Ukip - why are they gaining support?

[laptop]

Anyways. Yesterday I was wondering whether the real motivation of UKIP's funders was not to get the UK out of the EU, but to influence the EU toward an even more capitalist-friendly position. Much the same as Cameron's half-hearted anti-EU stance.

 

[Joe Reilly]

I go along with quite a lot of that post, but certainly not the "elephant in the room" thing. Migration is talked about a great deal. Why do people act as if it isn't?

It is of course referenced in the run up to elections particularly since the BNP breakthrough in 2002, but its day to day impact is actually not discussed at all.
What you have instead is set positions: either are pro-immigrant or anti-immigrant.
The adopted platform is then employed not to convince, but to demonise the other side.
Beginning and end of debate.

 

[taffboy gwyrdd]

It is of course referenced in the run up to elections particularly since the BNP breakthrough in 2002, but its day to day impact is actually not discussed at all.
What you have instead is set positions: either are pro-immigrant or anti-immigrant.
The adopted platform is then employed not to convince, but to demonise the other side.
Beginning and end of debate.

The quality of all public "debate" in the context of MSM is pretty questionable, migration being no better or worse on average than general economic policy, foreign policy, social security, privatisation etc.

But it's impact is "discussed" on a daily basis.

 

[SpineyNorman]

This whole 'political class' thing he constantly goes on about is tiresome. His party is stuffed full of ex-tory politicians and right-wing journos. Astroturf bollocks.

It's working though isn't it? And even though it's full of those types it's seen by people - even people who know full well what Farage and his colleagues represent - a way of kicking out at the three main parties who've betrayed them so badly. Rather than feeling smug because we think we can see through something the stupid proles are taken in by we should maybe be asking why it's Farrage and not someone on the left who's managing to channel that kind of sentiment.

 

[phildwyer]

we should maybe be asking why it's Farrage and not someone on the left who's managing to channel that kind of sentiment.

Because people who consider themselves on the "left" are terrified of being accused of racism.

 

[Dogsauce]

It's working though isn't it? And even though it's full of those types it's seen by people - even people who know full well what Farage and his colleagues represent - a way of kicking out at the three main parties who've betrayed them so badly. Rather than feeling smug because we think we can see through something the stupid proles are taken in by we should maybe be asking why it's Farrage and not someone on the left who's managing to channel that kind of sentiment.

It's not so much smugness as sheer boredom/frustration with him coming up with that defence/statement all the bloody time.

I think players in the party being connected to power has helped them in this substantially - they haven't got here through chance. With backers like James Goldsmith back in the Referendum Party days (which UKIP appeared to grow out of) they've always been pretty close to power and money, and have been able to use this. The left has no equivalent footing, other than maybe the soft left/liberal media occasionally pushing the green party agenda.

 

[Dogsauce]

DP

 

[brogdale]

I'm sorry I missed this today...sounds like it was a rather jolly jape....top respect to the steel band members who refused to play!

Nigel Farage failed to turn up to his mini street carnival in Croydon as rows broke out in the street over whether the party was racist and one of his local candidates described the town as an unsafe "dump". My colleague Rowena Mason was there, and she has sent me this:

The event quickly turned into a farce as two members of a hired steel band said they were uncomfortable about playing at the event. Marlon Hibbert, whose parents are Jamaican, said he he thought Ukip was "racist" and he had no idea it was the party that had made the booking.

Crowds gathered round Ukip supporters, including one of the party's most prominent black activists Winston McKenzie, a Croydon council candidate, who used a megaphone to say he was proud to be a supporter.

But he was interrupted by two Romanian protesters, who declined to give their names, accusing Ukip of being a Nazi party.

He was also confronted by local resident Anthony St Croix, who demanded to know why a Ukip candidate had talked about sending Lenny Henry back to a "black country".

As McKenzie was mobbed by the media, supporter and passers-by arguments started to break out over whether Ukip's policies and comments by supporters discriminate against immigrants.

After an hour, it became clear that Farage was unlikely to come with one aide attributing his non-appearance to security concerns.

Asked whether Farage was frightened of attending, McKenzie, standing in Croydon North, said: "If he hasn't turned up he is a very sensible man. It just shows how successive governments have continued to fail communities like Croydon.

"Croydon, which was once the place to be, the place to shop, has now become sadly a dump ... How can you ask an international leader to turn up somewhere where he feels unsafe?"

Top campaigning tactics from McKensie...

Asked whether Farage was frightened of attending, McKenzie, standing in Croydon North, said: "If he hasn't turned up he is a very sensible man. It just shows how successive governments have continued to fail communities like Croydon.

"Croydon, which was once the place to be, the place to shop, has now become sadly a dump ... How can you ask an international leader to turn up somewhere where he feels unsafe?"

 

[DotCommunist]

croydon- the new beirut?

 

[brogdale]

croydon- the new beirut?

Seems singularly inept to call his leader an international leader.

 

[Idris2002]

I kip, they kip, we all kip for UKIP.

