IWCA v BNP, on your radio

[Nigel]

No. The OP stated, in fact, the opposite - the BNP 'platform' was being actively contested by Stuart from IWCA.

This approach was criticised with the suggestion made was that the correct approach was that BNP should have appeared on their own and the 'anti fascists' stand outside waving lollipops whilst they were being interviewed - and then confront their ideas in an interview separately and later.

Stuart Craft didn't get a chance to debate with BNP, from their perspective the BNP they outmaneuvered any opposition and got a platform unhindered.

 

[Smokeandsteam]

More to do with the consciousness of the working class and how to go from a transition from the chauvanistic perspective that people are indoctrinated on a day to day basis, with the indigenous white working class seeing racism and xenophobia in their interest or stereotypes of what various classes are supposed to be and developing class consciousness in the interest of working class as a whole.

Yes, all white working class people are racists and xenophobes. Fucking hell.

 

[love detective]

The Pakistani men prostituting underage girls is a story just breaking in Oxford as we speak (though a couple of the gang are in fact African Muslim acquaintances of the Pakistani gang)

The general issue of Pakistani gangs preying on young women, as past caring has already pointed out, has already been racialised in the media and seized upon by white nationalist as an example of the deviance of all Pakistanis/muslims (for what it’s worth, the tension between Pakistani and black people in Oxford is far worse than that between whites and blacks or whites and Asians). If you also take into account the fact that Pakistani gangsters control the drugs and protection rackets in the Pakistani dominated (Labour controlled) area of Cowley Road, it would be hard to report on this story and ignore the ethnicity of these scumbags without looking like you are trying to cover up for them (funny enough the press have been banned from reporting the identity of a ‘businessman’ at the heart of this story).

Labour and the Lib Dems are often guilty of working with ethnic minority gangsters as they are so desperate to secure the ethnic minority block vote that they will work with anyone who appoints themselves as a community spokesperson regardless their character. It is hard to believe that the price paid for votes isn’t to turn a blind eye to the wrong doing of their community ‘leaders’ and it is probably no coincidence that all the working class areas controlled by drugs gangs are longstanding Labour wards.

 

[Smokeandsteam]

Stuart Craft didn't get a chance to debate with BNP, from their perspective the BNP they outmaneuvered any opposition and got a platform unhindered.

The BNP have pulled out of the debate. Have you even read this thread?

 

[past caring]

No need to when (what passes for) your mind is already made up.

 

[belboid]

No. The OP stated, in fact, the opposite - the BNP 'platform' was being actively contested by Stuart from IWCA.

This approach was criticised and the suggestion made that the correct approach was that BNP should have appeared on their own and that the challenge consist of the 'anti fascists' standing outside waving lollipops whilst they were being interviewed - and then confront their ideas in an interview separately and later.

yeah, cos making shit up really helps with your argument

 

[Jeff Robinson]

I have to agree with frogwoman. While I have no problem with most of that statement I didn't like the sentence 'We hate the likes of the Islamists, Jamaican and Somali drug gangs and Pakistani men who prostitute under-age girls, and we have no qualms about raising these issues in the same way as we have confronted the extreme anti-social behaviour of groups who happen to be white.'

Why is it that drug crimes and paedophilia are racialised whereas the rather more nebulus notion of 'extreme anti-social behaviour' is mentioned in relation to groups who 'happen to be white'? Notice also the former are 'hated' whereas the latter are merely 'confronted'. I get that this was probably a rather hastily drafted statement meant for a message board rather than general public consumption, but if Mr Craft is going to be an effective spokesperson against the BNP (and I have no problem with him publically debating that BNP whatshisface turd) then I hope he avoids that sort of racialised langauge.

 

[Joe Reilly]

thanks for that, its an interesting piece. The first thing that jumps out is what a fuckig prick the guy from that station is. Some people say they would vote BNP if they could. They cant, because the BNP dont stand there (yet). And then someone decides that the beat way to stop the BNP getting votes it to, uhh, invite them into a studio from where they can begin to organise a branch that will stand locally. Fucking madness. Doing so is clearly only going to benefit the BNP, no matter who is also on to oppose them.

Now, the fact that the station boss is a prick is obviously not the IWCA's fault - tho you'd hope they made similar points and said they didnt think there was any value to inviting the BNP in in the first place. But how best to deal ith it? The desired result is for the BNP not to appear, surely? So accepting the request to debate means accepting that they will appear. A refusal would start to put pressure on the station not to have the fuckers on.

