It’s not really a persecution complex if public knowledge of their membership really will lead to bias and discrimination against them, is it?
I guess you’re right. A “self-awareness” complex? In the case of these idiots, that seems unlikely.
Several of the buggers round the corner from me 
So where is the damn list? I think my uncle may be on it.
Thanks, my racist Uncle was not on it after all.
Nobody I know is on the list, but it was interesting to check out. Doing a search for “police” turned up a lot of ex-police officers, and one amusing entry:
Right, what’s all this then?
Wow. I was doing a search on towns I’ve lived or worked in or near I’d expect to be hotspots. No real surprises in that regard. What was a bit of a shock was that as I flicked through I found the name of someone I worked with in my old office. Who I’d never in a million years have pegged as a BNP member, and in fact was on perfectly friendly terms with. Just… wow. I moved office a few months back into London but I’ll probably see this person at a Christmas meal in a few weeks. Am I wrong to feel uncomfortable about that?
What makes it a little more interesting is that we’re civil servants. I don’t think there’s anything restricting political party membership in the Civil Service Code, in fact at this person’s grade I think you can even stand for office nationally (hence why it’s only a ‘little’ more interesting!) but I wasn’t expecting the leak me this list to touch me personally.
Anyway, just needed to share that… carry on.
(Apologies for the lack of lines between paragraphs, I’m writing this on my phone and while I’m putting them in, they don’t seem to be passing through to the post.)
Reading in the paper this morning it seems that at least some of those people named have never been members or are no longer members.
I think it includes some tentative enquiries, and also some malicious entries designed to settle personal scores, as well as people who have left the party.
Having said that, the majority of the list seems to be accurate… enough to cause problems for several people I would imagine.
(Just as a thought… the publication of the list is currently subject to a UK court case; publishing links to the list here might leave SDMB open to some legal issues). It’s easy enough to find on a torrent if you want it.
One person from my village is on there. Their family fits the stereotype, though (rough as houses), so I’m not really surprised. What’s shocking is how short the list is—is that a complete list? I was expecting it to be a lot longer, to be honest.
I agree. That would be a very progressive move. Perhaps the principle of casting votes openly and unashamedly should be applied to anyone and everyone who wants to vote.
Voting should be done openly, publicly and honestly. It should be done under full public, official scrutiny. An added bonus from such a reform would be that there would be no messed up and rejected votes because as soon as the official scrutineer sees that the voter’s made an error that would nullify the vote, then the scrutineer can draw the error to the voter’s attention and the voter can then replace the messed up vote with a revised version of the vote.
Correctly this time.
That’s only the membership of the party. Most people I know may support a party but wouldn’t bother becoming a member.
The SDMB is in America. The sun does set on the British Empire these days, you know.
And you feel qualified to make that decision on behalf of the Reader? :dubious:
Internet hosting crosses all sorts of national boundaries, as do the interests of newspapers; probably not an issue but why take the risk? ::shrug::
Or just go to Wikileaks.
Evil-doers fear the light. I hope it burns. Any police members can kiss their jobs goodbye.
I think the question of how public a person’s vote should be, is a considerably more difficult one than you seem to think. I keep thinking about it every time a big election comes up (wasn’t there something recently? A black fella and an old geezer somewhere).
You identified the basic pro-democracy argument for making the vote public - it virtually eliminates fraud and error in the electoral process. But you missed the main pro-liberty argument for making the vote secret - it protects voters from political persecution. You can say, ‘a BNP member in Britain should just take their lumps’. What about an MDC supporter in Zimbabwe? A Solidarity supporter in Poland during the Soviet era? An ‘anyone but a Nazi’ supporter in Nazi Germany?
Make votes secret, and you protect voters at the risk of abetting voting fraud. Make votes public, and you combat voting fraud at the risk of enabling voter persecution. I can’t say I’ve worked out which scenario I prefer yet. But it’s not as clear cut as you make out.
Much as I despise the BNP, I’m not sure why being a member should automatically lose you your job (unless you’re a civil servant or in a similar job which prohibits membership in any political party). In fact I would have thought that dismissal based upon party membership would be considered illegal. They are scum, but they are scum with rights.
Which is not to say that their supervisors shouldn’t be keeping a closer eye on them…
I think… I hope… you are being whooshed here.
Imagine you are an Asian father. You send your kids to a state school to be educated by a teacher who is a member of the BNP. Your children’s education will be in the hands of a person who wants to send your kids “back” to Pakistan. No matter than your children are 3rd generation Briton, the policy is “send 'em back”.
Or imagine your afro-caribbean girlfriend is robbed on a night out; the policeman to whom you report the crime does not consider your girlfriend to be a legitimate citizen of the UK purely because she is black, and thinks she should be sent back to St Lucia (a place none of her family have lived since her great-grandparents emigrated).
The BNP are an expressly racist party… it’s right there in their constitution. Anyone who joins the party must give at least tacit consent to those views.
If you are paid by the public purse you have a duty to respect your fellow citizens regardless of the colour of their skin… it is impossible to maintain public trust if employees of the state express openly racist views (and BNP membership counts IMO as an open expression of racist views).
I’ve no problem with right-wing moonbats in general - UKIP etc - but when a party’s whole purpose is promote discrimination against other citizens on the basis of their skin, society has a right to protect itself.