Immigration

[Kropotkin]

Originally posted by Heresson
Immigrants can cause internal problems -of their fault or not. Natural growth of your own nation won't.

I have to disagree. "Natural growth"* 15-20 years down the lane leads to crime and vandalism.



* I guess the immigrants didn't come to this world like the rest of us.

[Bugs ****ing Bunny]

Originally posted by Boddington's

For those of you that dub the BNP racist.

They are racist. Want me to publish their criminal records again?

What's more, there's a singular lack of any corroboration of those claims. How surprising.

[Bugs ****ing Bunny]

Originally posted by Albert Speer
I think the BNP is basically ultra-nationalist but because Britian is a racial country (made up of ethnic British), they got a natural tendency towards racism.

What? You're bizarre, you know that?

They're white supremacists and anti-semites.

[Dinner]

Immigration is often a good thing but this isn't a case of some=good so more=better. Ideally you want to have a policy similiar to Canada's where if the native population can't fill all the requirements for industry then you allow enough immigraints to come in and fill the vacacies without letting so many in that you end up with depressed wages, unnecissarially high unemployment, or high welfare/social costs. Again ideally you will have the system set up so as to encourage people to assimulate rather then just setting themselves up as a perminent minority or underclass so you will want immigraints to know the national language, the nation's history, it political structure, and at least understand the common national values.

Unfortunately, in the quest for "diversity" many leftists have ignored the ideal and have instead just let anyone and everyone migraite. Often times leftists even put up legal barriers to enforcing existing laws just so a politician can curry favor from the immigraint community. For instance Democrates have passed laws which prevent officers from asking or looking up what a suspect's legal status is even if the person is pulled over or arrested for a different offense.

A crime is a crime and we should be enforcing all the laws or we should get the laws off of the books.

[Heresson]

Originally posted by Kropotkin

I have to disagree. "Natural growth"* 15-20 years down the lane leads to crime and vandalism.



* I guess the immigrants didn't come to this world like the rest of us.

Phi.
The crime rate amongst immigrant youngsters seems everywhere to be bigger than amongst local ones - also because they are poorer, of course.

[Whaleboy]

" i do wonder about their stance on people of foreign descent whose family has been there since the turn of the century. The grandson of an Indian immigrant and what not"

According to a documentary I watched a while back on Channel 4 on the BNP, my father, as a Jewish Indian (Portugese descent), myself and my brothers, would be encouraged to go to India. I have never been to india myself, and consider myself British, and more Iberian by descent and appearance than anything else. Not sure about 3rd generation. Someone said a while back on a documentary that if you appear white, you should stay. How messed up is that?

Anyway, the BNP's arguments... here we go:

Immigration. They automatically will kick out illegitimate asylum seekers, but what is most disturbing is the encouragement for legal asylum seekers to move out. That implies that they do not want ethnic minorities in this country, but cannot find a legal loophole to kick them out forcefully. Undoubtably, if they ever achieve power, they will attempt to change that, of course, that is speculation, but it is clear that they do not want ethnic minorities in this nation.

The idea that white people will become a minority is both misguided and ludicrous. Immigration is so high at the moment because of turbulent international conditions, following the end of the cold war, a polarisation of wealth distribution and the perceived receptiveness of Britain/Europe. None of these factors, and others, are permanent. By that time, minorities should become established in the British community. The idea of perceiving them as a different race would be like blondes perceiving brunettes as a different race. Its purely subjective, geocentric and ethnocentric.

Nonetheless, we need asylum seekers, as my initial post says.

Europe. Economically helps British business and travel. Helps us to break down our island mentality that may have been useful in the time of Napoleon, but not today. The arguments against further European integration seem to be based on prejudice, the fallacy of the nationstate, and the issue of sovereignty. All of which are irrational, illogical, and idiotic to be used to govern a nation! The reasons for further integration with Europe are economic and (imo) philosophical. It is breaking down an ancient barrier of the nationstate, that was forged when we all warred against each other. Now we cooperate and are better off for it. Keeping that barrier in place simply because people have some emotional attachment to it, is damaging in the long term. Ironically, further integration with Europe will help reduce immigration (one of the downsides), as nations can cooperate in inter-border policing.

