Nick Griffin, BNP leader on BBC's Question Time

[Uzzy]

I wonder why the population of China is perceived as being such a big problem. It certainly has a big population (1,323,324,000) but it is a big country (3,705,407 sq miles) giving a population density of 360 people per square mile.

Many other countries are far more densely populated including UK, Gemany and Italy in Western Europe and India, Japan, Taiwan and Bangladesh in Asia. So why is it China that is perceived as having the problem?

Mainly as the Chinese Authorities themselves perceived it as a problem? I'm not going to second guess them about their own country, without evidence to the contrary.

 

[Uzzy]

I don't understand why people are against the free movement of labour. I keep hearing that globalisation is a good thing and that free movement of capital is both beneficial, and impossible to prevent even if we wanted to.

Oh, that is right: if there is free movement of labour there won't be any point in "outsourcing" jobs to countries where the costs of production are cheaper because of low wages.

Free movement of labour is indeed a good thing. Knowing how many people are in the country and where they are, so that state resources can be adequately distributed to aid the new migrants and the existing populace, however, is also a good thing. That's where Labour's failed over the past ten years.

 

[funk de fino]

I'm amazed at the ignorance surrounding it, with few people really knowing the difference between an illegal immigrant, an asylum seeker and a refugee.

This is a good point and is relevant to the UK alongwith with the EU freedom of movement incomers. Most of the knuckledraggers lump them all in the same pot.

 

[Skeptic]

The UK's spectator has it right: the problem is that the only people saying the truth about Islamic fascism in the UK are... the BNP fascists, who also mix it with tons of lies about Muslims in general. So what we have (as their latest issue has) is a "battle of the fascists": BNP vs. Islamic radicals.

 

[Undesired Walrus]

Both Homophobes, both anti-semitic, it's a match made in heaven!

BTW, What have the BNP said about Islamic radicals that Labour and the Tories haven't?

 

[dafydd]

Here is Nick Griffin in his younger days.

 

[funk de fino]

The UK's spectator has it right: the problem is that the only people saying the truth about Islamic fascism in the UK are... the BNP fascists, who also mix it with tons of lies about Muslims in general. So what we have (as their latest issue has) is a "battle of the fascists": BNP vs. Islamic radicals.

Incorrect. Many people are talking out about it, including muslim leaders and MP's in the UK.

The BNP has latched onto the Islam thing because it is the new flavour after 911 and 7/7. They think it will pull them more voters rather than the old school immigrant stuff.

 

[mbp]

Oh, that is right: if there is free movement of labour there won't be any point in "outsourcing" jobs to countries where the costs of production are cheaper because of low wages.

It would not affect the point in outsourcing one bit.
Unless your point is that if there's free movement of labour it will be impossible for any country to maintain wages much above the global average. Which may indeed be the case, but that hardly makes it an attractive prospect for those of us currently living in countries with fairly high wages and relatively generous social safety nets.

 

[Fiona]

I think if Mahomet comes to the mountain he gets the same wages as everyone else who lives on the mountain.

 

[mbp]

I think if Mahomet comes to the mountain he gets the same wages as everyone else who lives on the mountain.

Yes, assuming he's in the same line of work as everyone else on that mountain.

If everyone is free to choose to work on whatever mountain they want wouldn't every single worker come to the mountain paying the highest wages?
What then happens if there aren't actually jobs for the entire human population on that mountain?
Does the right to work on the mountain also imply the right to live on the mountain while unemployed and looking for work? If it does I think it will be virtually impossible for that mountain to maintain any kind of robust social safety net.

 

[Fiona]

Yes, I agree.

I also think that if capital is free to move then it will go to low tax economies and thus we will also not be able to maintain any kind of robust social safety net.

As I see it, you can believe that libertarian principles are correct: in which case free movement of labour and capital are both desirable. The market will sort out an equiibrium which will result in greater prosperity for all. Or you can believe that regulation of both capital and labour is better because competition between the rich and poor countries can only result in increasing inequality, as seems to be happening at least on some analyses

Or you can believe that business should do what it likes when it likes and nobody else should have that freedom. For me that is the worst of all possible worlds because in that case you have no effective voice in your own security at all.

 

[WildCat]

I wonder why the population of China is perceived as being such a big problem. It certainly has a big population (1,323,324,000) but it is a big country (3,705,407 sq miles) giving a population density of 360 people per square mile.

Many other countries are far more densely populated including UK, Gemany and Italy in Western Europe and India, Japan, Taiwan and Bangladesh in Asia. So why is it China that is perceived as having the problem?

I think a better metric would be population density per square mile of arable land.

 

[Dr Adequate]

The UK's spectator has it right: the problem is that the only people saying the truth about Islamic fascism in the UK are... the BNP fascists ...

I have always been most interested to hear what you have to say about conditions "on the ground" in Israel. Now, reciprocally, unless Britain has radically changed since I left it a few months ago,

Edited by Lisa Simpson: 

Edited to remove personal remarks.

because you have no frickin' idea what you're talking about. You sit thousands of miles away from my country, and you placidly endorse people whom you know damn well are fascists. Well shame on you.

 

[Skeptic]

Incorrect. Many people are talking out about it, including muslim leaders and MP's in the UK.

Fair enough; good point. Let's hope this becomes a good cause. I repeat what I often said: Islamic fascism is above all an inter-Islamic problem. If other Muslims get help from non-Muslims combating it, good.

 

[volatile]

The UK's spectator has it right: the problem is that the only people saying the truth about Islamic fascism in the UK are... the BNP fascists,

What, exactly, are the BNP saying about "Islamic fascism" that is "true"? I'm all ears.

 

[funk de fino]

Fair enough; good point. Let's hope this becomes a good cause. I repeat what I often said: Islamic fascism is above all an inter-Islamic problem. If other Muslims get help from non-Muslims combating it, good.

Islamic facism is not the only facism. However much you want it to be. To standup against facism, from any angle, should be every persons duty.

 

[WildCat]

Hey, only 22% of Brits would consider voting for a whites-only racist homophobic political party...

 

[Undesired Walrus]

When you break it down it becomes less alarming:

Among voters polled by YouGov, 4 percent said they would “definitely” consider voting for the BNP, 3 percent said they would “probably consider it", and 15 percent said they were “possible” voters for the party, the Telegraph said.

There's no "definitely will" there.

On the bright side, they only have a 4% support in London, unsurprisingly.

It's worth remembering that it is highly likely that many new voters to the BNP are not racist, but instead are disillusioned Labour supporters. They most probably feel completely cut off from politicians, and appreciate it when they are approached by locals, people who live in the area. It happens to be the case that the BNP are good at this, and good at exploiting the impression amongst many that 'they took our jobs'.

In the last general election they got a total of 192,746 votes nationwide. This has been going up ever since 1992. However, in 1987, they only got 553 votes, nationwide. The following election it climed to 7,631. What happened in 1987?

 

[WildCat]

What happened in 1987?

British Airways was privatized, Thatcher was re-elected, and Michael Robert Ryan killed 17 people in the "Hungerford Massacre".

These things are important. And significant. Somehow.

 

[Undesired Walrus]

Interestingly enough, the 1950 election -the first election after the Windrush- didn't have a single racist party on the shortlist.