Awol

Please, explain how they are similar - instead of just repeating the post from the previous page again. What similarities did you find interesting? EDIT: In fact, what similarities did you find at all? The essence of fascism is an authoritarian and totalitarian state to which the individual is subordinated, the complete opposite of liberal democracy. UKIP are (some would say obsessively) anti-big state, pro market, pro individual liberty, pro decentralisation of power. UKIP's approach could crudely be summed up as the government getting out of the way and letting people get on with their own lives - the complete opposite of fascism. Sorry Drat, but that's a big fat fail from you.

Oh Drat. Please, make me laugh some more and explain how the definition of fascism and the policies of UKIP are similar? This should be hilarious.

It's also a disgrace, imo. Yes the benefits bill has to come down but grow some balls and do the things that will make real savings while not hurting the poorest. They could take the winter fuel allowance, free TV licence and free bus passes away from wealthy pensioners who frankly don't need it, for starters.

Here's a starter for 10. Do you dispute that multiculturalism has been pursued by the state as a policy objective? It's not just here either, Merkel commented (last year as I recall) that it had failed in Germany and I'm pretty sure the French have said the same.

It's a policy now? It's been policy since Harold Wilson's time.

UKIP are proposing a temporary freeze on the right of permanent settlement, not ending it. They are also not suggesting an end to all immigration in the interim, merely controlling and limiting it to skilled workers on a work permit basis. Given the rampant levels of unemployment at the moment then restricting the inflow of unskilled labour seems like a very sensible move if one favours giving opportunities to the people of the UK as a priority of any UK government. I do, and I don’t think that is racist to say so. That others buy into the propoganda that UKIP simply want to close the borders is their own problem, they should try reaching out beoynd their comfort zone of 'Comment Is Free' and do some actual research. Not being able to identify and remove all illegal immigrants is very different to saying “oh well, it’s all a bit too difficult to try and do something about this, let’s just not bother”. If you want to do something about it then target employers, make it illegal to employ people with no right to be in the country and jail those you catch who don’t comply. The ability to pay illegals sub-minimum wage will soon seem less of a worthwhile incentive if the penalty for getting court doing it is the loss of personal liberty. Why bother? One less illegal in the UK is one more vacancy in the legal job market. In political stuff I come at everything from one perspective: what can improve things for the British people. Anyone who thinks that is "racist" is so naive to the how the rest of the world thinks they're barely worth talking to anyway, imho. This is a fundamental point that I think is widely misunderstood. The UK doesn’t need a Human Rights Act because our rights are enshrined in Common Law. The British people are sovereign in their own right and grant certain rights to Parliament to govern us, those rights can be withdrawn. The European system is based on the Napoleonic Code where the state grants rights to individuals and it is the state that is sovereign. For me it’s the people who don’t recognise that situation and happily accept the surrender of their birth right to foreign authorities that are nobbers (and worse frankly). That doesn't affect the obligation to abide by the Geneva Conventions or any other supra-national laws, as long as they are raitified by the elected Parliament. Ultimately none of those laws can override the will of Parliament, that is the crucial factor that is the cornerstone of a democratic society. And it's not just us apparently mental types who believe this. This from Tony Benn lays out the issue plainly. For those with the ability to think beyond moronic party political tribalism and actually look at the bigger picture then the extent, seriousness and threat of these problems should be obvious. I think this boils down to differing a definition of multiculturalism. For me it is the encouragement by the state of parallel cultures to exist seperately in the same space, cultures that in some cases I’d happily say are utterly inferior to our own. That’s not about race but about social norms. It’s easy to say “oh but we have single mums, chavs, football hooligans etc” but that is a cop out. Our culture stands for certain values, freedom of speech, freedom of worship, democracy, the rule of law, equal rights regardless of race, sex or sexuality. That’s great as long as everyone buys into it. Unfortunately we have other cultures which have been actively encouraged to maintain their beliefs into 2nd/3rd/4th generation immigrants that run counter to those UK cultural values, and in so doing encourage separation and segrageation. That leads to antipathy and ultimately to violent radicalisation. There is no undoing the unprecedented racial diversity that has come about in the UK over the last 20 years through mass immigration and no reason at all to want to do so. The problem (and I’m in no doubt personally that it is a massive issue) is getting incomers to buy into our way of thinking, not to do so is simply storing up conflict for the future (even more conflict that is, because like it or not we have British citizens trying to commit mass murder on their fellow countrymen on an industrial scale, every year. Mostly in the name of their culture..). Multiculturalism actually encourages segregation and as such is taking society in precisely the wrong direction. It’s not about race, it’s about core values. Anything done to encourage integration is good, vital in fact. Policies that encourage the opposite are dangerous and frankly retarded. Like multiculturalism.

