# Some ideas for making the bnp unwelcome



## soulman (Feb 10, 2008)

Let's say they have targeted an area.

What, when, how?


----------



## Yossarian (Feb 10, 2008)

Soweto-style necklacing?


----------



## gentlegreen (Feb 10, 2008)




----------



## soulman (Feb 10, 2008)

Yossarian said:


> Soweto-style necklacing?



Bit harsh, although it did cross my mind this morning.


----------



## soulman (Feb 10, 2008)

Stickers?


----------



## soulman (Feb 10, 2008)

Lamposts?


----------



## barney_pig (Feb 11, 2008)

lollypops?


----------



## snadge (Feb 11, 2008)

pressure group


----------



## soloqi (Feb 11, 2008)

I think we should get in contact with the pro hunting group and convince them chasing down stupid racists is far better game then foxes.
What say you.


----------



## Dillinger4 (Feb 11, 2008)

A comittee.


----------



## Nixon (Feb 12, 2008)

I would use stickers..


----------



## chymaera (Feb 12, 2008)

Addressing the problems in an area that make people likely to vote BNP would be the best course of action.


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 12, 2008)

Bingo!


----------



## KeyboardJockey (Feb 12, 2008)

chymaera said:


> Addressing the problems in an area that make people likely to vote BNP would be the best course of action.



My pov on the matter as well.  The bnp being a success in an area is a symptom that the people are pissed off with their corrupt mainstream politicos and feel that theya re being shat upon. 

Sort out the problems and you sort out the bnp. 

One thing I would do if I was an area under pressure from the fash is put some effort into dissuading the swappies from even thinking of entering an area as their campaigns piss people off and make them more likely to vote bnp.


----------



## skyscraper101 (Feb 12, 2008)

Carnival!


----------



## quimcunx (Feb 12, 2008)

distribute union jacks to all ethnic minorities and immigrants to display in their windows etc.


----------



## the button (Feb 12, 2008)

chymaera said:


> Addressing the problems in an area that make people likely to vote BNP would be the best course of action.


One of his last posts on these boards, & a good 'un too.


----------



## dylanredefined (Feb 12, 2008)

chymaera said:


> Addressing the problems in an area that make people likely to vote BNP would be the best course of action.



   Have to agree with the above .BNP jump on bandwagons and either offer simple solutions or a scape goat .If poltical parties arent seen to be doing anything people may look to more extreme parties.Fix the problem the bnp go back to the shadows .
   Unfortunatly its less satisfying than smashing their faces in ,but,probably better for everyone concerned at lot of bnp supporters are not evil just misguided.


----------



## Dillinger4 (Feb 12, 2008)

Reggae Festival.


----------



## Spion (Feb 12, 2008)

Some ideas for making the bnp unwelcome?

Behead them?

No, seriously, working class politics and anti-fascism


----------



## likesfish (Feb 12, 2008)

getting locals on side dealing with problems and keeping the swappies at arms length very little point talking left wing politics with "normal people" as they wont have a scooby about what your on about.


----------



## Spion (Feb 12, 2008)

likesfish said:


> getting locals on side dealing with problems and keeping the swappies at arms length very little point talking left wing politics with "normal people" as they wont have a scooby about what your on about.


What like 'make the rich pay for jobs and services - don't blame immigrants for the lack of them' is too difficult? I can see it might be for you


----------



## KeyboardJockey (Feb 12, 2008)

likesfish said:


> getting locals on side dealing with problems and keeping the swappies at arms length very little point talking left wing politics with "normal people" as they wont have a scooby about what your on about.



Spot on.   The swappies and similar are not part of the solution to combatting the fash they are part of the problem.


----------



## poster342002 (Feb 12, 2008)

Do people mean the answer to the rise of the BNP _isn't_ to send in a busload of shouty middleclass students sticking up "asylum seekers welcome here!" posters or to stand outside the local supermarket bellyaching on about about Iraq or Guantanamo Bay?  Surely not!


----------



## KeyboardJockey (Feb 12, 2008)

poster342002 said:


> Do people mean the answer to the rise of the BNP _isn't_ to send in a busload of shouty middleclass students sticking up "asylum seekers welcome here!" posters or to stand outside the local supermarket bellyaching on about about Iraq or Guantanamo Bay?  Surely not!



You've just described the activities that the swaps endulged in that caused B and D to have 11 fash councillors.


----------



## bluestreak (Feb 12, 2008)

Definitely stickers.  Or in extreme cases, perhaps some sort of protest gig, possibly featuring a number of indie bands, a member of the Levellers performing acousticly, and a local hip hop artist so that the ethnics know we're on their side.


----------



## poster342002 (Feb 12, 2008)

... and when all else fails, send round Malcolm & Cressida from _Viz_ comic's "the modern parents". Hell, send round Student Grant & Pals as well.


----------



## scumbalina (Feb 12, 2008)

chymaera said:


> Addressing the problems in an area that make people likely to vote BNP would be the best course of action.



Another vote for this - find out the problems that the BNP are riding on the back of and offer altenative solutions, maybe do some counter campaigning pointing out to people that the BNP are full of promises but the cases when they've been elected they've been as useful as chocolate teapot etc etc. But has others have said, for the love of god don't let it turn into some patronising campaign run by irritaing twats who have no interest in the local area and are just going to get up peoples noses, a bit of grass roots organising involving local folk sorting out their own issues will be more likely to make people feel empowered and less likely to want to turn to the BNP.

And stickers are cool if you can get shit loads up as they might give the impression that there's lots of opposition in the area


----------



## bluestreak (Feb 12, 2008)

poster342002 said:


> ... and when all else fails, send round Malcolm & Cressida from _Viz_ comic's "the modern parents". Hell, send round Student Grant & Pals as well.


 

Pffft, students don't do politics anymore, as any fule no.  That's why we need the concert.  If you can't change the world with a concert, it can't be changed.


----------



## poster342002 (Feb 12, 2008)

scumbalina said:


> And stickers are cool if you can get shit loads up as they might give the impression that there's lots of opposition in the area



Big no-no. People aren't stupid and see through things like that in an instant. Very counterproductive.


----------



## Yossarian (Feb 12, 2008)

Whatever else you do, make sure the cunts' cars get a good keying.


----------



## scumbalina (Feb 12, 2008)

poster342002 said:


> Big no-no. People aren't stupid and see through things like that in an instant. Very counterproductive.




Not to affect the people in the area's opinion,for the benefit of the BNP. If it's just one sad loser going door to door with leaflets etc, which it often is, they might not bother focussing too much on that area. Don't see how it could hurt anyway (depending on the stickers) so even if it doesn't work, it's not really counterproductive or a big no-no.


----------



## Spion (Feb 12, 2008)

Could you two (KBJ, Poster) offer any positive suggestions rather than tilt at the usual windmills? (of whom there are no representatives here, afaik) I know it may make you feel better, but come on!


----------



## Spion (Feb 12, 2008)

scumbalina said:


> Another vote for this - find out the problems that the BNP are riding on the back of and offer altenative solutions, maybe do some counter campaigning pointing out to people that the BNP are full of promises but the cases when they've been elected they've been as useful as chocolate teapot etc etc.


All good, IMO


----------



## scumbalina (Feb 12, 2008)

Spion said:


> Could you two (KBJ, Poster) offer any positive suggestions rather than tilt at the usual windmills? (of whom there are no representatives here, afaik) I know it may make you feel better, but come on!




@ me?  I thought I had given what I thought were useful suggestions?


----------



## TopCat (Feb 12, 2008)

I was leafletted in Croydon by them and pointed out that all the leafletting squad were short fat blokes with no neck. Is this the new master race I asked?

They did not rise to the bait at all.


----------



## Spion (Feb 12, 2008)

scumbalina said:


> @ me?  I thought I had given what I thought were useful suggestions?


Not you - KBJ and miseryguts. I took a long time editing. Your suggestions were dead good, I thought.


----------



## scumbalina (Feb 12, 2008)

Spion said:


> Not you - KBJ and miseryguts.



Phew! I can stop furrowing my brow and being all confused!


----------



## KeyboardJockey (Feb 12, 2008)

Spion said:


> Not you - KBJ and miseryguts. I took a long time editing. Your suggestions were dead good, I thought.



More resources into housing and jobs in working class areas
Halt the mass immigration
Mass retraining of locals
Enterprise Grants and support
Local employment scheme where stuff can be earned by doing work for the local authority
sack corrupt local poltiticians
educate people about how their council works 
make councils more democratic


----------



## Spion (Feb 12, 2008)

KeyboardJockey said:


> More resources into housing and jobs in working class areas


 How, where from? Paid for by who? Many people would natually assume you have to work within the limits of existing council funding and come up with anti-immigrant or other cuts against services as an answer. The answer is to demand the rich pay more in taxes to fund local authorities, IMO



KeyboardJockey said:


> Halt the mass immigration


 Playing with fire. You'll have a job distinguishing yourself from the BNP



KeyboardJockey said:


> Mass retraining of locals


Yeah, agree, if appropriate. You still have to say who will pay for it tho



KeyboardJockey said:


> Enterprise Grants and support
> Local employment scheme where stuff can be earned by doing work for the local authority


Ditto. Who pays?



KeyboardJockey said:


> sack corrupt local poltiticians


Good idea. How?



KeyboardJockey said:


> educate people about how their council works
> make councils more democratic


I think there should be ways of working outside the council. Can they be made more democratic within existing structures? How about a medium term aim of workplace and community councils that elect representatives who address local and central govt?


----------



## likesfish (Feb 12, 2008)

kill a few local councilors and replace with some competent ones 
  BNP tend to only get elected where the local council is so crap they have pissed the locals off so badly anything is better than voting for the incumbants
  strangely even Brighton and Hoves shambolic no hoper's have yet to sink to the depths that might encourage the bnp.
 either there not really that hopeless
 or b you really need to work at being crap to give the bnp a hope


----------



## KeyboardJockey (Feb 12, 2008)

Spion said:


> How, where from? Paid for by who? Many people would natually assume you have to work within the limits of existing council funding and come up with anti-immigrant or other cuts against services as an answer. The answer is to demand the rich pay more in taxes to fund local authorities, IMO



Agree the rich need to pay more tax that I don't have a problem with.  A lot of money could be released by not having the disaster of pfi and Iraq for example.  The bottom 


Spion said:


> Playing with fire. You'll have a job distinguishing yourself from the BNP



Its a difficult one but you need to have an 'immigration breathing space' to rebuild the services and facilities that have been decimated by 28 years of Blatcherism.  This would be easier without the extra drains.  Also if the govt is seen to be prioritising Britons (of all creeds and colours) then it will pull the rug from underneath the bnp's feet.  You can't stop immigration totally but you could reduce the worst impact of cheap labour importation.  You would HAVE to have facilities for helping those fleeing persecution but the current free for all (as it is percieved) and the feeling that all new resources are being swallowed up by newcomers because of their extra 'needs' means that we need to halt unecessary immigration in order to rebuild the UK and help those fleeing oppression.  


Spion said:


> Yeah, agree, if appropriate. You still have to say who will pay for it tho
> 
> Ditto. Who pays?



The taxpayer and savings from not wasting so much resources as we are currently.  



Spion said:


> Good idea. How?



See above also the govt / local auth who provided the enterprise grant could hold a third of the shares in any company helped to start up by the enterprise grant.  


Spion said:


> I think there should be ways of working outside the council. Can they be made more democratic within existing structures? How about a medium term aim of workplace and community councils that elect representatives who address local and central govt?



Some good ideas there.  I think making ward councillors more visible and also having a police house in every ward would make the work of the council more visible.