If the station is still insisting, what then? Stuarts reply, and your comments throughout the thread, argue that the only way of responding is to accept the debate and sit down round a table with them. The idea that you could reply seperately, going on the station afterwards, is never even considered. Why not? Why is it sit down debate or nothing?

I love all this tactical finessing from a Left whose strategy was to creep onto estates in the middle of the night and plaster them with the edict: 'REFUGEES WELCOME HERE!' thus creating/fanning racial tensions where none may tangibly have existed. The flip side was to go on predominately Asian estates bravely announcing: 'BNP NOT WELCOME HERE!
No doubt causing locals to look askance at their white neighbours for a considerable time thereafter.

Of course there is a chance that the interview could benefit the BNP - but arguing that this is a given 'no matter who opposes them' and thus regardless of the outcome of the debate, is frankly, barmy.

 

[belboid]

I love all this tactical finessing from a Left whose strategy was to creep onto estates in the middle of the night and plaster them with the edict: 'REFUGEES WELCOME HERE!' thus creating/fanning racial tensions where none may tangibly have existed. The flip side was to go on predominately Asian estates bravely announcing: 'BNP NOT WELCOME HERE!
No doubt causing locals to look askance at their white neighbours for a considerable time thereafter.

Of course there is a chance that the interview could benefit the BNP - but arguing that this is a given 'no matter who opposes them' and thus regardless of the outcome of the debate, is frankly, barmy.

yawn. Try responding to what is actually written, eh Joe? Not some perverse version of what I'm supposed to be arguing.

If you think that Stuart is so astoundingly awesome that no one could hear him and not be convinced by his argument, well, there would be no need for him to sit alongside Darby to make his points. Of course, it is actually completely barmy to imagine that his counter-argument would convince everyone, that there aren't some bigots who would just ignore whatever he was saying and lap up the drivel from the BNP. Thus explicitly benefitting the BNP.

 

[love detective]

so best not to have a counter argument at the time in case there is someone who wasn't convinced by it and therefore the BNP would benefit

this thread has went even more loopy than it was previously

 

[belboid]

fucks sake, are you being deliberately thick?

The point is to stop the BNP appearing at all. You seem happy for them to be there, as long as you are too. The best way for stop them benefitting is for them not to be in at all. Its quite simple.

 

[love detective]

so it's back to placards outside the radio station and the left as the protectors of what the local working class should or should not here

and also to give a boost to the BNP claim that they are the radical alternative to the mainstream and the left is an upholder of that mainstream by physically trying to prevent their voice being heard

onwards

 

[articul8]

. It is hard to believe that the price paid for votes isn’t to turn a blind eye to the wrong doing of their community ‘leaders’ and it is probably no coincidence that all the working class areas controlled by drugs gangs are longstanding Labour wards.

So you're claiming that Labour are deliberately in league with drug dealing gangsters in a number of Oxford Wards (and that somehow there is a bloc vote in Pakistani areas which is turned out on the say-so of drug dealers)?

 

[Joe Reilly]

yawn. Try responding to what is actually written, eh Joe? Not some perverse version of what I'm supposed to be arguing.

If you think that Stuart is so astoundingly awesome that no one could hear him and not be convinced by his argument, well, there would be no need for him to sit alongside Darby to make his points. Of course, it is actually completely barmy to imagine that his counter-argument would convince everyone, that there aren't some bigots who would just ignore whatever he was saying and lap up the drivel from the BNP. Thus explicitly benefitting the BNP.

If you follow your own logic then anti-fascists would not quote someone like Nick Griffin; indeed would not mention the BNP by name at all?

In fact, while we're at it, let's not mention anything that might give 'a bigot' succour ever.

 

[love detective]

So you're claiming that Labour are deliberately in league with drug dealing gangsters in a number of Oxford Wards (and that somehow there is a bloc vote in Pakistani areas which is turned out on the say-so of drug dealers)?

I said what i said - make of it what you will

 

[Nigel]

Yes, all white working class people are racists and xenophobes. Fucking hell.

So you don't think that a substantial lumpen element of the white working class consider that they benefit from racist legislation and policy and that popular media doesn't play on this.

 

[past caring]

"And the thick bastards just lap it up" - don't forget that bit.

 

[articul8]

I said what i said - make of it what you will

Do you think the same could (and is?) happening in white w/c wards - drug dealers "turning out the vote" for Labour? W/c people of all communities only vote Labour because they're smacked off their tits I suppose?

