UKIP go from strength to strength

[Arakhor]

I dislike the way you've framed the question. I'm a nazi or a creep..what...

He didn't use those words or anything like it. I imagine you're somewhat oversensitive.

 

[jackelgull]

Believe it not Quackers, I wasn't trying to be insulting. I am sorry if you felt so, and I am just going to go bugger off from this thread for now, and leave you to celebrate UKIP's victories. It isn't worth being misrepresented at almost every post to properly convey my question.

 

[Quackers]

So Nick Griffin is a racist idiot, but sometimes you have to give the devil his due. The only thing I've literally ever heard him say that I'd tend to agree with (too lazy to pull up the quote but bare with me) is something along the lines of "The UKIP is bad because of Britain leaves the EU, it will by default, be even closer tied to America than it already is. Britain will not be a truly independent country if the UKIP gets their way, it will just become the 51st state rather than being in the EU."

Only possibly smart thing I've ever heard the man say. I do think if Britain leaves the EU the American gravitational pull will be too strong to bare. I'm an American myself so- meh, up to you.

But the possibility of Britain being involved in American wars/conflicts/interests even moreso than they already are is quite realistic to me... especially if you all leave the EU.

I disagree with Griffin's POV on that, the idea that the UK will become a "51st state" is mad. Even if we do come further under the umbrella of the States it won't be a wholly bad thing. It is a fantastic country.

Griffin is right on one issue. Back in 2004 he was talking about Pakistani Muslim gangs raping white British teenagers en mass in Northern cities. Nobody listened to him. In fact the left barricaded and mocked him. If we had listened to Griffin back in '04 we would have prevented so much suffering.

 

[Quackers]

i find the degree of support you hold for Farage to be slightly creepy. I can get supporting a party, but the amount of attention you lavish on the individual party head, and how you cheer his every move is reminiscent of a cult of personality. Is there a particular reason as to why your posts only contain information on Farage the individual, or his party but never anyone else? Is UKIP's leadership really so unremarkable that Farage is the only politician worth noting?

I'll bugger off as soon as you tell me one politician worth noting from UKIP besides Farage. If you can't name one, then I'll assume that UKIP is similar to the Nazi party in that it involves a charismatic leader with a platform that largely consists of giving the masses what they want on the issues they care about, while making their own policies on the issues that people don't care about like human rights, resulting in a mixed bag of policies in terms of effectiveness and practicality.


Here is the source I worked with.
http://ukineurope.com/ukip.html

Believe it not Quackers, I wasn't trying to be insulting. I am sorry if you felt so, and I am just going to go bugger off from this thread for now, and leave you to celebrate UKIP's victories. It isn't worth being misrepresented at almost every post to properly convey my question.

Not intending to be insulting doesn't mean you aren't being insulting.

I haven't misrepresented your posts at all, lets review:

i find the degree of support you hold for Farage to be slightly creepy

how you cheer his every move is reminiscent of a cult of personality

So here you've called me slightly creep and I have some kind of Stalinist fixation on Farage. Lets be honest, that's not conductive to a good question. You ought to read Hygro's thread on how to be reasonable.

If you can't name one, then I'll assume that UKIP is similar to the Nazi party

Ok, so if I don't give you your satisfactory answer I'm suddenly a supporter of a fascist party and therefore a nazi. Yup, well I'm not going to answer questions framed like that. I have self respect.

If you began your inquiry with:

Is there a particular reason as to why your posts only contain information on Farage the individual, or his party but never anyone else? Is UKIP's leadership really so unremarkable that Farage is the only politician worth noting?

I would be happy to answer.

 

[bathsheba666]

Is there a particular reason as to why your posts only contain information on Farage the individual, or his party but never anyone else? Is UKIP's leadership really so unremarkable that Farage is the only politician worth noting?

 

[Truronian]

Thanks for the publicity Mr T.

This has been one of my favourite years in UK politics. I hope next year is even better.

Trust me: page 27 of a UK specific thread in OT does not count as publicity. There ain't no-one here but us.

 

[bhsup]

Is there a particular reason as to why your posts only contain information on Farage the individual, or his party but never anyone else? Is UKIP's leadership really so unremarkable that Farage is the only politician worth noting?

I would think this would be the ideal situation for every party in the UK. You guys never vote for the person anyway, but rather vote the party you want to have the PM come from (a failing of the parliamentary system, but that's for another thread), so who cares who is running? Having one figurehead person to be out front espousing the party platform seems to make the most sense under such an election system.

 

[Traitorfish]

I would think this would be the ideal situation for every party in the UK. You guys never vote for the person anyway, but rather vote the party you want to have the PM come from (a failing of the parliamentary system, but that's for another thread), so who cares who is running?

I think that's more a matter of how electoral politics are reported than how they actually work. Swing-seats get the most attention, and candidates in those seats are carefully selected to be as well-disciplined and on-message as possible. In safe seats, MPs can and do build up a lot of personal credibility, but they're not very well-reported. A lot of it simply comes down to the weakness of local media in the United Kingdom as compared to the United States, and the consequent preoccupation on national politics to the neglect of local politics, rather than to the parliamentary system itself.