----------



## KeyboardJockey (Feb 12, 2008)

likesfish said:


> BNP tend to only get elected where the local council is so crap they have pissed the locals off so badly anything is better than voting for the incumbants



Agree there.  The thing with Skidrow On Sea is that the majority of people are doing just about OK so there isn't the impetus to vote for anyone but the mainstream.


----------



## bluestreak (Feb 12, 2008)

KBJ, you are aware that this would mean pulling out of Europe?


----------



## KeyboardJockey (Feb 12, 2008)

bluestreak said:


> KBJ, you are aware that this would mean pulling out of Europe?



Not necessarily.  EU countries can restrict their borders if necessary.   We are not part of the Schenegen agreement.

What would cause problems with the EU is spending to rebuild as it would count as extra govt expenditure.  

The thing is other countries such as Germany rebuilt before there was a consensus that govt spending as a proportion of gdp should be reduced therefore they have an advantage.  We are still suffereing from Thatchers legacy and we need to spend to put that legacy behind us.


----------



## Spion (Feb 12, 2008)

KeyboardJockey said:


> Agree the rich need to pay more tax that I don't have a problem with.  A lot of money could be released by not having the disaster of pfi and Iraq for example.  The bottom
> 
> 
> Its a difficult one but you need to have an 'immigration breathing space' to rebuild the services and facilities that have been decimated by 28 years of Blatcherism.  This would be easier without the extra drains.  Also if the govt is seen to be prioritising Britons (of all creeds and colours) then it will pull the rug from underneath the bnp's feet.  You can't stop immigration totally but you could reduce the worst impact of cheap labour importation.  You would HAVE to have facilities for helping those fleeing persecution but the current free for all (as it is percieved) and the feeling that all new resources are being swallowed up by newcomers because of their extra 'needs' means that we need to halt unecessary immigration in order to rebuild the UK and help those fleeing oppression.
> ...


So, the KBJ campaign would be for:

* A halt to immigration
* More police
* An end to council waste

It's sort of BNP without the racism, no? I simply wonder if that's possible. If it really is possible to place such a heavy emphasis on being against immigration and not end up pandering to racist sentiment?

That is why I'm against putting the blame on immigration and placing it on the lack of tax revenues from the rich


----------



## likesfish (Feb 12, 2008)

I think theres a bit of both
  allowing unchecked immigration was never put to the uk populence and no plans were put in place to deal with the resulting problems


----------



## soulman (Feb 12, 2008)

TopCat said:


> I was leafletted in Croydon by them and pointed out that all the leafletting squad were short fat blokes with no neck. Is this the new master race I asked?
> 
> They did not rise to the bait at all.



Election or plain old recruitment shit?


----------



## northernhord (Feb 12, 2008)

At this present time in History, flush the fuckers out using whatever it takes, if not they are gonna cause untold amounts of trouble in our Communities.


----------



## soulman (Feb 12, 2008)

Aye, whatever the situation ignoring it is no solution


----------



## HST (Feb 12, 2008)

http://www.antifa.org.uk/

Apologies if already posted.


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 12, 2008)

What does by any means necessary mean?


----------



## soulman (Feb 12, 2008)

I know. Maybe you need some way of people letting you know what's happening, however insignificant it may be


----------



## soulman (Feb 12, 2008)

butchersapron said:


> What does by any means necessary mean?



Flicking your nose, and telling you to sleep it off!


----------



## soulman (Feb 13, 2008)

*A Response*

Leafletted today by the United Socialist Party. Two sides of A4 headed:
REAL AIMS OF THE BNP

"The *real aim* of the BNP is a totalitarian state (something like Saddam Husseins regime). Their aim is to abolish democracy, to take away your freedom of speech. They would abolish the Trade Unions and every other political party.

*The BNP don't believe in democracy so why should they share in it?*

More interesting stuff, a picture of Griffin doing the heil hitler salute, and under it

*KEEP THESE THUGS OUT OF LIVERPOOL.*


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 13, 2008)

Who are the United Socialist Party?


----------



## Idris2002 (Feb 13, 2008)

Remnants/splinter from the Millies, I think.


----------



## Idris2002 (Feb 13, 2008)

TopCat said:


> I was leafletted in Croydon by them and pointed out that all the leafletting squad were short fat blokes with no neck. Is this the new master race I asked?
> 
> They did not rise to the bait at all.



Sontarans Go Home!
Non-Terrans Out!


----------



## Idris2002 (Feb 13, 2008)

the button said:


> One of his last posts on these boards, & a good 'un too.



Remember him this way.


----------



## soulman (Feb 13, 2008)

butchersapron said:


> Who are the United Socialist Party?



Liverpool based -  http://www.tusp.org.uk/


----------



## audiotech (Feb 13, 2008)

KeyboardJockey said:


> You've just described the activities that the swaps endulged in that caused B and D to have 11 fash councillors.



So, a small band of trots shouting slogans in Barking and Dagenham led to 11 BNP councillors did it?


----------



## audiotech (Feb 13, 2008)

soulman said:


> Leafletted today by the United Socialist Party. Two sides of A4 headed:
> REAL AIMS OF THE BNP
> 
> "The *real aim* of the BNP is a totalitarian state (something like Saddam Husseins regime). Their aim is to abolish democracy, to take away your freedom of speech. They would abolish the Trade Unions and every other political party.
> ...



The infamous, alleged picture of Griffo doing a straight arm has surfaced then? Link?


----------



## William of Walworth (Feb 13, 2008)

Anyone know exactly how chymaera was banned? Is it a permaban?? 

Checked his recent post stuff but I can't work it out, must have missed something.

PM welcome to avoid thread derailmrent, ta.


----------



## poster342002 (Feb 14, 2008)

MC5 said:


> So, a small band of trots shouting slogans in Barking and Dagenham led to 11 BNP councillors did it?



I doubt it did a lot to stem the tide, lets put it that way.


----------



## poster342002 (Feb 14, 2008)

soulman said:


> "The *real aim* of the BNP is a totalitarian state (something like Saddam Husseins regime). Their aim is to abolish democracy, to take away your freedom of speech. They would abolish the Trade Unions and every other political party.



You reckon this will have any sort of resonance or effect on people who aren't members of unions anyway and see the exisitng political parties as the cause of their problems?


----------



## KeyboardJockey (Feb 14, 2008)

MC5 said:


> So, a small band of trots shouting slogans in Barking and Dagenham led to 11 BNP councillors did it?



Not directly the bnp was building in the area but the actions of the some of the so called anti fash in dismissing the concerns and fears of the locals about resource allocation as worthless and calling people 'nazis' really didn't help and as I was living there at the time I reckon it added a good 15-20% onto the bnp vote.  They pissed people off so that they thought 'fuck 'em I will vote bnp now'.


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 14, 2008)

Have a look in the bin william.


----------



## Spion (Feb 14, 2008)

KeyboardJockey said:


> Not directly the bnp was building in the area but the actions of the some of the so called anti fash in dismissing the concerns and fears of the locals about resource allocation as worthless and calling people 'nazis' really didn't help and as I was living there at the time I reckon it added a good 15-20% onto the bnp vote.  They pissed people off so that they thought 'fuck 'em I will vote bnp now'.


Did they call you a Nazi, KBJ?


----------



## KeyboardJockey (Feb 14, 2008)

Spion said:


> Did they call you a Nazi, KBJ?



Why would they.  It was pretty well known in the area that I was anti bnp.  The problem was a lot of the waverers who might or might not have supported the bnp out of desparation had their decisions made for them by the actions fo the swaps etc. 

It was a case where the  opposition so obviously disregarded the locals that it made it much easier for the bnp to sell the idea that the traditional left was anti the white working class.


----------



## Spion (Feb 14, 2008)

KeyboardJockey said:


> Why would they.  It was pretty well known in the area that I was anti bnp.  The problem was a lot of the waverers who might or might not have supported the bnp out of desparation had their decisions made for them by the actions fo the swaps etc.
> 
> It was a case where the  opposition so obviously disregarded the locals that it made it much easier for the bnp to sell the idea that the traditional left was anti the white working class.


I was just pulling your plonker, chief, in a jokey reference to some of your politics


----------



## KeyboardJockey (Feb 14, 2008)

Spion said:


> I was just pulling your plonker, chief, in a jokey reference to some of your politics



I gathered that I was jjust soapboxing for the benefit of others.


----------



## audiotech (Feb 14, 2008)

KeyboardJockey said:


> Not directly the bnp was building in the area but the actions of the some of the so called anti fash in dismissing the concerns and fears of the locals about resource allocation as worthless and calling people 'nazis' really didn't help and as I was living there at the time I reckon it added a good 15-20% onto the bnp vote.  They pissed people off so that they thought 'fuck 'em I will vote bnp now'.



I don't buy it.

The concerns and fears of the locals about resource allocation would have been addressed by any serious anti-fascists and I would have thought that the only people being called 'nazis' would be BNP members and their supporters - no?


----------



## audiotech (Feb 14, 2008)

poster342002 said:


> I doubt it did a lot to stem the tide, lets put it that way.



So, what would have stopped the tide? A Labour Council truely representing the people of B&D and providing quality services do you think?


----------



## tbaldwin (Feb 14, 2008)

MC5 said:


> So, a small band of trots shouting slogans in Barking and Dagenham led to 11 BNP councillors did it?



The BNP have always relied on their Political opponents for the oxygen of publicity. AFA made huge mistakes in the early 90s, with their very public anti fascist events like the ultra swp style stupidity of "reclaim the lane" this helped boost the BNP enough for the SWP and a few opportunist who went on to form ARA to get interested. Both of them helped the BNP to get more and more publicity.

The thing that always makes the BNP feel most unwelcome is being largely ignored and then battered...Like the last Cod in a Chip shop thats closing down...


----------



## durruti02 (Feb 14, 2008)

William of Walworth said:


> Anyone know exactly how chymaera was banned? Is it a permaban??
> 
> Checked his recent post stuff but I can't work it out, must have missed something.
> 
> PM welcome to avoid thread derailmrent, ta.



he copied out 'the bnp song' ( which actually is mostly misty eyed nostalgia until the last few lines which are pretty nasty racist shite ) .. and then flailed wildly as to where he got them, from claiming to have heard 3 bands singing it ( possible?) and that his wife had a cd of it on a comp ( possible) made by a west indian women in birmingham! LOL so it was decided he was BNP ( and tobyjug who ever that was ) .. i still do not agree with these bans though .. i think we make our lives too simple by simply throwing off those we disagree with .. we should be able to destroy them with words ..


----------



## durruti02 (Feb 14, 2008)

Spion said:


> I was just pulling your plonker, chief, in a jokey reference to some of your politics



so are you going to deny what he says though? that theh actions of the left OFTEN push people into the arms of the BNP?


----------



## durruti02 (Feb 14, 2008)

Spion said:


> So, the KBJ campaign would be for:
> 
> * A halt to immigration
> * More police
> ...



where does KBJ "put .. the blame on immigration " ?


----------



## Meltingpot (Feb 14, 2008)

durruti02 said:


> he copied out 'the bnp song' ( which actually is mostly misty eyed nostalgia until the last few lines which are pretty nasty racist shite ) .. and then flailed wildly as to where he got them, from claiming to have heard 3 bands singing it ( possible?) and that his wife had a cd of it on a comp ( possible) made by a west indian women in birmingham! LOL so it was decided he was BNP ( and tobyjug who ever that was ) .. i still do not agree with these bans though .. i think we make our lives too simple by simply throwing off those we disagree with .. we should be able to destroy them with words ..



I agree, I don't believe in banning anyone for their views but once you allow pro-BNP people to post it takes over the whole board. They're almost fanatical in what they believe in and their desire to promote it.

Maybe there could be a part of the forum dedicated to debating with racial nationalists, just as Stormfront has an "Opposing Views" section?


