Results are out! Find what you need...fast. Get quick advice or join the chat
Hey there! Sign in to have your say on this topicNew here? Join for free to post

Anyone else fearing the rise of UKIP?

This thread is sponsored by:
Announcements Posted on
Applying to Uni? Let Universities come to you. Click here to get your perfect place 20-10-2014
    • 12 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by T.Fleming)
    I have never considered UKIP to be a racist party, however, their policy banning the burqa does fringe on islamophobia.
    It's no longer party policy (I think). But the point they were trying to make was totally different.
    (i) They didn't actually intend to ban it everywhere (at least, in Farage's words), simply in areas where security was high and where similar attire would not be allowed. This includes airports, banks etc. which is fair enough I would say.
    (ii) It could actually be seen as disciminatory for allowing the above. If you can't walk two steps into a bank wearing a balaclava, which is as (if not less) concealing than a burqa, then why should you be able to wear a burqa there? It could be described as positive discrimination and that a broad policy which enacted banning of face-concealing clothing in high-security areas would be more fair. Targetting the burqa on its own is questionable, however.

    Ultimately though, it's barking up the wrong tree and is an absolute can of worms, so I'm glad it's been dismissed.
    • 2 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    No, I'm not fearing 'the rise of UKIP.' In their manifesto they clearly state that they are not racist, nor even against immigration, but simply think that there's too much going on in Britain for it to handle at the moment - which I, for one, agree with.
    • 5 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Alofleicester)
    1. No, I'm not. I'm assuming that the economy is linked to general day-to-day life. So long as it is, removing amounts and storing it away weakens the financial state of a country and so can result in negative effects on the public.
    2. 50 pubs a week close down, that the likes of Asda, Tesco etc. can sell alcohol so cheaply due to their massive profit margins from other products and so undercut the public house is near certainly a contributing factor to that.
    3. To use the old Marx quote - "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need". If people have more money, they have a greater surplus income after the basic needs are accounted for - they have a greater ability to contribute and so should be expected to contribute more than those who have very little left over after covering the necessities.
    1. In which case, should we tax babysitting?
    2. The article is talking about duty increases, not corporation tax
    3. "Should" according to who, exactly?
    • 5 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by johnaulich)
    Thank you, sir. They had me surrounded! :P

    Why have you not replied to my post?
    • 27 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mendeleev's Table)
    1. In which case, should we tax babysitting?
    2. The article is talking about duty increases, not corporation tax
    3. "Should" according to who, exactly?
    1. What? The two aren't remotely similar. Storing away vast amounts of money and passing them on removes it from the economy, babysitting provides an income, which is then spent and goes back into the economy.
    2. Yes, but as I said - that major supermarkets are easily able to undercut them isn't going to do any good is it? Reduce corporation tax and you increase the ability of the supermarkets to undercut the pubs.
    3. People who think a sliding scale of income tax is the right way to go, rather than burdening the poor and increasing the wealth of the rich, as a flat income tax would do.
    • 3 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by T.Fleming)
    I have never considered UKIP to be a racist party, however, their policy banning the burqa does fringe on islamophobia.
    Well, the Burqa is more a cultural affectation than a religious issue, the justification in the Qu'ran is tenuous at best. This aside, what was actually proposed was to end the exemptions the Burqa enjoys from bans on head covering, which essentially amount to putting religious law ahead of civil law, a very dangerous thing to do.
    • 1 follower
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by johnaulich)
    That's why I said poorest taxable, rather than poorest in general. On a 37 hour work week, minimum wage workers would be paying the same proportion of their income in tax than someone who claims a 'bonus package' each year.
    the whole point of their system is that someone on minimum wage would not have to pay tax on their income, so the person in your hypothetical there would be paying 0% tax

    also there would be a difference in the proportion of income going to tax between someone just over the threshold to someone massively over it, as its a percentage over the threshold. thus someone who earns £12500 (over the threshold) would pay £310 a year income tax (2.5% of total income). whereas someone on £111,500 would pay £31,000 income tax (27.8% of total income).
    • 9 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    Our UK election and local council voting system means that they are unlikely to get a foothold, and I think most people don't take much notice of who their MEP is.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    As a EU sympathetic, left leaning voter, no I am not worried about the rise of UKIP.

    They are a one issue party who will have all their support swiped from them at the mere promise of a referendum on EU.

