In the wake of fascism… part two

Whether you like it or not, the BNP have now been on Question Time; unfortunately, the reaction to the show after it was shown maybe a bit ill-judged and short-sighted.

Of course Griffin made a right idiot of himself. When asked about why he used to say what he said about the Holocaust he mentions that ‘I can’t explain why I used to those things’, when discussing with Jack Straw the Second World War and the different ethnic backgrounds fighting for Britain, Griffin launched into a personal family attack on Straw. The panel were dumbfounded by what is a schoolboy tactic by resorting to personal attacks when threatened by a tangible attack on your ideology. Nearly everybody on the panel and in the studio were prepared and firmly against Griffin. And this is the problem.

Griffin knew what he was going to be facing. Sure, he looked like a dimwit, but at the same time he has come across (in the eyes of BNP supporters at least) as misrepresented. The BNP will turn what happened and Question Time as a personal attack on Griffin, the BNP and the ‘indigenous’ British public. They will argue that Griffin never really got to represent what his party stood for. They will argue that he will look like a martyr. And looking back over the show you can see their point. For example, when asked a question not about race or immigration, Griffin said that the sight of two men kissing is ‘creepy’ – we could argue for days on end the extent to which this comment was homophobic, but as soon as he said that there was heckling from the audience. Now I understand this reaction to Griffin, but at the same time this plays into his hands.

What also play into his hands are the protests outside the BBC and the build up to the show. It has to be said that the BBC will, and did, exploit the publicity surrounding the show in order to increase its viewership (around 8 million according to the Guardian). This at the same time gives the BNP so much more publicity than they would of if it was just the show and nothing else. It does not matter that the publicity surrounding the show was opposition to the BNP, as the saying goes, any news is good news. The BNP grow support from exploiting the idea that politicians and elites are out of touch with the ‘common folk’ in Britain, and the strength of opposition will be used by the BNP as examples of how the BNP are the only party that stand for what the ‘common folk’ believe. This is not to say that the ‘common folk’ they are appealing to are racist as you’d notice from last night that issues of race stemmed fully from the panel and the people asking the questions – Griffin, as I have said previously, is a PR man, he knows focusing on race will not win him support. This is supported by a video from YouTube I posted on this blog a few months back which was quoted last night; talking with members of the KKK, Griffin explained that you have to focus your efforts on things such as security and democracy, that if you go out publicising your ideas on race then you will never gain mass support.

Now, I am not suggesting that protestors should stop. I like the idea of wherever the BNP are, UAF or some other group will be as well. However, there was a very interesting interview on BBC News 24 during the day yesterday from the President of YouGov. He suggested that protests should not be based around anger (despite anger being the obvious emotion in this case) but that protests should be based around showing people that Griffin is a pillock. They should be based around custard pies and eggs. They should satirise and embarrass Griffin. This he would argue will make it harder for the BNP to turn the protestors’ anger around to their advantage.

So whilst many of the Twitter and Facebook generations will rejoice at how ridiculous Griffin came across (Twitter and Facebook are not the BNPs target audience), we have to proceed with caution before declaring a victory. It’s too soon to say a battle has been won, but it is safe to say that the war is far from over.

The importance of history in developing national identity

Interest in your own country’s history amongst those other than historians develops largely out of a longing to find your nation’s place in the world and where your national identity derives from (national identity is best pitched by comparing your culture and history to another culture and history). The times when interest in history grows is often when people feel a lack of pride in their nationality, so they look back at past ‘achievements’. However, when it comes to these achievements as events to be proud of, they are often distorted. For example, the Armada- although was a fantastical victory, it was a victory in a war that England essentially lost. The Blitz was indeed a time when Brits had the mentality to stand up to the greatest might the world has seen, but was also a time when Britain lost its imperialistic history. In fact, the coupling of the First and Second World Wars helped destroy what Britain had become- it helped bring down the Empire, it helped break the class system and drive equality (everything that Britain at the time was historically not) and it also levelled Britain’s footing in world politics in comparison to other countries.

However, this should not hide away the benefits this history can bring to developing what has always been an evolving national identity. (I must stress that patriotism and nationalism does not always induce national and racial tension- it is only when these forces are moulded into that direction that it does). For example, the Empire was imperialist, colonialist, based on false racial claims and was exploitative. But when people look back on it patriotically, they do not do so thinking we ruled over inferior races, they do so thinking back at Britain’s influence in the world, or ability to have influence in the world- its power. The myths form stories based in the Blitz evoke feelings of doggedness, standing up for what is right, doing your bit. The Second World War belonged much more to the forces of anti-imperialism, to equality, to the fight against fascism and hence racism and to social justice than to powers that bought about racial cleansing and who had(ve) the power to enslave humanity, to destroy cities, to kill innocent lives- all of which Britain could shame to but which Britain had to switch from as it grew up into a world developing it’s own national consciousness’. Britain may not have a history it could be ‘proud’ of in its most traditionalist interpretation, but there is much history during Britain’s darkest moments to enlighten a national identity, a national culture and a national consciousness that helps shape the direction of what being British (or English, Scottish, Welsh, Irish) really should become.

