Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

The BNP list: would you have leaked it?

Assuming no consequences for you, woudl you have leaked it?


  • Total voters
    153
I would have done.
Hate politics always picks up the dafter end of humanity but no so many with the balls to admit what they are.
Publishing this may well put off new people from joining that oddball bunch of misfits.
Having said that I would not wish anyone to have a go at them other than verbally.
Politics needs to be kept to mouth only. Fists and weapons only bring the whole thing into chaos.

Just noticed the thing about unions wanting BNP members out.
In this case I have to agree with Griffin (makes me puke to do so I must add)

But BNP leader Nick Griffin said it was a "totalitarian" move aimed at excluding Labour's political opponents.

In this case the bastard has it right. You can argue with people who hold differing opinions from yours but you can't use force of any kind including this.

Still I believe we live in a world where justice is still king so, with that in mind, I can only hope Nick meets some black lass, falls in love and marries her.
 
I said knee jerk yes, but if push came to shove I'd probably end up weighing the pros and cons and get myself in a hopeless mess and end up doing nothing.
 
Some of the arguments against here are making a number of assumptions:

1) that those listed face the prospect of serious physical harm, even murder

2) that there is going to be some kinda mob frenzy against those on the list

3) that anyone using the list is incapable of distinguishing the "innocent children" from the diehard activist.

Well...

1) How many fascists have been murdered by "the reds" in the UK? some may get a beating, perhaps, and this may or may not be right, but murdered? hmmm...

2) I'd be surprised.

3) Well. you have been perfectly capable of spotting that theres kids, I think others can too. The list also helpfully has notes to assist in determing the committment of the member anyway.

Besides as noted above, the widespread dissemination of the list lessens the chance of really planned physical attacks but places responsibilty for the consequences in the hands of a much wider constituency than just the hardcore antifa. That is probably a good thing, no?
 
Much as I disagree with the BNP's racially obsessive, anti-immigration stance,
and their history of homophobia and anti-semitism, I'd like to sound a note of caution
regarding the premature jubilation over the publication of this list.

Whatever people might think about the politics of the BNP or BNP members
it is appalling that their confidential membership list has been published in this way.

Some people might think it perfectly acceptable that during the most severe, unfolding
recession in decades, BNP members working in teaching, the police, nursing and other areas
now face seeing their livelihoods and that of their families put at risk.

I do not. It is like McCarthyism in reverse, and we know what a tumult that era turned out to be.

It would seem more than coincidential that during the biggest economic crisis of capitalism in decades, when socialism and progressive, pro-people movements are in the ascendency, that this list should be leaked at this time. The publication of this list runs the serious risk of provoking a mini-war between the left/far left and far right.

Never forget the words of Jay Gould (known as the 'Mephistopheles of Wall Street'):

"I can hire one half of the working class to kill the other half."

Don't fall into the trap.
 
"First they came for the vile, moronic, racist neo-fash and I said nothing ...."

Probably not - I doubt it would help promote our "liberal" cause. (sic. Griffin)

Glad there's only 10,000 of 'em - hope there isn't one in my street.
 
Nope, definitely not. I detest the BNP as much as anyone else on here but this is pretty pointless isn't it? While I think the list can hold some value on keeping tabs on them - putting it on the internet, as butchers said, just ruins any value of it - it also makes the people who done look like a bit of a tit.
 
I keep trying to articulate my ideas on this, but I can't get past the thought that some people are willing to treat every BNP member as if they were a member of the Gestapo, and then apply the same to those BNP members' families.

It's interesting that the society I live in is unlikely to accept such overt racism, to the extent that we can all agree about how damaging this published list will be to the people on it. That's a good sign.

But a bad sign is that there's fairly widespread agreement that, for a few of these of these BNP members at least, the repercussions will be physical. Even some of those who think the names should have been published agree on this - 'those BNP bastards deserve it.'

And so do their families, apparently. Unless anyone somehow thinks that, if somone's outed as a member of the BNP, their kids are going to be miraculously unaffected by it.

The way that some people either disregard this or possibly just don't give a shit, is a very, very bad sign.

These are my thoughts too, by and large.
 
your assumptions are way off, and your questions do not deserve the same answers, so it is impossible to vote in your poll.