----------



## audiotech (Feb 15, 2008)

tbaldwin said:


> The thing that always makes the BNP feel most unwelcome is being largely ignored and then battered...Like the last Cod in a Chip shop thats closing down...



So you ignore them and then "batter" them at the same time - don't make sense somehow?


----------



## tbaldwin (Feb 15, 2008)

MC5 said:


> I don't buy it.
> 
> The concerns and fears of the locals about resource allocation would have been addressed by any serious anti-fascists and I would have thought that the only people being called 'nazis' would be BNP members and their supporters - no?



The stupidity of the far left has always been the biggest bonus for the far right.
On immigration and allocation of resources sections of the far left have always played right into the hands of the BNP. Both sides have lied and exaggerated for their political ends.

The BNP have benefited hugely from the publicity given to them by the far left.


----------



## tbaldwin (Feb 15, 2008)

MC5 said:


> So you ignore them and then "batter" them at the same time - don't make sense somehow?



Not to a Liberal like yourself. What it means is that instead of activities that help to publicise them, they get attacked. Sometimes quietly and sometimes not so quietly. If you read that Jewish 43 group what worked was not a huge political campaign with them at the centre. It was the same in the early 90s the groups who helped to publicise them including AFA should hang their opportunist heads in shame.


----------



## frogwoman (Feb 15, 2008)

Meltingpot said:


> I agree, I don't believe in banning anyone for their views but once you allow pro-BNP people to post it takes over the whole board. They're almost fanatical in what they believe in and their desire to promote it.
> 
> Maybe there could be a part of the forum dedicated to debating with racial nationalists, just as Stormfront has an "Opposing Views" section?



no, because urban75 isnt specifically about race ... they have no place here

if that happened we would lose most (if not all) of our good posters ... this is (well, it started out being) a left wing/anarchist site ... not somewhere where fash should be made welcome


----------



## frogwoman (Feb 15, 2008)

and at the risk of starting all this up agian ... chymaera was a bit stupid/ignorant ... but no fash


----------



## soulman (Feb 15, 2008)

poster342002 said:


> You reckon this will have any sort of resonance or effect on people who aren't members of unions anyway and see the exisitng political parties as the cause of their problems?



To be fair that was only a few lines from the leaflet. Here's the full thing:



> (p1)
> 
> *The BNP would have us believe that none white people and immigration cause all our financial problems. Sound familiar? It should do, Hitler (remember him? He started the Second World War) used this sort of rubbish to abolish democracy in Germany and then every country that the Nazi's invaded, resulting in the death of millions of people.
> 
> ...


----------



## Spion (Feb 15, 2008)

durruti02 said:


> so are you going to deny what he says though? that theh actions of the left OFTEN push people into the arms of the BNP?


Yes. The reasons people go for the BNP are far wider than that.


----------



## Spion (Feb 15, 2008)

durruti02 said:


> where does KBJ "put .. the blame on immigration " ?


He doesn't explicitly, but in the post to which I was replying immigration has the highest wordcount of any subject

I don't believe immigration is the root of our troubles.


----------



## tbaldwin (Feb 15, 2008)

Spion said:


> He doesn't explicitly, but in the post to which I was replying immigration has the highest wordcount of any subject
> 
> I don't believe immigration is the root of our troubles.



You might not think Immigration is the root of our troubles.

But Economic Migration is part of the problems of worldwide inequality.
It helps to increase that inequliaty as poorer nations inevitably lose the people they most need to richer nations.

Combating the bullshit of the BNP means being honest yourselves and sadly sections of the left have proven to be as dishonest and as out to lunch as the BNP.


----------



## durruti02 (Feb 15, 2008)

Spion said:


> Yes. The reasons people go for the BNP are far wider than that.



of course spion!! you thnk i do not think that also??? but when teh SWP then parachute into an area as KBJ as so well described it can be teh straw that breaks teh camels back


----------



## durruti02 (Feb 15, 2008)

Spion said:


> He doesn't explicitly, but in the post to which I was replying immigration has the highest wordcount of any subject
> 
> I don't believe immigration is the root of our troubles.



this is poor mate .. wordcount??? FFS is this what you do .. wordcounts NOT what people actually say?? 


neither you me TB OR  KBJ think "immigration is the root of our troubles"  .. 

never have never will but your, and the lefts, refusal to see that it is being used by the bosses, HAS contributed to the rise of the far right


----------



## Spion (Feb 15, 2008)

durruti02 said:


> this is poor mate .. wordcount??? FFS is this what you do .. wordcounts NOT what people actually say??


If some spends more time speaking about one thing than another in a post I assume it is more important to them



durruti02 said:


> neither you me TB OR  KBJ think "immigration is the root of our troubles"  ..
> 
> never have never will but your, and the lefts, refusal to see that it is being used by the bosses, HAS contributed to the rise of the far right


I've never denied the use of immigration to the bosses. Where did I ever do that?

It's just I believe dealing with it involves a) not calling for immigration controls and b) fighting for jobs, decent wages and housing for ALL. How exactly do you disagree with that?


----------



## Spion (Feb 15, 2008)

tbaldwin said:


> You might not think Immigration is the root of our troubles.
> 
> But Economic Migration is part of the problems of worldwide inequality.
> It helps to increase that inequliaty as poorer nations inevitably lose the people they most need to richer nations.
> ...


What exactly should we be honest about?

Do you want immigration controls or not?


----------



## tbaldwin (Feb 15, 2008)

Spion said:


> What exactly should we be honest about?
> 
> Do you want immigration controls or not?



Everything but specifically housing and jobs.

Yes. They are going to be an absolute neccesity if we do want a more equal world. No controls means that money would dictate everything.


----------



## Spion (Feb 15, 2008)

tbaldwin said:


> Everything but specifically housing and jobs.
> 
> Yes. They are going to be an absolute neccesity if we do want a more equal world. No controls means that money would dictate everything.


If they're that central to your project I suggest you join the BNP or the Tories.

Personally I think a more equal world will come about through workers combining to force the bosses to shell out for jobs, better pay and better housing and services for all. But hey, I'm a bit old fashioned like that


----------



## northernhord (Feb 15, 2008)

tbaldwin said:


> You might not think Immigration is the root of our troubles.
> 
> But Economic Migration is part of the problems of worldwide inequality.
> It helps to increase that inequliaty as poorer nations inevitably lose the people they most need to richer nations.
> ...



Worldwide inequality has everything to do with the Market place screaming for more profit and greater control than they already have, economic migration is dwarfed as a reason for inequality compared to the ruin the Market is creating itself.


----------



## audiotech (Feb 15, 2008)

tbaldwin said:


> Not to a Liberal like yourself. What it means is that instead of activities that help to publicise them, they get attacked. Sometimes quietly and sometimes not so quietly. If you read that Jewish 43 group what worked was not a huge political campaign with them at the centre



The 43 Group was founded, because they thought no bugger else was doing anything about the fascists. That changed on one operation, when they realised, that along with themselves, the CP had infiltrated a fascist rally and attacked the platform before the Group did.

There were other groups involved, but only a few were prepared to physically attack the fascists, but as time wore on local people, sick of the fascists intimidating people this changed.

The Group achieved two out of it's three initial objectives. It exposed the fascists for what they were and as a result the British Press totally condemned post-war Mosleyism.

So, in fact, despite your attempt at revisionism, the 43 Groups made sure that publicity was crucial to the organisation; to gain new recruits and to expose the fascists at every opportunity.

However, the 43 Group never succeeded in persuading Atlee's Labour government to make incitement to racial hatred (in those days, 'Jew baiting') illegal. Had they done this, the 43 Group would never had emerged.


----------



## audiotech (Feb 15, 2008)

tbaldwin said:


> The BNP have benefited hugely from the publicity given to them by the far left.



No they haven't. The publiciity comes overwhelmingly from the established mass media and established politicians on the make. The BNP have also benefitted hugely from New Labour and it's slavish following of the neo-con agenda.


----------



## brasicritique (Feb 15, 2008)

Spion said:


> No, seriously, working class politics and anti-fascism



no fear of that on urban lo there is evidently fascism in abundence on other threads


----------



## brasicritique (Feb 15, 2008)

MC5 said:


> No they haven't. The publiciity comes overwhelmingly from the established mass media and established politicians on the make. The BNP have also benefitted hugely from New Labour and it's slavish following of the neo-con agenda.



The bnp have benefited from and will continue to benefit from communities that contain  'low attainers' in which the higher educational prosepects for manyare in decline . I was going to do a thread on the whole 'widing participation ' and related fall/stagnation amongst those from poor backgrounds going to university and the the fact that if the wadicals/politicians / elitie which run society do not contain any people from these backgrounds then we are heading for trouble OH  but how silly of me i have just realised this _is_ urban


----------



## Spion (Feb 15, 2008)

brasicattack said:


> The bnp have benefited from and will continue to benefit from communities that contain  'low attainers' in which the higher educational prosepects for manyare in decline . I was going to do a thread on the whole 'widing participation ' and related fall/stagnation amongst those from poor backgrounds going to university and the the fact that if the wadicals/politicians / elitie which run society do not contain any people from these backgrounds then we are heading for trouble *OH  but how silly of me i have just realised this is urban*


Just do it. If you want to argue a case go ahead.


----------



## Oletjo (Feb 15, 2008)

Try and engage with the reasons an authoritarian party like the BNP might be attractive in the first place - poverty, lack of identity, crap education, crap housing, poor job opportunities, rightwing propaganda, left wing elitism, a culture based upon abstract ideals that have been smashed by global capitalism, shall I go on?


----------



## Treacle Toes (Feb 15, 2008)

Oletjo said:


> Try and engage with the reasons an authoritarian party like the BNP might be attractive in the first place -


TBH I do engage, relate to  and accept the reasons.


> poverty, lack of identity, crap education, crap housing, poor job opportunities, rightwing propaganda, left wing elitism, a culture based upon abstract ideals that have been smashed by global capitalism, shall I go on?


All of the above affect me and my family in one way or another but it hasn't made me blame any one particular community, and i'm not the demographic the BNP want supporting them. In fact if they had their way.........


----------



## Oletjo (Feb 15, 2008)

Rutita1 said:


> TBH I do engage, relate to  and accept the reasons.
> 
> All of the above affect me and my family in one way or another but it hasn't made me blame any one particular community, and i'm not the demographic the BNP want supporting them. In fact if they had their way.........



- but just attacking the BNP because they're the BNP doesn't seem to be the answer either.  How do you deal with the fact that people, from all races, religions, backgrounds etc etc point at 'the other' when it comes to assigning blame?


----------



## Treacle Toes (Feb 15, 2008)

Oletjo said:


> - but just attacking the BNP because they're the BNP doesn't seem to be the answer either.  How do you deal with the fact that people, from all races, religions, backgrounds etc etc point at 'the other' when it comes to assigning blame?



I actively do exactly the opposite. 
I simply choose not to myself and don't throw sticks and stones. If enough of us don't do that and stop supporting those that do they'll get no where.


----------



## Oletjo (Feb 15, 2008)

Hmmm- I can't help but feel that we live in a society that sets individuals and communities against one another - if you lead capitalism to its logical conclusion then wiping out 'competitors' becomes an acceptable course of action.


----------



## audiotech (Feb 15, 2008)

brasicattack said:


> The bnp have benefited from and will continue to benefit from communities that contain  'low attainers' in which the higher educational prosepects for manyare in decline . I was going to do a thread on the whole 'widing participation ' and related fall/stagnation amongst those from poor backgrounds going to university and the the fact that if the wadicals/politicians / elitie which run society do not contain any people from these backgrounds then we are heading for trouble OH  but how silly of me i have just realised this _is_ urban



I'm from a poor background, educated at a secondary modern shithole (unlike you brasssic, no scholorship to a public school for me ) where 'low attainment' was part of the curriculum. Managed a degree later in life. Big deal! 