Looking back at Britain’s history develops a notion of wanting Britain to be a world power again, but in a world where social, economic and political equality and justice flourishes. Being a world power should not mean you rule over other peoples, to tell them what to do- instead it should be about setting an example. Making other people and countries look at Britain and aspire to be like it. But in this day and age we as a nation are well off of this example, and that is why I look back at our history and wonder….

From Jamaica to Britain; fighting for the mother country in the Second World War

As part of my continued research (i.e. academic reading) I have come across several accounts detailing the experiences of civilians and soldiers fighting on both sides during the Second World War. In a book I have previously mentioned, Forgotten Voices of the Blitz and the Battle for Britain edited by Joshua Levine and taken from the oral archive at the Imperial War Museum, I have come across the following account of one Jamaican’s trip across the Atlantic to fight for Britain, the ‘mother country’, in the RAF. I think this is such an amazing story, it almost reads as the plot outline for a film.

The Jamaican RAF pilot in question is one Flight Lieutenant William Strachan of the 99 Squadron, and here is his story. I hope you enjoy.

We had heard these requests on the radio in Jamaica, coming from Britain, speaking to their large family overseas that they should help to defend the Crown against the German invaders. I’m an 18-year-old, just left school and I had the ambition of getting into the RAF – but it was difficult. The British army were still in Jamaica so I went down with a friend to see them and I told them they I wanted to join the air force. We had difficulty getting past the guard but they sent us for a medical and we were both passed fit. ‘Right, we want to join’, we said, ‘will you send us to England?’ We were laughed out. ‘You find your own way there!’ they said.

I knew if I’d gone to my father and said, ‘I want to go to England’, he’d have completely squashed the idea. As conservative as he was, he inherently suspected Britain and I knew he wouldn’t support the idea.

Wartime rules had been brought in that nobody could leave the island unless they had didn’t owe the government any income tax and didn’t have a criminal record. Because I was 18, just left school, I had no income and no criminal record so that was no problem. Still, how was I going to travel? I had no money so I went round all the shipping companies -  they were all run by Englishmen, white men – and I said, ‘Can you give me free passage to England?’ I’d been listening to the propaganda on the radio sating how everybody was loyal to the crown but none of them were interested until I went to Jamaica Fruit Shipping Company, major shippers of bananas to Britain. They had a number of boars coming out from Britain with middle-class white people who were fleeing from the war to the colonies for safe haven and I was able to persuade the management to take me. Nobody was going from the Caribbean to Britain but they told me that I might have to pay for it. The full price was about £45 and i paid £15. I didn’t have that so I had to sell my bicycle and my saxophone and I got about £17 for them. So I got on a ship and left Jamaica with £2 10s in my possession and a small case with one change of clothes. That’s how I came to Britain.

On this ship – a vast luxury passenger ship – I was the only passenger. I was given a first-class cabin which was rather fortunate, right next to the captain, but that was for their convenience, to save opening up lot of the cabins and having cleaners and things. I ate with the captain which was regarded as quite an honour in those days. Normally those ships would have deck quoits and swimming pools, but those facilities weren’t opened up so I spent my time smashing tin cans, saving metal for the war effort. The trip usually took just over two weeks in those days but it took a month because they had to do the zigzag route because of the U-boats in the Atlantic. We arrived at Bristol. I remember the train station. A porter came towards me in his uniform. ‘Your case, sir,’ he said and I saluted him. I thought he was a bloody admiral in his uniform. I didn’t dare thing that he would take my case. ‘No, sir!’ I said.

I got on the train to Paddington. The ticket was about thirty shillings and wartime England was dark. There was a blackout. The only place I’d heard of to stay was the YMCA on Tottenham Court Road – every West Indian that I’d ever met seemed to go there – so I took a taxi from Paddington, spending six shillings out of my fifteen. It was Saturday night, wartime, places were boarded up, wardens and Local Defence Volunteers walking round the place. I was so tired I went to bed. Come the Sunday morning, I went across to the YWCA to meet some people there. I met a lady there who was a Jewish refugee. It was the first I’d heard about these things from Germany. I went out with her for the Sunday evening and she told me what she was fleeing from and all that sort of thing.

