Then you're saying democracy isn't a good idea? Or is it only a good idea when a party you're complacent about wins?

Suddenly the media is averse to political parties receiving money for funding: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1191424/BNP-5million-cash-boost-party-celebrates-Euro-election-successes.html and apparently violence against a party chief has become normal in Britain: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UQOfykEImeg

It is unfortunate but inevitable that it has come to this, but the "right wing" will become increasingly prominent until the parties who've enjoyed decade-long governances realize that it is the common man who is most affected by their social engineering attempts. I can assure you that chauffeured MP and MEPs do not often take the bus with rowdy Africans or witness first-hand the injustice of affirmative action.

To anyone who has violent objections (or any objections at all to these "right wing" parties' right to exist), please imagine you were alive 50 years ago when minorities were fighting for the right to vote or 100 years ago when women had few legal rights.

Would you have been against them? Most probably, because that was the orthodoxy at the time.

Those concepts were primitive in retrospect, but the majority thought like that. It was only by perseverance that women and minorities swayed the tides and established what are today commonly accepted principles of equality.

Imagine that in 100 years from now it turns out multiculturalism was indeed a catastrophic failure that not only destroyed once healthy societies but so diluted European culture that it ceased to exist, that dozens of countries who've contributed so much to humanity have become so ethnically identical that they've lost all discernible elements.

Suppose people like the BNP voters are correct, just as women were in the early 1900s. If most people could go back in time, I'm certain they'd at least provide the Suffragettes at least some respect and dignity.

I'd expect any civil person to exercise that same respect for ideas outside the current orthodoxy today.

If it were not for people who challenge the status quo, nothing in the history of the world would have ever changed.

It's precisely because the voters today are the same mindless bigoted scum of 50 and 100 years ago that democracy is a terrible idea. That's why people who actually know how to think like human beings should be making the decisions.

Nick Griffin and everyone who voted for the BNP should be executed. You don't just get to vote however you like; if your party of choice holds corrupt policies you are guilty of their crimes, potential and realised.

Morality and reason are not subject to time. The correct positions of today were the correct positions of 1000 years ago, will be the correct positions of 1000 years from now.

It is impossible that the BNP will be proven right. Were your multicultural cataclysm to come to pass in all its improbability, the BNP voters would still have been what they are now, which is irrational, rabid animals deserving only to be put down.

The position of an idea within or without the orthodoxy does not determine its value.

Excellent gorillaman.

The first post on this page is outrageous, i can barely stomach the whole thing. Comparing ideals which exclude people on the basis of their skin to the suffragette movement?

So you think excluding people based on their race/colour/creed is comparable to NOT EXCLUDING PEOPLE BASED ON THEIR RACE/COLOUR/CREED (gender) !?!?!??!?!?!?

The BNP have specifically preyed on people in areas who are subject to racial differences and problems. They have thinly veiled their racist and neo-nazi policies behind a virtually transparent curtain of patriotism.

It's sick and disgusting that great britain - a country we once were proud to say that our empire, for a time, stood ALONE against a rising tide of opression which threatened the world - has become a country in which neo-nazi high-rankers (literally, one quit his neo nazi group to take a position at the BNP) can get into a position of vocal power.

Welcome to germany in the 1930's. A rising popularity grows for a party which claims that <x> are the source of your problems, we can do better without <x>. This time, we have history to look back on and realise - QUICKLY - the road we're going down.

The people who voted for the BNP are unreservedly stupid. a) for not realising these thinly veiled racist policies, and b) for not realising that their vote is going to a party of people AS STUPID AS THEY ARE.

The BNP recently made a poster saying "BRITISH PEOPLE FOR BRITISH JOBS!" - featuring a picture of 3 white AMERICANS stood in front of a union jack patting each other on the back. There's a reason not to vote for them. At least our more popular parties would have been crafty and devious enough to not do something so stupid!

