Every failure to vote on 1 May is a vote for the BNP

[Editor]

http://plattitude.blogspot.com/2008/04/every-failure-to-vote-on-1-may-is-vote.html

[lena]

Hmmmnn.

Only if they are standing in your area, the BNP only have an influence in a few parts of the country.

I have sympathy for those who spoil their ballot papers as this is a kind of positive abstentionism, I would refuse to vote for the mainstream parties, luckily we have Green Party and Respect to choose from here!

We have to be careful about helping the BNP by "bigging them up" too much, on the other hand whenthey do want to stand we should make a stand against their Nazi crap!

[treborc]

I shall not be voting, like many many more people, waste my time and if the BNP do get in, well it's the will of the people.

Sad to say New Labour really does think it's doing the will of the people, it cannot see how much the people have become to hate it.

[Sacco]

It was the "will of the people" when the Nazis took power in Germany as well ....

[Editor]

Don't forget to vote in our poll on this subject as well .... (on the home page)

[treborc]

Yes and if you do not bother to look at the reason why Hitler came to power, then sad to say you learn nothing.

If I had lived in Germany like my father, more then likely I would have voted for him as well.

Germany was a country which was dying, poverty was normal, the black market was alive, prostitution was the only way to make a living.

The UK, America, and France took the money Germany needed to rebuild after the first world war, something we did learn after world war two.

You cannot strip a country and make it repay money it does not have, the people will hit back, hence the rise of Hitler.

Something we have not learned here the BNP will become the only way the poor can have a say, because New Labour is not listening, it does not hear anymore it See's the cash sign and sells it's sole.

The people at the bottom will build a party and that party might well be the BNP.

[rob9443]

Yes there was a reason why Germans found the Nazis appealing to begin with.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZMVql9RLP34

Another issue is that if you have a large influx of immigration there is bound to be a tendency to lower wages and inflate house prices. When politically correct liberals ignore the economic problems of working class people in deprived areas and dismiss those who raise concerns about immigration as racists it is a gift to the BNP.

As a social democrat rather than a free market liberal I believe in immigration controls as well as regulation of financial markets. Letting market forces rip and blaming the victims is a big mistake.

One argument against proportional representation is that it would allow the BNP to get elected.  But if you take democracy seriously you have to argue with your opponents and deal with people's concerns not pretend they don't exist or rig the system to lock people out.

[Editor]

There's more discussion on this here:

http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2008/04/396150.html

[christie malry]

Only if they are standing in your area, the BNP only have an influence in a few parts of the country.

Just a note to anyone in Tyne & Wear - the BNP are fielding their highest number of candidates ever this year. 2 dozen in Sunderland and around a dozen each in Newcastle and Gateshead. I'd urge everyone to get involved with UAF activities in the area if possible. You can contact UAF or the Northern TUC for more info.

I shall not be voting, like many many more people, waste my time and if the BNP do get in, well it's the will of the people.

It's your will as well though. You didn't use your x to cancel out someone else's. Bad though Labour are, since there's no Respect candidate locally, I'll probably vote Labour if it's a choice between them and fascists.

It was the "will of the people" when the Nazis took power in Germany as well ....

Exactly. The Nazis never got more than a third of the vote. It was acquiesence wot done it.

[treborc]

God almight vote for that idiot with respect no thanks, Galloway should have joined the BNP if he thinks Saddam was a hero of his people.

[christie malry]

The continuing split in Respect makes it a bit of an odd one, but Respect up here means Respect, not Respect Renewal - No Galloway involved! It's just that they're not in my ward.

But in defence of Galloway for a moment, 'cos I know he gets this one thrown back at him all the time, I've seen the bit in the footage immediately before Galloway says 'I salute your courage' and he's actually delivering a message from a Palestinian group, they're not his words. Not defending him as such, but I believe he was there to get money for the Miriam Appeal rather than on a mission of political support.