On Monday morning, how do I get into the RAF? I’ve got no money, no connections, nobody. After great difficulty I found that the Air Ministry was at a place called Adastral House which was at the foot of Aldwych. So I went along to Adastral House and I spoke to the guard who I now know was a corporal. I said to him, ‘I want to join the air force.’ I’ll never forget this. He said to me, ‘Piss off.’ Here am I dressed in rather lightweight colonial stuff in March – I think he thought I was drunk or a lunatic. I persisted and as he tried to get away, a sergeant came along, and asked what was going on and I tried to tell him. He said ‘You don’t join the air force here, you’re trying to take the mickey out of us! This is the head office of the Air Ministry!’ But in my logic at that period, where else do you join the air force but at the Air Ministry? I didn’t even know about recruiting stations. So I persisted in my arguments with this sergeant and he said, ‘Where do you come from?’ and I  said, ‘Kingston.’ He said, ‘There’s a recruiting station at Kingston down in Surrey,’ and I said, ‘I don’t come from Surrey! I come from Jamaica!’ He didn’t know where Jamaica was. As he stood there quite mystified, a Hooray Henry type young officer came past and heard the argument. He said, ‘Oh you’re from Jamaica. One of our colonial friends. Welcome! I did geography at university and I’ve always been impressed with you West Africans. Come in!’ And this to his supreme ignorance I was dragged in. This bloke was a pilot officer, the lowest officer but he was above the sergeant. And thanks to his intervention, he took me in and I was taken up and saw a much higher rank, a flight lieutenant. I had to go through this story in much more detail and he really satisfied himself of its truth. And then they sent me for a medical at Euston.

I went there in the afternoon. I was told to stand in a room, ‘Get all your clothes off because you’re going to be medically examined.’ I was shivering and freezing. I’d only been in England for 48 hours. They examined me and found me fully fit. The doctor said, ‘Right now you can go home and we’ll call you up when we can take you in.’ I had to explain that I had no money and going home was very difficult. That took another period of argument but by about nine or ten o’clock I was on the train to Blackpool recruiting unit. I’d managed to break all regulations – to get recruited after 48 hours in this bloody country. I was joined up in 4 Elementary Flying Training School. On the Tuesday morning, I was in the RAF, in uniform, kitted out, in a group of 50 strange Englishmen. I was the only coloured person from the colonies. I was very proud of what I’d achieved.

And then these English people said, ‘You’re mad! You’re a bloody fool! If we’d been in Jamaica, we’d still be there now! What an idiot!’ It destroyed all my ideals of what I believed the whole thing was about. I was so proud of what I’d achieved and they said, ‘We’d do anything to get away from the bloody war and you say you come all this way and you tell us that story.’ They thought it was completely weird.

The corporal in charge of us was an ex-Bertram Mills clown. He was extremely gymnastic and fit and he looked at us in the traditional way a corporal looks at a bunch of new recruits and he said, ‘Now I want you all running on the spot.’ These blokes creaked into action. And then he looked at me and said, ‘Right, I’m making  you my deputy. Darkie, come over here!’ I’d never been called ‘darkie’ in my life before. I was shattered because it was a term of contempt. He said, ‘Darkie, you are in charge of the squad!’ I had conflict in my minds. I was annoyed I was called ‘darkie’ but my chest swelled out because I was regarded as a man fit to be promoted, second airman in the RAF.

We should never forget all those who fought against and died as a result of fascism during the first half of the twentifth century and we should never forget what they were fighting against and what they were fighting for. Remember to support the troops even if you don’t support the war.

Is that a cow?

So today I gowned a green paper suit, put around 5 bucket loads of disinfectant on my boots and was told that I should behave because I am representing the government. That’s right. I went on a farm visit.

I could talk about my professional feelings towards the visit- but that is best kept for when I am at work behind my desk. Instead I would just like to say a few things from my own personal standpoint. [Note, these are not the views of RPA, Defra or HM Government :@].

I firstly would like to say I really enjoyed the trip. I gained valuable insights into agriculture that you just can not appreciate when you are stuck behind a desk reading about EU subsidies!

Part of the trip meant we were able to see the lifecycle of the milking process (the farming side of the farm we went to had a rather large daily element). We started off by viewing some Heifers and other pregnant cows. Before I carry on I would like to say that the farm manager who was showing us around explained to us that everything is consumer driven, he also explained that for the majority of farms in the UK, animal health and wellbeing is of utmost importance, firstly because the supermarkets have strict standards (consumer demand…) and secondly because of regulations placed upon farms to abide by strict animal health procedures with the penalty of non-compliance a reduction in subsidy payment.

Anyway, back to the pregnant Heifers. As the farm primarily dealt with producing milk as this was most profitable for them (but not very) then females cows were important to them. The life of a female cow ranges from growing up (year) to pregnancy (artificial insemination or from a suitable bull if AI is unsuccessful), then when the calf is born after a few weeks it is taken away, this female cow then goes into producing milk- which is collected, after a few months the female is impregnated again, starting the whole cycle over again. One cycle occurs between every 1 and a half to 2 years and each female cow goes through around 3 or 4 cycles (depending on the cow and this is specific to this farm) through it’s life (even though cows can live to around 15).

