|
|
Post by sandypine on Apr 21, 2024 22:19:56 GMT
wapentake And a perfectly legitimate opinion it is to hold. However in a few months when General Election time is with us, it will be a test of opinion on whether the British public wish to elect into power politicians than prioritise the protection of our heritage and way of life, or whether they put a cross in the box next to politicians who prioritise self selected pronouns, transgenderism, Drag Queen storytime for infants, and are signed up to the diversity is our strength doctrine. All indications are that the great British public will endorse the latter in great numbers, while shunning the former. The need to protect our heritage and way of life is claimed to be needed right up until it becomes time to actually do something about it to make sure that it happens. The small number of votes cast for Britain First will almost definitely bear this out. Perhaps that is indicative of how strong and widespread the anti British propaganda is and denigrating Britain and its culture is presented as not just to be faced but right and proper. It has been around since the sixties and was latched onto by those who have more insidious reasons. |
|
|
|
Post by Baron von Lotsov on Apr 21, 2024 22:26:18 GMT
You .” Well, I can't quite get my head around that tbh. It doesn't wish to discriminate on the basis of religion, but wishes to build a society based on one? Them “ Britain First is committed to maintaining and strengthening Christianity as the foundation of our society and culture." So using Christianity as a foundation of society and culture but tolerating other religions is something that you ‘ can’t get your head around ‘? I dont necessarily support this but it’s quite a simple concept . Love thy neighbour.
We can love them in their own country. Actually me personally, I have nothing agaisnt Africans in Africa. I'm quite happy for Iraqis in Iraq as well.
|
|
|
|
Post by Vinny on Apr 22, 2024 12:11:42 GMT
Didn't realise Britain First were still going.
They're about as electable as one of Katie Price's crashed cars.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dan Dare on Apr 22, 2024 14:50:15 GMT
Is racism the same thing as racial hatred?
|
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Apr 22, 2024 14:53:49 GMT
Racism means anything that lefties or the serial offended want it to mean.
However ….Racialism is the unequal treatment of a population group purely because of its possession of physical or other characteristics socially defined as denoting a particular race
Racial hatred is whole different level .
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 22, 2024 15:24:56 GMT
Is racism the same thing as racial hatred? I think the margins in the definitions are similar to those between anti-Jewish, anti-Semitist and anti-Zionist. Blurred and dependent upon the user's intentions. |
|
|
|
Post by Dan Dare on Apr 22, 2024 15:54:40 GMT
It seems to me entirely possible for racist thoughts and actions to occur without their being motivated or caused by the emotion of hatred.
I might say, for example, that a multiracial society is bound to be a sub-optimal form of organising a polity without hating those of other races.
|
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Apr 22, 2024 15:58:40 GMT
To my understanding this thread was started to present the case that Britain First was a racist and fascist party by looking at their objectives and policies. As far as I can see no one has managed to pinpoint what makes them racist and fascist but that will not stop the MSM and the hordes of anti racist groups saying that is exactly what they are with a similar lack of evidence. On such unproven diatribes does our democracy rest. It seems a shame.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 22, 2024 19:09:16 GMT
It seems to me entirely possible for racist thoughts and actions to occur without their being motivated or caused by the emotion of hatred. I might say, for example, that a multiracial society is bound to be a sub-optimal form of organising a polity without hating those of other races. They divide people into groups and offer them defence from imagined enemies in exchange for support. Your argument undermines that, so you will be called a racist. That much I have no doubt.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 22, 2024 20:19:54 GMT
From wiki: I suppose being a jailbird for religiously aggravated harassment is a good thing, right?  |
|
|
|
Post by Orac on Apr 25, 2024 11:58:28 GMT
It then goes on to say: "3. Britain First is committed to preserving our British cultural heritage, traditions, customs and values. We oppose the increasing colonisation of our homeland through uncontrolled, mass immigration. Britain First is committed to maintaining and strengthening Christianity as the foundation of our society and culture." Well, I can't quite get my head around that tbh. It doesn't wish to discriminate on the basis of religion, but wishes to build a society based on one? In the parts you highlight, they don't say anything about discriminating on the basis of religion. Perhaps they do elsewhere? In any case, any mealy-mouthedness would just be a reflection on how bizarre the whole general atmos has become - attempts to preserve our own culture from extermination have to be written in code rather than plainly expressed. It's almost like we lost a war and are being occupied. |
|
|
|
Post by Baron von Lotsov on Apr 25, 2024 16:07:54 GMT
From wiki: I suppose being a jailbird for religiously aggravated harassment is a good thing, right? It's fascism, and we live in a fascist state. |
|
|
|
Post by andrewbrown on Apr 25, 2024 18:28:07 GMT
It then goes on to say: "3. Britain First is committed to preserving our British cultural heritage, traditions, customs and values. We oppose the increasing colonisation of our homeland through uncontrolled, mass immigration. Britain First is committed to maintaining and strengthening Christianity as the foundation of our society and culture." Well, I can't quite get my head around that tbh. It doesn't wish to discriminate on the basis of religion, but wishes to build a society based on one? In the parts you highlight, they don't say anything about discriminating on the basis of religion. Perhaps they do elsewhere? In any case, any mealy-mouthedness would just be a reflection on how bizarre the whole general atmos has become - attempts to preserve our own culture from extermination have to be written in code rather than plainly expressed. It's almost like we lost a war and are being occupied. Actually it does, which I mentioned in my OP: |
|
|
|
Post by Orac on Apr 25, 2024 18:52:55 GMT
The word "colonisation" is a strange one to use. For a party who is trying to insist that they are not racist and do not discriminate, they seem to be indicating that immigrants are "others", and not worth the same as white Britons. Nothing seems out of order here - it wouldn't be much of a colonisation if you considered you and your colonisers to be the same group |
|
|
|
Post by Vinny on Jun 15, 2024 8:00:02 GMT
They are a completely unelectable spin off from the BNP whose like and share model of promotion was banished from social media the best part of a decade ago.
|
|
