In fairness Tebbit did warn people off voting BNP after he recommended not voting for the main parties. Seems like a pretty roundabout way of saying "Vote UKIP", but logic never was his strongpoint. The Telegraph's political bias is pretty well known, and the whole handling and timing of this expenses debacle continues to be orchestrated as to best shame the government in the run up to the elections. I think far right parties would always do better during a recession, and especially coming off the back of a decade of inactive and increasingly irrelevant Labour government.

Methinks you may not agree with that last bit. Anyway, we'll see about the BNP. I think they may pick up a seat, but any more than that, I'd be suprised.

Originally Posted by Dr The Evidence

. I think far right parties would always do better during a recession, and especially coming off the back of a decade of inactive and increasingly irrelevant Labour government.

Methinks you may not agree with that last bit. Anyway, we'll see about the BNP. I think they may pick up a seat, but any more than that, I'd be suprised.

No he won't but I do .

But Labour are not the only irrelevant ones, at least for all their sins the BNP are able to speak to real people instead of speaking about speaking to real people like Labour (lousise Casey in particualr) do.

I think my next paper will be called

New Labour's social construction of the Public and how it functions as a mechanism for legimising bad polcies and distances decsion makers even further from the views of the people of Britain

long title may cut it short.

Originally Posted by Dr The Evidence

Methinks you may not agree with that last bit. Anyway, we'll see about the BNP. I think they may pick up a seat, but any more than that, I'd be suprised.

You are very easily suprised.

I think more than 1 is not really a big suprise is it? Its on the cards.

Originally Posted by SussexWithLove

You are very easily suprised.

I think more than 1 is not really a big suprise is it? Its on the cards.

Seriously suusex don't get your hopes up. I think the bNP will do well, but you seem to be getting a little unrealistic now! Okay they may get 2 or three euro MPs tops.

Originally Posted by Marxist Nutter

Seriously suusex don't get your hopes up. I think the bNP will do well, but you seem to be getting a little unrealistic now! Okay they may get 2 or three euro MPs tops.

I personally think 3, but definitely not 1 as the Dr. said.


But saying that there is a gut feeling that the BNP may clean up and suprise everyone.

very ignorant anti BNP article.They don't even mention Austria, the only country where far right won the elections

Originally Posted by One

very ignorant anti BNP article.They don't even mention Austria, the only country where far right won the elections

The Austrian far right are proper nut bars. This is the sort of company the BNP hopes to keep in Europe.

Originally Posted by SussexWithLove

I personally think 3, but definitely not 1 as the Dr. said.


But saying that there is a gut feeling that the BNP may clean up and suprise everyone.

THe following link might give all BNP supporters and indication of what might be in store for the BNP in the forthcomming European Elections



The BNP's rise is a fantasy created by anti-democrats | Nick Cohen | Comment is free | The Observer

Most Conservatives (at local level at least) believe the BNP will do very well in the European Elections. Our local association believes they will get between 3 and 5 MEPs.

As everyone knows I dispute the term far right... Let's not get into it here though

What Norman Tebbit said was logical. If he said vote UKIP he would have been expelled from the Conservative Party. But by saying don't vote for the mainstream parties or the BNP, he is literally saying vote UKIP.

[QUOTE=Liberal Authoritarian;71030]

As everyone knows I dispute the term far right... Let's not get into it here though

/QUOTE]

Becoz you think the political compass is God (invented as it was all about ten years at most ago) and you seem to not be able to understand that nationalist politics are 1. economic as much as they are social and 2. right wing by virtue of the fact that they cannot be left (which is internationalist) and have always been associated with far right parties in history - but that's your problem, I guess

I have no problem.
I just don't think nationalism is economic; it is social.

Originally Posted by Liberal Authoritarian

I have no problem.
I just don't think nationalism is economic; it is social.

Fair comment.

But I think you miss my point. It is more a critique of the political compass way of viewing politics, in general.