[treborc]

Anyway it does not matter, I cannot vote anyway i did not register.

[Dugsie]

Anyway it does not matter, I cannot vote anyway i did not register.

I could lend you one of mine.

[treborc]

Did you hear the latest although I've not checked this out, but Jack Straw has put into force a white paper, white states the political levy all Union members pay, must now go direct to Labour HQ. No levy can go to other political parties and the Union cannot give donations to MP's unless they are Labour.

Hows that for annoying people, 1997 Blair said he did not want the Unions involved, not to long ago Brown was talking about a split with unions.

I think Labour are up to something, perhaps annoy the Unions so they leave and Labour can demand state funding. Also the are splitting the funding issue they agree with the Tories that Donations from Unions must not go above £50,000 , but the political levy of course is independent and will go straight to the Labour head office.

What a blood cheek

[Dugsie]

Sounds unlikely. What's your source ?

[treborc]

I have it now, it's all over the papers and on most Labour party sites like Peter Kenyon Labour party activist.

This is the story, The row centers on plans floated by Jack Straw with the backing of Gordon Brown, to insist that all moneys collected or raised by 4 million trade Unionists affiliated to Labour is paid directly to Labour Party Headquarters this would be worth millions.

The idea is that donations from any Union would not go above £50,000 as agreed with the Tories, but the money which goes directly to Labour headquarters would not count.

It seems Labour have debts of £20 million plus some are over due repayments of loans.

The Unions are not very happy it seems.


www.guardian.co.uk

[Dugsie]

The trade union leadership have been a very pathetic bunch in the face of New Labour's neoliberalism. It seems strange to me that this should be in a White Paper. It raises the remote prospect of trying to refound the Labour Party and leaving the New Labourites isolated.

Peter Kenyon chairs Save the Labour Party. I'll see what they are saying.

[KevinBlowe]

A repost to Steve Platt's original posting:

http://kevinblowe.blogspot.com/2008/04/not-just-boris-but-bnp-too.html

[christie malry]

That was a really interesting post Kevin, thanks.

I'm not sure I'm convinced by your reasoning however. If there is a realistic chance of BNP candidates being elected then surely voting to keep a party as deformed as Labour is still better than not voting at all? Your activities in the 90s may not have reformed Labour but surely by helping to keep the actual fascists out it did more good than harm?

Admittedly it's easier for me - I've just got ordinary council elections with none of this second preference malarkey and my council's really rather good (4* actually!) so if it's a choice between not voting and letting the fascists get a higher %age at the ballot box or voting for a council with a good track record and good services, it's not such a hard decision!

[KevinBlowe]

Christie,

I understand what you are saying and it is certainly true that helping to keep the actual fascists out it did more good than harm - for one day. But in the end it didn't make any positive difference to the communities where anti-racist campaigners were frantically urging voters to turn up to polling stations.

If individuals, as a matter of conscience, feel they must vote then that is up to them. I disagree with telling people what to do rather than trying to convince them - whether it's by giving orders or trying to frighten or falsely apportion blame - so I'm hardly going to condemn anyone if that's their choice.

But I wasn't really talking about the isolated actions of an individual in a polling booth. As activists we always talk about the importance of collective action, not the detached decisions of individuals, and I was questioning the wisdom of collectively mobilising the Left around an election - any election - simply to maximise turnout.

In the context of the London Mayoral elections, I believe it sets the bar of ambition pitifully low, does nothing to address the reasons why working class people vote for the BNP (or Boris Johnstone, for that matter) and in no way challenges the complacency of London's Labour councils, It provides a lifeline to self-serving politicians who we would passionately condemn if they weren't "the best of the worst" and, on top of everything else, legitimises an entirely undemocratic process that has the nerve to call itself "democracy".

Actually, perhaps if I'd said it that way on my blog, I could have saved myself an hour and about 200 words! Thanks for the comment though. It remains an intersting debate.

Respect,

kevin