Oh dear

[djm4_lj]

I understand the temptation, but I very much doubt that anything Nick Griffin could have said in his press conference could have got him the publicity and made him look good to those who voted for him as being pelted by eggs outside Westminster. Doing this just makes him look like a martyr.

As a Liberal, I disapprove of treating any democratically elected representative this way, but even if you don't, I challenge you to convince me that this sort of protest doesn't just play straight into the BNP's hands. They want to be seen in the media being attacked and silenced - a lot of their core support are people who feel that they have no voice, so anything that looks as though this is a deliberate conspiracy to silence them will ring true.

Comments

[ergotia.livejournal.com]

See, this is a constantly repeated sort of, I dont know, issue in the discourse between you and I. I agree with you completely on an intellectual level, but my hands are madly itching with the desire to throw eggs at Nick Griffin :)

[djm4]

Actually, my hands are itching too. Just because I disapprove, doesn't mean that I don't see the appeal. ;-)

[barakta]

I have been thinking this - and you've made it into coherent words!

[ajva.livejournal.com]

I completely agree with you on this one. I'd also extend my concerns to more subtle things like politicians walking off stage when a newly elected BNP member of some parliament or other (the London Assembly in Barnbrook's case; the Euro parliament in Griffin's) go forward to make their thank-you speeches. Obviously you can't completely legitimise the BNP, but treating them as outcasts just plays into their hands, as you say.

[djm4]

I agree with most of that. The only quibble I have is that the BNP are participants in a political process that I believe is legitimate, and to that extent I think they are legitimate. I might want to improve the system, but I wouldn't consider banning the BNP from participating in it to be an improvement (although I'd certainly consider a system where they didn't get elected because fewer people wanted to vote for them to be a considerable improvement).

Of course, I understand the reaction as an emotional response, and so have a lot of sympathy with the politicians who walked off-stage during Griffin's and Barnbrook's acceptance speeches. I'm not sure I'd have resisted the urge myself, had I been in their position, even though I think it's the wrong thing to do.

[ajva.livejournal.com]

I agree with all of this too. My use of the word 'legitimise' perhaps doesn't quite reflect what I meant.

[ciphergoth.livejournal.com]

I would have thought that walking off stage was closer to the "I disagree in the strongest terms with the honourable member" end of things than the pelting eggs end of things. Obviously it's stronger than would be used on other parties, but it seems like there should be some way for the parties to indicate that they don't think of the BNP the way they think of the opposition, no?

[djm4]

Yes, there should be some way to express that, and that's as good a way as any. I don't think it's a useful opinion to express, since it sends the message to anyone who voted for the BNP that even if they go with the rules of the system, the system is going to ignore them. And it strengthens the BNP's case amongst its supporters as a result.

But if it's the opinion that you want to express, that's certainly one way to do it, and I agree you should be allowed to.

[ciphergoth.livejournal.com]

I think the message that it sends is that the BNP aren't going to find allies among the other parties; that sort of thing is also part of how democracy works, isn't it?

[djm4]

That may be the message you would like to send by it, but that's not the one that I'd expect to be heard by everyone, and certainly not by BNP supporters. Walking off-stage and refusing to listen is a little bit too much like taking one's ball home in a fit of pique.

It feels wrong to respect the BNP. But I do, at least, respect that enough people voted for them to get two MEPs elected. Those people may have voted for people I loathe, but they've done it in sufficient numbers that they've got a voice that has a right to be listened to (and, mindful of recent conversations, I believe that 'right' was given to them by their participation in a democratic system I support). Obviously, having listened to them, I may disagree with them in the strongest possible terms, but I do feel that we should listen, and should be seen to listen.

Again, I'm a Liberal, so that's a point of principle for me. However, even for non-Liberals, I think it's a point of practicality in this case; anything that makes the BNP look like victims of a conspiracy to silence them by 'the establishment' will strengthen their ability to recruit from the people who feel that politicians don't represent them. Which is a lot of people at this point.

[friend-of-tofu.livejournal.com]

I'm not sure it's respecting the BNP, it's showing respect for the system. NG might be a vile human being, but when he's doing his job in the way he's allowed to, he's acting as a representative of such. Not physically attacking elected representatives (assuming they aren't acting outside the reasonable bounds of that job) is something of a point of principle with me too.

Not to mention that these idiots have actually gone and made Griffin look as if he's been telling the truth all these years! GAH! The man's probably been rubbing his hands together in utter glee all afternoon. Making Nick Griffin happy is not high on my list of priorities, funnily enough.

