Explaining the BNP
In a recent post, a reader pointed out that the British National Party, despite its official rejection of anti-Semitism, continues to sell some anti-Semitic books. Robert Locke, who follows the BNP carefully, replies.
Sam H. writes from the Netherlands:
I don’t understand why you keep paying so much attention to marginal, fringe groups like the British National Party. The BNP is an irrelevant group filled with misfits, cranks, racists, anti-Semites and other people with low IQ and even lower social status. They will never play any role whatsoever in British political life. Every now and then they get some media attention, but they are being used by the left-liberal media as evidence that “right wing” or “nationalist” views are unpalatable. The only function the BNP serves is to keep such views beyond the pale in polite society. Each item you pay attention to them you therefore, indirectly, help that left-liberal agenda (and diminish the moral authority of your own site).LA replies:
I pay attention to them because (1) they are virtually the only organized entity in Britain that seeks to defend Britain from national suicide, (2) they have done something that no anti-Semitic organization has ever done before, intelligently argue against anti-Semitism and officially reject it within the party, and (3) articles in BNP publications such as the one I recently discussed about Israel point toward a key component in the possible salvation of the West, namely the possibility of race-conscious white Westerners defending Jews and Israel, and of Jews realizing they are on the same side as white Westerners.Sam H. writes:
I understand that. Yes, none of the mainstream parties are, at the moment defending Britain from national suicide, but the Conservative Party has come quite close. They have, even in the recent past, led the way on Euroscepsis (indeed, invented it) and immigration control. [LA interjects: This is a wildly off-base statement given that the current head of the Conservative party is rushing in the direction of “Inclusion.”] People like us should work to re-take control of the Tory party (or at least help those conservatives in Britain who are willing to do so). The Tory party is probably the soundest of mainstream parties in Britain. [LA says: I don’t think the Conservative party as it now exists can be called sound in any sense.]Sam continues:
Maybe it’s a European thing. Allow me to try to make an analogy. David Duke, as I understand it, is a completely irrelevant person in American politics (despite some past electoral successes) who will never, ever be a force in American politics. Now you could spend a lot of time discussing his particular policies and other doings, but that would be a wasted effort, and the very act of publicly discussing him would turn off certain people from your site, wouldn’t it?LA replies:
I think you have not read carefully the things I’ve had on the BNP. Every single article has expressed caveats and cautions. I have not given it a clean bill of health. I have not endorsed it. My discussions have been cautious and have always laid out the reasons why I thought this was worth discussing, therefore I don’t think thoughtful VFR readers would be turned off by my mentioning it.A reader writes:
Nick Griffin has a law degree from Cambridge.The reader continues:
Regarding the idea that the BNP is insignificant, for one thing, the BNP doesn’t have to win a Parliamentary majority to affect policy.
Posted by Lawrence Auster at August 08, 2006 11:17 AM | Send