Nationalism is a discourse that is obviously as economic as it is social - in fact the modern BNP pitch it almost exclusivity on economic grounds (when they are not getting all confused about identity) - stealing jobs, not enough resources etc etc.

Now I think this is true of all issues. They have both a social and economic dimension. hence it is folly to seperate out social dimensions from economic ones as they are too interwoven. This is becoz the economy itself is a social construction.

The other issue with this, is the compass neglects that left and right have different views on what economics and society are not just on what policies they advocate. The old left would say that the social is purely epiphenomenal with regard to the economic base, for example.

I think the compass should be redesigned to look at people's ontology and normative beliefs instead.

Originally Posted by Expounder

THe following link might give all BNP supporters and indication of what might be in store for the BNP in the forthcomming European Elections



The BNP's rise is a fantasy created by anti-democrats | Nick Cohen | Comment is free | The Observer

Are you Nick Cohen in disguise? I could imagine you writing this article.

I don’t like this link between 1930’s Germany and Modern day globalised multicultural Britain. Its ridiculous. The only similarity is the fact the there was a global financial crisis in the 1930’s.
1930’s German didn’t have 15% of their population formed from ethnic monitories, who were descendants from 60 years of immigration. 1930’s Germany wasn’t part of a European super state; it was trying to create a European super state. 1930’s Germany didn’t have 1 million polish people invade their country through European law; they broke International law by invading Poland.

He states that the BNP are putting on suits and using friendly smiles to win the electorate. Please name one successful political party that hasn’t done this? This is written as if to claim these people have never worn a suit or a smile, this is nothing more than utter snobbery.

And the part about anti-fascist campaigners, or should I say fascist anti- BNP campaigners, which stated that the BNP are a feeble organisation running out of money and credible candidates. If this is the case, why have they got candidates, plus backups, for the first time ever, in every single area in this up and coming Euro election? They have just raised £300,000 plus for this campaign, which is the biggest Nationalist campaign ever seen in modern Britain.
New members sign up and donate every day. At current trends the membership list would have doubled within the next 2 years, which would mean they would have more members than the Lib dems.
If they were so short of cash and feeble how did they pay for such an expensive campaign? How are they coping with the thousands of calls they receive every day?
Don’t underestimate them.

“The regular convictions of BNP members for racial assaults, drug dealing and sex crimes”
What a load of crap. Where is the proof of this and how does it compare to the other parties “perfect” records?

The part at the end proves this guy is a hidden fascist himself. Not wanting to change the system to make it fairer for the smaller parties for fear of the BNP rising. Our country is now monpolised by the sleaze of lib/lab/cons and this guy still wants to oppress this country.

Originally Posted by SussexWithLove

The part at the end proves this guy is a hidden fascist himself. Not wanting to change the system to make it fairer for the smaller parties for fear of the BNP rising. Our country is now monpolised by the sleaze of lib/lab/cons and this guy still wants to oppress this country.

Actually, if you read it correctly, you would realise he is implying that the over-hyped, widespread fear of BNP gaining seats is used as justification to avoid electoral reform, and that he does nto agree with this.

can we please learn to use the word fascist appropriately?

Originally Posted by JacquesMagique

can we please learn to use the word fascist appropriately?

That applies to more people than just Sussex.



Marxist, I agree the political compass test is hugely flawed. According to that test I am further right than Thatcher, when the fact is, I am very pro-nationalisation of certain industries such as Health Care, Education, Utilities; and during this recent economic crises, the banks.

However, I do like how they balance social with economic and I agree that the BNP are left wing and authoritarian. But it is just a matter of opinion really.

Originally Posted by JacquesMagique

Actually, if you read it correctly, you would realise he is implying that the over-hyped, widespread fear of BNP gaining seats is used as justification to avoid electoral reform, and that he does nto agree with this.

Over hyped??? Do you mean media bashing?