    Even if they didn't so what? They are just more right than the center-right Conservatives.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    IMO UKIP are the only party with any bloody sense, and a party who really do seem to see the stuff us ordinary people see, not the politicians bubble wrapped in parliament who are oblivious to most things... the most notable is cutting us out the EU but maintaining trade links.
    • 4 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Dennerers)
    Do you even read your own website!? It absolute irrational fascist ballocks!
    If your going to comment, be serious, you can't start calling UKIP 'fascist'.
    • 5 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    I fear their rise in some respects, yes. But certainly not all of them.

    Bad
    1. They're right-wing. That in itself is bad enough for me.
    2. They're homophobes - the party opposes same-sex marriage
    3. They're highly sceptical of global warming and the need to cut carbon emissions, which in this day and age is almost as bad as advocating creationism.
    4. They reject multiculturalism.


    Good
    1. Less dependence on Europe.
    • 3 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by exe)
    We all know UKIP is associated with some rather unsavoury views.
    By 'we all', I assume you mean left wing voters. IIRC a YouGov poll said that over 65% of Tory voters agreed with the majority of UKIP policies.

    They are the only rational party worth voting for:

    - Labour are just trying to bring the country into a class war, plus the last 15 years show how ****ing **** they are.
    - David Cameron is too concerned with trying to make everyone happy and therefore won't make any decisive moves on social policies.
    - The Lib Dems are just liars.

    The United Kingdom for the past 13 years has been wading through the endless crap that is Political Correctness gone mad and ludicrous Human Rights laws. UKIP will get rid of this, bringing in simple, fair-minded common sense.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Gales)
    Yes, UKIP are homophobes.
    Not sure, David Coburn UKIP's London chairman would agree with you, he has been in an open gay relationship for many years, as has Gordon Parkin UKIP's lead candidate for the North East in the European elections. Peter Staveley, UKIP candidate for Enfield and Harringay in the recent London elections stood there because that's where his gay partner lives and UKIP got a transgender candidate elected to the European parliament in 2009, the first and only one to date.

    Would be so much better if you did some research before you made such sweeping statements.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The Patriot)
    I fear their rise in some respects, yes. But certainly not all of them.

    Bad
    1. They're right-wing. That in itself is bad enough for me.
    2. They're homophobes - the party opposes same-sex marriage
    3. They're highly sceptical of global warming and the need to cut carbon emissions, which in this day and age is almost as bad as advocating creationism.
    4. They reject multiculturalism.


    Good
    1. Less dependence on Europe.
    More sweeping statements

    1 UKIP are a libertarian party, neither on the left nor the right. Many recent detectors to UKIP have come from the Tory right but there many former Labour and Lib Dem members in the party who recognise the folly of open- door immigration between countries with vastly differing GDPs and the fact that the EU is a vast anti-democratic blunder which is slowly killing its member states one by one (stand by for the domino effect to hit Italy after Ireland, Greece, Poetugal, Spain and Cyprus, Frane not far behind that!

    2 See my earlier post, UKIP has many elected MEPs who are gay and even got a transgender MEP elected in 2009. David Coburn, UKIP's openly gay London chairman and spokesman on gay rights opposes gay marriage as it exposes various religious groups to threat of prosecution by the ghastly ECHR for refusing to carry out gay marriages against their beliefs. He believes like most gays (except for a highly vocal militant minority) that civil partnership is the perfect way for gays to make a lifelong commitment without stomping over a primarily religious institution like marriage. I, like many UKIP members do not really care either way and so have left it to our gay members to work out the party's stance in this issue.

    3 A that old chestnut, the Global Warming debate, sorry, we mean Climate Change, sorry we mean rebranding plant food as poison! An increasing number of scientists including 50 at NASA recently are distancing themselves from the AGW position as it becomes increasingly unsustainable. The models don't work, the glaciers aren't melting, polar bears are thriving, the artic ice is expanding, wind farms deface the landscape, push up energy bills and don't work at all when we most need item in winter anti-cyclones, necessitating the need for gas turbine subsidies at the same site. The BBC dumped David Bellamy for pointing this out and that real environmental issues like deforestation and overfishing were being lost in the tax-driven obsession with AGW (governments are always looking for new ways to two us). most attempts to limit CO2 production result in Carbon Monoxide or even more poisonous gases being created and all evidence points to a rise in CO2 levels as a result of natural warming cycles not a cause. The problem is you can only get researcg grants to prove global warming not investigate it dispassionately and those whonare sceptical about climate change are treated the same way that the Church treated heliocentric pioneers like Galileo and evolutionists like Darwin. if anyone is behaving like creationists, it is the pseudo- scientists who believe models over empriical data because they can be manipulated to give the required answers for funding renewal. how many more scandals like UEA and IPCC need to be uncovered before you 'flat-earth' AGW believers stop accusing sceptics of 'heresy' and believe the evidence instead of the cultish climate modellers!