When the Heifer/female cow has given birth the fate of the calf is dependant upon its sex (and if there are any diseases).  Female calves are obviously starting life in the milking cycle. Male calves are dependent on two things. The first is whether there is enough meat on them at birth. If it is possible to tell in the early stages of life that this calf will grow big and strong then it is sold on in market for consideration for the dinner plate. Weaker looking calves essentially have no purpose in the milk or food chain. In some circumstances they are put down because economically they have no use. However, this farm does note that there is a moral side and it is not all about economics. They are therefore more reluctant to kill the calf straight off and are likely to try and sell these calves on albeit at a very low price. Within this context we were taken to see such calves, some of which were only 4 days old, others 10 weeks old. We were told that this is the side of things consumers tend to miss when they buy or demand cheap milk. If you want your milk cheap then only the most productive animal is of economic use, those with no economic benefit are essentially useless.

We were taken to the main housing shed for the cows. This was a large open area, regularly cleaned- in fact it was being cleaned while we were there. It was not overcrowded and there was plenty of room for the cows to move and over the course of an hour I watched as cows had the freedom of movement of the length of the shed.

Finally on our trip we were taken to two different fields so we could assess things such as set-aside land, arable land, environmental stewardship and cross compliance (good agricultural and environmental condition). It should be pointed out that farmers only get subsidy payments without penalty if they keep their land in good environmental condition; there are also extra subsidy payments available for farmers who take part in environmental schemes such as countryside stewardship and planting hedgerows (for example). One of the amazing things that occurred to me was that the first field we were taken to was around 5 and a half hectares. Everyday at work I come across farmers who have fields about 5 times the size of this (and this is only one of their fields/parcels!).  But I thought this field I was in was huge. It made me appreciate how much land some farmers had (this is not the case when it comes to tenant farmers of course). Anyway, the farm manager explained that a lot of the field around Berkshire is of poor soil quality but one of the most popular crops to grow in this soil is corn. This is not the kind of corn that you have a dash of butter on top for dinner. No. The main purpose of this corn was to feed animals- such as those cows on his farm. Now I have heard of the statistic that around 60% of grown food crops in America go towards feeding animals involved in diary/meat farming,but you don’t appreciate how many crops are grown just for animal feed. I only started appreciating this whilst standing in the middle of a 5 hectare field.

I have to admit that despite being a vegetarian on moral and ethical grounds I now feel even guiltier for not being a vegan. It appears that it is pointless to say you will become vegetarian because you disagree with treatment of animals or the effect upon the environment that animal farming causes. If you were really serious about these issues then you’d become a vegan. But can I make this step? Vegetarianism is really easy for me; I have not been tempted to try meat once in over 2 years. But soya milk? I don’t know :-S

***   ***

There are two other points I picked up from the visit. Apparently, there are farms (rather big ones) who are still being screwed over by the larger supermarkets. This is because a contract can be made between the farmer and supermarket, the farmer will then fulfil his side of the agreement but then the supermarket turn around and say “Great, but we are going to pay you £15,000 less”. The farmer has no power in these circumstances. Of course what the supermarket is doing is illegal and of course the farmer does have the National Farmers Union to go to, but then that farmer will lose that supermarket’s contract. Therefore the farmer has no choice but to accept the new terms imposed by the supermarket.

This is not the first time I have seen this kind of undercutting. When I worked on building sites the way things are generally done is that the main builders will contract out jobs to other companies’ i.e. electrical work, plumbing etc. These companies will bid for the work; the lowest price for the quickest work plan will win. However, for a few of the electrical companies I have worked for after they had won the contract and signed the deal the builder has turned around and have said that the electrical company will need to cut their price by 5%. The electrical company (depending on its size) will not walk away because it needs that contract. Therefore two things happen. The first is that the quality of materials used will fall because money is tighter. This may not sound like a lot but the quality of the material can severely affect the quality and speed of the work. Secondly, and most importantly, the wages on offer falls. Most companies do things on price. This means that there is no fixed wage but the amount you take home at the end of the week depends on the work you do. The theory is that the incentive to you is to work quicker and faster in order to make more money. However if after you start working for the builders they ask you to lower your price then you can see situations where a first fix (putting in all the wires and cables whilst the house is being built- a second fix is when the walls and ceilings are up and you put the covers on switches etc) originally was say £500 and took 3 days to do, would now be £450 but still take 3 days to do, or because the quality of the materials falls can take 3 and a half days.

I’m digressing.

The final point I was pondering from my visit was the future of farming in England. We were told that the average age of a farmer was 59/60. We were told that there is a high illiteracy rate amongst farmers and many still didn’t (and refused) to have the internet. Some farms apparently are still running without electricity. Regardless of all this there are enormous pressures placed upon the farming community when it comes to inspections and paper work. A lot of farmers who went into farming straight from school years ago went into an industry that was purely manually based. Now because of the pressures imposed by the capitalist model and especially supermarkets, many farmers are hardly making a profit. The more efficient farms turn out to be those that are bigger. These bigger farms are able to claim bigger subsidy as well (SPS is based on potential land that can be used- the more you have the more money you get).

In the context of the average age of farmers, their illiteracy and the idea of it being purely manual labour, the pressures placed upon smaller farms in terms of the bureaucracy involved with farming (not all bad in terms of environmental care, animal health and food quality) means that many of these farmers may not get the full subsidy they are entitled to because they don’t fill out the relevant forms or make a mistake. On top of all this you have to remember that for a variety of reasons there is not an influx of younger farmers in the industry. Younger farmers would be more open to technology and bureaucracy because that is what the more recent generations have grown up with. But farming is not attractive to a huge majority of youngsters, even to those from a farming background because there is not enough money in it for the amount of work you have to put in.

Therefore could the future of farming be a few large companies? This would be of serious detriment to tradition and raise the entry levels for new farmers, but on the flipside larger farms can employ people to deal with the bureaucracy and then employ people to work on the farm. Could this help save farming? It would provide well paid farming jobs, but then what would be the result of this? Would animal health go down? Well larger farms would be able to experiment with new techniques and use the newest technology. They would also continue to be at the mercy of government regulation which ensures quality. The bad taste left in the mouths of the ethical consumer when it comes to market dominance of companies such as Tescos and Primark may not necessarily reflect if the same was to happen to farming. With Primark for example, they buy their clothes from a producer, they do not operate at the bottom of the chain, only buy from it. Farming would essentially be at the bottom of the chain- control this and you control the quality of the chain (in theory).

The idea of a larger more monopolised farming industry would still create problems. If one company was to collapse this would have a huge impact upon food prices and supply- this would be the same if these companies started demanding more for their product (because there is less competition)- food prices would go up. Finally there is still the problem of entry into the farming industry being higher and those small independent farmers whose families have been farming for generations will be wiped out- do we really want to do this?

The Battle of Britain (1940)

The Battle of Britain was ‘won’ by Britain due to a few interdependable factors.

The first was Britain’s eye in the sky, RDF (Radio Direction Finding), or what the Americanised English language describes as Radar. RDF was a fantastic defensive weapon during the war as it allowed Britain to keep an eye on what Luftwaffe squadrons were doing over the sea and what direction they were taking (once German planes made it mainland RDF was less effective and instead the British eye in the sky relied people on the ground to report enemy movements) this help Britain plan for enemy attack and mobilise a more effective defence.

The second was the coupling of the Spitfire and the Hurricane planes. The Spitfire was used primarily as a nimble fighter plane against the Luftwaffe’s other fighter planes. The Hurricane was used effectively against the German bombers as it wasn’t as effective as the Spitfire at fighting German fighters.

These two factors were at the route of Goering’s two biggest mistakes when tactically planning the German attack.

One; Goering was encouraged to attack the RDF stations- it should be noted that although the German’s had a vague idea of the existence of RDF and it’s use, there existence was still not wholly accepted as plausible by German leaders. For a short period in 1940 the Luftwaffe attacked these stations however, destroying some such as the one on Ventnor (Isle of Wight) and putting them out of commission for days, weeks at a time. To counter this in some cases, such as at Angmering  Park, where a RDF was completely wiped out a MB1 transmitter was set up that sent the same signal as the RDF into the air leading the Germans to think that hadn’t knocked the RDF out.

As Goering felt that it was pointless attacking what he saw as small defensive units and with the apparent ineffectiveness of knocking many of these of the map, it was decided to ignore these RDF stations (not fully understanding their importance to Britain) and again fully focus on the destruction of the RAF.

Two; Goering wanted the German fighter planes (such as the Messerschmitt 109 and Messerschmitt 110) to protect the bombers (Heinkel 111’s and Junkers 88 for example). To do this the aim was to reduce the fighter’s speeds to that of the bombers to keep them as one tight unit. Bombers were susceptible to British attacks because of the Hurricane’s greater speed and manoeuvrability over them. This limited the effectiveness of the German fighters who were themselves more susceptible to attacks from Spitfires because they were told to fly at reduced speeds and which gave the Spitfire the edge in ambushing them.

There are of course other factors leading to the British ‘victory’. For example, the aim of the German attack was to wipe out Fighter Command and the RAF. If this was done then invasion would be made possible as the Germans would have had a clear path (baring the Royal Navy) across the Channel. However, instead of putting hundreds of RAF planes into the air at a time, it was decided by Hugh Dowding, commander of RAF Fighter Command, to only send small batches of planes in the air. Thus situations occurred where there were 4-20 British planes against 200+ German planes.  This allowed a continuous flow of British planes to be able to take off into the air at any one time- aiding defense. It also helped lower the number of downed British planes and allowed a more robust yet jagged machine line flow of new planes to come out of manufacture to easily replace the downed planes.

Regardless, towards the end of the Battle of Britain the RAF was in dire straits. The Luftwaffe attack on the airfields made many redundant and the inexperience of new fighter pilots was taking its toll. If the Germans continued the war in the air then they would had wiped out the RAF. However- and there are several stories as to why this occurred ranging from Churchill becoming more ruthless and sacrificing huge chunks of the population in major British cities, to a lone Junker 88 dropping a few desperate bombs on London – the Battle of Britain ended the moment the RAF bombed Berlin. This led Hitler to counter attack by moving the focus of Luftwaffe attack from the airfields and to the major population centres- like London. What followed had such a huge cost and effect upon the civilian population and city infrastructure, but in reality it saved Britain from what seemed inevitable invasion.

Historical readings from today… and the death penalty

Today I started my preliminary reading for my Master’s dissertation, my chosen topic; to what extent did the Second World War help develop a notion of Britishness (throw into that the question of race during early 1940’s Britain). So the first book I pick up to read is: Forgotten Voices, stories of the Blitz and Battle of Britain. The Forgotten Voice’s series is a fantastic couple of books that take oral testimonies of those who fought or lived in the war and put’s them into chronological order without historical analysis (well, this point can be debated as only extracts of oral testimonies are selected and it could be argued that the author only selected those testimonies that can be moulded around his own view point).

The point of my reading (not just out of interest) was to try to piece together some ideas of what British people during the war thought of their country and some common characteristics of national culture during the war. I have already done some reading into this- Paul Ward and Britishness since 1860 where he claims many West Indians who fought in the British army called their post-war children Winston out of patriotic support. Also Tom Harrisson’s Mass Observation archive has bought up such classics as ‘I don’t consider myself British, [I consider the Scots and Welsh as a different race] but I would die to defend Britain [and my Scottish, Welsh neighbours]‘.

From my brief reading I have discovered that the whole British identity could be summarised by two things: tea (that old Chinese import) and common decency. One story talks about how during the blitz a father lost his child through decapitation, he held his child’s body stroking it and saying ‘So this is how you went, Jimmy’, he then got up and thanked a stranger on the street for handing him a mug of tea. More obscure forms of common decency came during the vacation of Dunkirk. One example is that many French and British soldiers were shot by their own side, without hesitation, because they tried to barge into the queues for the boats (that’s right, during the evacuation of Dunkirk when the German’s were bombarding the troops you were expected to form an orderly queue while waiting to get onto a boat and in some cases wear full clean uniform and have a shave).

Digressing from my reading, some thoughts on the death penalty came into my mind today. I would like to point out first that I do lose a lot of respect for people when they make the uneducated statement that we should bring back the death penalty, even if it were for only the most serious of crimes. These thoughts centred around the obvious- if the death penalty were a deterrent then why are crimes still committed in places that still have the death penalty. Then onto the notion that if the death penalty were the most righteous form of justice, then why do some killers kill themselves before they are caught? As a matter of fact- why did Hitler kill himself before he was caught, even though the Allies would had killed him in the end anyway? Are the majority of these people acting through the will of remorse, regret and justice? I think not.

In the wake of fascism…

So now the dust has settled on a night labelled as ‘a punishment to the left in Europe’ and we find ourselves with two ultra-nationalist fascist salesmen ‘representing’ us in the European Parliament.

The first reactions from anyone on the left are going to be one of disbelief and shock; I am guilty to early morning bouts of hysteria. However, as the day has passed and the events of the previous night have sunk in my understanding of the future of British politics has developed into a new kind of comprehension and hope.

Let me start with the cons of having Brons and Griffin as MEP’s. The first is that they are there to represent us. Unlike UKIP who deliberately vote ‘no’ to every motion regardless of its benefit to the UK (including to EU plans to track child molesters), the BNP representatives in the name of indigenous British people (am I apart of this?) will happily vote on motions to put towards the European Commission that help bolster their racist message. On the upside, they are only two MEP’s out of a parliament of 736, but the diarrhoea will still be coming out of their mouths “on behalf of the indigenous British people”.

The most serious damage coming from the BNP result is that which is inflicted upon New Labour.  Their wins came at the expense of New Labour and their votes which will give New Labour the belief that they can win these voters back. New Labour Minister Andy Burnham has already said that “There are concerns about immigration… the Government have to get a response to those concerns”. As if the UK government’s immigration policy is not strict enough, it seems it will get ignorantly stricter to appease former New Labour voters.

Furthermore any hope of effective electoral reform is bound to be dashed now. Despite its flaws Proportional Representation is often touted as the best alternative to replace First Past the Post as the most commonly used system in the UK. However, as it was PR that allowed the BNP to win their seats the main parties can use this excuse to dismiss PR electoral reform. Here’s to the status quo, New Labour, Tory and LibDems leading the majorities in Westminster far into the future, all in the name of stopping the rise of fascism.

