mate with people from different races, which should be left up to them, and is going to happen whether or not we have mass immigration etc.

In other words - white people may be surrounded by people of different ethnicities, but no one's forcing them to mate with them or adopt their culture. Just live alongside it and tolerate it, that's all.