 

[Smokeandsteam]

yeah, cos making shit up really helps with your argument

#59 The "NO PLATFORM" position has been perfectly well understood, on the "LEFT" anyway, for as long as I can remember. You DON'T enter into cozy "DEBATES" with the bastards - you picket the radio station/TV station where any airing of fascist views is proposed and demand that the fascists are given NO PLATFORM for their poison. This is a HUGE miscalculation by the IWCA guys. Believe me you will NEVER live it down. This error will haunt you for ever more. BIG MISTAKE !

 

[love detective]

Do you think the same could (and is?) happening in white w/c wards - drug dealers "turning out the vote" for Labour? W/c people of all communities only vote Labour because they're smacked off their tits I suppose?

i thought you'd given up the drink

 

[articul8]

i thought you'd given up the drink

I have Why doesn't apply the other way round - drug dealers can deliver Labour a bloc vote in asian areas (according to you) but not in white w/c areas?

 

[past caring]

i thought you'd given up the drink

Aye, for crack.

 

[articul8]

ah that'll be it - the dealer slips "vote Labour" in with the rocks

 

[Nigel]

"And the thick bastards just lap it up" - don't forget that bit.

Unopposed a lot of them will, or unless circumstances show a different perspective such as the Lyndsey Dispute.

 

[Smokeandsteam]

So you don't think that a substantial lumpen element of the white working class consider that they benefit from racist legislation and policy and that popular media doesn't play on this.

Stuart Craft "From our experience, explaining our position to working class people from across the ethnic spectrum is an almost effortless process. The fact that some on the ‘left’ assume that this is an area fraught with danger merely exposes their own lack of practical experience in this field, their own lack of genuine empathy with working class communities and above all their own lack of faith in the intelligence of working class individuals."

 

[love detective]

I have Why doesn't apply the other way round - drug dealers can deliver Labour a bloc vote in asian areas (according to you) but not in white w/c areas?

are you seriously having to ask this question?

a key plank of the IWCA critique of multiculturalism as it has led to the bolstering of unrepresentative 'community leaders' in asian and muslim ethnic areas. People who just because they come from the same ethnic background (regardless of their social or economic status) can apparently speak for a whole community, and a community defined on the basis of race/ethnicity. Freedom for individuals within particular communities are dispensed with in favour of the racist view that they are all the same and therefore some self appointed community leader can speak on their behalf

now largely due to the effects of political multiculturalism over the last decade or so, this situation does not arise in white working class communities - it's not racist to point this out, it's just a fact

therefore the likelihood of this method of community leaders delivering bloc votes (to labour or anyone else) in white working class areas is less than it is in asian areas - purely because this is a consequence of a decade or two of top down political multiculturalism creating this very situation

now because i've mentioned the word asian we'll probably get the usual frothing from those 'uncomfortable' with things like that happening (you know words that are appropriate to describe something being used to describe something)

 

[belboid]

so it's back to placards outside the radio station and the left as the protectors of what the local working class should or should not here

and also to give a boost to the BNP claim that they are the radical alternative to the mainstream and the left is an upholder of that mainstream by physically trying to prevent their voice being heard

onwards

the only people talking about lollipops is you. and its obvious why, you cant answer any of the actual arguments. hey ho

If you follow your own logic then anti-fascists would not quote someone like Nick Griffin; indeed would not mention the BNP by name at all?

In fact, while we're at it, let's not mention anything that might give 'a bigot' succour ever.

eh? that makes no sense. You dont appear to understand the difference between countering an argumnt and sitting down alongside the person making it. You dont need to do the latter in order to do the former

 

[love detective]

the only people talking about lollipops is you. and its obvious why, you cant answer any of the actual arguments. hey ho

where did i mention lollipops?

I've answered your 'arguments' - it's not my fault your arguments are fuckwitted and you don't like the answers

 

[articul8]

therefore the likelihood of this method of community leaders delivering bloc votes (to labour or anyone else) in white working class areas is less than it is in asian areas - purely because this is a consequence of a decade or two of top down political multiculturalism creating this very situation

And the community leaders are turning a blind eye to the drug dealers? For what purpose?

 

[belboid]

where did i mention lollipops?

I've answered your 'arguments' - it's not my fault your arguments are fuckwitted and you don't like the answers

sorry, you said 'placards', big difference.

You've answered nothing I'm afraid, just said 'I trust Stuarts judgement' and 'so you want us to ignore them then.'

Not very convincing