D00, your post makes no economic sense at all.
Just because there was no referendum on immigration doesn't mean that there was no choice associated with providing immigrants with opportunities in Britain. If the British people were really simply overruled by their government, then howcome immigrants were given jobs by their "host country"? How can immigration to Britain have been an attractive proposition for potential immigrants if Brits were so against it? Immigrants were given opportunities to work by white Brits wanting to make use of their skills and efforts long before there was any talk of "equal opportunities" or "affirmative action". If the "British people" had really been so anti-immigration, immigrants would have found no work, and either left the country, or at the very least dissuaded their friends and relatives from joining them.
Now of course it is possible to criticise the immigrant screening mechanism which all too often grants entrance to individuals of somewhat dubious moral and economic value. But to attribute the immigration phenomenon to a few misguided politicians is ridiculous.
The problem with organisations like the BNP is that you operate on a double standard. You want immigrants to drive your buses and clean your floors because you feel these jobs are beneath you, yet eventually you bemoan the fact that someone, somewhere has let in too many foreigners.
How do you define a British person? Need they be white, for example? How many generations must they have lived in England before they are officially the native people?
And the BNP openly encourage the idea that British people be given priorities in various aspects of society, for example in housing.
The OP is as deluded in that they feel they can justify the BNPs policies as they are deluded in the belief that the party isn't racist.
Nick Griffin describes his views on race as follows: "... while the BNP is not racist, it must not become multi-racist either. Our fundamental determination to secure a future for white children is restated, and an area of uncertainty is addressed and a position which is both principled and politically realistic is firmly established. We don't hate anyone, especially the mixed race children who are the most tragic victims of enforced multi-racism, but that does not mean that we accept miscegenation as moral or normal. We do not and we never will." Griffin's use of the phrase "secure a future for white children" seems to allude to the white nationalist "Fourteen Words"
What a crock of contradictory faeces