    4 best of all, multi-culturalism, the policy which has deprived the British working man of his birthright, a job and a home in favour of cheap foreign labour & votes for New Labour bought with the welfare gravy train for new arrivals, which ends up with a country full of terrorists with British passports (at recent Tunisian elections radical Islamist candidates were met with cries of "Go back to London"), gangs of Muslims grooming young white girls for underage sex and prostitution being described as Asian in the media (racist against all well-behaved Hindus, Sikhs and Buddhists, not to mention Japanese, Thai and Russian Asians). Cultures which are in themselves sexist (misogynist would be a more accurate terms), homophobic (to the point of issuing death threats against gays, not merely speaking out against gay marriage), fascist and world peace-threatening are given equal or greater rights than the superior liberal Western culture which allows them the voice they would deny it. Wake up and smell the coffee, this is the policy which will deliver the West gift-wrapped to mediaeval Islamist warmongers in ten years if it isn't reversed. We need to eradicate Koran - justified murders of gays, christians and girls who refuse forced marriage, female circumcision and banning of equal rights and social participation for women and all the other hideous consequences of multi-culturalism like kids of all colours speaking like Jamaican gangsters, people who die in this country ripped off by the fellow Asians all their lives because they never learnt English. All cultures are not created equal, some are downright nasty and need controlling. If we are not careful we will find ourselves back in the Middle Ages, pandering to the ramblings of a self-confessed pedophile and mass-murderer. We didn't tone down the homicidal racist tendencies of the Catholic and Jewish faiths to something civilised over 500 years just to have them replaced with something worse from a slavery supporting, wife-beating, genital mutilating variant from North African whose adherents already boast they will "outbreed" us. Wake up, people, and realise that there is nor freedom of religion and sexuality without stict control of primitive backwards looking cults like radical Islam, whose faith allows them to lie, cheat and kill with automatic absolution in the pursuit of global domination by their neandethal agendas. As Voltaire said, "We should tolerant everything except intolerance!" What do they teach them in these schools?
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by barnetlad)
    Our UK election and local council voting system means that they are unlikely to get a foothold, and I think most people don't take much notice of who their MEP is.
    Missed what is happening in Ramsay and Tunbridge Wells then have you? UKIP mayor and council in the former, UKIP toppling the Tory leader in the latter!

    Also people do not have an MEP like they have an MP. The proportional representation system means that each region has numerous MEPs and constituents can have recourse to the one that matches your political viewpoint. Sadly if course the EUropean Parliament is a rubber stamp without teeth for the unelected Commission and the directive-making bureaucrats which cost us £50M a day to be tied up in legislation which is destroying fisheries, agriculture, landscapes and in the Mediterranean the grandfather of all democracies!

    Really wish you'd read a newspaper occasionally (the EU loving Trots at the BBC do try and keep this stuff from you as they know UKIP will hasten the death of Cameron's Blue Labour and the EU politburo!
    • 23 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    The problem with the 'rise' of UKIP is that in the first past the post system they will find it very difficult to get even a single seat in the Commons. As they increase their vote they will basically eat into the Tory vote. They don't offer anything that will tempt Labour or Lib Dem voters away because those are basically lefties of some dimension and even apart from the Europe issue, UKIP are very definitely not a left wing party. They are an alternative to Conservatives on issues like low tax, small state etc.

    If we had the AV system then UKIP votes would probably end up getting transferred to Conservatives as they would more than likely list Conservatives as second choice, but in first past the post they are just going to erode the Tory vote and nudge marginals into the hands of Labour. There isn't an equivalent party on the left on the rise to eat votes away from Labour, in fact Labour will pick up a fair chunk of deserting Lib Dems, so mediocre as Labour are at the moment they are in a good situation for picking up votes by default which raises the rather disturbing possibility that Ed Miliband is going to be the next PM.
    • Thread Starter
    • 2 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DigitalGuru)
    More sweeping statements