What assumptions are those, then? And why are they "way off"?

The question in the poll is a very straightforward one - would you have leaked the information onto the internet or not? You just need to say yes or no; it makes no assumption about your reasons for choosing either option.

I for one have no 'glee', tho I do have an interest (they're not the same thing you know), and it does amuse me to know the BNP are incompetent fools.

Anyone leaking such a list must know they may have to face the 'consequences' - whether they be legal ones or not - and doing so thinking there would be no consequences would be an act of total stupidity.

Does everyone deserve whatever may come there way? Utterly meaningless nonsense of a sentence. Not worth commenting further upon.

It's a perfectly straightforward question.

I might well have leaked it, but if I did, I wouldn't have put in on the bleedin' internet.

I'll put you down as a "no" then.
 
Most of this discussion seems to revolve around rights. I'm not interested in nonsense like rights. The discussion should focus on whether this is effective or not - and i don't think the answer is a simple yes or no. There will be a number of clashing effects - some of the softer elements, the non-ideological may well leave, and these are exactly the sort of people Griffin needs to keep onboard if their normalisation is to continue. The hardcore will have probably have their own commitment strengthened, but that was never really in doubt. In terms of public opinion it will make them look inept and in the same mould as the other parties, when they're really pushing their difference from them, but the reaction from the other side is likely to make them look just as unappealing.

I don't think it's possible to judge how effective this is yet, Griffin could balls it up or he could make something of it, likewise the other side. But one things crystal clear, and was before this happened - that any deus ex machina from on high like this is not going to stop them, it's not going to deal with the roots of the problem or the social conditions that produced the modern BNP.
 
Most of this discussion seems to revolve around rights. I'm not interested in nonsense like rights. The discussion should focus on whether this is effective or not - and i don't think the answer is a simple yes or no. There will be a number of clashing effects - some of the softer elements, the non-ideological may well leave, and these are exactly the sort of people Griffin needs to keep onboard if their normalisation is to continue. The hardcore will have probably have their own commitment strengthened, but that was never really in doubt. In terms of public opinion it will make them look inept and in the same mould as the other parties, when they're really pushing their difference from them, but the reaction from the other side is likely to make them look just as unappealing.

I don't think it's possible to judge how effective this is yet, Griffin could balls it up or he could make something of it, likewise the other side. But one things crystal clear, and was before this happened - that any deus ex machina from on high like this is not going to stop them, it's not going to deal with the roots of the problem or the social conditions that produced the modern BNP.

I'm not convinced the 'softer elements' will leave. Why should they? Nothing is likely happen to them. No one crippled the outed ballerina did they? Once the dust settles it may in fact embolden others to sign up. In any event as you point out, none of this deals with the BNP at a 'political' level which is where the real problem lies.
 
Is it a "Human Right" to know who would strip you of your human rights...?

Your call, gentle reader. No-one else can decide this for you. You decide.
 
I'm not convinced the 'softer elements' will leave. Why should they? Nothing is likely happen to them. No one crippled the outed ballerina did they? Once the dust settles it may in fact embolden others to sign up. In any event as you point out, none of this deals with the BNP at a 'political' level which is where the real problem lies.

I'm not entirely convinced myself to be honest. A lot will depend on the reactions over the next weeks/months - i could see those with businesses and so on panicking fior a bit, but coming back if nothing adverse happens to the remaining members. I think there will be some initial flake off though, simply because with the quest for normalisation also comes members who, depsite their politics, are still concerned about personal safety, community standing, respectability and all that sort of stuff that the hardcore aren't too fussed with.
 
Most of this discussion seems to revolve around rights. I'm not interested in nonsense like rights. The discussion should focus on whether this is effective or not

Whether or not it is effective is a discussion, of course (and one relevant to the question of whether you would have leaked the list or not).

But I think the discussion of whether or not people who are members of the BNP (and their relatives) should be granted the same right to privacy and freedom from harassment that might be granted to any other group is also important and relevant.

You may not be interested in "rights"; I am. I don't believe any rights are universal, they are things that are offered and protected in a civilised society. But I think that they should be applied consistently, otherwise they start to become meaningless.
 
