1 in 5 Britons could vote far right (YAwwwwwn)

mkpdavies · 20-01-2005, 05:36 PM

http://www.newstatesman.com/200501240011

Quote:

Ukip and the BNP are far closer in their views and much more popular with voters than most of us realise. Peter John, Helen Margetts and Stuart Weir report on new research

If these people are researchers, I am captain of the Tony Bliar fan club.

Quote:

The rhetoric of "truth-telling" is fundamental to the strategies of both the BNP and United Kingdom Independence Party (Ukip) and shows that they are part of the same phenomenon. It allows them to express solidarity with racism and xenophobia while also defining themselves as plain-speaking folk who will risk persecution for their defiance of liberal hegemony and "politically correct" laws and attitudes.

Insulted yet? I guess Veritas (truth) will be lobbed in the same basket.

Quote:

Yet we estimate that the two parties between them can draw upon a potential reservoir of support from about 20 per cent of the electorate. It is our view that this level of potential backing has existed at least since the late 1960s - when Enoch Powell gave his "rivers of blood" speech - but is only becoming evident with falling support for the Labour-Conservative duopoly and the introduction of a wider range of elections with diverse voting systems that make voters' preferences more apparent.

Make that 50%, 49% UKIP, 1% BNP. How do they get away with such blantant ****?

Quote:

The BNP and Ukip are bitter rivals, but they draw from the same reservoir of support, and opinion polls and focus groups suggest they are linked in voters' minds. Though Ukip's main policy position is withdrawal from the EU, its policies link the EU and immigration as closely related nationalist concerns. The party would "put an end to mass immigration". One of its five pledges is "freedom from overcrowding" - which echoes popular resentments about immigrants and asylum-seekers clogging up roads, railways, doctors' surgeries, hospitals and even the countryside.

They draw from the British people, and thats where the similarity ends.

Quote:

As Nigel Farage, leader of Ukip's MEPs, explained to the Times, Ukip allows voters to "express their anxieties about immigration, but without having to vote for a party that is violent and racist".

Spot on Nigel, where is the far right nature in that comment?

Quote:

This comment clearly referred to Robert Kilroy-Silk, who campaigned in Northampton. It is easy to ridicule Kilroy-Silk and his perma-tan conceit, the pompous Griffin and many of their colleagues. But we should abandon the belief that far-right parties in the UK attract only a lunatic fringe. There is significant potential support for both parties and Ukip has the image and skills to broaden this constituency. We need to take this threat seriously.

Notice how they are the biggest bunch of hypocrites going. Abusing RKS for his skin colour, why trying to smear UKIP with the same brush.

The Brits aren't going to fall for this **** anymore.

C_steam · 20-01-2005, 05:49 PM

Little piece on R4 this morning regarding focus groups set up for women to understand their voting habits.

Key points - all in the focus group voted labour in the last 2 elections. Their vote is now 'up for grabs'. 100% do not trust Blair, to the point of calling him a liar.

Iraq was not asn issue with them - except for the cost and ongoing cost. Conversely, the economy is not an issue either.

Pensions and immigration however were viewed as very important.

The votes are there for the taking - go get 'em, UKIP.

TheVoiceOfReason · 20-01-2005, 10:58 PM

Far right is term of abuse, much favoured by Guardian journalists, New Statesman writers and pro-Europeans. Any party advocating withdrawal from the EU will automatically be labelled with these epithets. It is what passes for intelligent debate in liberal circles.

To some extent it is pointless to argue - in today's political climate (ie, the climate created by, and perpetuated through, the mass media, particularly (BBC) TV and radio) any attempt to raise the issue of the restriction of immigration is in itself far right. Opinions that thirty years ago would have been solidly middle-of-the-road conservative are today routinely described as "far right" or even "neo-fascist." This will continue to be the case until there is a fundamental shift in the political climate itself. Arguing against such terms may force some interviewers or journalists to back down temporarily, but they will use the term again as soon as they get the opportunity.

Intbel · 21-01-2005, 12:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mkpdavies

1 in 5 Britons could vote far right

Oh, goody.

That leaves one for the extreme right, one for the right and two for UKIP.

Seems we're onto a winner!

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

20-01-2005, 05:49 PM	#2 (permalink)
C_steam Super Moderator Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: Paddling up 5hit creek..... Posts: 7,704	Little piece on R4 this morning regarding focus groups set up for women to understand their voting habits. Key points - all in the focus group voted labour in the last 2 elections. Their vote is now 'up for grabs'. 100% do not trust Blair, to the point of calling him a liar. Iraq was not asn issue with them - except for the cost and ongoing cost. Conversely, the economy is not an issue either. Pensions and immigration however were viewed as very important. The votes are there for the taking - go get 'em, UKIP.

20-01-2005, 10:58 PM	#3 (permalink)
TheVoiceOfReason Member Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 106	Far right is term of abuse, much favoured by Guardian journalists, New Statesman writers and pro-Europeans. Any party advocating withdrawal from the EU will automatically be labelled with these epithets. It is what passes for intelligent debate in liberal circles. To some extent it is pointless to argue - in today's political climate (ie, the climate created by, and perpetuated through, the mass media, particularly (BBC) TV and radio) any attempt to raise the issue of the restriction of immigration is in itself far right. Opinions that thirty years ago would have been solidly middle-of-the-road conservative are today routinely described as "far right" or even "neo-fascist." This will continue to be the case until there is a fundamental shift in the political climate itself. Arguing against such terms may force some interviewers or journalists to back down temporarily, but they will use the term again as soon as they get the opportunity.