    1 UKIP are a libertarian party, neither on the left nor the right. Many recent detectors to UKIP have come from the Tory right but there many former Labour and Lib Dem members in the party who recognise the folly of open- door immigration between countries with vastly differing GDPs and the fact that the EU is a vast anti-democratic blunder which is slowly killing its member states one by one (stand by for the domino effect to hit Italy after Ireland, Greece, Poetugal, Spain and Cyprus, Frane not far behind that!
    4 best of all, multi-culturalism, the policy which has deprived the British working man of his birthright, a job and a home in favour of cheap foreign labour & votes for New Labour bought with the welfare gravy train for new arrivals, which ends up with a country full of terrorists with British passports (at recent Tunisian elections radical Islamist candidates were met with cries of "Go back to London"), gangs of Muslims grooming young white girls for underage sex and prostitution being described as Asian in the media (racist against all well-behaved Hindus, Sikhs and Buddhists, not to mention Japanese, Thai and Russian Asians). Cultures which are in themselves sexist (misogynist would be a more accurate terms), homophobic (to the point of issuing death threats against gays, not merely speaking out against gay marriage), fascist and world peace-threatening are given equal or greater rights than the superior liberal Western culture which allows them the voice they would deny it. Wake up and smell the coffee, this is the policy which will deliver the West gift-wrapped to mediaeval Islamist warmongers in ten years if it isn't reversed. We need to eradicate Koran - justified murders of gays, christians and girls who refuse forced marriage, female circumcision and banning of equal rights and social participation for women and all the other hideous consequences of multi-culturalism like kids of all colours speaking like Jamaican gangsters, people who die in this country ripped off by the fellow Asians all their lives because they never learnt English. All cultures are not created equal, some are downright nasty and need controlling. If we are not careful we will find ourselves back in the Middle Ages, pandering to the ramblings of a self-confessed pedophile and mass-murderer. We didn't tone down the homicidal racist tendencies of the Catholic and Jewish faiths to something civilised over 500 years just to have them replaced with something worse from a slavery supporting, wife-beating, genital mutilating variant from North African whose adherents already boast they will "outbreed" us. Wake up, people, and realise that there is nor freedom of religion and sexuality without stict control of primitive backwards looking cults like radical Islam, whose faith allows them to lie, cheat and kill with automatic absolution in the pursuit of global domination by their neandethal agendas. As Voltaire said, "We should tolerant everything except intolerance!" What do they teach them in these schools?
    UKIP are libertarians that want to increase defence spending and "eradicate" a significant portion of society's way of life. That sounds very libertarian...

    This post is why everyone thinks UKIP are nutters and reasonable people won't vote them. They're just not interested in real issues, just harpering on endlessly abouut immigration and Europe and making extremely offensive and uneducated statements like this post.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DigitalGuru)
    More sweeping statements

    2 See my earlier post, UKIP has many elected MEPs who are gay and even got a transgender MEP elected in 2009. David Coburn, UKIP's openly gay London chairman and spokesman on gay rights opposes gay marriage as it exposes various religious groups to threat of prosecution by the ghastly ECHR for refusing to carry out gay marriages against their beliefs. He believes like most gays (except for a highly vocal militant minority) that civil partnership is the perfect way for gays to make a lifelong commitment without stomping over a primarily religious institution like marriage. I, like many UKIP members do not really care either way and so have left it to our gay members to work out the party's stance in this issue.
    I can see your (and UKIP's) view on this. They're Libertarian so see no role for the state in introducing into people's private lives - in this case religion.

    However as a positive minded liberal Conservative Libertarian (not a snappy title I know but hey) I just don't see the downside in same-sex marriage.

    Even if the law was passed and the gay community could go to Church to get married - but nevertheless chose not to, then at least they would be able to make that choice out of free will, not because they legally are not allowed to (as is currently the case).

    Moreover there are plenty of religious homosexuals who are just as strong in their faith as heterosexuals, why shouldn't they have the right to get married in their Church?

    Plus, as an Atheist I don't have much time for the idea that religious beliefs are somehow "out of bounds" and shouldn't be challenged. Let's have the debate about marriage with the religious community! Let's challenge their views in respectful, open and thorough debate, just as we would debate any other political issue. Why do the religious have this get out of jail free card on the issue of gay marriage?
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by exe)
    lol at this post. this discussion is for rational people, not nigel farage's cult of personality.
    Blairite? Brownite? "Call me Dave" Cameron, weeping Nick Cleggover. Bojo! Red Ken....

    In-case you didn't realise, British politics has been incredibly personality-driven for years now :rolleyes:

Reply

Submit reply

Register

Thanks for posting! You just need to create an account in order to submit the post
  1. this can't be left blank
    that username has been taken, please choose another Forgotten your password?
  2. this can't be left blank
    this email is already registered. Forgotten your password?
  3. this can't be left blank

    6 characters or longer with both numbers and letters is safer

  4. this can't be left empty
    your full birthday is required
  1. By joining you agree to our Ts and Cs, privacy policy and site rules

  2. Slide to join now Processing…

Updated: December 1, 2012
New on TSR

Personal statement help

Use our clever tool to create a PS you're proud of.

Article updates
Useful resources
Reputation gems:
You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.