The Failed Attempts to Destabilise the BNP

Constant observation of the legal framework is, as much as anything, the acid test with which to judge political concern. 2 days ago Andrew Dismore, MP for Hendon, raised a point of order (that was subsequently dismissed as a point of debate) on motion 52 which excludes Members of the European Parliament from gaining access to the House of Commons through passes, thereby making sure Nick Griffin can not be seen in or around the house.

All the while many established political figures and pressure groups alike pour scorn on the BBC’s decision to allow the BNP free air time on this coming week’s Question Time, it should be reminded of how much the BBC have attempted to forge the perfect oppositional panel to counter every last aspect of Griffin’s bile.

Nick Cohen in his Observer column today has noted the ways in which nervy producers have panicked about how to stage Thursday’s ‘car-crash television’ event. At first the BBC had booked Douglas Murray to oppose him, as he was only so happy to do so, but moments later the BBC cancelled his inclusion as Murray takes firm support for restricted immigration, something Griffin will not put up too much of a fight about, making him appear ‘like he was the voice of the consensus’.

For a voice on the right the BBC settled for Lady Warsi, who may not see eye to eye with Griffin on the subject of defining Britishness, but would certainly be able to share a quip o two on homosexuals, owing to Warsi’s claim that Labour allowed children to be propositioned for homosexual relationships, printed on her campaign material in the run up to the 2005 Dewsbury elections. The BBC, instead of coolly slotting strong voices from both the left and the right to pull the turf from beneath Griffin, they have ended up pulling their hair out and ‘hitting the phones as they began to realise the 1,001 ways the show could go wrong.’

Another recent aim at destabilising the BNP, gone awry, was the pressure put on them to change their all whites constitution by the Equality and Human Rights Commission

But this new core of legality and legitimacy only serves to benefit the BNP. Not only does it serve to obscure the hub of the BNP’s existence – to secure a white only Britain – but it also fragments the moral high ground of the other parities in the UK, who do not oppose non-white membership.

The same, I will suggest, goes for quotas in political parties. For example in Spain the Constitutional Court confirmed a 2007 law obliging political parties to have at least 40% female candidates on their electoral lists. This of course suited the leading Socialist party (PSOE), whose moral compass directed them in this direction anyway, recognising societal gender inequality, and taking the measures themselves to lead the way for a more egalitarian political structure. The point of failure for this measure was when the law obliged the opposition Conservative party (PP) to do the same. They of course appealed against the measure, preferring to maintain a majority of white male candidates to a mixed setting.

Until this law was established, PSOE, on the issue of gender equality, held the moral high ground over PP, and Spanish women who had previously felt vilified against, seeing the socialists as their natural friend and the conservatives as foe, now, because of the forced level of egalitarianism fostered upon PP, are no longer necessarily the nasty party, and have benefited in turn, not through any conviction, but have basked in the success of the socialists.

The same logic can be seen with the BNP now. Through no conviction of their own to redress their racism the authorities have offered them an olive branch of legitimacy, and as Sunny H recently tweeted, ‘Griffin…has always wanted to change the rules’ – for this very reason, not because at heart the BNP are a multi-ethnic, inclusive organisation, but because it takes the burden away from him to get party backing and change their constitution, all under the guise of modernisation (after all, the leaked membership list by a disaffected ex-member is enough to see why Griffin would see such a move as burdensome).

All this created fuss has done nothing at all to destabilise the BNP, in fact it has only further secured their main aim, to seem like a consensus party, when in fact they are an extreme party, employing seemingly successful methods to avert this fact, and being helped along the way by the very people who think they are taking measures to destroy them. Nick Griffin has said it himself on stage with the KKK’s David Duke in 2000:

Once we’re in a position where we control the British broadcasting media, then perhaps one day the British people might change their mind and say, ‘yes, every last one must go’. But if you hold that out as your sole aim to start with, you’re not going to get anywhere. So instead of talking about racial purity, we talk about identity.

11 Responses to The Failed Attempts to Destabilise the BNP

  1. Pingback: Best of the web 22/10/09 |

  2. Joe Nutt says:

    Having sat through every minute of the “car crash” last night, what most struck me was not that Nick Griffin is a naive clown, I expected to see that: but that both Jack Straw and Chris Huhne were models of precisely the intolerance and hatred they accuse Griffin of.

    Straw in particular was almost tangibly out of control, trembling with rage and hatred. And this man is our justice secretary? How on earth did that happen?

    • Save for Straw’s rant without answers on the subject of immigration, I think all the panel were willing to answer questions on anything, it’s just that the audience wanted to dig deep into one member of that panel (fair enough) and the rest of the panel were only too happy to join in. Thus, I feel it was legitimate to rage up, but I don’t know, was Jack Straw “out of control”?

  3. Joe Nutt says:

    Is it ever legitimate to “rage up” in any kind of serious debate? Not something I would ever teach a child and not something any citizen should expect to see in a minister for justice… or any kind of senior minister.

    • I didn’t think Straw raged up, Warsi did a little, but Straw was collected and scored points with me. Greer came out on top though, she was very calm. I can hardly criticise, I think I would’ve been rather riled. How about yourself?

  4. Interesting post. I’ve commented (from a post-Question Time perspective) at

    • I read your post Julian, also very interesting. It worries me a lot that the perceived “down-to-earthness” of casual racism, as opposed to those “stuffy politicians”, may well fit perfectly with what some voters want to hear, and the BNP provide that by playing up their victim status. This status has only been exacerbated, not curbed, by the moves to force them to allow non-whites. The mainstream is trying to move the BNP more in fitting with their standards rather than trying to expose them for what they are, a dangerous move I wonder if you’ll agree.

  5. Pingback: Best of the web 26/10/09 |

  6. Paul says:

    This is a useful piece, Carl, which I’ll reference in my own post-BBQT piece when time allows.

    The analogy I often come back to when I’m trying to think through the local practicalities of defeating the BNP message is the way in which it became largely unancceptable, over a 10-15 year period in the 70’s and 80’s, to drink alcohol and then drive a car, with the argument that it was all about personal freedom being defeated by the argument that driving drunk might be dangerous, and that if you did so you were a selfish git who deserved no respect.

    • I’ll look forward to a nice supply of new traffic Paul.

      Nice analogy, curbing drink driving, amid attempts to call it a breach of personal liberty, may well ensure the liberty of others from mad drink-drivers, thus curbing portions of liberty is necessary in order to secure liberty for the masses? Am I way off?

  7. Pingback: Best of the web |

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: