If your argument is that extremist parties eventually meet, I've some sympathy for that but the BNP derive from the National Front, their past is with Martin "Sweetie" Webster, not with any form of leftist party.

I don't disagree: first Blair moved right, now Cameron moves left, the result is occupation of the centre-ground with similar policies. Labour taxes more and spends more but services don't noticeably improve. The Conservatives cut taxes and spend less and services noticeably suffer.


I wasn't referring to enfranchisement - but to the fact that the spectrum of political ideas in Britain has more to do with trying to 'equalise' a society still divided along quasi-feudal lines and distribute wealth differently.

Simplistic I know, but in essence Labour try to negate the advantages of the aristos and bourgeois by favouring the 'workers' and underclass; the Conservatives are less kind to those on the bottom of the pile while deregulating to ensure those at the top continue to make kazillions.

Try listening to Nick Griffin's victory speech. It sounded like Labour in 1983. Norman Tebbit describes them as old Labour with racism, which seems to fit pretty well.

I assume you accept that the National Front was a far right, one might say a neo-Nazi, party. I assume you accept that the prominent members of the BNP were, in the past, members of the NF. I suggest that, far from being a leftist party, the BNP have adopted a socialist cloak in order to cultivate the masses; what poor man does not want wealth redistributed to him? I think it's a gimmick, a popularist stunt, and they have no ideological commitment to socialism.

Apparently, Nick Griffin was egged while giving a news conference outside the Houses of Parliament. He was unhurt, but was distressed that no one had separated the whites.

boom tish