[ajva.livejournal.com]

That may be the message you would like to send by it, but that's not the one that I'd expect to be heard by everyone, and certainly not by BNP supporters. Walking off-stage and refusing to listen is a little bit too much like taking one's ball home in a fit of pique.

I think this goes to the heart of the matter, really. What I am really hoping for is a society where the BNP becomes less popular, and that's the single most important thing. If, as I believe, encouraging a martydom/plucky underdog complex will increase its popularity, then I perceive that as something to be avoided. I think the crux of the disagreement here is whether that is actually the case or not, and that's a valid and interesting debate in my view.

[djm4]

...and that's a valid and interesting debate in my view.

Very much my view as well.

[ergotia.livejournal.com]

This is where my agreement with you wrenches asunder with a loud groan. I cannot respect them just because they got elected, and that is a gut feeling and a political position - I dont think liberal democracy is the ultimate justice in a capitalist society and I dont think all voices have a right to be listened to - and the first example of voices I dont think have a right to be listened to are those inciting racial hatred.

Re your last para, I think it is important for those drawn to the BNP to see how much they are hated and/or not given legitimacy (and elected or not, for me inciters of racial hatred just dont have legitimacy).

[djm4]

For what it's worth, there are circumstances when I could agree with all of this. If the BNP ever got elected to government, for example, I'd be doing everything in my power to bring down that government (and not expecting to survive the experience unharmed, either in body or soul, but that's by-the-by).

It's not that I think liberal democracy is 'ultimate justice in a capitalist society' - at least, I don't think it's that; I'm not completely sure what you mean by that anyway - it's that it's a system I currently endorse. That could change, but electing two BNP MEPs, no matter how unhappy that makes me feel, isn't enough to make me reject the system. And given that I don't reject the system, I have an obligation to work within it.

It makes sense to me that someone like you who broadly speaking does reject the system feels no obligation to accept the results. I think that's a consistent position - as I said above, there are circumstances under which I'd reject the system in a similar way to the way you do here.

On whether or not the BNP - and those who vote for them - have a right to be listened to, I realise that's a tricky one. I emphasise again that I don't think it's an absolute right, but one that I'm (through gritted teeth) granting them conditionally. I do realise that many people wouldn't even grant them that, and that is a clear political and ideological divide as much as anything.

I think it is important for those drawn to the BNP to see how much they are hated and/or not given legitimacy

I can't work out whether or not I think that's important. I think it's important (but very hard to achieve) that they realise why a lot of people disagree strongly with their views, and that they take a good long hard look at whether or not they actually agree with the views of the people they elected. Making them feel hated has the unfortunate likely side-effect of making them feel as though they have common cause, and I think can only increase the BNP's strength; I'm not sure I want that just for the satisfaction of letting them know they're hated.

That said, if I had an egg in my hand and saw Nick Griffin, my hand would twitch.

If I thought making them feel hated would stop them voting BNP, I might be OK with it. I see it as likely to have the opposite effect. These are people who feel that society has largely abandoned them; they're not likely to give much of a toss about its approval. In fact, they may see the hatred of society as welcome attention, and a sign that they're doing the right thing.

And if you're proposing disenfranchising as large a number of people as voted for the BNP, it's going to get bloody. You (and alan1957) may well be prepared for that; I'm not, yet.

[ergotia.livejournal.com]

Thanks for thoughtful response - will respond, thinking it over.

[liadnan]

I think the fact the BNP got two MEPs because a crash in turnout for major parties is evidence of a problem with the system (generally, and specifically this abysmal variant of PR -no I'm not anti all PR, I am anti D'Hondt, and any system that is based on party lists) rather than an argument in favour of giving them any respect, whatever you precisely mean by "respect", it's a rather nuanced word.

But more generally, no I don't think that the fact they participate in democracy, and achive some limited success, gives them, or their supporters, any right to respect on any kind of level from the rest of us anyway. You don't get points for doing what you're supposed to do. Nor do I think the proper response is to listen to them even for a minute. Listening can only mean one of two things: either you are open to the possibility the policies they suggest are worth considering or you are going through the motions so you can say "I listened to them". You won't understand why people voted for them, or what the problems of this society are, both of which are indeed necessary, by listening to them or respecting them.

Noxious views are still noxious views no matter how many people vote for them and frankly I think egg pelting and other forms of demonstrating utter contempt has an entirely honourable and proper place in the democratic debate. As does farting in their general direction.

[liadnan]

Oh, and one final thing: I simply don't buy the argument that they will benefit from any kind of underdog fillip out of this or anything similar. Nor will it stop those who voted for them this time doing so next time, but that isn't actually the point.

[lovingboth]

Hmmm, the martyr aspect probably depends on who was throwing the eggs.