But then it is not all doom and gloom. Having two MEP’s is very much likely to destroy the BNP. By being forced more into the political mainstream their actions can be more widely scrutinised without the claims of ‘fringe party’ and ‘left-wing hysteria’ being thrown at them. During the BBC coverage of the EU election results Jeremy Vine suggested that current BNP councillors in places like Burnley had lost some of their support because the public could see how awful they were in local government. Times this with non-stop scrutiny throughout most of the major press for the next five years and we could well see the implosion of the BNP vote come 2014.

Importantly, it is a safe bet to suggest that a huge majority of those who thought about voting for BNP actually did so. The passion of racists who actually believe in the BNP’s message or those who just want to perform a serious protest vote would have voted. Any remaining votes the BNP would have got if everyone had voted will be small in number and so they will have to rely on selling their brand of racism even more effectively than they already have, unless the left are even better prepared.

Perhaps another plus point is that this could actually help destroy a part of the British public’s apathy. There are people I have spoken to who have accused me of hyping up the BNP threat, suggesting that people will not really vote for them to the extent to giving them any kind of serious representation. Well now that opinion will change, helped by the media hyping up the story. It may force people to go out and vote in the next elections because they are now recognised as a threat.

This could transcend to other ‘fringe’ parties who are considered too small to make a change, too small to vote for. Well now we see that the smaller parties do attract enough votes to win seats in elections. Granted this is a consequence of Proportional Representation, but it could offer that glimmer of hope, a glimmer that will benefit parties like the Greens. For too long the Greens have been pushed to the dark corners of the newspapers. Despite already having two MEP’s, their support ever increasing and the prospect of national electoral breakthrough in places like Brighton, the response of some mainstream media to the party is one of blankness. It is if they are too nice to really attract voters or of the ignorant belief that voters are bored of the ‘go green’ message, as if that is all the Green Party stands for. You can already see that the party to gain the biggest percentage increase in votes in the EU elections is the Green Party, going up 2.4%, much more than the Conservatives (+1%), UKIP (+0.3%) or the BNP (+1.3%).

The most important result of the BNP’s success is that this is going to re-energise the left and British politics. Brons and Griffin are now the biggest indication that ideology politics can still lead to success. The transparency between politicians, New Labour and the Tories has become so diluted that people are searching for an alternative and the only effectively marketed alternative has come from the far right. Well now is the chance for the left to learn from the BNP. Throughout the election campaign I heard nothing from any serious left-wing party (accept the Greens) without going out there to find out about parties myself. For those who are not interested in going to find these parties but still would vote then what chance do they have?

It is also a chance for the left to properly ‘unite’ against the BNP. Sure there are superb campaigns such as Hope Not Hate and Unite Against Fascism that have helped to do this to some extent, but there were still those on the left who did not believe that the BNP were any sort of a threat.  It is going to force the left together, it will be a case of unite or die, especially if the left really did take the sort of pounding around Europe that the EU results have suggested. (Here is a good article that suggests that across Europe the left did score more votes, but because there is more apparent unity on the right the vote was split between the different leftist parties- already one anarchist commentator has suggested that the Socialist Party and Socialist Workers Party are looking at some kind of ‘agreement’).

The next 5 years are going to be exciting, especially if the BNP win a few MP’s as well (I’d rather they do not), as British politics is going to be revitalised- ideology is going to start to rule again. Come the next election when New Labour get kicked out they are going to go through some soul searching to rediscover their leftist routes, far right politics is going to be acknowledged (if not accepted), and the need for a serious alternative is going to allow space for the left to speak up and be counted again.

Vote Cock!

Are you feeling the Tory blues? Do New Labour make you turn red? Are the yellows way too mellow? Do the Greens make you queasy and do the BNP and UKIP actually make you spew? Well, have you ever considered writing ‘COCK’ across your European Election ballot paper?

With too many parties not representing what you believe and politicians becoming more distrustful by the day, it is an attractive option not to cast your democratic vote and to throw it into the bin out of a matter of protest.

But have you considered the damage you are doing to society?

Imagine today’s political landscape with New Labour in power and the Tories waiting outside Number 10 with a sledgehammer, the LibDems are far behind, with the Greens and ‘the others’ lurking nearby. You feel that none of these parties represent you, so you refuse to vote, or you feel a party like the Greens does, but you refuse to vote because ‘they are never going to get into power’. Well a refusal to vote is only going to strengthen the New Labour/Tory dominance of government and they will never ever represent you or do things in your interest. Why, I hear you ask.

Look at the situation like this, in this example there are 210 voters in total:

Party A have 100 diehard voters who will always vote for them.

Party B have 80 diehard voters who will always vote for them.

There are 30 voters who don’t know who to vote for, or are thinking of not voting.

Who are the party’s going to target policies towards? That’s right, the 30 voters. If parties already have their diehard voters then they are much more willing to create policies for the other 30 voters to encourage them to vote for them, either to get into power (Party B) or to consolidate power (Party A).