That's deep.

2 of 2 "recognise" - more dog whistling. Then what are they gonna do - eliminate them? Agreed, this is dog toffee. I demand to measure my journeys in furlongs and hands, not these johnny foreigner things called "kilometres" and metres. Ghastly foreigners. Again, stupid. Off with their heads! Too right. Recognising the problems in our own system isn’t a great rationale for accepting a far worse set of problems as an alternative. I do, on two massive issues: 1) The catastrophe that is the single European currency, why it wouldn’t work, what its effects would be and who would suffer as a result. 2) The gradual destruction of nation state democracy. The financial crisis has starkly illustrated the fact that this is the desired end state – the answer to every problem of course being “more Europe, more centralisation of power on Brussels”. That’s the economy and the future of democracy in Europe he has called correctly. I don’t see another politician in the UK over the last 10 years who has managed the same – or even 50% of that!

1 of 2 in reply to Blandy - i hate this new quoting format! stupid beyond belief. Because they're saying that someone can't come here from abroad, work here, contribute to nursing, to football, to business, to science, to technology and hope to stay here afterwards. They have to go away again. A great deal of the success we've had in the UK has been from overseas immigrants. It's just whistling to the prejudiced. Hardly any countries guarantee a right to permanent settlement once a work permit or visa has expired. Are they all prejudiced racists? Note even UKIP are suggesting a temporary freeze, not a moratorium until the end of time.. - yeah right. more dog whistling So you think illegal immigration is a good thing? If they are illegal then they can’t work legally, so can’t pay tax and are not contributing to broader society. In that situation people are also logically more likely to turn to crime. Amnesties do encourage more of the same and on a very basic level if you can’t secure your own borders then you can’t secure your country. Acting to do something about that is just common sense, not dog whistle politics. more bonkers, little Englander stuff. The human rights act key elements are stuff like the Right to life, Prohibition of torture, Prohibition of slavery and forced labour, the right to liberty and security, to a fair trial, to respect for private and family life, Freedom of thought, conscience and religion, Freedom of expression, Freedom of assembly and association, the right to marry, the prohibition of discrimination, Protection of property, right to education, to free elections, no death penalty except in time of war... Dreadfull isn't it. Looked at another way the intent is clearly to make Parliament sovereign again and not subject to any authority that is not directly accountable to the British people. Prior to the UK ratifying the HRA were any of the points you raised not already addressed – right to a fair trial, prohibition of torture, prohibition of slavery etc etc? Did we live in a police state before we had the protection of Strasbourg? No, and making Parliament sovereign again wouldn’t diminish the rights of the British people one iota, but it would be a benefit. little Englander racism Had hoped you might look a bit more deeply at that one to be honest, that’s the sort of cop out less thoughtful posters would use.

Yes, absolutely. Society will find its own balance and doesn't require misguided attempts at social engineering that can end up doing more harm than good. Equality before the law is all government should worry about providing and the rest will sort itself out quite happily, as it always has. That's got nothing to do with race btw. Yeah, cheers for that DDID.