Hey, guess what? I'm still fucking poor though and owe thousands to some privatised debt collection agency that dished out the student loans.  

How do the BNP benefit from communities that contain these apparent 'low attainers' you mention btw?


----------



## Oletjo (Feb 15, 2008)

Have to say - If you even felt that you could go go to university in the first place - no matter how much you earn/owe now means you are not a 'low attainer' though I am not exactly certain what that really means.  Acheivement should hardly be measured in material wealth - some of the most intelligent people I know are fucking poor - I know afew kids who got to go to private school - mummy and daddy paid for them to go - got no GCSEs and spent the trust fund on coke - now, to me, those are the real low attainers - and interestingly also the most racist fuckers I know.


----------



## audiotech (Feb 15, 2008)

Oletjo said:


> Have to say - If you even felt that you could go go to university in the first place - no matter how much you earn/owe now means you are not a 'low attainer' though I am not exactly certain what that really means.  Acheivement should hardly be measured in material wealth - some of the most intelligent people I know are fucking poor - I know afew kids who got to go to private school - mummy and daddy paid for them to go - got no GCSEs and spent the trust fund on coke - now, to me, those are the real low attainers - and interestingly also the most racist fuckers I know.



As you say 'low attainers' what does it mean?


----------



## Treacle Toes (Feb 15, 2008)

Oletjo said:


> Hmmm- I can't help but feel that we live in a society that sets individuals and communities against one another - if you lead capitalism to its logical conclusion then wiping out 'competitors' becomes an acceptable course of action.



It depends who you see as your competitors surely?
I do not look around and see different communities as my competitors.

Day to day, I don't do the blaming of X or Y community. I see there are hardships for us all. Getting angry and blaming 'others' doesn't solve the problem, my energy is better spent.

It feels lazy to me.


----------



## Oletjo (Feb 16, 2008)

"Day to day, I don't do the blaming of X or Y community. I see there are hardships for us all. Getting angry and blaming 'others' doesn't solve the problem, my energy is better spent.

It feels lazy to me".

But blaming 'the other' still returns almost as a natural reaction for some.  Me included - I am a horrible racist - I can't stand white people who drive porches - but I don't have a problem with black people who drive porches - did I mention that I am white?  I instinctively discriminate against people who went to private school - all of which I kknow is lazy and a waste of time - when i am being rational I can resist this temptation - but - it is not easy.  Now this is the crux - how do you deal with the tendency to take the easy way out and simply blame 'the other' - if you can actually address that then maybe you can go some way to making the BNP history.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Feb 16, 2008)

Oletjo said:


> But blaming 'the other' still returns almost as a natural reaction for some.  Me included - I am a horrible racist - I can't stand white people who drive porches - but I don't have a problem with black people who drive porches - did I mention that I am white?


Mate that's unhealthy.
What you imagine none of those White people in porsches deserve to drive them? None of them worked hard for them? regardless if it's an ugly car..



> I instinctively discriminate against people who went to private school - all of which I kknow is lazy and a waste of time - when i am being rational I can resist this temptation - but - it is not easy.  Now this is the crux - how do you deal with the tendency to take the easy way out and simply blame 'the other' - if you can actually address that then maybe you can go some way to making the BNP history.



I think being Mixed helps me here. It has given me a healthy insight into more than one culture, outlook on life, aspirations etc.. Also, having been subject to prejudice ourselves for daring to mix, and be happy when popular ideas suggested it was wrong and couldn't work out.

That and coming from a family that just gets on with it...doesn't just sit there and say, _'well that's it then, we fucked, not our fault, nothing we can do.'_


----------



## northernhord (Feb 16, 2008)

tbaldwin said:


> The stupidity of the far left has always been the biggest bonus for the far right.
> On immigration and allocation of resources sections of the far left have always played right into the hands of the BNP. Both sides have lied and exaggerated for their political ends.
> 
> The BNP have benefited hugely from the publicity given to them by the far left.



I dont see how this can be true, the hard left isnt in the media or political limelight, similarly the AFA aint as active as they were back in the day, unless you mean the SWP?


----------



## Oletjo (Feb 16, 2008)

Rutita1 said:


> Mate that's unhealthy.
> What you imagine none of those White people in porsches deserve to drive them? None of them worked hard for them? regardless if it's an ugly car..
> 
> 
> ...



Unhealthy it may be, but I would propose that is the foundation upon which politics, both of the extreme left and right survive (actually, politics in general??).  Pointing fingers is the basis of our society - I wish I could step aside from that in the way that you can.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Feb 16, 2008)

Oletjo said:


> I could step aside from that in the way that you can.



But you see here's the deal. I don't side step it, I still have to engage with it and accept it as it is inescapable. These things still affect me and the people around me. What I do is try not to add to it in any way, and I challenge it where possible.


----------



## Oletjo (Feb 16, 2008)

Rutita1 said:


> But you see here's the deal. I don't side step it, I still have to engage with it and accept it as it is inescapable. These things still affect me and the people around me. What I do is try not to add to it in any way, and I challenge it where possible.



But you do step aside from it in that you do not resort to simplistically blaming other people for a wider social and economic malaise - Despite my attempts to step aside from this I still blame other people, I have to try bloody hard not to.  Maybe that's because I was brought up in the shire, had a fucking boring life and rich people were either the ones we sold drugs to or the pricks in sports jackets who went hunting at the weekend - to be fair - giving them a damned good kicking was the only form of entertainment I had back then.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Feb 16, 2008)

Oletjo said:


> But you do step aside from it in that you do not resort to simplistically blaming other people for a wider social and economic malaise -


Again I say I don't side step it, I confront it and challenge it where possible. Challenging it can also be done by behaing differently.



> Despite my attempts to step aside from this I still blame other people, I have to try bloody hard not to.  Maybe that's because I was brought up in the shire, had a fucking boring life and rich people were either the ones we sold drugs to or the pricks in sports jackets who went hunting at the weekend - to be fair - giving them a damned good kicking was the only form of entertainment I had back then.


 Umm... there's more than a hint of envy in that relationship. Don't mean to sound condescending.

Being happy with who you are helps I think. I mean i'm not completely happy and secure about myself but being miserable and angry and projecting that onto others is a much more uncomfortable and unhealthy state for me to be in. So in some ways I think I don't actually have a choice. I hate being miserable more than I hate 'others'.


----------



## Oletjo (Feb 16, 2008)

Good point.  I think I am just too interested in what exactly creates envy - why would I be envious? I agree I am - but can't figure out what lies in the human condition to prompt envy.  Besides, I'm off topic.  Think I'll go and read instead - I'm all to easily swayed into the other simplistic way out - just giving up on it all.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Feb 16, 2008)

Oletjo said:


> Good point.  I think I am just too interested in what exactly creates envy - why would I be envious? I agree I am - but can't figure out what lies in the human condition to prompt envy.  Besides, I'm off topic.  Think I'll go and read instead - I'm all to easily swayed into the other simplistic way out - just giving up on it all.



There's a lovely Spanish expression which is 'envidia sana' it means sane envy. The idea is that you can be envious of something but sanely so, therefore nothing to be embarressed about. It acknowledges that envy/jealous are natural feelings and very human.

What you do with those feelings is another point entirely. Behaving badly because your envious or jealous is why those feelings have a bad image.

Enjoy your read. THe suns out...read in the park?


----------



## Meltingpot (Feb 16, 2008)

frogwoman said:


> no, because urban75 isnt specifically about race ... they have no place here
> 
> if that happened we would lose most (if not all) of our good posters ... this is (well, it started out being) a left wing/anarchist site ... not somewhere where fash should be made welcome



We'll probably have to agree to differ on this one froggy.

I'm not saying make them welcome here - every board's got its own ecology -  but I happen to believe that anyone who's being attacked should have the right to defend themselves and, if that attack is on a bulletin board, that's where it should happen. I'd want the same if it was I or a group I supported who was being attacked.

I've seen posts here where people have said BNPers should be "necklaced", others claiming they're all Nazis who are intent on imposing a fascist state on us.

There's quite a lot of posts here about the BNP, so they're obviously of major interest to a lot of Urbanites. Why not give them a chance somewhere here to defend themselves and say what they believe and why?


----------



## soulman (Feb 16, 2008)

Meltingpot said:


> We'll prolly have to agree to differ on this one froggy.
> 
> I'm not saying make them welcome here - every board's got its own ecology -  but I happen to believe that anyone who's being attacked should have the right to defend themselves and, if that attack is on a bulletin board, that's where it should happen. I'd want the same if it was I or a group I supported who was being attacked.
> 
> ...



MATB gives them space. Go there if that's your thing.


----------



## Meltingpot (Feb 16, 2008)

soulman said:


> MATB gives them space. Go there if that's your thing.



Don't know what MATB is, but there's this place;

http://www.mootsf.org/

You'd be welcome.


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 16, 2008)

Meltingpot said:


> Don't know what MATB is, but there's this place;
> 
> http://www.mootsf.org/
> 
> You'd be welcome.



It's http://www.meanwhileatthebar.org

just a board...

I think Soulman spat out our name in disgust.


----------



## soulman (Feb 16, 2008)

lol don't flatter yourself


----------



## frogwoman (Feb 17, 2008)

Meltingpot said:


> We'll probably have to agree to differ on this one froggy.
> 
> I'm not saying make them welcome here - every board's got its own ecology -  but I happen to believe that anyone who's being attacked should have the right to defend themselves and, if that attack is on a bulletin board, that's where it should happen. I'd want the same if it was I or a group I supported who was being attacked.
> 
> ...




Who cares what people think? 
this site is not about them - we've had bnp members here before and they usually end up behaving like utter cocks and being banned very quickly
by the way - allowing them some degree of leniency to post here provided the follow rules (wihch they usually dont) is not the same as making the whole board about them and creating a forum about them.


----------



## Meltingpot (Feb 17, 2008)

butchersapron said:


> It's http://www.meanwhileatthebar.org
> 
> just a board...
> 
> I think Soulman spat out our name in disgust.



Thanks. 

I've registered there now but I post more than enough already so I mightn't post much there; still I'll have a look at it soon.


----------



## frogwoman (Feb 17, 2008)

there's a radio 4 thingy now if anyone's interested ...


----------



## durruti02 (Feb 18, 2008)

Spion said:


> If some spends more time speaking about one thing than another in a post I assume it is more important to them
> 
> I've never denied the use of immigration to the bosses. Where did I ever do that?
> 
> It's just I believe dealing with it involves a) not calling for immigration controls and b) fighting for jobs, decent wages and housing for ALL. How exactly do you disagree with that?



you first para is still incredibly lazy 

but with the second i agree 100% with you and have argued this consistently on here ( and you have ignored that but whatever .. this is about KBJ.. does KBJ call for immigration controls?)


----------



## Spion (Feb 18, 2008)

durruti02 said:


> you first para is still incredibly lazy
> 
> but with the second i agree 100% with you and have argued this consistently on here ( and you have ignored that but whatever .. this is about KBJ.. *does KBJ call for immigration controls?*)


Yes. Check back on p2 of this thread, lazy boy


----------



## likesfish (Feb 18, 2008)

I do know what piss's a lot of people off in skid row on sea.
 I go to a fair number of local action team events tenants meetings etc etc.
  every single piece of bump f  goes on about how keen the council is to reach out to ethnic minority's etc etc.
 Its Brighton ffs most of the city is white I'm not being racist its a fact  all the councilors are white. but they do shit like advertise a museum traineeship only open to BME applicants 
   its like some stupid conspiracy to annoy the electorate


----------



## tbaldwin (Feb 18, 2008)

northernhord said:


> I dont see how this can be true, the hard left isnt in the media or political limelight, similarly the AFA aint as active as they were back in the day, unless you mean the SWP?