I've decided. No, I wouldn't have done it. Not so much out of consideration for the members, as for their families. No way should the kids of these people get even more punishment for having arseholes as parents. I'm pretty much 100% certain that will happen; rumours will spread, other kids at school will find out, and the kids will suffer.

You reckon? You might regard the BNP as akin to paedos...but how many working class people actually share your views?
 
No, as there were kids on there. Whoever leaked this list unedited and uncensored, on either side, was either Psychotic or a Spook.
 
Yes, but then I'm of the opinion that political party members rolls should be publicly available documents anyway - if you're committed enough to join a party that might seek power, I should be able to see that.

That the BNP had lots of other information on this dbase that the DPR is investigating because they shouldn't is unfortunate...still, funny to see the govt privacy campaigner types indulging in their usual 'Well, it's for a good cause so it's ok' crap...
 
Most of this discussion seems to revolve around rights. I'm not interested in nonsense like rights. The discussion should focus on whether this is effective or not - and i don't think the answer is a simple yes or no. There will be a number of clashing effects - some of the softer elements, the non-ideological may well leave, and these are exactly the sort of people Griffin needs to keep onboard if their normalisation is to continue. The hardcore will have probably have their own commitment strengthened, but that was never really in doubt. In terms of public opinion it will make them look inept and in the same mould as the other parties, when they're really pushing their difference from them, but the reaction from the other side is likely to make them look just as unappealing.

I don't think it's possible to judge how effective this is yet, Griffin could balls it up or he could make something of it, likewise the other side. But one things crystal clear, and was before this happened - that any deus ex machina from on high like this is not going to stop them, it's not going to deal with the roots of the problem or the social conditions that produced the modern BNP.

As I mentioned above, what this leak does is take the burden of reponsibility away from the specialist antifascists and into a much wider swathe of the public.

Despite some of the wilder claims on these threads I personally doubt that the general public will be sharpening their pitch forks and organising lynch mobs for theri neighborhood BNP members.

Perhaps we will see a range of responses showing peoples disgust.

Perhaps we will see some sympathy.

Likely we will see a complex mixture of both.

Either way the wider reaction to the list will be instructive for organising a response to the BNP in the longer term.
 
Yes, but then I'm of the opinion that political party members rolls should be publicly available documents anyway - if you're committed enough to join a party that might seek power, I should be able to see that.

That's not a justification for making information, given in good faith that it would be kept private, publicly available.
 
Most of this discussion seems to revolve around rights. I'm not interested in nonsense like rights. The discussion should focus on whether this is effective or not - and i don't think the answer is a simple yes or no. There will be a number of clashing effects - some of the softer elements, the non-ideological may well leave, and these are exactly the sort of people Griffin needs to keep onboard if their normalisation is to continue. The hardcore will have probably have their own commitment strengthened, but that was never really in doubt. In terms of public opinion it will make them look inept and in the same mould as the other parties, when they're really pushing their difference from them, but the reaction from the other side is likely to make them look just as unappealing.

I don't think it's possible to judge how effective this is yet, Griffin could balls it up or he could make something of it, likewise the other side. But one things crystal clear, and was before this happened - that any deus ex machina from on high like this is not going to stop them, it's not going to deal with the roots of the problem or the social conditions that produced the modern BNP.

Well it's certainly not more effective than 30 years of anti-fascist politics that's for sure. It's a 'bureaucratic' scare tactic that as you and Jo have mentioned does nothing to actually halt the 'normalisation' of the BNP. That there's 12,000+ names on this list shows that there has been a notable advance.

I'm not convinced the 'softer elements' will leave. Why should they? Nothing is likely happen to them. No one crippled the outed ballerina did they? Once the dust settles it may in fact embolden others to sign up. In any event as you point out, none of this deals with the BNP at a 'political' level which is where the real problem lies.

There's probably a little difference between the ballerina and the average member though. She will have been fairly well acquainted, as a result of her relationship with Barnbrook, with the downsides of being a member. As such she'll be more able to deal with the fallout perhaps than someone who just angry at what's happening may be. Even Griffin accepts that this will result in a loss of members, how much is debatable and in any event not really the issue. As butchers said the issue is surely whether it will have any tangible effect, I won't hold my breath.