"we intend to aim towards greater national self-sufficiency"

With a population of 58ish million (the vast majority of whom are white incidentally), and a small island with limited resources, its not going to happen. Britain couldnt even be self sufficient during WWII, when the population was about half what it is today. And that was with highly intense farming. Those nationalists will have the bite the bullet and accept that this country is dependent on others for its survival. This is one big internaitonal society, a community of all of humanity, and the basis of community is cooperation.

Law and order. What I have classified under the Mill Limit as a tyranny by majority, the BNP would further enhance. A form of vigilante rule. Punitive measures have their place, but in more limited forms than today. I prefer the idea of helping criminals become productive members of society through rehabilitation and re-education, rather than pointless incarceration, or in this case, execution. I believe that the justice system should not succumb to the subjective, punative, revenge-based vigilantism that the British people have a tendency to promote, like the paedophile witch hunts where innocent people got severly beaten, others traumatised etc. These crimes, terrible as they are, should be dealt with objectively and with clearness and fairness, in court! The people obviously need help, so they should get it.

"We will free the police and courts from the politically correct straitjacket that is stopping them from doing their job properly"

Which is code for targetting black and asian people as they are more prone to crime. One fails to mention that that is caused by education, history of persecution (both perceived and actual), and of course poverty.

"The liberal fixation with the 'rights' of criminals must be replaced by concern for the rights of victims"

It must be BALANCED. This kind of state-sponsored vigilantism or police state mentality is best described as idiocy.

"e support the re-introduction of corporal punishment for petty criminals and vandals, and the restoration of capital punishment for paedophiles, terrorists and murderers"

Doesnt really deserve consideration does it? Corporal punishment? What about human rights? Everyone is human, there are only certain rights that it is productive to take away. Revenge is irrelevant. Capital punishment well, I wont go too much into that as some people here may support it, but the arguments against are exaggerated forms of the above, in other words, a belated, thus irrelevant and disproportionate removal of rights. Also a waste to society as these people can be re-habbed.

With regards to the economy, that is an area best left to economists and businessmen, not politicians. Obviously, when business gets too big, monopolistic and damaging, steps should be taken to dissolve it, but only when it starts hurting humans, the economic conditions are down to business itself, includign a nations economy. Economists can run the economy much better than racist pub-dwelling idiots.

Education.

"We are against the 'trendy' teaching methods that have made Britain one of the most poorly educated nations in Europe"

I dont see the link between those two things. I also dont believe that we are one of the most poorly educated nations in Europe. If he means that we are behind France and Germany, and other liberal nations, then we should increase spending to education, and in that respect, emulate the liberal nature of those nations. Technological, industrical and other "pragmatic" (suited to economy) based education is all very well, and needed, but it is equally important to have other subjects as well. Education is not merely about jobs. It is also about (among other things), being able to challenge and formulate ideas, and see through poor reasoning like the BNP's, or indeed most of the far right. Also the usual about expanding minds etc.

Farming is hardly a big issue, nor are they being contentious on it, so I'm not going to address it. However, like I said, we will never even come close to self-sufficiency. Especially with their apparent environmental concerns .

"We are wholly committed to a free, fully funded National Health Service for all British citizens"

Not a quantum leap to say that they oppose asylum seekers getting free health.

The health policy seems reasonable, yet the money spent on foreign aid is not a high proportion of GDP and would not affect healthcare spending much. More on that later.

I agree with most of their transport policy, however, I think we should increase fuel and vehicle tax costs to encourage more to use the trains. The speed cameras, used sensibly and liberally, is a good idea.

With regards to pensioners, it is entirely possible to have good pensioners conditions, and asylum seekers, and also the latter benefits the former, as if they are allowed to work, then there is a larger workforce, thus more tax, thus more available for spending.

With regards to defence, peace keeping ops are crucial in international security, as well as moral situations where as one of the worlds richest and most powerful countries, we should try to help those less fortunate. I favour a more streamlined approach, where the armed forces are further cut back, but are better trained and deployed in peacekeeping operations, rather than oriented for a cold-war threat. Their policies are needless in that respect. We do not need a large military, but we do need a good one. As such, small and efficient is the way to go.