Its the domino theory.... AFA in 1991 decided to launch a load of very public anti fascist nonsense. SWP style crap. This gave AFA and the BNP loads of publicity. The SWP saw this and decided to re-launch the SWP after a dire AFA march thru Bethnal Green. Then other people like Lee Jasper saw an opportunity to create their own vehicle. As more and more people attempted to tell everybody how important the BNP threat was and how they were the best people to deal with it. The BNP got more and more publicity and stronger and stronger...

The thing that really set them back was when some of us Ex AFA people got our act together.

Publicising Fascist Groups as AFA the ANL and ARA did is a very dodgy strategy. Without publicity the BNP would have never grown so quickly in the 90s.
Nowadays they type of activity that worked so well in the early 90s is much more tricky. But the fact remains that some people are still far more interested in building their own groups thru their anti nazi stuff than actually damaging the fascists.


----------



## tbaldwin (Feb 18, 2008)

likesfish said:


> I do know what piss's a lot of people off in skid row on sea.
> I go to a fair number of local action team events tenants meetings etc etc.
> every single piece of bump f  goes on about how keen the council is to reach out to ethnic minority's etc etc.
> Its Brighton ffs most of the city is white I'm not being racist its a fact  all the councilors are white. but they do shit like advertise a museum traineeship only open to BME applicants
> its like some stupid conspiracy to annoy the electorate



Good post.


----------



## durruti02 (Feb 18, 2008)

Spion said:


> Yes. Check back on p2 of this thread, lazy boy



 er who is lazy? KBJ does NOT appear to call for 'immigration control' - he says 

"Its a difficult one but you need to have an 'immigration breathing space' to rebuild the services and facilities that have been decimated by 28 years of Blatcherism. This would be easier without the extra drains. Also if the govt is seen to be prioritising Britons (of all creeds and colours) then it will pull the rug from underneath the bnp's feet. You can't stop immigration totally but you could reduce the worst impact of cheap labour importation. You would HAVE to have facilities for helping those fleeing persecution but the current free for all (as it is percieved) and the feeling that all new resources are being swallowed up by newcomers because of their extra 'needs' means that we need to halt unecessary immigration in order to rebuild the UK and help those fleeing oppression."

if he means this to be done via controls then you have sussed him right .. he has not yet actually said that here .. afair he used to say it would be done at the point of employment, like i do .. maybe he has changed or i got him wrong


----------



## bluestreak (Feb 18, 2008)

Ooooh, oooh, itching powder in their swastika-print undercrackers?


----------



## Meltingpot (Feb 18, 2008)

frogwoman said:


> there's a radio 4 thingy now if anyone's interested ...



Thanks babe but I've just been kicked out of Stormfront (Opposing Views, as you know but others may not, I'm not allowed to post on the main board), and a pack of lies told about me and what I believe so I'm not in a very good mood right now.

Here's the miserable thing if you're interested;

http://www. stormfront.org/forum/showthread.php?p=5154198#post5154198

I accept that Urban75 doesn't allow people with certain views to post, but just one last go at this, since I've seen people banned here for saying what they think about the BNP.

I've just suffered the opposite fate myself (prolly for saying someone should be locked up for wanting to kill people, though he hasn't so far been honest about that), and it blows big time so I can't find it in myself to support others being banned for expressing their thoughts. 

Soulman, it isn't a case of what's my "thing." Freedom of speech doesn't just mean views you agree with, or even ones you'd want to share houseroom with. It means being willing to listen to people who have very different temperaments and life experiences from yours. 

And it's not negotiable IMO. Anyone has the same right to say what they honestly believe based on their experiences and reasoning as anyone else has. Once we lose sight of that we're in trouble. No one should (or probably even can) sit in judgment about another person's whole personality, judgment, reasoning, instincts and life experiences, which is what you are doing when you ban someone from a board for speaking their mind.

As I said, space allowing (and there seems to be plenty here) there should always be the option of a space on a board for people whose views you find unpalatable, whether that be about race, abortion, anti-feminism (such as the "White Taliban" contingent on the Phora) or anything else. No one would have to visit it and read it if they didn't want to; it may even be possible to blank it off in the COP panel, just as you can put people on "ignore" from the profile.


----------



## frogwoman (Feb 18, 2008)

hmmmmm...sorry m8, but why do you care? why is it so important to you that you'reallowed to post there and have their approval? just dont worry about it 
i mean if i had a quid for every time i'd been banned from a nazi/proto-nazi board ... its not a big deal at all  
anyone posting there as someone opposed to them is gonna get banned sooner or later unless they're VERY clever about it ... of course they're going to ban people for saying certain things, that's the sort of people they are ... disingenuous scum... i wouldn't even want to post on there anyway ... sorry, dont mean to derail the thread or anything ...


----------



## frogwoman (Feb 18, 2008)

sorry mate i just really dont see why you're upset about it ... if it was me i'd be happy ... i dont see where your coming from at all on this one


----------



## Meltingpot (Feb 18, 2008)

Excuse me babe I'm a bit tired at the moment. Basically, I'm talking about banning people for their views, as opposed to giving them space to express themselves on a topic under discussion (even off the main board). I'm a bit anti the whole idea atm, and I feel I should say my piece. What annoys me atm is I feel jack_boot's lying about me and because I'm banned from there I'm not able to defend myself in front of others reading the thread. So, I don't want the same thing happening to people here.

It's not a case of "approval," froggie, you don't expect that even here. Just look at the flaming I've had to put up with on Urban - far worse than anything I've had to put up with on SF or indeed anywhere else -  when I've got into arguments about 9/11, JFK and the Virginia shootings (OK maybe I was wrong about that last one).

Dub didn't exactly "approve" of my views, he called me a "fucking idiot", and nor did 8den who called me a "moron" - but I'm still tolerated here and allowed to say what I think. That's the difference.

Sorry if I'm going on a bit about this. This is a hot topic for me right now, on top of about 5 hours' sleep last night.


----------



## frogwoman (Feb 18, 2008)

Meltingpot said:


> It's not a case of approval froggie, you don't expect that even here. Just look at the flaming I've had to put up with on Urban - far worse than anything I've had to put up with on SF or indeed anywhere else when I've got into arguments about 9/11, JFK andthe Virginia shootings (OK maybe I was wrong about that last one)
> 
> Dub didn't exactly "approve" of my views, he called me a "fucking idiot" nor does 8den who called me a moron -
> but I'm tolerated here. Allowerd to say what I think. That's the difference.



but they're nazis. they are nasty cunts - it's what they do. i don't particularly care - i don't post there, i know what to expect from them, i know its useless to engage with anyone who is that far gone that they are part of a nazi organisation and actively involved in their politics, as opposed to merely sympathising with it. saying that they ban people for disagreeing with them is like saying that the pope has been seen taking holy communion.


----------



## frogwoman (Feb 18, 2008)

im sorry but you cant really expect anything else on any of that kind of site unless you're really clever about what you say. 

a lot of people manage to succeed in doing that though ... know thy enemy


----------



## audiotech (Feb 18, 2008)




----------



## frogwoman (Feb 18, 2008)

careful - you might hurt their feelings


----------



## frogwoman (Feb 18, 2008)

stop persecuting them. they have a right to be heard.


----------



## Meltingpot (Feb 18, 2008)

frogwoman said:
			
		

> careful - you might hurt their feelings



You may think that but then it's Tories who should be banned - they're nasty cunts too (you should hear what people said about Thatcher back in the early 80's), then Liberals who believe in the "orange book", then Labour party members who supported the war in Iraq (mind you that one is tempting), then all Labour party members, then revisionists, then anyone who doesn't believe in revolution NOW -

Where does it stop?

Anyway, they've posted my rebuttal now on page 2 of that thread "Retew's ghost" so I can rest content (if a bit worn out). 

Thanks for reading this anyway.


----------



## frogwoman (Feb 18, 2008)

that's the old slipperly slope argument that's been done on here a thousand times before ... it doesn't logically follow that any of the other groups you've mentioned will be stopped from expressing themselves.


----------



## Meltingpot (Feb 18, 2008)

No it doesn't, but unless you have a principle underlying what can and cannot be said here (if you want to draw limits) then anyone could be banned as soon as the mods get fed up with them. I was pretty much threatened with a ban for posting conspiracist stuff, for example, that people didn't like - have a look at the Virginia Tech thread. It was done very jokingly but the threat was clear.

As I said, I no longer think the point of view expressed there is credible but it's the principle that counts. 

My feeling is that the presumption should always be in favour of freedom of expression. If you say Nazis shouldn't be allowed to post anywhere here, which I'd have some sympathy with, then how about someone like the lady I met recently who was unhappy about a mosque being built next to her family cemetery? Not so easy to draw the line.


----------



## frogwoman (Feb 18, 2008)

Doesn't follow at all, sorry. Banning people from an internet site who are disruptive and abusive is the same as stopping people building a place of worship near a cemetery? 

Oh and as for freedom of expression - what about the freedom of anyone to run a website how they want? Freedom of expression has limits and I dislike the way that it's used as an excuse for EVERYTHING. If I invited a load of guests round to my house and one of them started insulting everyone, calling people cunts, going on about how the nordic race was better than the medditeranean race or whatever and how black people are less intelligent, I have the RIGHT to throw them out of my house because it's my house. 

same goes for people who own websites - if you run a website you have the right to choose who to give a platform to. I don't like the fact that stormfront even exist but you can't complain about being banned if you go on their website and they then ban you for disagreeing with you. they're not going to be doing anything different - it's what they do, don't expect anything different. they're not little fluffy bunny rabbits. 

we don't like it but i don't even agree with the fact they exist in the first place  

Come on, you can do better than this.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Feb 18, 2008)

Yes, there is "censorship" here, at least on this micro scale - you're not allowed to promote the BNP, race science, homophobia, your Texas Holdem site, free iPods... we have (pretty loose, admittedly) limits on exactly how rude you can be, whether you can post call-out threads, reveal RL details... clearly there are things that you are not allowed to say on Urban. I don't think this has ever really been in doubt, surely?


----------



## KeyboardJockey (Feb 18, 2008)

Spion said:


> Yes. Check back on p2 of this thread, lazy boy



I concur.  To clarify my idea of immigration controls. I think that we should be much more fair open and transparent about our asylum system.  In my book first priority for entry to the UK should be those at genuine risk of harm if they were returned to their home countries.  

I think there does need to be more controls on economic migration and migration associated with it.

The country has never had a proper chance to rebuild after Thatcher.  So many of her ideas were incorporated in a mutated form into NL that stuff that has needed to be done either hasn't been done or has been done on the cheap or expensive andineffective if pfi is involved.

We have at least two generations who have been fucked over by the state and rather than invest in putting right the wrongs of the past which is why many people voted Bliar in 97 New Labour have bypassed so many of our own people and encouraged business to buy in labour from abroad that UK hasn't paid to train or support in their earlier lives. 

We need to restrict the majority of economic migration especially in some key areas to give our own workforce a chance to shine.  It doesnt' need to be done over night I'd envisage a five year wind down of entry.  It may cause problems with the EU but it should be looked at as part of a whole National 'Marshal' Plan to bring us up take a proper place in Europe and expunge the scars of Thatcherism.


----------



## KeyboardJockey (Feb 18, 2008)

durruti02 said:


> if he means this to be done via controls then you have sussed him right .. he has not yet actually said that here .. afair he used to say it would be done at the point of employment, like i do .. maybe he has changed or i got him wrong



I do mean it should be done by transparent and well publicised controls. I agree with durruti02 that I'm pretty certain that I didn't say that immigration controls should be done at the point of employment.  It should preferably be done at the border or ideally before.