One of the elements of the fallout will be the possible ramping up of those sacked for merely being members of the BNP. Even if their job has never been affected there could well be sackings, as with the 1936 Public Order Act-ostensibly brought in to stop Mosley et al-it could very soon be used against those on the Left/pro working class elements in 'sensitive' jobs and then wider still.
 
Okay, how about this. Say you get on the bus and on the seat beside you is a CD ROM, no markings nothing on it. You pick it up, take it home, pop it in the computer and discover it's the BNP membership list.

Well, I wouldn't put it on the internet for starters because there's no way of knowing what people will do with the info once it's out there. Also, there's no way of knowing if it's accurate. Might there be some "false trails" put on there intentionally and might the CD have been left deliberately in the hopes that the wrong peeps would be targetted, thereby drumming up sympathy for the BNP.

Might pass it, however, to an anti-fascist organisation or something. They could quietly keep a copy if they chose, but would max the PR opportunities of the BNP's "security lapse." Basically, even if the list weren't plastered all over the interweb, those who think they're on it will still be shit scared that their employers, neighbours, etc. might find out.

I'd want to big up the BNP's crap approach to data protection for starters and maybe raise the question about whether party membership should be kept secret and why anyone should think that's important. Basically, I'd want to hit all the buttons that would make the BNP look like a disorganised sack of shite as well as bigoted scum. You don't have to publish their membership list on the web to do that - and it would deny them the chance of any sympathy for their "poor" members who might be targeted for abuse as a result.
 
One of the elements of the fallout will be the possible ramping up of those sacked for merely being members of the BNP. Even if their job has never been affected there could well be sackings, as with the 1936 Public Order Act-ostensibly brought in to stop Mosley et al-it could very soon be used against those on the Left/pro working class elements in 'sensitive' jobs and then wider still.

On this last point, elements of the govt and civil service top layers have benn lobbying for a UK version of the old german Berufsverbot banning members of certain parties or with certain views from employment in the public sector. I could see this idea getting a boost now.
 
As butchers said the issue is surely whether it will have any tangible effect, I won't hold my breath.

One of the elements of the fallout will be the possible ramping up of those sacked for merely being members of the BNP. Even if their job has never been affected there could well be sackings, as with the 1936 Public Order Act-ostensibly brought in to stop Mosley et al-it could very soon be used against those on the Left/pro working class elements in 'sensitive' jobs and then wider still.

All sensible comments. Still a copy of the list is good to have as its out there like
 
On this last point, elements of the govt and civil service top layers have benn lobbying for a UK version of the old german Berufsverbot banning members of certain parties or with certain views from employment in the public sector. I could see this idea getting a boost now.

Exactly the law I was thinking of, worth noting how it 'evolved' from the Nazi laws against Jews, racial and political opponents. I would say however that the 'specifics' of Post-War Germany are a 'special' case given the legacy of 'Denazification' and the 3rd Reich. It would be interesting to see how that legacy allowed for the Anti-Radical Decree to be introduced. Even more interesting, imho, that given the 'Anne di Piombe/Years of Lead' in Italy when political violence and killings were far higher than Germany that there wasn't a similar law introduced there.

Btw Was in Rome at the weekend and found out Romanzo Criminale is now a tv series in Italy.
 
Yes, but then I'm of the opinion that political party members rolls should be publicly available documents anyway - if you're committed enough to join a party that might seek power, I should be able to see that.

That the BNP had lots of other information on this dbase that the DPR is investigating because they shouldn't is unfortunate...still, funny to see the govt privacy campaigner types indulging in their usual 'Well, it's for a good cause so it's ok' crap...

Same here - I may not have published it directly on the net but I would certainly have passed it on to an anti-fascist organisation
 
All sensible comments. Still a copy of the list is good to have as its out there like

Imho, any non-state/non hack set up would have kept it quiet but still got it out to those who might be able to use it effectively instead of handing Griffin, and other BNP memebrs, the opportunity to reply on TV/radio etc.
 
Imho, any non-state/non hack set up would have kept it quiet but still got it out to those who might be able to use it effectively instead of handing Griffin, and other BNP memebrs, the opportunity to reply on TV/radio etc.

So you reckon this was MI5 or summat?
 
Back
Top Bottom