http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2014/05/why-has-bnp-collapsed
This is what happens when you don't go officially and exclusively civic nationalist ALL THE WAY when you should have done. Jean Marie Le Pen was nagging Nick Griffin to do that way way way back in 2004.
But then the BNP is full of uneducated lower class racists and the Chairman too afraid of upsetting the plebs to even explain about the necessity for adopting a civic nationalist strategy.
Imagine having to explain the abstract concepts of "civic nationalism" and "strategy" to these lower class racists who only read the Star, or who can't even read.
Any talk of civic nationalism would mean a sell-out was taking place to these people. Too bad Nick Griffin didn't call their bluff and tell them to join the NF if they didn't like it in the BNP.
Too bad the constitution at 3.2.1 still says:
http://www.bnp.org.uk/sites/default/files/constitution_12.3_with_candidate_contract.pdf
Too bad the idiots still don't get it when I tell them that if you say you are an ethno-nationalist you are advertising to the world the fact that you are racist.
"How many of you are ethno-nationalists ie racists as opposed to those of you who are not?" would have been a fun question to ask the Chairman on Newsnight.
What is more repulsive than an uneducated lower class racist?
An uneducated lower class racist who doesn't even know how repulsive voters find him.
It is as disgusting and repulsive as watching an ugly fat stupid slag behaving as if she thought she were beautiful and witty.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
I know even this sordid compromise upset a lot of these old dinosaurs, but what surprised me was that the Chairman actually thought he could get away with this fudge. The concept of adapting to survive is a concept known only to the fittest, who survive, while the intellectually unfit and ill-adapted will fall off the wall, one by one, like the ten green bottles sitting on the wall ...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/schoolradio/subjects/mathematics/countingsongs/G-Z/ten_green_bottles
The difference between UKIP and the BNP is that UKIP people understand that they must say they are not racist and not even mention race at all, while BNP people still don't get it, or pretend it doesn't matter. It is the difference between being educated up to a certain standard and being able to handle abstract ideas and being a party of total and utterly disgustingly stupid plebs unable to grasp this simple concept, and it is this:
If people have the choice between joining and voting for a racist Eurosceptic party and one that declares that it is neither racist nor antisemitic Eurosceptic, they will choose not to be identified as racist or antisemitic.
It is now abundantly clear that civic nationalism has won the argument, and this was demonstrated when ex-BNP members have told me that they intend to vote UKIP this year and the next.
GENERAL ELECTION RESULTS
1992 BNP 7,631
1997 UKIP 105,722 BNP 35,832 BNP vote 33% of UKIP's
2001 UKIP 390,563 BNP 47,129 BNP vote 12% of UKIP's
2005 UKIP 605,973 BNP 192,745 BNP vote 31% of UKIP's
2010 UKIP 919,546 BNP 564,331 BNP vote 61% of UKIP's
PREDICTION on 22 May 2014 for 7 May 2015
2015 BNP vote 15-30% of UKIP's
UKIP was established in 1993. Once established, it effortlessly sailed past and beat the BNP, from 0 to 105,722.
Civic nationalism has won the argument. The conclusive evidence is when ex-BNP activists such as Mike Newland, Kevin Scott, Eddy Butler and Peter Rushton acknowledge that they have no choice but to vote UKIP and when they cannot think of a single successful ethno-nationalist party in Europe.
This is what happens when you don't go officially and exclusively civic nationalist ALL THE WAY when you should have done. Jean Marie Le Pen was nagging Nick Griffin to do that way way way back in 2004.
But then the BNP is full of uneducated lower class racists and the Chairman too afraid of upsetting the plebs to even explain about the necessity for adopting a civic nationalist strategy.
Imagine having to explain the abstract concepts of "civic nationalism" and "strategy" to these lower class racists who only read the Star, or who can't even read.
Any talk of civic nationalism would mean a sell-out was taking place to these people. Too bad Nick Griffin didn't call their bluff and tell them to join the NF if they didn't like it in the BNP.
Too bad the constitution at 3.2.1 still says:
"Our party is a party of British Nationalism, both civic and ethnic, ... "
http://www.bnp.org.uk/sites/default/files/constitution_12.3_with_candidate_contract.pdf
Too bad the idiots still don't get it when I tell them that if you say you are an ethno-nationalist you are advertising to the world the fact that you are racist.
"How many of you are ethno-nationalists ie racists as opposed to those of you who are not?" would have been a fun question to ask the Chairman on Newsnight.
What is more repulsive than an uneducated lower class racist?
An uneducated lower class racist who doesn't even know how repulsive voters find him.
It is as disgusting and repulsive as watching an ugly fat stupid slag behaving as if she thought she were beautiful and witty.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
I know even this sordid compromise upset a lot of these old dinosaurs, but what surprised me was that the Chairman actually thought he could get away with this fudge. The concept of adapting to survive is a concept known only to the fittest, who survive, while the intellectually unfit and ill-adapted will fall off the wall, one by one, like the ten green bottles sitting on the wall ...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/schoolradio/subjects/mathematics/countingsongs/G-Z/ten_green_bottles
The difference between UKIP and the BNP is that UKIP people understand that they must say they are not racist and not even mention race at all, while BNP people still don't get it, or pretend it doesn't matter. It is the difference between being educated up to a certain standard and being able to handle abstract ideas and being a party of total and utterly disgustingly stupid plebs unable to grasp this simple concept, and it is this:
If people have the choice between joining and voting for a racist Eurosceptic party and one that declares that it is neither racist nor antisemitic Eurosceptic, they will choose not to be identified as racist or antisemitic.
It is now abundantly clear that civic nationalism has won the argument, and this was demonstrated when ex-BNP members have told me that they intend to vote UKIP this year and the next.
GENERAL ELECTION RESULTS
1992 BNP 7,631
1997 UKIP 105,722 BNP 35,832 BNP vote 33% of UKIP's
2001 UKIP 390,563 BNP 47,129 BNP vote 12% of UKIP's
2005 UKIP 605,973 BNP 192,745 BNP vote 31% of UKIP's
2010 UKIP 919,546 BNP 564,331 BNP vote 61% of UKIP's
PREDICTION on 22 May 2014 for 7 May 2015
2015 BNP vote 15-30% of UKIP's
UKIP was established in 1993. Once established, it effortlessly sailed past and beat the BNP, from 0 to 105,722.
What does this tell us?
We already know that BNP and UKIP are both anti-immigration.
BNP are knuckle-dragging plebs and don't know not to say they are not racist and don't know not to say they are against uncontrolled immigration rather than immigrants per se.
The BNP are lower class racists who are perceived to want to send non-white British citizens on the next banana boat home, but UKIP are middle class citizens concerned about uncontrolled immigration and the rapid and unnerving rate of change they see around them, locally and nationally.
Only plebs vote for plebs and even then they hate doing this.
It's how you express yourself and the words you use.
Only plebs vote for plebs and even then they hate doing this.
It's how you express yourself and the words you use.
Civic nationalism has won the argument. The conclusive evidence is when ex-BNP activists such as Mike Newland, Kevin Scott, Eddy Butler and Peter Rushton acknowledge that they have no choice but to vote UKIP and when they cannot think of a single successful ethno-nationalist party in Europe.
No comments:
Post a Comment