 

[Dogsauce]

Seems singularly inept to call his leader an international leader.

Works abroad (in theory), married from abroad. A true internationalist.

 

[brogdale]

Works abroad (in theory), married from abroad. A true internationalist.

He did go to Scotland as well, didn't he?

 

[DotCommunist]

He did go to Scotland as well, didn't he?

they practically ran him out of fair caledonia brandishing sharpened farm tools and mel gibson

 

[brogdale]

they practically ran him out of fair caledonia brandishing sharpened farm tools and mel gibson

obviously 'safer' than the Cronx, though...we're wellard down here.

 

[taffboy gwyrdd]

we should maybe be asking why it's Farrage and not someone on the left who's managing to channel that kind of sentiment.

1) The continued divisions and sniping on and within the left (left of labour), for which one need look no further than Urban, though there are plenty of other places to look.

2) If a cogent left force were to emerge (for the sake of argument I'm not including The Greens, now polling up to 12%) - it would not benefit from having had it's agenda loudly trumpeted for years on a day in/day out basis by mainstream media. And there just doesnt seem to be the same sensationalist fetish of left issues as for right ones.

Having said all of this, the posturing of Miliband is slightly towards the centre left, the stuff on housing and tackling energy companies for example. As it happens, Labour have every chance of polling above UKIP even at the Euros, let alone the generals

Most people who are rightly fuming at privatisations, corruption, benefit shite and all the other reactionary hells eminating from the government are having their sentiment channeled into Labour.

Those with more generalised anger or anger stoked by hate-rags around migration etc. are being channeled into UKIP.

It's not "smug" to see through the fact that they are an establishment recommended "anti-establishment" hoax. It's plain as day. Was the little boy smug to say the emperor was naked?

 

[SpineyNorman]

You've answered the question as to why that anger isn't being channeled into the left but probably not in the way you think you have.

 

[eatmorecheese]

I'm sorry I missed this today...sounds like it was a rather jolly jape....top respect to the steel band members who refused to play!



Top campaigning tactics from McKensie...

 

[taffboy gwyrdd]

You've answered the question as to why that anger isn't being channeled into the left but probably not in the way you think you have.

Are you going to be explicit?

It's one thing to have a go at a tendency for being "smug", but responses like yours risk looking smug too.

Here's a more basic version of what I outlined: dissent not being channeled to the left because

1) Internal behaviours and problems of the left

2) A lot less support for left ideas in mainstream media and discourse.

Feel free to address these actual points, or carry on with more arch distraction. makes no odds to me really, though the former would probably be more constructive.

 

[SpineyNorman]

The idea that the media determine people's views, like they're just blank slates on which the establishment can write anything they like (obviously not you though, you're above all that, which is why you accept views on the power of the media that the likes of Murdoch have been deliberately cultivating for decades and take the exact same view of UKIP, who votes for them, why and how this should be combated as the 'establishment' media do). It's fucking insulting.

You're right about the failure of the left too - though it's not because we disagree with each other. It's because the more visible elements of the left are full of chest prodding twats who in truth don't trust the working class, who think they're just too easy for the right to manipulate.

Have you ever considered that people might have actual reasons (beyond being brainwashed by the Daily Mail) for disagreeing with you politically? That they might see through UKIP just as well as anyone else but vote for them anyway for a variety of instrumental reasons? I guess not - after all, that would mean actually listening to people and taking their concerns seriously. Much easier to assume they have these concerns because they Daily Express told them they should be concerned about them.

 

[taffboy gwyrdd]

SpineyNorman I've never said the media determine views, but clearly they significantly frame "debate".

"obviously not you though" - doing my thinking for me, how kind.

"It's because the more visible elements of the left are full of chest prodding twats" .... I know it's only metaphor, but aren't you doing rather a lot of er... chest prodding?

The problems of the left go far beyond that, and into the realms of people who are prepared to get very nasty and personal in determining that others are "doing it wrong". But if many were doing it right we wouldn't be in this fix in the first place.

"Have you ever considered that people might have actual reasons (beyond being brainwashed by the Daily Mail) for disagreeing with you politically?"

Yes. Thanks.

"I guess not" You guessed wrong.

"that would mean actually listening to people and taking their concerns seriously." - What concerns? The concerns that leave them exasperated with establishment politics? It's hard not to take them seriously. Or the concerns about 26 million people after their jobs, that are the product of deliberate and careful orchestration of lies?

"Much easier to assume they have these concerns because they Daily Express told them they should be concerned about them"

There's The Sun, Mail, Telegraph and Star as well. With The Times throwing their oar in from time to time and the BBC going along for the ride.

The general discourse is right wing and reactionary. It's no surprise or insult that people might be swayed by it. It would be surprising if they weren't. It's like advertising : It's all very well to scoff at the idea that people might be persuaded by it, but if it didn't work then capitalists wouldn't pay for it.

For all that you say, you still haven't managed to outline how it is that a private school neo liberal banker is presented and seen as "anti establishment" - there is a sharp cognitive dissonance there, and it doesn't require any chest prodding to discern it.

