Skip to main content

BNP fights Fascism

"The BNP – and indeed the entire far-right movement – is no stranger to infighting and claims of splits will be dismissed by its high command. Griffin, a former key player in the National Front, assumed control over the party only after ousting its founder, John Tyndall.
Since then he has shored up his position, surrounding himself with a core of lieutenants and taking control of party finances. This has led to concerns that Griffin has become too powerful. Several senior BNP members quit after he overhauled the constitution to make his position as leader practically unassailable." The Guardian.

Quite hilarious, I’m sure the reader will agree. Fascists fighting fascism.

Whilst promoting the rule or prominence of one 'race', they quibble over the rule or prominence of one man.

Can we call it ‘democratic fascism’ perhaps? Or democrats of the Fascist Left? That is, seeking the equal valuation of different others within a party that seeks to devalue cultural others because of difference. How about if I put it this way, ‘seeking the equal valuation of different others within a party that seeks to devalue others because of difference.' It's a strange pastime indeed to compromise the generic value of 'difference' whilst demanding that it is respected within specific circumstances.

Why does the BNP not simply accept the position and power of Griffin? They are fascists aren’t they? Should they not allow Griffin’s whims and fancies to determine the perspectival ceiling of the party? If one 'race' of people are supposed to hold all the answers to everything, then why can’t one man. They might say, well, we are all different and have different ideas, so the contribution of these differentially produced ideas would definitely serve the progressive evolution of the party since no one individual can possess all that is required to make sense of the entirety of reality. So, I have to ask the BNP, is it too much of a stretch of imagination to apply the same logic to peoples of different cultures?

Well, the BNP ought to be given credit for at least attempting to maintain equality amongst equals. But I have to wonder after their definition of ‘equals’. And they ought to make the most of their democratic impulse in their opposition to the power and prominence of a singular individual to wonder after it as well. For the good of the party of course.




Popular posts from this blog

Is singapore a tyranny, or are people to dumbed down to feel it?

The following is a consideration of the perspective posted at the site, 'article14'. The site, in discussing the so-called 'Black Sunday movement' whose members wear black and congregate at Starbucks - perhaps they have an unstated desire to boost Starbucks sales of overpriced beverages, or perhaps Starbucks is paying for their black garments...silly people - to express their support for the freedom of expression - brought up certain points that seem to be commonly held by the 'singaporeans' of today.

Manifesto Against Same-Sex Marriages and Homo-Promotion

My stand against homosexuality is based on the following.  It is a logical, rather than a personal, decision.

Under the slogan, 'the freedom to love', it in principle justifies incestuous, group, etc, marriages.  All it requires is 'consenting adults', without an inquiry into what it means to be an 'adult' in intelligent, moral, and introspective terms.

This in turn encourages a ‘go with your feel’ tendency, which in itself gives rise a myriad of tendencies that go unquestioned.  Right and wrong ceases to matter, and even if something is illegal, one can still view it as society just having its own bias against it, just as it once had a ‘bias’ against homosexuality.

‘Nothing is natural.  Everything is just a matter of preference.’  That is the basic thrust of this unfortunate situation.  In fact, having a preference is in itself seen as evidence of one’s intelligence.  No attention needs to be paid to intellectuals, thinkers, philosophers, sages, religious te…