So they *are *paid-up members, at a local level? Because I was getting the impression from this thread that US political parties had no formal paid membership at all, and I couldn’t see how that would work.
No. The way you get to be a local party officer is that you start attending meetings and volunteer to do stuff. If you do well and the other people around you like you, they’ll start giving you more things to do and maybe even elect you to a position. Then they start sending you to state-wide meetings and such, where you get to know even more people.
It has to do with social interaction, not with paying dues and entering your name on a membership list. I’m not even sure that such membership lists exist, beyond lists of people who are registered with the party.
I’ve received “membership cards” in the mail from both parties, accompanied by solicitations for contributions.
I tend to agree with regards to those people who vote BNP, but not necessarily with those who are actual members. Although, after listening to last night’s “News Quiz” it does appear that they have “Family Memberships” so the kids on the list may only be there because their parent(s) is a bigot, so I’m willing to give the under-18s the benefit of the doubt too.
After talking to a friend who lives in an area that is being targeted by the BNP, it appears that the views that they put forward in their canvassing (door-to-door and on the street) bear almost no relation to the views on their website. They play up the social welfare aspect of their platform and play down the racism, except in areas with significant racial tensions, where they play up the “us vs them” mentality. It’s then no surprise that they pick up a few council seats in disadvantaged areas, they’re deliberately targeting disaffected, disadvantaged people and offering them a “solution” to their problems.
From previous threads on this subject, I understand that US politics is actual rather less party-oriented than ours. At the time that the US constitution was framed, they had a real aversion to the idea of political parties, elements of which persist. So it’s even less common to be a “party member” there.
That just sounds like a justification for institutional bias. I don’t wish to defend the BNP (this whole story has me doing that much more than I would like), but I don’t see how any party worth its salt would not disagree on some points with the Civil Service Code. Political parties exist to challenge the established way of doing things, after all.
You don’t like the BNP, I don’t like the BNP. That does not justify curtailing their democratic rights.
Working for the civil service isn’t a right, and in fact BNP members are not banned for working for them. I just don’t see how a BNP member could work within the Civil Service Code (the impartiality bits are the sticking points imo). If a BNP member can work within the code, then fair enough, but I can’t really see how they can be impartial when dealing with people who they think are subhuman scum.
So what the fuck is all that shite about registered Democrats and Republicans about then? Is that not “party-orientated”? You do remember the excruciatingly drawn out US election recently?
Not all states allow for registration. Registration is a very casual process and can be easily (even accidentally) entered into and is easily changed. It’s nothing like party membership in the United Kingdom.
What does this have to do with the comparative forms of organization of political parties?
What am I doing wrong?
I clicked on the link in the OP but can’t seem to find a listing anywhere
See my post #25.
Thankfully, this approach is one which prevents a wider coordinated campaign from being effective, keeping them in isolated pockets of local politics rather than a serious national party.
“Resgistering” generally refers to registering to vote in an election. You may or may not register a party affiliation when you do this for a general election. For some primary elections – when you are voting for a party’s slate of candidates rather than for the actual office holder, you generally do need to register for the party whose candidates you want to vote for.
But you’re not held to this. You can change your affiliation for the next election.
Probably the biggest thing I can point out is that it’s effectively impossible to get kicked out of a party in the United States. Look at Zell Miller and Joseph Lieberman.
Say in 2005, Gordon Brown had endorsed Michael Howard and had given a speech at the Conservative party conference. Would he still be able to call himself a member of the Labor party? Would he have kept his ministry? Would he have succeeded Blair as prime minister?
American political parties have effectively zero control over their membership. Anyone who says “I’m a Democrat” is a Democrat regardless of any other statements he or she might make or actions he or she might take.
Yep, very true.
He wouldn’t have even kept his seat. His constituency (Kirkcaldy and Cowdenbeath) is a new constituency, formed in 2005, but it’s a safe Labour seat. In the 2005 election Brown got around 24,000 votes, the next closest party was the Scottish Nationalists with around 6000, and the Tories only got 4000. Aligning himself with the Tories (by making a speech at conference) would have got him deselected by his constituency party, and then if he still stood in the election (as a Tory or Independent) he would have lost to the Labour candidate selected to replace him by a huge margin. His political career would have been over, no seat in the Commons and, despite being Chancellor of the Exchequer, defecting would have robbed him of any chance of a peerage.
I have no familiarity at all with UK political parties, but by the same token, shouldn’t a member of the British Communist Party (or its equivalent) also be viewed with suspicion when doing his Civil Service job entails him dealing with people that he would likely view as subhuman scum (i.e. bourgeois parasites feeding on the blood of the workers)?
Well, that would be the case if there was a history of members of the Socialist Workers Party, or the CPGB (if it still exists) being involved in repeated random acts of violence against capitalists, for example.
I don’t think the Communist Party of Great Britain believe that at all. At least that’s the impression I get from reading their mission statement.
Communists might see individuals as running dogs because of their role/position in society, but that could change. Hence the “re-education camps” that were a feature of many communist states. But you can’t be educated out of being black.
As I said, I am a complete novice when it comes to UK politics. I was simply trying to point out that questions of ostensible professional impropriety due to party affiliation could be posed for countless varieities of political leanings. Misconduct should be punished, but not potential misconduct.
Having glanced over some of the BNP’s credos, they do indeed appear to be a bunch of shitheads, but this whole aspect of “outing” private political associations and making public recriminations as a consequence seems more than a little disturbing to me.
With regards to the Civil Service, they aren’t banned from working there. It was only my opinion that one couldn’t subscribe to the beliefs of the BNP and remain impartial in your professional life in the way that the Civil Service Code requires.
The outing was done by a disaffected member of the BNP, the “public recriminations” have been done by the media, which is allowed and should be in a free press.
The courts in the past have upheld the dismissal of BNP members from private companies on a number of grounds, including health and safety and the morale of staff.
There’s a large element of “karma’s a bitch” about this particular group of people having their details made public though… the site linked above (Red Watch, which is directly aligned with the BNP) exists to post the personal details of anti-fascists, with the expectation that BNP/C18 etc activists will call round for a “chat” (i.e. brick through the window).
This is why many Brits are now laughing at the sight of nazi sh*ts crapping themselves about having their details made public… it’s precisely what they’ve been doing for years, and they know what might occur (because they did exactly the same thing).
F*uck 'em, racist scum get everything they deserve.