----------



## durruti02 (Feb 19, 2008)

cheers KBJ 

so ok spion you were right .. my mistake 

in which case i disagree with KBJ (and TB! ) on this .. imho it is NOT possible to control movement of people by borders ... it is supply and demand that controls movement of people .. people come here not to go on the dole ( usually ) but to earn money .. and they know that employers here want to employ them on cheap temporary conmtracts .. you take that away by forcing employers to employ local kids .. and immigration would collapse

p.s. i did not mean immigation controls at employment -- by that i meant employers HAVE to employ locally and NOT recruit abroad as so many do now


----------



## KeyboardJockey (Feb 19, 2008)

durruti02 said:


> cheers KBJ
> 
> so ok spion you were right .. my mistake
> 
> in which case i disagree with KBJ (and TB! ) on this .. imho it is NOT possible to control movement of people by borders ... it is supply and demand that controls movement of people .. people come here not to go on the dole ( usually ) but to earn money .. and they know that employers here want to employ them on cheap temporary conmtracts .. you take that away by forcing employers to employ local kids .. and immigration would collapse


I think that the borders should be the primary stop point for immigration control.  However you would need to force employers to employ brits rather than foriegners.


----------



## northernhord (Feb 19, 2008)

tbaldwin said:


> Its the domino theory.... AFA in 1991 decided to launch a load of very public anti fascist nonsense. SWP style crap. This gave AFA and the BNP loads of publicity. The SWP saw this and decided to re-launch the SWP after a dire AFA march thru Bethnal Green. Then other people like Lee Jasper saw an opportunity to create their own vehicle. As more and more people attempted to tell everybody how important the BNP threat was and how they were the best people to deal with it. The BNP got more and more publicity and stronger and stronger...
> 
> The thing that really set them back was when some of us Ex AFA people got our act together.
> 
> ...



Even before the AFA though there was a swelling in the far right due to Nazi skinhead bands such as Screwdriver and cocksparrow plying their filthy wares all over Europe.
The popularity of the then BNP was more down to the removal of overtly racist language and a move towards back door racism (cultural identity and separtism as a means of preserving ethnic groups) and Nationalism which was something a disgruntled voter could chew on more palletably.

I dont think some of the hard left did themselves many favours back then but there are a lot variables going down in this arguement


----------



## KeyboardJockey (Feb 19, 2008)

northernhord said:


> Even before the AFA though there was a swelling in the far right due to Nazi skinhead bands such as Screwdriver and cocksparrow plying their filthy wares all over Europe.
> The popularity of the then BNP was more down to the removal of overtly racist language and a move towards back door racism (cultural identity and separtism as a means of preserving ethnic groups) and Nationalism which was something a disgruntled voter could chew on more palletably.
> 
> I dont think some of the hard left did themselves many favours back then but there are a lot variables going down in this arguement



Good post.


----------



## frogwoman (Feb 19, 2008)

northernhord said:


> Even before the AFA though there was a swelling in the far right due to Nazi skinhead bands such as Screwdriver and cocksparrow plying their filthy wares all over Europe.
> The popularity of the then BNP was more down to the removal of overtly racist language and a move towards back door racism (cultural identity and separtism as a means of preserving ethnic groups) and Nationalism which was something a disgruntled voter could chew on more palletably.
> 
> I dont think some of the hard left did themselves many favours back then but there are a lot variables going down in this arguement



exactly


----------



## Spion (Feb 19, 2008)

durruti02 said:


> er who is lazy? KBJ does NOT appear to call for 'immigration control' - he says





KeyboardJockey said:


> Halt the mass immigration



post #39

Yeah, so who were you saying was lazy?


----------



## audiotech (Feb 19, 2008)

KeyboardJockey said:


> I do mean it should be done by transparent and well publicised controls. I agree with durruti02 that I'm pretty certain that I didn't say that immigration controls should be done at the point of employment.  It should preferably be done at the border or ideally before.



There are clearly tough restrictions on immigration as we speak KJ (spouses and family members of immigrants already settled here were the last ones in of immigrants from the old colonial countries in Asia for example), I assume then you are wanting even more restrictions? What would these be and on whom?


----------



## tbaldwin (Feb 19, 2008)

northernhord said:


> Even before the AFA though there was a swelling in the far right due to Nazi skinhead bands such as Screwdriver and cocksparrow plying their filthy wares all over Europe.
> The popularity of the then BNP was more down to the removal of overtly racist language and a move towards back door racism (cultural identity and separtism as a means of preserving ethnic groups) and Nationalism which was something a disgruntled voter could chew on more palletably.
> 
> I dont think some of the hard left did themselves many favours back then but there are a lot variables going down in this arguement



Cocksparrer were never a blood and honour nazi band....

I think if anything that the nazi skin thing held the NF and BNP back for years.. They also made remarkably easy targets.


----------



## northernhord (Feb 19, 2008)

tbaldwin said:


> Cocksparrer were never a blood and honour nazi band....
> 
> I think if anything that the nazi skin thing held the NF and BNP back for years.. They also made remarkably easy targets.



Cocksperrer were'nt blood and Honour, they were a known racist band at the time though.
The more honest face of racism carried by the nazi skins was a prompt to go for something more softly softly, also at the time in the US Mr Farrakhan of NOI wasnt making much headway and they also began a slow move in the direction of cultural identity as a means of racism.


----------



## frogwoman (Feb 19, 2008)

We've already got one of the toughest policies, if not the toughest, on imigration in the whole of europe.


----------



## northernhord (Feb 19, 2008)

frogwoman said:


> We've already got one of the toughest policies, if not the toughest, on imigration in the whole of europe.



Indeed, and Tory wankers and their press make out like anyone can come into the Countyr whenever they like.


----------



## durruti02 (Feb 20, 2008)

Spion said:


> post #39
> 
> Yeah, so who were you saying was lazy?



fair play but he had not been explicit till that post 

( p.s. note how i can apologise?  )


----------



## durruti02 (Feb 20, 2008)

northernhord said:


> Even before the AFA though there was a swelling in the far right due to Nazi skinhead bands such as Screwdriver and cocksparrow plying their filthy wares all over Europe.
> The popularity of the then BNP was more down to the removal of overtly racist language and a move towards back door racism (cultural identity and separtism as a means of preserving ethnic groups) and Nationalism which was something a disgruntled voter could chew on more palletably.
> 
> I dont think some of the hard left did themselves many favours back then but there are a lot variables going down in this arguement



cockparrow nazi??


"Watch Your Back"

Everybody's talking about revolution
Everybody's talking about smash the state
Sounds to me like the final solution
Right wing, left wing, full of hate

[Chorus]
We don't wanna fight
Because you tell us to
So watch your back when you attack us
'Coz we might just turn on you.

Things get worse with every hour
The future fades into the past
All they want is total power
Climbing on the backs of the working class.

[Chorus]

[Chorus]

We don't wanna be part of no new religion
We don't need a boot and a switchblade knife
We don't wanna be part of a political dream
We just wanna get on living our lives

"They Mean Murderer"
When I was young those stories took me in
Of G.I.Joe the comic macho man
They mean murder they mean murder
Disguised as fairytales
The hero never fails
They mean murder they mean murder
They wave their flags
They play their anthems loud
Teach men to kill then teach them to be proud
They mean murder they mean murder
The ticker tape parade
Hides all the waste they made
They mean murder they mean murder

When governments find that they can't agree
They settle differences so easily
They mean murder they mean murder
Hysteria has spread
And it's you who ends up dead
They mean murder they mean murder
Turn men into machines
Disguise the truth with dreams
They mean murder they mean murder


----------



## KeyboardJockey (Feb 20, 2008)

MC5 said:


> There are clearly tough restrictions on immigration as we speak KJ (spouses and family members of immigrants already settled here were the last ones in of immigrants from the old colonial countries in Asia for example), I assume then you are wanting even more restrictions? What would these be and on whom?



I'm going to start an immigration thread to expound my theories more.


----------



## Meltingpot (Feb 20, 2008)

There is probably more to this issue than I'm aware of here, I don't claim everything I've said here is right or the whole truth.



frogwoman said:


> Doesn't follow at all, sorry. Banning people from an internet site who are disruptive and abusive is the same as stopping people building a place of worship near a cemetery?



No, disruptive I agree about but not stopping people even being able to say they don't like a place of worship being built near a cemetery. Why shouldn't **** come on here if she wants (which she doesn't, I've asked her) and say as she did elsewhere that there's nothing British about a mosque? You're free to disagree with her or argue with her if you want. I know she says far more extreme things than that, but that's one example.

Also, if you wanted to ban people because they're abusive, Dub, 8den and a few others would be long gone by now. 



frogwoman said:


> Oh and as for freedom of expression - what about the freedom of anyone to run a website how they want?



We're probably going to disagree here but I don't think anyone has the right anywhere to go unchallenged when they're presenting what purport to be facts about another person or something where another person has an interest, and where other people can read it. 

You'll probably recall on when I made an adverse comment about the BNP and M********, who was a BNP member at the time, thought I was being unfair and corrected me. He wouldn't be able to do that here apparently and I think that's wrong.

Increasingly the right of newspapers to print whatever they like about people without fear of rebuttal, however tenuous the connection with reality, is  being challenged (or was until New Labour chickened out of standing up to Murdoch); shouldn't the same apply to websites?



frogwoman said:


> Freedom of expression has limits and I dislike the way that it's used as an excuse for EVERYTHING.



I agree, but that can easily morph into, "they can say whatever they like as long as I agree with it." There's no point in stating a point of view everyone agrees with.

I've got a simple rule; anyone can say anything they want in the course of a debate as long as a/ they can back it up, and b/ they don't condone violence. Like on the Phora for example.



frogwoman said:


> If I invited a load of guests round to my house and one of them started insulting everyone, calling people cunts, going on about how the nordic race was better than the mediterranean race or whatever and how black people are less intelligent, I have the RIGHT to throw them out of my house because it's my house.



Of course, but if you're wise you wouldn't raise the issue in the first place if you didn't want them to say that. There's a difference between someone saying something like that completely out of the blue and someone saying that if you'd just raised the subject yourself, i.e. by saying The Bell Curve was a load of crap (which it probably is: I haven't read it) in the presence of someone who's just read it and has a different view.

This site constantly ventures into the motives of the BNP and doesn't let an actual BNP member post here to tell them how close to or wide of the mark they are. An SWP member wouldn't like it if a right wing site did that to his or her party.



frogwoman said:


> same goes for people who own websites - if you run a website you have the right to choose who to give a platform to. I don't like the fact that stormfront even exist but you can't complain about being banned if you go on their website and they then ban you for disagreeing with you. they're not going to be doing anything different - it's what they do, don't expect anything different. they're not little fluffy bunny rabbits.
> 
> we don't like it but i don't even agree with the fact they exist in the first place



Like M******** told you (or was it Sir Talksalot?), Stormfront exists precisely because people who hold views like theirs are denied a place to debate anywhere else and people refuse to debate them in the mainstream media. Shouldn't be defending the place when they've just banned me but I believe in fair play.

The Guardian CommentIsFree section, where I often post, is better than it used to be but they still delete posts from people who've said obviously pro-BNP things.

What they don't do though is ban the person; you're still allowed to try again.



frogwoman said:


> Come on, you can do better than this.



I'll try, but I'll probably be banned. Ah well.


----------



## Meltingpot (Feb 20, 2008)

FridgeMagnet said:


> Yes, there is "censorship" here, at least on this micro scale - you're not allowed to promote the BNP, race science, homophobia, your Texas Holdem site, free iPods... we have (pretty loose, admittedly) limits on exactly how rude you can be, whether you can post call-out threads, reveal RL details... clearly there are things that you are not allowed to say on Urban.