ETA : this is a standard reference for those who deride the idea that significant sections of the public may acutally be influenced by an endless stream of reactionary bilge. Talk of "chest prodding" is all very well, but doesn't address the actual issue.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...t-nearly-everything-survey-shows-8697821.html

 

[chilango]

Ian Bone seen heckling UKIP in Croydon on C4 news just now...

 

[chilango]

...and "fake" Romanian protesters. Weird.

 

[phildwyer]

ETA : this is a standard reference for those who deride the idea that significant sections of the public may acutally be influenced by an endless stream of reactionary bilge.

I've never understood people who minimize the influence of the media on the population.

Of course people are influenced by the media. Why else do they vote against their own interests all the time? If the media didn't influence people it wouldn't exist.

 

[brogdale]

Ian Bone seen heckling UKIP in Croydon on C4 news just now...

that's more like it, Ian.

 

[brogdale]

...and "fake" Romanian protesters. Weird.

Were they, weren't they? Litmus test...would Farage have wanted them as neighbours?

And candidate McKenzie; kinnel.

 

[SpineyNorman]

SpineyNorman I've never said the media determine views, but clearly they significantly frame "debate".

"obviously not you though" - doing my thinking for me, how kind.

"It's because the more visible elements of the left are full of chest prodding twats" .... I know it's only metaphor, but aren't you doing rather a lot of er... chest prodding?

The problems of the left go far beyond that, and into the realms of people who are prepared to get very nasty and personal in determining that others are "doing it wrong". But if many were doing it right we wouldn't be in this fix in the first place.

"Have you ever considered that people might have actual reasons (beyond being brainwashed by the Daily Mail) for disagreeing with you politically?"

Yes. Thanks.

"I guess not" You guessed wrong.

"that would mean actually listening to people and taking their concerns seriously." - What concerns? The concerns that leave them exasperated with establishment politics? It's hard not to take them seriously. Or the concerns about 26 million people after their jobs, that are the product of deliberate and careful orchestration of lies?

"Much easier to assume they have these concerns because they Daily Express told them they should be concerned about them"

There's The Sun, Mail, Telegraph and Star as well. With The Times throwing their oar in from time to time and the BBC going along for the ride.

The general discourse is right wing and reactionary. It's no surprise or insult that people might be swayed by it. It would be surprising if they weren't. It's like advertising : It's all very well to scoff at the idea that people might be persuaded by it, but if it didn't work then capitalists wouldn't pay for it.

For all that you say, you still haven't managed to outline how it is that a private school neo liberal banker is presented and seen as "anti establishment" - there is a sharp cognitive dissonance there, and it doesn't require any chest prodding to discern it.

ETA : this is a standard reference for those who deride the idea that significant sections of the public may acutally be influenced by an endless stream of reactionary bilge. Talk of "chest prodding" is all very well, but doesn't address the actual issue.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...t-nearly-everything-survey-shows-8697821.html

No surpsise that people are swayed by the media - not you though obviously. You see through all that. You don't actually say anything in that post beyond implicitly confirming what I just said.

How's Farrage come across as anti-establishment? Easy. He's not any of the other three. And the anti-establishment credentials are reinforced by the political establishment ganging up on them and highlighting something racist said on twitter by someone who once delivered some UKIP leaflets (the kinds of things you'd no doubt be able to find members of all the other parties saying - let's not forget the worrying number of antisemites found in the Green Party over the years, out and out racists in the Tory party, labour party loons and Lib Dem antisemites). And then when 'the left' joins in with the political establishment and sneers at people, implying they're brainwashed by the media but insisting 'that's not what I actually mean' it reinforces it - and the idea that you don't care about their concerns, that you're the same as the rest.

 

[taffboy gwyrdd]

No surpsise that people are swayed by the media - not you though obviously. You see through all that. You don't actually say anything in that post beyond implicitly confirming what I just said.

And you haven't remotely spoken to the point that evidence bares out that aggregated public perceptions are significantly out of line with reality in a direction conforming with the positions of right wing dominated media.

Clearly not everyone is swayed, including you and I I daresay. But the generality holds as the evidence displays.

How do you explain it? Please try.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...t-nearly-everything-survey-shows-8697821.html

 

[treelover]

The Ukip car has crashed, making the mask slip, revealing the cheap suits of the BNP. Hahaha, we don't do Fascism here Farage! But we do do self-delusion, impotent rage and shit analogies!

posted on cif and there are many more in the same vein

I do wonder now if Hope Not Hate are orchestrating people to frequently post on social media sites.

 

[SpineyNorman]

And you haven't remotely spoken to the point that evidence bares out that public perceptions are significantly out of line with reality in a direction conforming with the positions of right wing dominated media.

Clearly not everyone is swayed, including you and I I daresay. But the generality holds as the evidence displays.

How do you explain it? Please try.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...t-nearly-everything-survey-shows-8697821.html

First, I don't 'speak to points' - they can't hear what I'm saying.

How do I explain it? Does correlation = causation? Who is following who here?