Originally Posted by blueblood1920:
If the party made people sign a decleration wouldnt that be seen as being opposed to freedom of speech and opinion? Currently we can put forward ideas and policies to vote on at conference level. Now if someone who was signed up to this proposed something opposed to our traditional values wouldnt thathand the leadership who you accuse of being dictators more powers to expel people for having a different opinion.

So you are "reluctantly" tolerating fascists because not to do so would violate the principles of "free speech"?

What a joke. How a Nazi can complain of state oppression and the limitations of their freedom of speech is beyond me, surely they should applaud such firm action?

As for the BNP's position, obviously it doesn't have free speech. For example observe the reaction of the leadership to public complaints about incompetence and fascists in the party; as in the EiE blog. So if its going to restrict freedom of speech then surely this should start with the most heinous and most damaging ideologies not with criticism of the incompetence and compromised nature of the leadership.

Moreover the BNP has no power to restrict "free speech" if it did not let a Nazi join it would not impact the animals freedom of speech one jot.

The BNP must categorically rid itself of the liability which is its fascist fringe or accept that it will never be a force in British life. The least it can do to achieve this is to demand that fascists leave the Party and use its communication channels to denounce and refute fascist doctrine. Personally I would symbolically reintroduce compulsory repatriation, for Nazis.
[Rep]

Unfortunately the Greens are not a freestanding party but the English and Welsh division of a large and shadowy international Green movement that sets the agenda on many issues including immigration and gay rights. This means recapturing the Greens from the liberal-left is next to impossible.
[Rep]

Originally Posted by Village Idiot:
Read this thread with interest.

Regarding the Greens, yes I think recapturing the party from the liberal-left will be one hell of a tall order, but if a nationalist current could make some headway without being expelled then they should go for it. I remember Richard Hunt, former Green Anarchist editor, set out on a nationalist course when he started Alternative Green. I'd welcome such a faction within the Greens, but they'd have to tread carefully, use diplomacy and act almost on a clandestine basis. If the Greens shed some of the Liberal left baggage, they'd lose a lot of leftist support, but they could gain votes from elsewhere. Most Greens aren't as brainwashed as some of the Trot/hard left, so hope remains.

I don't think its possible or desirable to capture the Greens from the old school socialists who are effectively using it as a refugee camp.

The point is that the Green's have not had the intellectual courage to grasp the core problem generating the environmental crisis, overpopulation. Which means that their policies are treating symptoms and not the causes of the problems and almost certainly won't work anyway. The Green's can not even accept that there is not a painless Star Trek solution to our problems, instead they indulge themselves in the fantasy that if our society is "righteous" enough according to post war establishment orthodoxy the problems will miraculously solve themselves.

A case in point is nuclear power, it's pretty clear at this point that nuclear power is the only way we will be able to substantially reduce greenhouse emissions in any sort of reasonable time frame (although the consensus is hardening that if we started now we would still be far to late to mitigate the effects of global warming). However the majority Greens can't accept this because they are only interested in risk free perfect solutions, of which there are none. (yeah I know energy usage reduction will allow us to power the UK off a 9V battery)

All this must be tremendously frustrating to realist environmentalists who want to do something practical. The BNP could offer these people a platform to get their ideas out into the public consciousness and they would dovetail perfectly with the core BNP message. Which is it's time to stop pretending we can do what we like, be really nice to everyone, and that "something will turn up" and so we can ignore developing grave problems. It is time to start acting like adults and dealing with reality before it deals with us.

In short I don't want to see a nationalist Green Party and a Green BNP. I want to see one Party with an integrated message with the fantasists and scum ejected.
[Rep]

You talk sense and maybe I miss understood what you were implying and I would certainly be interested to see what so called fascist elements are in the BNP and what you are referring to.

I am a true nationalist and implying that there maybe members in the party who want to use the nation to fever state interests at the nations expense worries me. The Nazis were not nationalists and saying that you believe there are members who follow the idea of a state based on Race and a new false identity such as the Nazis using the Roman or similar mass identity is extremely bad.

I am opposed to any giant state that removes democratic representation and I hope Britain and the EU are pulled apart as quickly as possible. There is no need to start another nationalist party as there have been over 15 in the last 40 years and they all suffer the same problems.

I would rather people like you would stay in the party and help sort out a better system and organisation. I am sure you could get involved in the land and people side of the BNP and hopefully push it in the right direction. If true nationalists leave the party it will be open to manipulation which is very bad at this point in a time where the BNP is close to gaining seats. The new image has attracted new members and the future of the BNP should reflect from the image it used to attract them.
[Rep]