Were I to organise such a protest, I'd ask that it consist of just the sort of people the BNP claims to represent, even if the ones it doesn't have more reason to chuck stuff.

It's striking that none of the stories I've seen mention any arrests.

[lovingboth]

I'd also hope to have a better set of answers to media questions than the person who was just on PM...

[lovingboth]

Hmmm2, all the press coverage I've seen is what positive towards the protest, even in the Daily "1650 MIGRANTS INVADE UK EVERY DAY" Express which included an 'occupational hazard' comment from Anne Widdecombe.

[palmer1984.livejournal.com]

Of course pelting him with eggs also gives publicity to the anti-fascist movement - people might look them up and find out why they did it.

[friend-of-tofu.livejournal.com]

What makes you think we haven't already? Or don't already know about and have experience of dealing with various anti-fascist orgs? I for one have, and I'd have guessed that most people on this post have also.

Good lord, I guess the anti-fascist movement must be almost as obscure as the BNP!

(You might also want to think about the *kind* of publicity it gives them - or is any publicity good?)

[babysimon]

I would assume that by "people" palmer1984 means "people who voted BNP" or more generally "people watching the news" rather than "people reading this post". Your first paragraph seems to imply the latter - sorry if I'm miss-reading you.

[friend-of-tofu.livejournal.com]

Possibly. But it's so general it's hard to know. And are they reading this? Who is being advised here?

At any rate, that doesn't alter my point - what makes one think these "people" haven't already? Assuming voters-you-don't-agree-with are stupid or ignorant never strikes me as a good tactic.

[seph-hazard.livejournal.com]

I'd have guessed that most people on this post have also

"most people on this post" being, of course, not even vaguely the group that Rachel was talking about.

[friend-of-tofu.livejournal.com]

Doing this just makes him look like a martyr.

Couldn't agree more.

[vampwillow]

I concur. One PM this evening was one of the organisers of the egg-throwing who kept not seeing the point made by Eddie Mair that he had been *elected* no matter how abominable he is. She was saying things like "but he doesn't have a majority of supporters" oblivious to the fact that Labour, etc. didn't get above the 50%-of-electorate either.

It reminds me in many ways of the treatment of Sinn Fein with the "his words are spoken by an actor" farce.

And, of course, because it is a fixed parliament, we have five years of this ...

[alan1957.livejournal.com]

I've been thinking about this post all evening. Not thinking about whether or not I agree with it, of course. I utterly reject every syllable. But I had to decide whether I wish to see anything like it on my flist again, and the answer is no. So I shall be removing you from said list.

[friend-of-tofu.livejournal.com]

Now I've managed to stop laughing for long enough to type;

Well done for taking a bold stance against the oppressor, Sir. You really showed him! These dangerous liberal ideas of free speech and open elections should be stamped out ruthlessly.

[alan1957.livejournal.com]

I have read many of your comments in the recent past and you have become somewhat of a touchstone for me. Thank you for the above comment it has helped me greatly.

[friend-of-tofu.livejournal.com]

I'm always glad to be of service.

*doffs hat*

Beast of luck!

[friend-of-tofu.livejournal.com]

Oops, that was an unfortunate mistype! "Best", obv.

[babysimon]

I'm not sure I'm convinced.

You will, however, remain my friend ;)

As I understand it the BNP line is that established politicians / the media are conspiring to keep them down - that's very different from a bunch of ordinary people throwing eggs. I'm guessing that even a typical BNP voter would see a difference between a bunch of protesters and the government.

Otherwise, are we saying nobody should ever protest against the BNP? If so, is that according them special status or saying all parties should get the same protection? Not sure I like either possible answer to that.

[djm4]

I'm not saying - and wouldn't say - 'don't protest against the BNP'. For that matter, I wouldn't say 'don't protest against the Liberal Democrats'.

And yes, throwing eggs at people is a form of political protest. It's not one I approve of (it's possible there might be a situation in which I would, but this isn't it), mostly because it's a little bit close to assault for my liking. It also - to my mind - gives the impression that people opposed to the BNP have no arguments against them, and have to resort to violence to try to silece them. Especially as one effect of the protest is that Nick Griffin cancelled a press conference. It will look to a lot of his supporters as though he's been prevented from speaking uncomfortable truths that some people would rather were left unsaid. It doesn't matter that the 'some people' in this case aren't the government or the media (if that is indeed obvious to a BNP supporter); what's clear is that they're anti-BNP, and therefore part of the great big 'what's wrong with this country today' gestalt that the BNP supporter voted BNP to protest at.

[friend-of-tofu.livejournal.com]

It's not "close to" assault, it is common assault. Hence my objection to it.