Some of that's precise (the Texas Holdem site) and other things no one could disagree with such as not revealing RL details, but some of that isn't (what counts as "homophobia", for example?).

Also, it seems to me that mods here reach for the nuclear option as a first resort. Say something even mildly pro-BNP in a thread about the BNP and you're banned permanently. No temp bans, post deletions etc.



FridgeMagnet said:


> I don't think this has ever really been in doubt, surely?



True, and if I'm honest I knew I'd collide with it sooner or later. Things have come to a head lately.


----------



## frogwoman (Feb 20, 2008)

Meltingpot said:


> No, disruptive I agree about but not stopping people even being able to say they don't like a place of worship being built near a cemetery. Why shouldn't xxx come on here if she wants (which she doesn't, I've asked her) and say as she did on MSF that there's nothing British about a mosque? You're free to disagree with her or argue with her if you want. I know she says far more extreme things than that, but that's one example.
> 
> There isn't any comparison sorry especially given such a view has a very large section of the british media behind it and a newspaper practically dedidcated to it (the daily express).
> 
> ...


----------



## frogwoman (Feb 20, 2008)

Meltingpot said:


> Some of that's precise (the Texas Holdem site) and other things no one could disagree with such as not revealing RL details, but some of that isn't (what counts as "homophobia", for example?).
> 
> Also, it seems to me that mods here reach for the nuclear option as a first resort. Say something even mildly pro-BNP in a thread about the BNP and you're banned permanently. No temp bans, post deletions etc.
> 
> ...



Actually that's not true - you weren't here when Layabout was around. He made LOADS of posts before he was banned despite all of them being apologies for the BNP which wouldn't have happened if it was like how you're suggesting.


----------



## frogwoman (Feb 20, 2008)

Anyway time for a new thread. Sorry for highjacking yours Soulman.


----------



## frogwoman (Feb 20, 2008)

There's a thread now in Theory and History ...


----------



## Meltingpot (Feb 20, 2008)

frogwoman said:


> There isn't any comparison sorry especially given such a view has a very large section of the british media behind it and a newspaper practically dedicated to it (the daily express).
> 
> People come on urban to get away from that shit not see it perpetuated.



There should be some kind of balance IMO.



frogwoman said:


> Erm so right someone swearing in frustration or two people arguing over different views and expressing some strong opinions is the same as people being racist ...



That's not what I said, we're talking about abuse which takes many different forms. "Dear Meltingpot you're a fucking idiot regards everyone else" is abuse pure and simple, it's not just "swearing in frustration". Anyway, what's racism if not "strong opinions?"



frogwoman said:


> Anyone can go on the BNP website and see what theyre about, if someone on here who knows nothing about the bnp (unlikely given the demographic and general political outlook of people who read this site) read a post on them, they can just fucking google it and make their own mind up as to what the bnp's views are.



No they can't, they see what the BNP want them to believe about the party. Put it this way, it's in their interest for them to portray themselves as better than they actually are - "we're not racist, etc." - and for those who oppose them to do the opposite and say they're all Nazis. 

What you do get from the BNP site is a pretty good idea of what they object to, like money being spent on translation services for immigrants etc. You don't get much an idea of how far they'd be willing to go when they got into power to change it. Would they go for involuntary repatriation once they assumed power, for instance?



frogwoman said:


> I'd understand if we lived in a totalitarian society and urban was the only source of independent media in the UK but we don't.



So just how many websites are you supposed to read before you get an idea of what's going on, and every day at that? Life just doesn't work like that. Most people are busy and rely on one or two sources of info they believe they can trust, maybe three at the outside.



frogwoman said:


> He would. He wouldnt just be allowed to promote a fash viewpoint. If you look on this website there are loads of threads about immigration saying some quite fucked up things, which is proof that this website is quite lenient. You're allowed to say what you want as long as you arent too explicit about it and if you're fash scum it wil come out in your posts anyway.



So how come D** D*** got banned, twice (or so he says)?



frogwoman said:


> Hang on first you're going on about how BNP members should be allowed free speech and then you're saying that newspapers shouldn't be allowed to print whatever they want and neither should websites.



No, I'm not saying they shouldn't be allowed to print it, just that if they do people should be allowed to rebut it if it's wrong. Call me or my party what you want as long as I'm allowed to reply.



frogwoman said:


> What if its in the public interest for them to print it?



The same.



frogwoman said:


> What about freedom of information - INFORMATION not fash lies going unchallenged ...



Likewise, etc.



frogwoman said:


> Im sorry but i consider what you are advocating a far more dangerous threat to free speech. If a newspaper has evidence that an individual is complicit in a crime or in a scandal why shouldn't it be printed?



They can. 



frogwoman said:


> Can you not see the irony in what you're saying, on one hand you're saying fash should have the right of reply because of free speech but then you're saying that not anyone should have the right to say whatever they want to say.



You've missed the point. Look - people can say what they want but in return people who want to rebut their arguments should be able to do so. There should never be a situation where people have to see untruths printed about them without a right of reply.



frogwoman said:


> You're contradicting yourself ... you're saying newspapers being muzzled when it comes to private individuals and groups are a good thing and then you're saying everyone can say what they want.



No I'm not - you've got the wrong end of the stick. I'm arguing for more free speech not less. The paper's right to print what they want and others' right of reply.



frogwoman said:


> Circumstances are irrelevant.



No they aren't.



frogwoman said:


> They wouldn't like it but they shouldn't really complain, if you come to a right wing site declaring yourself to be a member of the SWP then that's what they'd probably do sooner or later. Its not a big deal is it? Its just the internet, if they dont like it tough.



I think a moderate right wing site would probably smile indulgently and think, "Leftie student, he or ahe will grow out of it, I thought the same at that age" - pretty much what Nigel Lawson told Nigella once apparently when she supported Labour.



frogwoman said:


> Im not saying it should be taken down. Its not under UK jurisdiction, america has its own laws about these things.



Yeah, I agree.



frogwoman said:


> Urban75 is not the mainstream media, neither are they. The way i see it is while they exist, they have a right to ban people who have views they don't like.



Perhaps they do, but that doesn't mean they should. The best sites have a mix of opinions. Those that don't soon become dreary.



frogwoman said:


> That's different from saying they should control the country in any way or be allowed a mainstream platform.
> 
> If they're going to run a website like that though they should expect everything they get, but if you complain about being banned from there for saying something left-wing you should have a good think about what you're saying.



Well, I wasn't kicked off for anything I said - at least not officially.



frogwoman said:


> And oh yeah the same mainstream media who decry the BNP and then come out with stuff like "Muslims ban Christmas" and give credibility to people like Richard Littlejohn and Melanie Phillips. Yeah some no platform policy.



Mel's not fash, she just doesn't like Islam. In all honesty I can't abide her but she still has the right to free speech. 



frogwoman said:


> Sure they aint allowed a voice in the mainstream media. That's why the BNP are allowed to put on party political broadcasts.



They had to tone it down though. Haven't seen one for a while but I'll bet they're a lot more moderate than when John Tyndall was in charge.



frogwoman said:


> They're not being censored, theyre self censoring because they know the majority of the shit that comes out of their mouths otherwise will NEVER get them elected.



If they're not being censored, why did Nick Griffin go to court on hate crime charges for saying Islam is an awful religion and then, when he got off, some government minister stand up and say, "we must tighten the laws?" Collett's comments were hate speech IMO - "cockroaches" etc. - but I don't think Griffin's were, as far as I could tell.



frogwoman said:


> The comment is free message boards are full of frothing at the mouth lunatics on all sides.



Disagree, I post there (tell you who I am by PM) and most posters are moderate. They delete quite a few posts.



frogwoman said:


> What about the BBC have your say message boards in which every single person leaving a comment seems to be racist, and the majority of comments by anyone left of Genghis Khan never get printed - despite the BBCs reputation as a "liberal establishment"?



Haven't seen that one, I used to post there under my real name but haven't for a while.


----------



## northernhord (Feb 20, 2008)

durruti02 said:


> cockparrow nazi??
> 
> 
> "Watch Your Back"
> ...



Here is another Cock sparrer ditty, you have to admit though a band that sings these lyrics whilst supporting screwdriver at a gig isnt good

"England Belongs To Me"

Years of being told you ain't as good as us
Join the line, sign your name
And they all said that our country's going bust
But no-one's fooling us again

[Chorus]
England belong's to me
A nation's pride the dirty water on the rivers
No one can take away our memory
Oh Oh, England belongs to me

We'll show the world that the boys are back to stay
And you all know what we can do
Heads held high, fighting all the way
For the red, white, and blue


----------



## Meltingpot (Feb 20, 2008)

frogwoman said:


> There's a thread now in Theory and History ...



Cool. 

Got to eat soon, but can the mods split the thread?


----------



## frogwoman (Feb 20, 2008)

dunno m8 - ask one of them. go and read my other thread  

those cocksparrow lyrics ............


----------



## tbaldwin (Feb 21, 2008)

northernhord said:


> Here is another Cock sparrer ditty, you have to admit though a band that sings these lyrics whilst supporting screwdriver at a gig isnt good
> 
> "England Belongs To Me"
> 
> ...




Ever heard the Upstarts song "England" 
England oh England the countrys so great there will never be any colours like the red the white and the blue.

Lots of misguided fash skins thought it was a song for them, just like a lot thought white riot was for them.

But there is big difference between patriotism and fascism.


----------



## KeyboardJockey (Feb 21, 2008)

tbaldwin said:


> But there is big difference between patriotism and fascism.





Well said!  What worries me about the conflation in the minds of some commentators and activists on the left is by conflating patriotism and fascism you make fascism much more acceptable as a philosophy.


----------



## poster342002 (Feb 21, 2008)

KeyboardJockey said:


> Well said!  What worries me about the conflation in the minds of some commentators and activists on the left is by conflating patriotism and fascism you make fascism much more acceptable as a philosophy.



It's ironic when you consider how keen the mock-left are to wheel out their own wierd version of uncritical patriotism when it suits them. Especially about London, for instance.


----------



## KeyboardJockey (Feb 21, 2008)

poster342002 said:


> It's ironic when you consider how keen the mock-left are to wheel out their own wierd version of uncritical patriotism when it suits them. Especially about London, for instance.



Yup.  They are so busy licking the winnits off of Livingslimes ringpiece that they can't see the comedy gold in their own position.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Feb 21, 2008)

Meltingpot said:


> Some of that's precise (the Texas Holdem site) and other things no one could disagree with such as not revealing RL details, but some of that isn't (what counts as "homophobia", for example?).


None of them are precise really. Some are _easier_ than others, but even "spam" is argued with, and there are constant arguments about RL details particularly if people have revealed them elsewhere.


Meltingpot said:


> Also, it seems to me that mods here reach for the nuclear option as a first resort. Say something even mildly pro-BNP in a thread about the BNP and you're banned permanently. No temp bans, post deletions etc.


A new poster suddenly popping up on a BNP or immigration or whatever thread and referring to the BNP is almost always there specifically to promote the BNP, not as part of anything "official" (I imagine) but just as an internet flagwaver. There are various signs, references, "dog-whistle" language, and also there may be details which mods can't explain for general confidentiality reasons. There's no particular point in temp bans in these instances and we prefer not to delete posts if it can be avoided.


----------



## northernhord (Feb 21, 2008)

tbaldwin said:


> Ever heard the Upstarts song "England"
> England oh England the countrys so great there will never be any colours like the red the white and the blue.
> 
> Lots of misguided fash skins thought it was a song for them, just like a lot thought white riot was for them.
> ...




True, there is also the context of singing such lyrics whilst supporting Screwdriver.


