Saturday, 13 March 2010

Crossed wires are causing undue sparks.....

*



Perhaps I will at least be able to get a word in edgeways on my own blog, so this offering is a means of expressing myself in a place where I will not be "set upon" by immature people as they throw their toys out of the pram, fly off the handle and generally go into some manic, far fetched, hysteria ladened, ad hominem vitriol because I dare to pose some alternative views.

Seeing as I do not currently feel able to approach a rational debate in a certain location any more without the said individual(s) going overboard, I guess I will have to stake my right of reply here instead (whether they see it or not) just for my own peace of mind. I have twice been verbally attacked in a matter of weeks, the first time I let it go and did not involve myself with the squabbling that followed it, but now that it has happened for the second time I can not just let the matter slide without having my say.


There appears to be a great misunderstanding on their part of what they believe me to be, and what I suggest (or rather they imagine I suggest) we should be doing, and it should be cleared up now. The latest attack upon myself was, in my view, wholly irrational and borne out of ignorance to not only my beliefs but also how I see the future developing as a result of recent events and attitudes within the ranks.

As ever, I can easily meet half way with these people, for I have already "been there and done that", got two t-shirts (and a whole pile of merchandise) from where they are coming from, and thus I do see their approaches. In fact, I have battled for such a long time on the very same kind of approaches that the idea I cannot "understand" what they are doing or saying is absolutely laughable.

However, regardless of this;

(1) I do think it is reasonable for some longer established supporters to air their concerns about the direction in which the party is being taken, regardless of whether it is because the party is being forced to do these things or whether it is by the will of new supporters who are clearly not as trained in Nationalist ideologies as they like to think they are.

(2) I think it is reasonable that people should be allowed to express their concern (and dismay) when the BNP actually loses a court case which, due to us losing, has cost the party £60,000 - of which I have personally funded £100's towards in an attempt to win the case and uphold our principles.

I think it should be acceptable to say that we could have been more celebratory had we won the case on our own terms and not had to fund the court costs, but we didn't, and I think it is justified to point that loss out without being hammered for it.

(3) I think it is reasonable to say that it could be seen as a sad day for democracy when we officially have (probably for the first time) allowed a non elected group to dictate party politics and the rights of association in a supposedly free democratic society. This principled matter is regardless of the BNP specifically, and applies to any other party from any spectrum of society. This is fundamental stuff to any free thinking individual, libertarianist, nationalist, or otherwise purported upholder of freedoms. To not mention it, or rather to sideline it from debate completely as "whining" and "being negative" is just imbecilic.

(4) I think it is reasonable to ask questions pertaining to what safeguards are still left in place now that the court has enforced the removal of some very important pieces from the constitution (regarding the membership criteria), to talk about how we might have to practically deal with the consequences of this (should there be an openness to problems), and I think it is perfectly reasonable to question the possibilities of what might happen in the future so that we are prepared.

Glib platitudes and wishful thinking that things are 'not going to happen' is not good enough and does not pass as debate or grounded thinking. If talking about such important matters is "negative" and otherwise spoiling a "patriotic" knee's up, then I am afraid that is tough luck.

I do remember when the party was first taken to task by the EHRC over the membership, and ethno-nationalists were assured (and appeased by the very same glib platitudes) that nothing like what has just happened to us would happen, that we were moaning minnies, worriers for no reason - and yet these 'positive spinners' have had to concede again and positive spin what they said would not happen.

But to be honest, I cannot help get the distinct impression that they never really cared in the first place, and nor do they care now. They will obviously do absolutely anything and everything; even when it means (cheerfully and willingly) stabbing your own principles in the back 'for the greater good' -which is a very slippery slope indeed.

Yes, there are positives to some of what has happened very recently and I absolutely applaud those aspects as much as everyone else - but not at the expense of whitewashing the negatives completely and harassing people who think (or are concerned) that there may just be a few problems ahead.

5) I also think it is reasonable to allow interjection into debates where people are advocating (and otherwise supportive of/promoting) principles which are not ethno-nationalist and are in fact ideologically civic nationalist driven, neo-conservative, or just plain knee-jerk reactionary and nothing to do with Nationalism whatsoever - especially when they are presenting that viewpoint as being the actuality of the party ethos when it is not currently the case - despite them obviously wishing it to be so

This does not mean I, or other people who are cautious, advocate other approaches to those which have been placed upon us, and nor does it mean that we are somehow rogue elements who are "spoiling" the "patriotic" 'love-boat' because we dare pose some more grounded questions and theories.

We are concerned, we have a right to be concerned and we should have a right to express those views without being shouted down and ridiculed over having these concerns, especially from people who are supposed to be on our own side.

Such treatment is not acceptable, and I feel the treatment of myself and some other people recently has been disgusting and infantile, even reaching the point where some previous contributors have had to leave those discussion rooms as a direct result of their similar treatment.

One of the most sadly ironic parts about my own situation regarding this issue, is that if they perhaps knew who I was before my reincarnation under the nom de plume "BritishActivism", they would know that their insinuations against me (and their assumptions about my party allegiances and my approaches) are absolutely ludicrous.

However, there is only so much you can convey isn't there, when you are essentially harassed into silence.

1 comment:

  1. It wasn't a victory, despite what some of us have been saying (myself included), but that is the party line.

    I think the ramifications of removing the criteria that defended the party against infiltrators could well come back to bite us, hard.

    Have you had another run in on the food discussion group? Haha.

    I'll add a link to this site, soon.

    ReplyDelete