Nine More Questions for Nick Griffin
In addition to Sunny Handal’s 20 Questions We Should Ask the BNP, here are nine more that have come my way via Urban 75. Whereas Sunny’s questions were addressed to the BNP’s thinly-concealed fascism, these take the BNP up on their record.
1. Why has the BNP consistently (Stoke, Burnley Pendle) voted for above-inflation increases in council taxation, despite its claims against council tax increases and property-based council tax in general?
2. Why did Broxbourne BNP vote to block free bus passes for pensioners against their pledge that “pensioners should get free bus passes”?
3. Why did Halifax BNP councillors in abstain from voting to block the closure of a primary school in Mixenden despite election literature promising to defend all primary schools in the area.
4. Why did BNP in Kirklees agree to council service cuts in Sep 2009 declaring “a lot of the silly posts can disappear. I’ve always advocated that you get rid of 25% of council staff and no-one would notice. We won’t be able to guarantee early retirement and gold-plated pensions.”?
5. You, Griffin, have expelled certain BNP members for their political actions (including ex-Conservative BNP councillor Geoff Wallace in Halifax for supporting greenbelt housing) but not those who have implemented these above actions which harm the majority whose interests you claim to further. Why is there this discrepancy?
6. Why did you oppose the firefighters’ strike of 2002-2003, asserting that firefighters should not have the right to withdraw their labour to renegotiate terms and conditions of work? You declared firefighters “must be placed on the same level as military personnel and police officers and … forego their ambiguous position of using strike action”. Do you still agree with it?
7. Why did Stoke BNP exonerate chief executive Wayne Nutbeen for closing (in 2005) Royal Doulton’s last factories. Nutbeen’s explanation was the “company isn’t owned by Stoke-on-Trent. It is owned by the shareholders. The board has to ensure it does right by them”.
8. Why has Stoke BNP agreed to budgets (2004, 2005, 2007) that cut social spending including Citizen’s Advice Bureaus, old people’s services?
9. Which aspects of the “national good” in “Oriental countries” would you emulate in Britain first - a 2000% increase in work-related suicides, mass dismissals of workers for attending anti-government meetings or homeless nomad families working in low-wage sectors? (Your manifesto (2009) claimed “Oriental countries such as Japan, South Korea and Singapore have managed their economies to combine private enterprise competition with the national good, and these are the models the BNP would emulate.”)
Also at A Very Public Sociologist.
These questions are irrelevant and unhelpful. All mainstream political parties are to varying degrees corrupt, hypocritical and anti labour movement. Only the BNP are fascist. These questions serve only to blur the distinction and play down the real principal character of the BNP as Britain’s Nazi party.
Comment by Mikey — 22 October, 2009 @ 10:52 am
Is your comment a self parody Mikey?
The BNP’s appeal is directly linked to its claim to be a party that offers a radical alternative to the anti (white) working class crooks of the mainstream parties. It is important to point out their utter failure to act in the interests of their chosen constituency if we are to undermine support for them.
Although of course there is no alternative to actually building a progressive working class alternative in our communities that will actually take on people’s concerns.
Comment by the bear with a shining face — 22 October, 2009 @ 10:59 am
Great questions Phil.
Unfortunately no-one will ask those sort of questions but instead will field the kind of ‘killer questions’ he’s answered a hundred times before, i.e. ‘didn’t you write articles denying the Holocaust’, ‘what do you think of David Copeland’, etc.
Like when he came to the Oxford Union from the point Griffin was invited onto Question Time it became a win-win situation for the BNP. They win if he appears on the show, they win if he’s banned at the last minute and they win if he’s physically prevented from getting into the studio.
Comment by Duncan — 22 October, 2009 @ 11:39 am
Excellent questions. We may be on dodgy ground with question 6, though, when the SWP-led Socialist Alliance refused to back the firefighters beyond the usual rhetoric — including one of ours on the SA exec — despite repeated pleas to do so. This isn’t to diminish the support from various individuals, but as a party we failed them badly.
Comment by Madam Miaow — 22 October, 2009 @ 1:09 pm
The BNP are on Question Time. The Post are on strike. A demo against the war this Saturday. And #4 you decide to bring up nonsense about ‘when the SWP-led Socialist Alliance refused to back the firefighters’. Shame on you.
