There was a bit of a buzz this week when British National Party leader Nick Griffin was the featured guest on the BBC show Question Time. That's going to fly doubly over most American's heads, as they've heard of neither the BNP or QT.
I hadn't heard of QT either, but it is a weekly BBC staple that seems to be a cross of a Sunday morning political show and a town-hall meeting; a panel of news makers field questions from a studio audience on Thursday evening at 8:30 and the session is shown live-to-tape as is (with the occasional bleepable or decorum breech edited out) at 10:35. Griffin was a guest on this week's edition, which had a bit-too-lively debate between he and his many critics.
Why the hoopla? Well, to put it kindly, the BNP folks make Tom Tancredo look like a member of La Raza. They are racists in that they want to end immigration and encourage non-ethnic-Brits to leave. They had a whites-only membership policy until recently; why a non-white would want to join is another matter.
However, calling them critters of the right would be a mischaracterization. Lest we forget, real fascists are leftists, and the BNP economic policy is of the left. They turn up their nose at both free-market-free-trade liberalism and socialism, wanting the economy to serve the state and to move away from big corporations and towards small mom-and-pop businesses.
Yes, that does sound a bit like Pat Buchanan's dream world, but both share a localist tendency to like the small and distrust the big. The problem with that romantic notion is that a lot of our modern technology is made possible by large corporations that have the scale to do things that can't be done easily in a storefront shop on a six-figure budget. I'd likely not be blogging on the Web were localist economics the rule of the day. Localism has crunchycon, paleocon, and leftist versions, and the BNP vision is that of the left.
The BNP got 6% in the last EU elections in that other UK (I can tell I've been in Lexington too long when UK has me thinking John Wall before I think of John Bull) and that gives them some credence; a proportional representation system lets minor parties like the BNP and the anti-EU UK Independence Party more votes than they get in standard first-past-the-post races. If the Constitution Party (not to equate the two, but that's our closest analog, albeit much less virulently ethnocentric) got 6%, they'd be in the mix of public affairs shows, too. They got that vote largely in Labour-leaning districts, so their vote is of blue-collars with red necks behind them.
That makes the Labour folks nervous. The anti-fascist protesters are right to rail on their racism, but the BNP isn't of the right. Militant racism and ethnocentrism is a blue-collar art-form by and large; the better off tend to be more cosmopolitan than Joe Shoprat, so you see blue-collar skinheads in German and the BNP taking votes from Labour in Europe.
When Labour needs all the help it can get in not getting slaughtered in next spring's election (the five year mark of the last election is May 5th, 2010, so by custom, they'll have to go to the polls by then), the threat of losing Archie Bunker types to the BNP is rather real; let's not forget Archie's prototype was Alf Garnett from the British show Til Death Us Do Part. The analogy might not hold perfectly, since Alf was a reluctant Tory, since Labour "pretend to represent the working classes, whilst all they would do when in power is feather their own nests."
Who such disgruntled (if they were ever gruntled in the first place) folks vote for next spring will be a good question, and the BNP rednecks might sadly get a few of those votes.
Recent Comments