Pprt - in one very small sentence, you hit on the truth - that our lazy, careless, empire building MPs in the popular parties do not realise that the backhanded, underhanded, sneaky and elusive tactics they use for governing are hurting us and them in the long run. Or worse, they probably know it and DON'T CARE. They're in it for themselves, not us. But that is NO excuse for letting racists into our government.

Democracy does not work. There.

People who don't know what they are voting about, should not have a vote.

>> ^gwiz665:
Democracy does not work. There.
People who don't know what they are voting about, should not have a vote.


I agree. I do honestly think that democracy can take us so far in an evolutionary/enlightenment kind of way, and at that point you have to discard it and move onto something different.

Don't ask me what. But there is no way we'll achieve something amazing, such as a completely free, work-free, hatred free world where everyone lives in harmony and bliss and chases whatever dream he/she has. And we use our technology as a tool to free us all from working our lives away, instead of a tool for crowbarring more money out of a public desperate for entertainment in their miserable lives

From bnp.org.uk

In regards to immigration:

-an immediate halt to all further immigration

-the immediate deportation of criminal and illegal immigrants

-the introduction of a system of voluntary resettlement whereby those immigrants who are legally here will be afforded the opportunity to return to their lands of ethnic origin assisted by a generous financial incentives both for individuals and for the countries in question

-abolish the ‘positive discrimination’ schemes that have made white Britons second-class citizens

-clamp down on the flood of ‘asylum seekers’

What is it about immigration policies that make them above criticism or even consideration of reform? Parties have been given carte blanche on this issue for a very long time and it's obvious a segment of the population would like to see some change.

Don't get me wrong, if the BNP ever starts being violent they'll lose my sympathy and undoubtedly that of countless others. Currently, all they advocate is policy reform.

About "ideals which exclude people"... we're talking about determining who deserves to immigrate to already prosperous and well-managed nations. This question merits serious caution, as the repercussions of creating an artificially ethnically diverse society should not be taken haphazardly.

^It's not the policies, it's what they stand for that's the issue. Why can't you see that I wonder?

>> ^alien_concept:
^It's not the policies, it's what they stand for that's the issue. Why can't you see that I wonder?


What exactly do they "stand" for that's wrong? Native White Britons?

"Nick Griffin and everyone who voted for the BNP should be executed."

If they're anti-immigration, and you're pro-genocide, I think you may have lost the moral high ground.

How many crimes need to be committed until you're not allowed to punish them any more?

>> ^chilaxe:
"Nick Griffin and everyone who voted for the BNP should be executed."
If they're anti-immigration, and you're pro-genocide, I think you may have lost the moral high ground.


Pffft. gorillaman's response was an obvious hyperbole, in reaction to the fact that someone around here supports a white only Britain. For fuck's sake, I dunno how people can even play DA with this shit

'fraid I mean it in all sincerity. People need to be held accountable. A vote for the BNP is an attempt to emplace a criminal government in power - these actions have moral consequences.

Haha ok then, lets put it another way. I agreed with what you said and I meant it hypothetically, cos I wouldn't want to kill anyone. Wouldn't mind locking them all up in a room and leaving them to act out their despicable ideals on each other though

@gorillaman

I do not think that morality is independent of time. The best you can do is try to come up with a consistent moral structure in the time and place you live in.

Take, for instance, selfishness and selflessness. Right now in our society the betterment of society in general is seen as morally superior to the betterment of your own life. In another time, another place, it could be the other way round by arguing that complete selflessness is a waste of your own life's potential and thus immoral. This is just off the top of my head so I don't know if it's persuasive... but my point is that both sides have valid arguments and are mutually exclusive. If you can say definitively that one is, without doubt, correct and one is wrong then you must be prescient because, given a problem demanding selflessness or selfishness, you can determine which choice fulfills both.

Er. I think. Comma.

Yes, you can take account of your circumstances, but the correct moral reaction to a given set of circumstances is unchanging and independent of social consensus.