La_Dolce_Vita Posted June 8, 2009 Author Share Posted June 8, 2009 One thing that Nick Griffin said that is the truth, is that it is the main parties inability to have a mature debate on anything to do with 'race' that has meant the BNP has gathered votes. Be warned the issues raised by the BNP have to be addressed by the main parties in a mature way otherwise other vile candidates will be elected in our name. Come on the big three take note and at least talk about the issues for gods sake don't let us follow 1930's germany. But the BNPs truth is one that they would like responding to in a particular way and it is their truth. They think immigration is a problem. And in many ways it is, because of the racism of whites and non-whites. But they want this to be recognised and make steps to respond to it by removing such people or giving white people privileges, rather than overcoming this racism. Racism should be discussed but not used to carry out racist policies. We're getting there slowly LDV. That's why I was surprised these guys got voted in by areas with large British born ethnic groups, like Leeds. These people need to get out and vote clearly. But the fact that lots of asian people live in a area does not mean the white people are more or less racist. Things are coming on slowly but the BNP take advantage of the racism that is still strong where many asians live and where they feel that things have become worse because of it. People should certainly not vote. Why should they? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluemonday Posted June 8, 2009 Share Posted June 8, 2009 One thing that Nick Griffin said that is the truth, is that it is the main parties inability to have a mature debate on anything to do with 'race' that has meant the BNP has gathered votes. Be warned the issues raised by the BNP have to be addressed by the main parties in a mature way otherwise other vile candidates will be elected in our name. Come on the big three take note and at least talk about the issues for gods sake don't let us follow 1930's germany. There's the danger, the extremists gain ground because of the inability of the mainstream loafers to deal with what concerns the man in the street. A lesson from history that should have been learnt but hasn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
La_Dolce_Vita Posted June 8, 2009 Author Share Posted June 8, 2009 much easier to issue fixed penalty tickets/fines on people who refused to vote to increase the turnout so it is more representitive. plus it would be a right good little earner. That's just stupid and authoritarian. Are you joking? So if you don't like any of the parties and understandably would not wish to participate by being responsible for putting them in power then tough shit because you have to vote? How is it representative if someone like myself was forced to vote. I have absolutely no desire to be a part of a system that exists to serve the priveleged view. When I disagree that I should be ruled, why should I be forced to choose my master? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manxman2 Posted June 8, 2009 Share Posted June 8, 2009 because you will always be someones bitch.{freedom is/was just a clever illusion bestowed upon us} whether you like it or not.{try rebelling by not paying your taxes} and i was serious about fining people for not voting. we have a responsibilty to our society to see it run the best it can be. even maybe going as far as an abstain box to tick. atleast then the statiticians would know the % of refusals .. and could maybe investigate thurther into the reasons if said % was to high. .. and i mean higher than the normal % of activists/vegetarians/ginger people etc. £100 fine for not voting would be about right imo. .. your principles worth £100 ldv. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
La_Dolce_Vita Posted June 8, 2009 Author Share Posted June 8, 2009 because you will always be someones bitch. whether you like it or not. That is what anarchist thinking is about. That many, many aspects fo authority can be done away with and more importantly that they illegimitate. and i was serious about fining people for not voting. we have a responsibilty to our society to see it run the best it can be. If so, we can start by not participating in the current system and looking for other ways to create a better system for society. even maybe going as far as an abstain box to tick. That just means that you don't like your choice of masters. Not that you disagree with the idea of having one Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whimsy Posted June 8, 2009 Share Posted June 8, 2009 £100 fine for not voting would be about right imo. .. your principles worth £100 ldv. It works in Australia and has re-invigorated politics there - people are a lot more interested and committed, as result of compulsory voting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slim Posted June 8, 2009 Share Posted June 8, 2009 But the fact that lots of asian people live in a area does not mean the white people are more or less racist. Things are coming on slowly but the BNP take advantage of the racism that is still strong where many asians live and where they feel that things have become worse because of it. See PK's post. It comes down as white's who are naffed off by the large ethnic population vs the number of ethnics who vote. Agree with what some are saying there, getting more people to vote is the solution to this stuff, including the ethnics with the ability to vote. People should certainly not vote. Why should they? Look out, day dreaming anarchist bollocks detected. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Terse Posted June 8, 2009 Share Posted June 8, 2009 anarchist thinking OXYMORON ALERT! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slim Posted June 8, 2009 Share Posted June 8, 2009 anarchist thinking OXYMORON ALERT! 9/10 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
La_Dolce_Vita Posted June 8, 2009 Author Share Posted June 8, 2009 £100 fine for not voting would be about right imo. .. your principles worth £100 ldv. That really riles. It has nothing to do with the worth of my principles but rather how much coercion is necessary to force me into doing something that I fundamentally disagree with. One hundred pounds may be enough to strike out a ballot paper. It works in Australia and has re-invigorated politics there - people are a lot more interested and committed, as result of compulsory voting. Which is a shame. Because clearly people were apathetic and for good reason. But rather than responding to this apathy in a good way the elite force you take part. The reasons for the apathy are now ignored because apathy, disengagement, or rejection of the system cannot be shown. Not very liberal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
La_Dolce_Vita Posted June 8, 2009 Author Share Posted June 8, 2009 anarchist thinking OXYMORON ALERT! Put some of your thinking into an intelligent response. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Terse Posted June 8, 2009 Share Posted June 8, 2009 anarchist thinking OXYMORON ALERT! Put some of your thinking into an intelligent response. I will.... when you deserve one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Terse Posted June 8, 2009 Share Posted June 8, 2009 It comes down as white's who are naffed off by the large ethnic population vs the number of ethnics who vote. Agree with what some are saying there, getting more people to vote is the solution to this stuff, including the ethnics with the ability to vote. "The BNP is not increasing its votes. In both Yorkshire and the north-west, its total number of votes fell from 2004. This absolutely does not mean that more people are being seduced by the BNP's propaganda. It means that Labour's share of the vote collapsed and went to other parties, thereby helping the BNP under a proportional system." SOURCE Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slim Posted June 8, 2009 Share Posted June 8, 2009 "The BNP is not increasing its votes. In both Yorkshire and the north-west, its total number of votes fell from 2004. This absolutely does not mean that more people are being seduced by the BNP's propaganda. It means that Labour's share of the vote collapsed and went to other parties, thereby helping the BNP under a proportional system."SOURCE Ta for that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
La_Dolce_Vita Posted June 8, 2009 Author Share Posted June 8, 2009 Do you believe that a first past the post system is preferable then? If so, how can it be justified when it less representative? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.