----------



## tbaldwin (Feb 21, 2008)

northernhord said:


> True, there is also the context of singing such lyrics whilst supporting Screwdriver.



Read Diamond in the Dust and it shows that Ian Stuart had a lot of contacts early on people like Lemmy from Motorhead and Suggs from Madness.
I dont know a lot about Cocksparrer but one of my old mates ran a skinzine and i will ask him,but my guess is they prob supported Skrewdriver in the early days when they were a shit punk band.


----------



## audiotech (Feb 21, 2008)

KeyboardJockey said:


> Well said!  What worries me about the conflation in the minds of some commentators and activists on the left is by conflating patriotism and fascism you make fascism much more acceptable as a philosophy.



Aggressive nationalism, as Orwell noted.



> He defined nationalism as the feeling that your way of life, country, or ethnic group were superior to others. These types of feelings lead a group to attempt to impose their morality on any given situation. When those standards were not met, more often then not, war would result.
> 
> In contrast he stated that patriotism was the feeling of admiration for a way of life etc. and the willingness to defend it against attack. The obvious difference between the two is that while patriotism is a passive attitude, nationalism is aggressive by nature.
> http://blogcritics.org/archives/2005/06/22/175803.php


----------



## tbaldwin (Feb 21, 2008)

Surely Patriotism is caring about those closest to you, which is fair enough. Nationalism is something different,putting a mythical national interest first and fascism is just as shit as Lee Jasper.


----------



## northernhord (Feb 21, 2008)

tbaldwin said:


> Read Diamond in the Dust and it shows that Ian Stuart had a lot of contacts early on people like Lemmy from Motorhead and Suggs from Madness.
> I dont know a lot about Cocksparrer but one of my old mates ran a skinzine and i will ask him,but my guess is they prob supported Skrewdriver in the early days when they were a shit punk band.



Interesting, I heard that Madness's Dancer Chaz Smash was once a member of the BM.


----------



## audiotech (Feb 21, 2008)

northernhord said:


> Interesting, I heard that Madness's Dancer Chaz Smash was once a member of the BM.



There's a photo of Suggs pictured with bonehead Nicky Crane somewhere that I've seen.

_Oi!_


----------



## northernhord (Feb 21, 2008)

MC5 said:


> There's a photo of Suggs pictured with bonehead Nicky Crane somewhere that I've seen.
> 
> _Oi!_



Was that tattood angry skinhead geezer on the cover of an oi album?


----------



## audiotech (Feb 21, 2008)

northernhord said:


> Was that tattood angry skinhead geezer on the cover of an oi album?



That's him.


----------



## northernhord (Feb 21, 2008)

MC5 said:


> That's him.



Ah yeah, one of them racist oi geezers who wasnt racist, defended by Gazza Bushall if I recal.


----------



## durruti02 (Feb 23, 2008)

northernhord said:


> True, there is also the context of singing such lyrics whilst supporting Screwdriver.



those lyrics ( i knew you would come back at me with that one! ) are NOT nationalist let alone fascist let alone nazi just pub rock ( which was what cocksparrer were) patriotism .. tell me what you dislike about them and put them in the context of the 2 other sets of lyrics .. it is the same working class song that the left ignores over and over of people proud of themselves and where they come from but angry with how the have been used over and over .. the left misinterprets this as fascism .. that has been, and increasingly is, disasterous 

and as tb says when did they support srcewdriver? again i suspect in the 7ts or very early 8ts when screwdriver were NOT nazi .. indeed a lots of lefties at the time were into them 

and that may well be why crane knew so many people as screwdriver were NOT nazi till the 8ts .. a certain radio 1 DJ is ex screwdriver .. should we campaign for him to be no platformed??? LOL

p.s. btw i do think bushell is a total liar in his story about how crane got on the front of OI! #1


----------



## JimPage (Feb 23, 2008)

Picketing their workplaces is a tried and tested tactic that works, as is phoning up their boss to get them sacked. Obviously, a strict no platform policy of no meetings, socials, elections, leafletting, canvassing, or street activity also works.

None of the above needs to be violent, just force of numbers and force of personalisty normally works


----------



## JimPage (Feb 23, 2008)

Oletjo said:


> Try and engage with the reasons an authoritarian party like the BNP might be attractive in the first place - poverty, lack of identity, crap education, crap housing, poor job opportunities, rightwing propaganda, left wing elitism, a culture based upon abstract ideals that have been smashed by global capitalism, shall I go on?



All of this needs an electoral party which will adress these issues from a class, nor race , perspective. but there is no organisation in existance, and will not be in the run up to the May elections. Until there is, No Platform is the only option upen to us


----------



## audiotech (Feb 23, 2008)

northernhord said:


> Interesting, I heard that Madness's Dancer Chaz Smash was once a member of the BM.



According to Red Saunders, founder of Rock Against Racism, their drummer was a vegetarian against the nazi's.


----------



## sleeper (Feb 24, 2008)

Its BS that they even exist...natural forces left to work will see them 'destroyed'...eventually. 

Of course this type of extremity has seen it's rise in History and they say history repeats itself...but it can't possibly come in this form ever again (dicscrimination against petals of a flower)..not on a large scale anyway. They will just exist to represent the stupid few and ultimately add a ray of democracy to the British constitution....whatever democracy may be.


----------



## Geri (Feb 24, 2008)

Dare i ask?


----------



## treelover (Feb 25, 2008)

I wonder what the Witchfinder Generals on here and other posters think of this song, it's called 'Roots' by Show of Hands' an incredibly popular folk rock band(though you won't hear them on the BBC)



some lyrics here



> And a minister said his vision of hell
> Is three folk singers in a pub near Wells.
> Well I’ve got a vision of urban sprawl -
> It’s pubs where no one ever sings at all
> ...


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 25, 2008)

It's shit. And stick your flag up your arse. It's embarrassing shit. It really is. This isn't the way to deal with the issues that are seen as white w/c. I thought better of you TL.


----------



## treelover (Feb 25, 2008)

You are living in the past, JP, why not listen to others, Oleto has got it spot on





> Quote:
> Originally Posted by Oletjo View Post
> Try and engage with the reasons an authoritarian party like the BNP might be attractive in the first place - poverty, lack of identity, crap education, crap housing, poor job opportunities, rightwing propaganda, left wing elitism, a culture based upon abstract ideals that have been smashed by global capitalism, shall I go on?
> 
> ...


----------



## bodach (Feb 25, 2008)

butchersapron said:


> It's...up your arse.



Mmm.


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 25, 2008)

....and this middle manager jingle is it is it? Not a mention of class, just difference.


----------



## bodach (Feb 25, 2008)

butchersapron said:


> ....and this middle manger jingle is it is? Not a mention of class, just difference.



You need to slow that finger down, or whatever you're using.


----------



## treelover (Feb 25, 2008)

I'm sorry BA, but SOH are not nazis, nationalists, or any other kind of ists, I was asking for views on the song, they actually have a wide progressive following, though the far right has latched onto it. One can have a love for ones country with all its faults, it can be love of the countryside, its architecture, etc, Orwell, much quoted on here was clearly an English patriot. Ironically on one thread, plenty of urbanites are slagging off KJ for dissing the UK!

tbh, on patrioitism , etc, I am not sure where I stand, however, I am sick of stock 1970's left responses to complex issues,


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 25, 2008)

bodach said:


> You need to slow that finger down, or whatever you're using.



First time for everything.


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 25, 2008)

treelover said:


> I'm sorry BA, but SOH are not nazis, nationalists, or any other kind of ists, I was asking for views on the song, they actually have a wide progressive following, though the far right has latched onto it. One can have a love for ones country with all its faults, it can be love of the countryside, its architecture, etc, Orwell, much quoted on here was clearly an English patriot. Ironically on one thread, plenty of urbanites are slagging off KJ for dissing the UK!
> 
> tbh, on patrioitism , etc, I am not sure where I stand, however, I am sick of stock 1970's left responses to complex issues,



Thanks for the prepared post.

I didn't call them nazis, nationalists, or any other kind of ists. Except shit. And that's what they and this shit in the same style is. It's fucking poison. 

What the fuck is wrong with you?


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 25, 2008)

You really have lost your political marbles TL.


----------



## bodach (Feb 25, 2008)

butchersapron said:


> First time for everything.



Maybe try a bit harder on your grammar.


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 25, 2008)

Ok, i'll sumbit to the hegemony.


----------



## bodach (Feb 25, 2008)

butchersapron said:


> Ok, i'll sumbit to the hegemony.



What about capitals.


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 25, 2008)

What capitals?


----------



## bodach (Feb 25, 2008)

butchersapron said:


> What capitals?



Let's start with Britain's.


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 25, 2008)

Yep. that'll help. Otherwise....


----------



## bodach (Feb 25, 2008)

butchersapron said:


> Otherwise....



I think you're english.   As opposed to british.


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 25, 2008)

That's for me to decide fuckface. Happy smiley property of idiot too scared to be offensive.


----------



## bodach (Feb 25, 2008)

butchersapron said:


> That's for me to decide fuckface.



I can hardly contain myself.


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 25, 2008)

What are my options culchie?


----------



## bodach (Feb 25, 2008)

butchersapron said:


> What are my options culchie?



If you can't make your options, you're fucked.


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 25, 2008)

bodach said:


> If you can't make your options, you're fucked.



And you, i think, are.


----------



## bodach (Feb 25, 2008)

butchersapron said:


> And you, i think, are.



A smilie.


----------



## soulman (Feb 25, 2008)

This is like two old drunks trying to fight in the street 



*disowns this thread*


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 25, 2008)

I would do too. Not a very distinguished first page. Not enough liberals talking about hanging people. Quality.


----------



## bodach (Feb 25, 2008)

butchersapron said:


> I would do too. Not a very distinguished first page. Not enough liberals talking about hanging people. Quality.



Gets butchersapron a hot water bottle.


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 25, 2008)

Thank you. I'll need another one soon.


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 25, 2008)

treelover said:


> I wonder what the Witchfinder Generals on here and other posters think of this song, it's called 'Roots' by Show of Hands' an incredibly popular folk rock band(though you won't hear them on the BBC)
> 
> 
> 
> ...





This drivel needs reposting.  TL is this really where you see a pro w/c politics coming from? Is this what you think the IWCA is about?


----------



## Meltingpot (Feb 25, 2008)

FridgeMagnet said:


> None of them are precise really. Some are _easier_ than others, but even "spam" is argued with, and there are constant arguments about RL details particularly if people have revealed them elsewhere.
> 
> A new poster suddenly popping up on a BNP or immigration or whatever thread and referring to the BNP is almost always there specifically to promote the BNP, not as part of anything "official" (I imagine) but just as an internet flagwaver. There are various signs, references, "dog-whistle" language, and also there may be details which mods can't explain for general confidentiality reasons. There's no particular point in temp bans in these instances and we prefer not to delete posts if it can be avoided.



Fair enough.


----------



## treelover (Feb 25, 2008)

of course not, its a seperate issue about culture, in fact it was probably posted on the wrong thread. However, i stand by my criticism of trite simplistic solutions to the rise of the far right, this isn't 1936.





> This drivel needs reposting. TL is this really where you see a pro w/c politics coming from? Is this what you think the IWCA is about?


----------



## audiotech (Feb 25, 2008)

treelover said:


> of course not, its a seperate issue about culture, in fact it was probably posted on the wrong thread. However, i stand by my criticism of trite simplistic solutions to the rise of the far right, this isn't 1936.



But what about the trite, simplistic lyrics you posted though?


----------



## audiotech (Feb 25, 2008)

KeyboardJockey said:


> You've just described the activities that the swaps endulged in that caused B and D to have 11 fash councillors.



I see it as Margaret Hodge and New Labour being the cause and daft SWP activities as the affect.


----------