Now if the 30 didn’t vote at all because they didn’t like any of the parties or felt the party they wanted never will get into power then Party A will create policies that benefit their own diehard voters and Party B will have more policies like Party A in order to attract Party A’s voters and get into power. They become the same, and politics/democracy becomes diluted.

Let’s now say for example that Party A and Party B are both right-wing, both still with 100 diehards and 80 diehards respectively. A new party, Party C, comes along who are left-wing, and those 30 turn to Party C because they are different to Party A and B. In an attempt to win back those 30 votes, Party A and B will create a few more left-wing policies in order to turn those 30 towards them, but still keep policies that are right-wing in order to keep their diehards voting for them instead of switching between Parties A and B (because they are the same). There is therefore a lot more choice and parties are becoming more representative.

That is why it is important to vote.

But still you may argue there is no party that represents me!

That maybe true, but did you know that in the UK spoilt ballot papers are still considered as part of the voting turnout. That means if 100 people vote and a Party has 20 votes (diehards or not) that Party will look at winning over the other 80 voters- even if those 80 put in spoilt ballot papers because it is shown that 100 people will vote.

Party’s will only direct policies at those who do vote. Why should they worry about those who don’t vote, especially when things like SCOPA stop you protesting.

So even if there isn’t a party that tickles your fancy still cast your vote, but just make sure across the ballot paper in big bold letters you write ‘THE BNP ARE SICK DISGUSTING RACIST COCKS’

So, i made some lolz

If you know the internet, you’ll know lolcatz and its other such variations. Well, i made some of my own. Obviously they are a bit more political compared to pictures and captions of cats trying to eat cheeseburgers.

The rise of the… my number 8

There is something really scary happening in Britain. I do not think the British, mainly the working class, are racist, but I can see that awful racist party that is the STD after the sex of British politics getting a bit more electoral success over the coming years. I am not going to even mention their name on this blog post, but I think those British readers will know who I am on about.

There is a massive campaign to stop this party getting the votes it does not deserve, with groups like Fight Against Fascism and the TUC mobilising to try and neutralise the treat of that party. But I do not think this is going to work as their very focus seems to be missing the point.

The reason I think that party is going to get more electoral success is because of the lack of another radical (left) voting alternative. For years people have been saying that New Labour, the Tories and the Lib Dems are all the same, that they are becoming disillusioned with voting because of this. During this time there had been no alternative force to vote for. Sure, you have the Greens, but they wrongly have the image amongst the British public that they are a one issue party, so do not count on them to pose the best alternative to that party. Then you have RESPECT, who, like every other left wing party have (and will do further in the future) become factious and are splitting. So do not expect them to pose an alternative.

The last time the far right ever really got as much support as they do now it was the 1930’s. The time of the Battle of Cable Street. At least this time we had an alternative on the left with the Communist Party. But now where are the alternatives?

People are going to vote for that party because they are different to New Labour, the Tories and Lib Dems. And that makes me sad.

Despite the work of Fight Against Fascism and the TUC (among many others) of which I support, and would gleefully help, I think the best way of countering the threat of that party is with a united left wing party who can give us an alternative vote to the main stream parties, and who can grow like that party have. But that is not going to happen, just look at the last attempt, RESPECT, funnily it was RESPECT’s MP that helped with the split. Ironic as getting an MP should had been the basis of expanding its support.

The best we can hope for is for the Tories to get into power, which could force New Labour to become Labour again and perhaps unite the left. But then they have a chance to get into power regardless, and I am too cynical to actually expect it to happen.

I’ll cheer myself up by listening to my number 8 favourite album of 2008:

8. Does It Offend You, Yeah? – You Have No Idea What You’re Getting Yourself Into

I came across this band as me and Johny 2 walked into the NME Awards tour last year down in Portsmouth. We walked in to what turned out to be the last song of their set, of which we heard about 40 seconds of it. But it only took 40 seconds of a heavy droning bass rift to make me explore this band further.

Before the album had come out with only a few songs released on their myspace, they had already become my going out band. We Are Rockstars, Let’s Make Out, Weird Science and Battle Royale were my essential tunes to listen to before going out for a night on the amber nectar. I cheesily call them rock’n’bass, they are the perfect get up and jump sort of band, get your heart beat racing with their bass and synth driven style of rock.

Then, wam bam, they released Dawn Of The Dead as a single. So different to what I had previously heard, primly cut specifically for the radio, I did not recognise who it was at first. It is essentially a pop song, but not one that you would be embarrassed to be seen listening to.

Apart from Dawn Of The Dead, the rest of the album is a fusion of rock’n’bass and pure punk attitude. Does It Offend You, Yeah want you to know where they are coming from, and they don’t care if that offends you. (Oh my cheese continues)

Oh and did I mention they are from my home town of Reading

Personal highlights on the album With a Heavy Heart (I Regret to Inform You) and Let’s Make Out.

Previous:

9. Vampire Weekend – Vampire Weekend

10. The Magnetic Fields – Distortion