Foreign policy. It is advisable for us to actually help other nations, as always in the long term, it will in fact be in our interests! You fail to help them, theyre going to end up poorer and a refugee situation will occur. While that is good for Britain it is not good for those countries who are in more need of economic growth than we are. Our national interest? We are just one nation. We are all humans. There is nothing holy about "Britain" or any other nation. We should aim to help those nations who need it, as such symbiosis ultimately helps all, and prevents suffering in the world. Compared to those in Ethiopia without food, the 12 million in that country that cannot feed themselves or their children, the suffering of someone who has their wall graffittied seems insignificant.

Some of their democracy stuff may appear good, but the rhetoric disguises an adherence to the principles of tyranny by majority and state sponsored vigilantism in some cases (i.e. crime).

This is an example of the democracy fallacy. A clearer example would be a pilot taking a poll of the passengers to see if he should make an emergency landing. The idea of democracy is that one delegates power to an elected government. In the interim, it is up to the government to give the people those rights to decide, although obviously in important issues, it is prudent to take the peoples views on board.

With regards to what they said about racism, that passage is misguiding because it fails to show that the majority of racist attacks are on white people. I do not believe that attacks on white people by other ethnic groups are classified as racist, so they are speculating on that one. Also, attacks on a minority by a majority is more disturbing, because it shows a general lack of acceptance. Attacks by a minority on the majority often show that they feel threatened, isolated and powerless, in a land where they have the same right to power as everyone else. Those words may appear high and mighty, but on the ground, the BNP is riding a wave of racism, and many of its members are racists, many of whom are holocaust deniers. There was an in-depth documentary on them a while ago, and I found it quite frankly disturbing, the views of the people behind those words.

In short, the BNP is stupid!

[Whaleboy]

"immigration can truely be a kind of conquest"

????

With regards to laws, of course that is true. Ideally, one should obey the law, no matter creed or colour. A society with time should also come to reflect the fact that it is multi-faceted with different cultures, partly integrated into the whole, partly separate with own identities. We are already seeing that with the 2nd and 3rd generation immigrants now in Britain. Its a bit of give and take. Ones culture does not stay constant, it cannot be quantified and qualifying it is notoriously difficult and innaccurate. Ultimately, immigration is fantastically good for any society.

[Whaleboy]

"immigration can truely be a kind of conquest"

????

With regards to laws, of course that is true. Ideally, one should obey the law, no matter creed or colour. A society with time should also come to reflect the fact that it is multi-faceted with different cultures, partly integrated into the whole, partly separate with own identities. We are already seeing that with the 2nd and 3rd generation immigrants now in Britain. Its a bit of give and take. Ones culture does not stay constant, it cannot be quantified and qualifying it is notoriously difficult and innaccurate. Ultimately, immigration is fantastically good for any society.

[Whaleboy]

ahem, sorry, double post there, apolyton server must be taking a heavy load right now, i clicked twice while it was loading

[Starchild]

[quote]quote:
Originally posted by Albert Speer
I think the BNP is basically ultra-nationalist but because Britian is a racial country (made up of ethnic British), they got a natural tendency towards racism. [quote]

And what's ethnically British? British-ness is a social construct created to accomidate different cultures and nationalities. If you want to pick an ethnic Briton, who are you going to choose? The Welsh? The Cornish, Highland Scottish, the Northern Irish? The Germanic-AngloSaxon and French-Norman hybrid that is the modern English?

[Whaleboy]

Couldnt have said it better Starchild. It is a subjective construct. The notion of being English, is a fallacy. If people are to use the logic of calling themselves English, then it would make more sense to say we are all Africans

[Az]

a british culture DOES exist, though.

[Arrian]

Why is the BNP even worthy of discussion?

-Arrian

[Whaleboy]

But it is merely an amalgamation of the separate cultures of which it is composed. It is like baking a cake.

[Starchild]

Originally posted by Azazel
a british culture DOES exist, though.

A culture that is remarkably adaptable and able to grow stronger by embracing others. The Irish, Scottish, Welsh, and English aren't culturally identical. Is a Scot who listens to London hip-hop and eats kebabs and curry somehow less/more culturally british than a British Pakistani born and living in Birmingham who goes to see Shakespear and has fish and chips for tea?

Culture is adaptable. Embracing other cultures doesn't make us less British, it makes British culture stronger by making it more diverse.