Comment by Anonymous — 22 October, 2009 @ 4:59 pm
Thanks Mikey. What’s the point of this? We could pose these question to any party who has exercised office.
There seems to be a worrying retreat from an anti-fascist politics that *begins* at the point of recognising the particular specificity of the BNP as a fascist organisation. Of course we cannot remove the question of working-class political representation from anti-fascism, but I fail to see the effect that thes questions seek to have. Indeed it points more fundamentally to the absolute hopelessness of attempting to ‘debate’ the facsists at the current juncture. The arguments belong with the working-class and the labour movement - the sharp roots of organised fascism must be confronted head-on, not on the terrain of their choosing.
Comment by Rev9 — 22 October, 2009 @ 5:57 pm
Mikey and Rev might find these questions unconvincing, but speaking from experience talking to BNP voters out on stalls or on the doorstep I’ve found pointing out these sorts of things tend to be more fruitful. It’s another arrow for the anti-fascist bow, and a useful one when the BNP are in the business of trying to position themselves as an anti-establishment alternative.
Comment by A Very Public Sociologist — 22 October, 2009 @ 6:38 pm
Excellent questions to ask.
Obviously BNP is different from Labour, Tories etc as it as a fascist party but they are trying to pose as a radical alternative.
Another questions they should be asked is how much Asylum Seekers get paid a week (35 quid) and what percentage of the national budget asylum support makes up (0.5%).
Left should attack BNP more from a standpoint of “What are you going to do about the bankers etc”.
People might not have a lot of sympathy with single mums, asylum seekers, gypsies etc but I think most folk would accept they haven’t caused the economic collape.
Comment by AndyB — 22 October, 2009 @ 7:10 pm
I’d say both kinds of question are worth asking. Which is what I understood AVPS to say in the original post.
Comment by christian h. — 22 October, 2009 @ 7:14 pm
Obviously challenging the BNP as a fascist party is paramount but exposing their inability to serve the interests of the working class is also fundamental, especially when they are going to attempt to appear populous on QT.
Comment by Stupot — 22 October, 2009 @ 7:19 pm
Ridiculous argiung with fascists is like trying to teach an earth worm algebra absoloutely stupid.
See what happens you go on to the radio as Sunny Handal did tonight on the World Service, and finish up looking acomplete idiot arguing with half crazed fascists about immigration and loosing the argument as they spew their lies and racist nonsese. Hundal tried to argue with one racist who was an immigrant from the UK to the USA and lost again.
Sunny Handal for all our sakes please shut up go away and learn something about anti fascism
As for this blog what a disgraceful sectarian swamp it has become with its new anti fascist policies appeasement, pacifism and not making any noise or breathing because the fascists might get angry and they might hurt us.
If this is what Socialist Unity thinks is anti fascism we might as well give in now before Andy gets a nose bleed from watching Jack Straw being vigorous with Griffin. Straw the Home Secretary who allowed Pinochet to be wheeled out of the UK so he could strut around Chile
Comment by Anonymous — 22 October, 2009 @ 7:46 pm
11* honestly interested, what do you think ‘we’ should be doing?
Comment by non-partisan — 22 October, 2009 @ 7:53 pm
#12 I’m not sure. I think that we need to highlight the fascist/racist nature of the BNP at every occasion. The large numbers of people outside BBC at the moment emphasise the strength of feeling against the hatred that the BNP spread and that brings attention to the anti-fascist arguments.
However one of my concerns with the BNP being on a show like QT is that they will come across as a party that stands for the ‘normal person’ and they will be able to handle any questions on the fascist level (e.g. about repatriation or holocaust denial). So for me the questions highlighted by AVPS in the original post tackle the notion of the BNP standing in the interests of the ‘normal guy’. What do you think non-partisan?
Comment by Stupot — 22 October, 2009 @ 8:02 pm
I can’t really see the point of Phil’s suggested questions here.
The BNP’s “big idea” is racism and people vote BNP for that reason only.
Ignoring the BNP’s racism and attacking it because a councillor missed a few meetings all seems a bit surreal to be honest.
