The BNP [Andrew Stuttaford]
The relative success (it won two seats) of the unlovely British National Party (a party with, at the very least, as David Pryce-Jones points out, a fascist core) in the U.K. slice of the EU elections is best seen primarily as the product of five factors: (a) the largely accurate perception that the Blair-Brown governments were enablers of mass immigration; (b) not-unconnected fears over the rise of militant Islam within the U.K.; (c) dislike of the EU; (d) the economic crisis; (e) globalization (on economics & trade policy the party is quite some way to the left) and; (f) the widespread perception, flowing in no small part from points a-e, that no parliamentary party is prepared to stick up for the interests of the white working class, a perception that explains the BNP's recent success in finding support amongst former Labour voters. Throw in the the way that the expenses scandal now roiling parliament has discredited much of the existing political class, and there you have it . . .
If you want to see an example of how not to respond, Labour's Andy Burnham (the Health Secretary) comes up with an almost textbook example:
We have got to understand why people have voted for the BNP.
He, of course, already "understands" perfectly well. The question is what he is prepared to do about it.
For a more sensible take, here's EU Referendum's Richard North:
Internally, BNP is as big a mess as was UKIP. It is going to be struggling to rise above its own internal party rivalries and jealousies and, in a sense, yesterday's success will be a challenge for it. It will either make or break the party.
Here, its strongest asset is the visceral hatred exhibited by establishment which fails to understand that BNP's attraction to those who increasingly feel disenfranchised is precisely that it is hated by the establishment. Griffin has been clever enough to understand that and, the more vitriol that is directed at his party, the easier he will find it to attract voters.
The response, of course, should be to take on the BNP full frontal. Its prejudices are obvious, its politics are loathsome and its policies are incoherent. Against an open, intelligent, coherent challenge, it would not last five minutes.
Where the traditional parties have their difficulties though are that they too are unable to offer coherent policies. Not least, they are constantly having to hide or deny that "elephant in the room", the European Union – which has given the BNP its opening. And, as long as the major parties attempt to build their own electoral base on a foundation of deception and lies, their support will always be fragile and prone to peeling off by the "extremists".
I wouldn't agree with Mr. North on all of that (the EU is probably less important an element in this equation than he thinks). I also suspect (do read the whole piece) that it is a mistake to think that the increasing powerlessness of the Westminster parliament will mean that voters will feel that it's "safe" to vote for BNP in a national election. If they are angry enough they won't care one way or the other about that, but that's a big "if."
For another take on the BNP check out this recent (U.K.) Spectator piece by Fraser Nelson. The comments are well worth reading too.
The BNP - Andrew Stuttaford - The Corner on National Review Online (8 June 2009)
corner.nationalreview.com |