Be grateful if you could re-post them please, instead of content free innuendo that amounts to "oooh, they're really rather nasty, you know..." maybe we could discuss some of these unreasonable horrors? As you wish From the UKIP 2012 National Manifesto - UKIP calls for an immediate five-year freeze on immigration for permanent settlement. - Return people found to be living illegally in the UK to their country of origin. There can be no question of an amnesty for illegal immigrants. Such amnesties merely encourage further illegal immigration. - Repeal the 1998 Human Rights Act and withdraw from the European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. In future British courts will not be allowed to appeal to any international treaty or convention that overrides or sets aside the provisions of any statue passed by the UK Parliament - End the active promotion of the doctrine of multiculturalism by local and national government and all publicly funded bodies - Recognise the numerous threats to British identity and culture - Safeguard British weights and measures (the pint, the mile, etc) which have been undermined by the EU. UKIP will also provide proper support to the Royal Mail and the Post Office as key British institutions - reintroduce a proper Treason Act As Chindie said the weights and measures stuff is parochial nonsense and the call to "recognise the numerous threats to British identity and culture" is just meaningless guff. The rest of it is good stuff. As for Farage himself, while he may be abrasive (and probably a bit of a front bottom) his analysis of the economic crisis in Europe has been consistently spot on and three steps ahead of the EU itself, as is his focus on the democratic deficit at the heart of the EU project. The other parties are now adopting his line on some issues because he's demonstrably correct.

Be grateful if you could re-post them please, instead of content free innuendo that amounts to "oooh, they're really rather nasty, you know..." maybe we could discuss some of these unreasonable horrors?

And me. Having failed to identify the apparent madness in their policies then me too, and I think they'll win the euro elections next year outright. To Richard's question on why vote UKIP in the local elections, most parties only break through into Westminster when they have established themselves in local government first and built the grassroots organisation required to deliver the bigger wins - basically the lib dem's model. If one thinks the Tories under Cameron are a joke - but would rather go down on a menstruating hooker than vote labour - then UKIP provides an alternative option. I agree with Blandy in so far as UKIP do not have a fully worked up and properly costed manifesto yet, but then again Labour are currently a policy void and those ideas the coalition do have seem to be failing, in the main. If that is the stick with which to beat UKIP then it should also be applied with equal intellectual force to the so called 'main' parties. UKIP have a long way to go in terms of finessing their policies and front line personnel, but there is a gap in the political market for a genuine centre right party and they look like the only people capable of filling it, for now.

Fixed that for you, Tone.

I'm not so sure about that, Jon. As was shown by the IFS analysis after the budget (and in reports about Beaker and the spending review to come), it is likely that the government will be bequeathing to its successor (whichever flavour that may be) large departmental budget reductions for 2015/6 (and beyond) and a notional idea of a ceiling for Annual Managed Expenditure (which seems to be a loose idea about setting a number and acknowledging that one doesn't really have control about whether one stays below that). If people thought that it was a good idea not to win the last election, it may turn out to be utter madness to try and win the next. I agree with that and actually laughed at the logic in Jon's comment. According to him it will be 'better for a Labour PM in two years time because the economy will have recovered during the five years of disasterous Tory rule from the mess Labour left behind and people won't hate them anymore'. Genius. Even more laughable is the idea of any "recovery" at all, imo. An interesting stat I read the other day said that between 2000-2010 public spending in absolute terms rose by 53%. Since the last election that figure has been reduced by 2.7% and people are screaming blue murder about it. Conclusion, the UK Gov are still spending eye watering amounts of money they don't have and there isn't a politician alive who will stand up and say the country is still living far beyond its means because no one wants to hear it. The big UK banks remain under capitalised and are masssively vulnerable to the euro's slow motion (for now) train wreck, but if they don't have the money to recapitalise and lend simultaneously (which they don't) then there can be no recovery. Eventually the UK will go bankrupt along with the rest of Europe - probably followed by a bloody big war if history is anything to go by. I can't see how an alternative (better) outcome is possible.

That 'perception' (or reality depending on your employment/trade) has been around since 2006 when border controls for Polish people were dropped. The response of the middle class (who were the people benefiting from these depressed wages) was to call those complaining about it, racist. The politicians who's policies created it are now tapping into that vein of bitterness in the hope of exploiting it electorally. Even Labour have caught on, hence their recent mea culpa and apologies for getting it wrong in 2006. Skilled immigration is vital for the economy and should be properly managed on a work permit system. Unskilled immigration when we have a million young people unemployed is bonkers.

Cough ** Rotherham By Election ** Cough

If UKIP didn't even exist the Tories would still be hard pressed to retain their deposit in South Shields. It's solid Labour so I don't think the result of this one will worry Cameron and Co. A few more Eastleigh's where they get panned by UKIP in winnable seats would be a different matter..