A bit like criticising Hitler for having a poor record on waste recycling!
Comment by Karl Stewart — 22 October, 2009 @ 9:36 pm
I think that we need to highlight the fascist/racist nature of the BNP at every occasion.
The problem with this is that there are now areas of the UK where the BNP have had a regular, visible presence and a solid electoral base for getting on for a decade now. In these areas voters have received leaflets with a picture of deceased BNP leader John Tyndall and information about David Copeland’s bomb attacks multiple times and yet are still voting BNP.
‘Highlighting’ the fascist/racist nature of the BNP or ‘exposing’ them as Nazis to these voters seemingly has little effect so we can either write large numbers of working-class voters off as irredeemably racist or we can try a different strategy.
Comment by Duncan — 22 October, 2009 @ 9:38 pm
The thing is Karl, the shoutings of Nazi and fascist at them hasn’t worked. Many people are aware of this and still vote for them. I would argue that people don’t necessarily vote BNP because they are racists, but because the mainstream parties have abandoned them. The questions that are being posed here are precisely the questions that haven’t been asked. I think both go hand in hand.
Comment by Steve — 22 October, 2009 @ 9:42 pm
Duncan, no-one’s suggesting writing off anyone.
The way to combat racism is to argue against it - not pretend it’s not there as Phil seems to be saying.
People vote BNP because they’re attracted by the BNP’s racism - we need to combat that by arguing against racism.
Phil reminds me of the journalist who asked: “but apart from that Mrs Lincoln, how was the show?”
Comment by Karl Stewart — 22 October, 2009 @ 9:50 pm
No Steve, people vote BNP because they’re attracted by its racism - please note, I said “racism.”
People who are simply disillusioned by politics, or who feel disenfranchised don’t vote at all.
Comment by Karl Stewart — 22 October, 2009 @ 9:58 pm
#5 Anonymous.
Actually, the post raises the firefighters in question 6 and that’s what I’m responding to. Events referred to are something we should all be learning from in order to become stronger.
Comment by Madam Miaow — 22 October, 2009 @ 10:30 pm
Debating the nazis is futile and completely counter-productive as will be seen on Question Time now. As Ken Livingstone says in the London Evening Standard the BBC has a moral responsibility for the inevitable increase in racist attacks after giving Griffin a platform. The BBC exec have the blood of these victims of racists attacks on their hands.
The complete hypocrisy of the BBC is highlighted by their claim that they will edit racist comments out of the program in order to comply with the law. Yet they claim that they have a responsibility to allow Griffin so-called “freedom of speech” on a program that has no connection with the democratic electoral process. The BBC routinely denies anti-nazis a chance to air their views as seen on the 10 o’clock news tonight where the BBC didn’t interview any of the organisers of the anti-nazi picket and protest or allow them to put their case across. So much for the BBC’s claim of fair and impartial reporting.
The picket and demo are fantastic. Even though allowing Griffin a platform was a disastrous mistake and will encourage racist across the UK the anti-nazi protest will strengthen the protest and determination to top the BNP.
I attend a community education college in London and out of 25 people in the class 24 were against Griffin appearing. The majority of students are white working class people who have never really engaged in a political debate before but at the start of class this morning three students spoke about their anger at the BBC. One student defended the BBC’s decision claiming it was a case of so-called “freedom of speech” but another student pointed out that when the media and politicians engaged with Le Pen in France it brought his nazi party into the mainstream where they have remained ever since.
There is a groundswell of anger and revulsion at the BBC’s decision. Anti-nazis everywhere will be able to build on this and if the BBC try to give Griffin a platform again I hope that we will prevent it.
Comment by Ray — 22 October, 2009 @ 11:03 pm
“…determination to top the BNP.” Should of course read, “…determination to stop the BNP.” Typo or Freudian slip? Lol!
Comment by Ray — 22 October, 2009 @ 11:06 pm
We’re just a small tea shop in Brighton but we had a very recent encounter with the BNP. Read about our experience of Nick Griffin and our take on the Question Time debate here: http://bit.ly/3CJcaQ
Comment by Metrodeco — 22 October, 2009 @ 11:18 pm