Originally Posted by JacquesMagique

can we please learn to use the word fascist appropriately?

Not letting the BNP voice the opinion, in support of a single-party (in this case monopoly Lab and Con governments) is pretty fascist.

From his BNP name calling and neo-Nazi / 1930's related rubbish he's hardly in support.

Originally Posted by Liberal Authoritarian

However, I do like how they balance social with economic and I agree that the BNP are left wing and authoritarian. But it is just a matter of opinion really.

You're right. They do have a balance to them and so do their supporters.

Originally Posted by SussexWithLove

Over hyped??? Do you mean media bashing?


Not letting the BNP voice the opinion, in support of a single-party (in this case monopoly Lab and Con governments) is pretty fascist.

From his BNP name calling and neo-Nazi / 1930's related rubbish he's hardly in support.

I like how you completely ignored my point. Typical of you when you know you are wrong.

Again, you display complete misunderstanding of what fascism is. How is supporting 2 parties in supprot of a one party state? :S

Originally Posted by SussexWithLove

You're right. They do have a balance to them and so do their supporters.

he was referring to the political compass, not BNP

Originally Posted by JacquesMagique

I like how you completely ignored my point. Typical of you when you know you are wrong.

Again, you display complete misunderstanding of what fascism is. How is supporting 2 parties in supprot of a one party state? :S

another point. He said Britain is coming to the end of a massive wave of immigration. What end? Its still happening.


I haven’t ignored you're point. Its a very good one. He could well be not in favour of not stopping the smaller parties coming through in a BNP panic, but he cant hind his hate for the BNP.

How can we trust what this guy says when he has blatantly lied about immigration and the BNP?

Labour and conservatives are one and the same these days. Nothing would change if either of them got into power. We are stuck in a see-saw so call democracy where only 2 parties every win. Its like the Scottish premiership.
If one try’s to stop the smaller parties breaking through by protecting the 2 party monopoly, this could well be viewed as fascist behaviour, if you are capable of looking beneath the surface. I dont think you are.

Originally Posted by JacquesMagique

he was referring to the political compass, not BNP

You love picking at every single thing i say. Did i offend you or something?

He said the bnp are left wing and authoritarian. I was referring to this.

Originally Posted by SussexWithLove

another point. He said Britain is coming to the end of a massive wave of immigration. What end? Its still happening.

is it? last i checked, lots of migrants were leaving due to the recession, many to their place of origin.

I haven’t ignored you're point. Its a very good one. He could well be not in favour of not stopping the smaller parties coming through in a BNP panic, but he cant hind his hate for the BNP.

How can we trust what this guy says when he has blatantly lied about immigration and the BNP?

Thanks.
Fair point, i'm not sure he does blatanly lie thoo. he cleverly distances himself from the claims that the BNP is running out of money by saying that "searchlight claim" although to be fair he does go on to sympathise witht their point.

Labour and conservatives are one and the same these days. Nothing would change if either of them got into power. We are stuck in a see-saw so call democracy where only 2 parties every win. Its like the Scottish premiership.
If one try’s to stop the smaller parties breaking through by protecting the 2 party monopoly, this could well be viewed as fascist behaviour, if you are capable of looking beneath the surface. I dont think you are.

I disagree that Con and Lab are one and the same, I would certainly be (and probbaly will be soon) to see a conservative government get itno power.
No, I can see why you are suggesting they are fascists, but this is based on the perception that fascism is merely suppressing political opposition, when the truth is considerably more complicated than that.

Originally Posted by JacquesMagique

is it? last i checked, lots of migrants were leaving due to the recession, many to their place of origin.

2008 immigration figures tell a different story. Some Poles are maybe going home now they have filled their pockets but 3rd worlders are still coming in.

.

Originally Posted by SussexWithLove

2008 immigration figures tell a different story. Some Poles are maybe going home now they have filled their pockets but 3rd worlders are still coming in.

.

2008 figures are old though aren't they.