That is a fantastic picture. I've never seen snow like that in the UK.

Assuming this is just the usual bluster and NK aren't about to commit collective suicide, they've put themselves in a difficult spot by saying this. When you want to escalate the rhetoric on another occasion but have already threatened nuclear war, where do you go from there? Double nuclear war?

Talk on twitter of the Kremlin potentially freezing German assets in Russia. Nothing really attributable source wise yet but reinforces your point. UBS bank already claiming Cyprus will probably need a second rescue package and the EU is calling this the model for future bailouts... ...Is it a bird? Is it a plane? No, it's capital flight*! *from Spain, Italy, et al.

Question. If that Russian money is - as is being insinuated - all dodgy, why aren’t criminal investigations being launched to trace the provenance of the funds prior to seizing 100% of it (which is allowed under EU law) and therefore averting the need for any bailout at all? The Russian argument seems like a red herring to divert from the obvious – depositors are being made to pay ahead of the banks that are exposed to Cyprus. Yes they did, because as part of the Greek bailout the same Troika of the EU, ECB and IMF, imposed “haircuts” on the creditors of the Greek banks, in this case the Cypriots, in turn tipping their banks over the edge. Why one wonders, aren’t the Troika now imposing the same loses on the creditors of the Cyprus banks instead of raping the depositors? What’s that, the creditors includes big German banks? Well colour me shocked… So most of the EU’s 10 billion for Cyprus will never actually leave Frankfurt and just be sent to other German banks, instead of them taking the hit on their stupid investments – as the Cypriot banks were forced to. Meanwhile Stavros and Spirios are left grabbing their ankles instead because, let’s face it, what are they going to do about it? Meanwhile in order to recycle 10 billion around Frankfurt Cyprus is going to receive a massive dose of austerity, huge tax rises, runaway unemployment, endure the wholesale sell off of public sector assets and has lost in one week about 40-50% of their GDP generating industry – i.e. the financial sector. They will remain stuck in the Euro (so no devaluation possible to make them more competitive), have no way to service the new debts being racked up and will no doubt require yet another bailout ‘X’ weeks or months hence. Meanwhile, the delivery of this “bailout” (akin to being thrown a breeze block whilst drowning) is conditional on there not being a Parliamentary vote in Cyprus to approve it. This has been achieved by the clever wheeze of re-structuring the two biggest Cyprus banks instead of the little guy’s money being taken as a tax - which by definition has to be lawful and approved through legislation. Good solid EU stuff, **** democracy, we WILL get what we want. This article from Zero Hedge is also worth reading, apparently the bank freeze has only applied to some (read, the little guy) while those with the power and influence have been getting their wonga out of Cyprus while the plebs are protesting in the streets. Cash Exodus From Cyprus Surges Despite Bank Closures, Capital Controls If that shift of cash has been significant (and doubt it will be billions on the basis that if you have the juice to get around the law then you won’t be wiring pocket change to safety) then the bailout will already come up short as it is based on the amount that was “supposed” to already be in the system. So, how long before this merde is coming to Italy, Spain, Portugal or Ireland? Impossible you'd think, because the EU says Cyprus is a special case? Au contraire: Are your deposits in Irish banks safe? I find it hard to believe LL, that you are arguing for the protection of bankers over the man in the street – and having over 100K in the bank doesn’t mean you either rich or a crook. Plenty of anecdotes doing the rounds online about Brit’s who are going to lose many many 1000s because they were exchanging contracts on property, businesses etc. when their Cypriot accounts were “frozen”. I accept there is always a hazard when you decide to put your money in one place and sometimes shit just happens. However, what we are seeing now imo is the abandonment of any pretences that government actions from 2008 onwards have been designed to do anything other than protect banks at the expense of oridnary people, and a shit sandwich is a shit sandwich, no matter which end you are eating it from. This is a not over, not by a long way.

A long but very interesting (if you like this kind of thing) take on how this could play out - if the Cypriots had the stones for it. Mind you if they did launch criminal investigations then the Russian mafia would be the least of their worries! Cyprus – The ‘nuclear’ option