Now that I read Aquila Be’s post a second time, with coffee, I agree. Sorry about that AB. Perhaps casdave will benefit from my post. :o
The BNP’s headline policy is voluntary repatriation, saving forced deportation for ‘criminal and illegal immigrants’. Their website is overloaded at the moment, so I can’t find anything more, but I don’t think you’ll find them questioning citizenship purely on the basis of skin colour. That’s too obviously racist for them to claim to be a mainstream political party, and they know it.
Sorry to Godwinize this discussion, but would that include Annelies and Margot Frank?
This is from their membership requirements:
Obviously that only applies to party membership, but it don’t think it’s unfair to extrapolate from that to see how the BNP would approach governing the nation (which is their aim, after all). The terminology is pretty clear about the status of “non-indigenous Brits”, and I don’t think it’s an unreasonable assumption that under a BNP government black, asian, jewish Britons would not be afforded the same citizen’s rights as whites.
Even the idea of “voluntary repatriation” becomes meaningless when speaking about 2nd, 3rd and 4th generation immigrants, all of whom would fail to meet BNP membership criteria, but who are unlikely to have much connection to their purported “homeland” anyway.
No prizes for guessing what part of the UK would host those seemingly most proud of their membership;
The Republic of Ireland has members too for some unfathomable reason.
From reading Ray Hill’s book, there were always clashes between British far right groups and those from Europe during their get togethers when the British dickheads discovered their European brothers’ definition of nationalism included support for the IRA.
39 out of 10,000 names doesn’t seem like much.
They like the newsletter?
I walk by one of them’s house every day. I just feel sorry for him to be honest. Maybe I should call up to his house and call him a race traitor, that oughta confuse the hell out of him.
I hold the BNP’s racist views in utter contempt, but I respect their right to hold those views. After all, if you’re going to ban the views of the BNP, why not ban the views of the Labour Party? Let’s bring in the Thought Police and get rid of anyone who isn’t in lockstep with the Prime Minister. Sheesh.
More seriously, having parties with which we disagree - however odious we may think them to be - out in the open forces us to address the issues they raise; for if we can’t address them, maybe they have a point after all?
Their views are idiotic and hateful, but it’s their right to hold those views, and they should not suffer for so doing. Should they act on those views, however…
I don’t buy the abuse of authority argument: the police and courts still enforce laws with which they personally disagree.
BTW the ‘allowable races’ don’t include the Normans (Franco-Norse), who’ve only been here since 1066, nor do they include the Greeks - namely our Royal Family. And what of those of Roman descent?
Thankfully, it really is this easy to point out how their racial distinctions are nothing more than Aryanism dressed up as science.
The list only tells us where they currently live, not their nationality (legal or perceived).
The right to vote in privacy is obviously vital to democracy, and I cannot imagine why you believe that I think otherwise, since this was not stated anywhere in my post.
I really don’t need a lesson in poltical democracy.
However, BNP in public services, or rather in certain public services is a discplinary matter, for pretty obvious reasons.
BNP, and their closely related groups, such as Stromfront ,Combat 88 etc are cowards, they commit acts if intimidation, violence under the cloak of anonymity.
Criminals are deterred by the prospect of being caught, not of the prospect of being put in prison or some other punishment, most studies in criminilogy conclude this.
If you wish to be racist, then you should be prepared to stand up and justify it, and there are a number of those who will do just that. I don’t like them, but they have a right to be heard.
We are not talking of some opressed minority here, in fact we are talking about the opressors themselves, oppressors who are frightened by being examined too closely.
These are the ones who would take away democracy and rights from others, maybe now they understand how it feels to come under scrutiny, perhaps now they will have some idea what it feels like to be an Asian shop owner having the business attacked by anonymous thugs.
Two things that the BNP despises, and would crush at a moments notice, Trade Unionists and those from ethnic minorities, and I am in both of those groups.
Once you have endured their “protected by a face mask” abuse, you start to wonder about legitimate rights to free speech, which would come as no surprise free speech brings responsibility.
I can cope with those who are open about their affiliations, I support their right to make public their statements, what I do not support is the right to deny the same rights to everyone from under a veil of anonymity.
casdave - I think you mean Combat 18.
And I agree with a lot of what you are saying. I want them to feel that fear as well, but not when it is the government causing it. I had a hell of a lot of sympathy with the AFA. But I just don’t trust the government. It isn’t the BNP they have traditionally gone after, it was pacifists, and union members, and gays, and many other groups they didn’t like…
By all means lets make the BNP feel uncomfortable. But lets not give the government increased powers to look into the private/political lives of those of whom they do not approve in order to do it.
Are we sure this wasn’t just a list of Daily Mail subscribers?
There’s not a single really high profile celebrity, minister or MP on the list?
I wonder if they laundered their list before leaking?
There’s a difference? 
Minister or MP? That’d be very surprising!!! As for high profile celebrities, I suspect that the successful ones mostly have enough awareness of the fickle nature of public image not to put things into such a concrete form. By all means be photographed shaking hands with the PM or visiting Number 10, but don’t sign up for Labour Party membership.
Yeah!
What have the Romans ever done for us?
By the way, how long has the secret ballot been the norm in Britain? I’m wondering because earlier this year there was an interesting article in The New Yorker that pointed out that secret voting was not at all the norm here in the States in the early 1800s. In fact, it apparently took a long time to become an accepted practice.
Their current actions seem to be on my side.
“Folk Community”? Hey, I love folk music! Sign me up for that!
What do you mean, it isn’t that sort of community?
In all seriousness, the BNP sounds like a bunch of turds, but that’s their choice and (from a US-centric point of view) their right. Forbidding them public service smacks of the anti-Catholic laws that used to be on the books in England, and the membership list leak and subsequent hoorah of the “are you now or have you ever been a member of the Communist Party” and blacklists of recent, inglorious memory here in the USA.
The whole thing just leaves me shaking my head. What is with people, anyway?
Similar story and timeline in Britain.