No they are not old.

Immigration figures are useless without comparison. So figures from the 1960s are still useful.

Originally Posted by Liberal Authoritarian

No they are not old.

Immigration figures are useless without comparison. So figures from the 1960s are still useful.

WRONG

(sorry couldn't resist it)

differences in data collection make these comparison spurious in most cases.

Originally Posted by Liberal Authoritarian

No they are not old.

Immigration figures are useless without comparison. So figures from the 1960s are still useful.

erm yeah, but like data from the 1960s, data from 2008 doesnt show whats happening right now though does it...

Originally Posted by JacquesMagique

erm yeah, but like data from the 1960s, data from 2008 doesnt show whats happening right now though does it...

Data is useless if you have no comparison. Using data over a long period of time allows you to fit an accurate trend line.

Take Global Warming for an example. It is true that in the recent 100,000 years the Earth has warmed. However, over the last 400,000 the Earth has got a lot colder.

When looking over longer periods of time, you realise that in terms of climate change, there is nothing wrong with the current warming. It is within normal parameters.

The point is, you need a lot of data over a lot of years to make it useful.

Originally Posted by Liberal Authoritarian

Data is useless if you have no comparison.

Not true at all, although Todd Landman's gonna love you!!!

Using data over a long period of time allows you to fit an accurate trend line.

See my comment below on data collection (which would need to remain fairly consistent) that may be possible to get round but still makes it hard to draw firm conclusions from trends in data

Originally Posted by Marxist Nutter

Not true at all, although Todd Landman's gonna love you!!!

See my comment below on data collection (which would need to remain fairly consistent) that may be possible to get round but still makes it hard to draw firm conclusions from trends in data

I am sorry, this is where my youth causes problems. Can you explain why Todd Landman would "love" me and who he is.


In my experience with data collection, everything we do with data is to collect it, plot it, create a trend line, interpret the trend line, predict the future of the trend line. It is true they are not firm, they are merely predictions based on past data.

But data in itself is useless.

100,000

That 100,000 is data, but is useless without information and past data for comparison.

Originally Posted by Liberal Authoritarian

I am sorry, this is where my youth causes problems. Can you explain why Todd Landman would "love" me and who he is.

He'll most likely be teaching you 'comparative politics' at Essex

In my experience with data collection, everything we do with data is to collect it, plot it, create a trend line, interpret the trend line, predict the future of the trend line. It is true they are not firm, they are merely predictions based on past data.

yep

But data in itself is useless.

100,000

That 100,000 is data, but is useless without information and past data for comparison.

100, 000 is not data (no units) it is just a number.

Sometimes in depth data, say a semiotic analysis of a single document can be very useful. Sometimes comparison itself can be a spurious method and you can learn more by looking at something in depth.

This could get very complicated. Although in essence i agree with where you are coming from, I just wanted to point out there are other ways of thinking about data. For me, for example, all data is text.

Originally Posted by Marxist Nutter

He'll most likely be teaching you 'comparative politics' at Essex

I see. I assume by the "he'll love you" that that was just some subtle sarcasm.

100, 000 is not data (no units) it is just a number.

Sometimes in depth data, say a semiotic analysis of a single document can be very useful. Sometimes comparison itself can be a spurious method and you can learn more by looking at something in depth.

I forgot to put the units in, so sorry about that. Reread that statement but with a unit in place

This could get very complicated. Although in essence i agree with where you are coming from, I just wanted to point out there are other ways of thinking about data. For me, for example, all data is text.

It's too late to get into this

Originally Posted by Liberal Authoritarian

I see. I assume by the "he'll love you" that that was just some subtle sarcasm.

Nope , no sarcasm at all - he agrees with your view 100%. You'll get on like a house on fire!

Originally Posted by Marxist Nutter

Nope , no sarcasm at all - he agrees with your view 100%. You'll get on like a house on fire!

Oh excellent, rather good to hear.