Notes in Contemplation of the Question Time Debut of BNP

Suggested membership clause for the BNP after the finding that their membership terms were discriminatory: ‘Persons of African descent will not be admitted into membership’. That way, since all of us are thought to have descended from ancestors somewhere in the Great Rift Valley, no one will qualify.


I like to think that I am fairly tolerant although I can be somewhat gruff and grumpy. I like to think I know a bit about where picking on the less fortunate or minorities can lead. I also like to think that I know where envy and greed can lead. More importantly I do not think, but I know, that ignorance is the greatest enemy to our race. By ‘race’ I do not mean Anglo- Saxon, white pink or brown or any other variation you care to think of. I simply mean that little mentioned race in the Race Relations legislation, ‘the human race’.

As a result the forthcoming presence of Nick Griffin on a BBC television programme ( the organisation of ‘and nation speak peace unto nation’) has been causing me some anguish this week. This is because I am just old enough to see where the BNP has come from since the fifties. I know very well the history of Sir Oswald Moseley and his successors who have peddled their views down the years. In hard times it is no surprise that the rise of such groupings occurs and the challenge to us all is what we think and what we do. As a true blooded mongrel who would have to be sent in at least four directions should I heed the call to go back where I came from, the option of joining the BNP would not be available to me. Racial/ethnic mix aside I have certain old fashioned views about the equality and fairness brotherhood/sisterhood of man/woman which would be a self denying ordnance in any case, should an application form come my way.

So what do I think about the BBC having Nick the Griffin on my screen? Firstly I believe in freedom of speech and I believe that unless there is a law saying that an organisation or the expression of certain views, is illegal, they should not and cannot be silenced. However, the counter balance to this must lie in the opportunity for those who disagree to put their point of view and so the selection of the panel for Thursdays programme is crucial. Jack Straw will be there as will Sayeeda Warsi, Bonnie Greer and Chris Huhne who I hope have all done their homework. I think Nick Griffin will be called to account as from what I have seen of him so far I think he may well get out of his depth pretty quickly. His populist views which go down well among his usual audience are unlikely to withstand the scorching power of the studio light. And, it is through light that I think I remove all ambivalence regarding the presence of such a person in the public arena. The cleansing light of public exposure is far better than a banning order or ostracism by our broadcasting institutions. The effect of exposure to light will allow the vast majority of the electorate to see that there must never be a return to the black shirts of the thirties, and the provocative marches on the East End of London, or come to that, the deportations of that decade. Most of the world has seen the folly, let alone the wickedness, of such dark paths and so it is the duty of all humans to turn up the light and expose the ignorant and selfish views of this outmoded minority to the excoriating effect of public debate. The risk is that some will like what Nick Griffin has to say, but my expectation of the British public is that they will see the BNP exposed for what it is and reject it.

Big is Generally Ugly

Having analysed the political flyers for the EU elections and seeing we now have two BNP representatives I have reached a conclusion as to how I feel about the EU. In theory it looked quite a good idea back in the sixties when Gen DeGaulle didn’t want us in. When the UK went in without a vote it seemed worth a punt. When we voted to stay in without really knowing what we were voting for, some thought, well were in, it looks a bit early to get out. Some 25 years later we are still in, but we are now part of an unsustainable structure which like the universe is constantly expanding from the big bang that set it in motion, World War II. I now fear we are the human debris settling to the ground in the dust of ignorance. Judging by the EU election leaflets, and the results, I think that is the condition which many politicians and bureaucrats prefer. Or, it could be, that being a bit stupid themselves, they have no idea how to reverse that state of ignorance. Since rulers prefer ignorance I doubt this latter point.

I have always suspected big organisations. They usually seem to concentrate rather too many unpleasant people at the point of the pyramid. This might be sour grapes on my part, having never been invited to rise to such lofty heights. On the other hand I am sufficiently arrogant to think that I could hardly do a worse job, and I could do with the money. Many years ago I was at a meeting when one of the lightweights who was busily floating skyward to the summit of the pyramid, pointed out with all the gravitas he could muster, which wasn’t a lot at the best of times, ‘Ya know, some of you had better realise that small is no longer beautiful’. At the time I suspected he was getting at some of us greener types, thinking we were green behind the ears rather than in our life style expectations. Alternatively he could have been reading ‘Readers Digest’.

Coming from such a person this shallow prose has been enduring proof for the last thirty years that I was right to suspect big cars, building projects and super constitutional arrangements, and even big ideas, as something which for the most part can have ugly, not beautiful outcomes. I am glad to say that Mr Gravitas minor rose to the top of a rather small pyramid in a rather small pond, so perhaps he now realises that small is rather beautiful after all.

And that is how I think about the EU as presently constructed and operated. Since the political parties can’t present specific arguments for or against I shall take refuge in the following small but not beautiful thought. In the short term the EU might be able to better regulate the environmental disaster we have created for ourselves, it might be able to improve the welfare of the masses, but in the long term I fear it’s massive superstructure will drift away from them, taking democratic principles with it before crashing down in a pile of expensive political masonry. This is not to say the European idea should be abandoned. It is more a case of recognising the dangers of high rise living and seeking a return to more humane, co-operative living. Now that would be beautiful.
Dacier

Archbishops Intervene!

When I heard reports of Archbishop Rowan William’s article in the Times ( Sat 23rd May) it seemed to be out of touch with what has been going on. We were told that the humiliation of delinquent MPs had gone far enough and would endanger our democracy. The next day he joined with the Archbishop of York to call on voters not to vote for the BNP at the forthcoming European Elections.

In reading the article it was clear that the headline emphasized the first paragraph and skipped the ethical issues. There is much to agree with in the article. The Archbishop argues the need to urgently re-establish trust and to connect the underlying attitudes with a wider problem i.e., personal integrity should allow observance of the spirit of rules not just the letter. Asking, ‘what can we get away with?’ is not a sound moral starting point. By acting in good conscience we not only respect ourselves we also earn the respect of others. I have no problem with any of this.

The humiliation of MP’s is not a pretty sight and by itself could indeed be dangerously undermining of confidence in our democracy. Unfortunately the truth which has now come out will run its course and cannot be stopped. But it would seem that electors have woken up to what has been going on and wish to reclaim democracy, through the ballot box to a new Parliament which recognizes the failings of its predecessor. It is because many electors feel that they know what is fair that they have regained their political self respect. Where the danger lies is in irrational voting or abstention which is exploited by extremists. This is sufficient reason not to plunge into a General Election for the moment. Sadly, the PM was not quick witted enough to grasp this reason for delay.

Whilst the relationship between integrity and rule observance, is a point which needed making, it gives insufficient emphasis to those who ignored the rules. How anyone can say that the purchase of a duck island was an expense incurred wholly, exclusively and necessarily in the course of carrying out parliamentary duties, is beyond imagination. It is a breach of the rules and the claimant is having a laugh at our expense. You might have a different way of expressing this when not in the presence of an Archbishop.

Although many now lack faith in the Parliamentary system we must keep faith with those politicians who have earned our respect during the present crisis. We must also trust the people through the electoral process. But this is where democracy is it at its most fragile and which as we now know, in view of his and the Archbishop of York’s condemnation of the BNP, gives rise to his concerns. If our faith in democracy is lost, or if our votes are misplaced, then delinquent politicians will not be the only ones being humiliated. This is why the intervention of the Church of England should be welcomed by all tolerant people and why others should join in. Lord Tebbit’s advice not to vote for the main parties could easily become, in the present volatile situation, a constitutional nihilism which he had not foreseen, but which we must all fear.
Dacier