 

[bhsup]

Huh. Okay, fair enough. I'll bow to your direct knowledge of the system.

But still... Presidential rulez, parliamentary droolz!

 

[Oruc]

I'll bugger off as soon as you tell me one politician worth noting from UKIP besides Farage. If you can't name one, then I'll assume that UKIP is similar to the Nazi party in that it involves a charismatic leader with a platform that largely consists of giving the masses what they want on the issues they care about, while making their own policies on the issues that people don't care about like human rights, resulting in a mixed bag of policies in terms of effectiveness and practicality.


Here is the source I worked with.
http://ukineurope.com/ukip.html

Why do you believe a democracy shouldn't give people what they want? If that is what you believe then why support democracy why not just get rid of it?

 

[Arakhor]

He didn't say anything of the sort (or even anything remotely similar).

 

[Oruc]

He didn't say anything of the sort (or even anything remotely similar).

He bloody well did, read it again.

 

[Kyriakos]

In the interest of objectivity I feel it's probably worthwhile to start posting some counter-articles to Quacker's UKIPathon 2014. This one is from last year.

Nigel Farage 'was a racist schoolboy'

Spoiler Full Letter :

This is a very stupid letter, considering it was from an authority figure (part of the school) against a pupil of that school (Farage). I don't like Farage, but how is this letter anything to be printed in a national newspaper, or (by extension ) even the Telegraph?...

 

[Arakhor]

He bloody well did, read it again.

He really didn't. He mentioned nothing about democracy, rather criticising UKIP's nakedly populist policies. That's a very long way from "I hate democracy".

 

[Oruc]

He really didn't. He mentioned nothing about democracy, rather criticising UKIP's nakedly populist policies. That's a very long way from "I hate democracy".

I never mentioned him hating democracy, I think you just can't read. I asked if he thinks a democracy shouldn't give the people what they want then why does he, supposedly, believe in democracy.
I really do think you struggle with reading comprehension.

 

[Senethro]

I never mentioned him hating democracy, I think you just can't read. I asked if he thinks a democracy shouldn't give the people what they want then why does he, supposedly, believe in democracy.
I really do think you struggle with reading comprehension.

You ever heard a saying about democracy being two wolves and a sheep voting on whats to be served for dinner?

I think it illustrates how even laws supported by the majority of a democracy still need to be examined for their effects on the rest of the citizens.

 

[caketastydelish]

I disagree with Griffin's POV on that, the idea that the UK will become a "51st state" is mad. Even if we do come further under the umbrella of the States it won't be a wholly bad thing. It is a fantastic country.

I'd sort of disagree with you, but it's even more than that. The world is a deeply inter-connected place these days. The economies of the world, the internet, etc etc make sure we are all one deeply connected web. These days countries are only technically independent, if that makes sense. This sort of old-fashioned "clear cut" independence that Farage wants seems kind of... nieve in the modern day world. You can leave the EU alright (although Britain joined the EU in the first place for a reason) but... then what?

You know as an American I like talking about different countries politics and I'm not a UKIP hater one tenth as much as many of these posters here. But is this really
a one-issue party of "kick all immigrants out"? Surely there's got to be more to it than that? Because if their other thing is "we want to go to the good old days of true clear cut, self-reliant independence" then lol. That doesn't happen to any country in the modern world anymore, regardless of whether they happen to be in the EU.

Griffin is right on one issue. Back in 2004 he was talking about Pakistani Muslim gangs raping white British teenagers en mass in Northern cities. Nobody listened to him. In fact the left barricaded and mocked him. If we had listened to Griffin back in '04 we would have prevented so much suffering.

There are random moments where the National Enquirer tells the truth as well, but they get ignored by the vast majority of the public for a reason.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

Why do you believe a democracy shouldn't give people what they want? If that is what you believe then why support democracy why not just get rid of it?

A democracy doesn't work in the way that each decision is voted on. A democracy works in a way that people are elected with ideologies, and they are the ones who will define and execute the policies.

 

[Oruc]

You ever heard a saying about democracy being two wolves and a sheep voting on whats to be served for dinner?

I think it illustrates how even laws supported by the majority of a democracy still need to be examined for their effects on the rest of the citizens.

Sure I heard it and it's nonsense. Things you don't want become populism and the elite decides what the demos can influence or have a say on at all and people like you are radicals for the establishment.
Cut the crap and get rid of the democracy we've never had and the people don't even want.

 

[Kyriakos]

(agreeing with Oruc in this) ^If the majority of people in a state were aptly likened to wolves or other metaphors of that nature had merit in this context, then 'democracy' itself would not even be there in the first place. Usually it is the few people who actively try to screw over all others so as to gain money or whatever else they crave. Most of the public seems to accept some democratic sentiment by and large, and not just so as to be itself protected

So beware of sycophants spewing pitiful stuff along the lines of 'tyranny of the majority', cause they just want a tyranny, which is by definition always by a (very small) minority.