Question Time

[BarneyRubble]

I was gutted when I tuned in last night. I was looking forward to Peter Griffin on QT.

 

[velomaniac]

Bit off colour that about Gordon Brown there Si even if it was a quote from Clarkson whose PC statements are few and far between. He was a pretty good chancellor and the economic crash is world wide not just down to him :?

As for Mr Griffin, its obvious the majority think him a buffoon but if you banned his appearance you effectively say that censoreship is OK. Sooner or later nobodies allowed an opinion other than the one given by the powers that be.

Thats my pennies worth and I'm glad I can express it

 

[The Ken]

Population of the UK were all fat, one eyed, Scottish morons* labour would walk the next election.

If you poked my eye out and gave me a lobotomy I still wouldn't vote for Brown, yes he was a reasonably good chancellor, but having been brought up in his constituency, I have never trusted the man.

Nick showed us what to expect from his party and there were no suprises, what worried me more that was the person that put over and defended her views the best on the panel was a arts reviewer.

The other politicians had their moments but really were as cringe worthy as Griffin, that is what I worry about the most - who do I vote for next to run your country?

 

[cchris2lou]

I dont think i can vote for general election , so cant do much about it .

but we had same issues in france a few years ago with the Front National gaining a lot of support .

people were fed up of other political parties and FN used same issues to gain voters . It nearly all went wrong when Le Pen reached the second round of presidential election .

5 years later , the FN is dead and burried . they have hardly any voters .

 

[Neil]

Is Free Speech all it's cracked up to be, and such a great thing for society?

Oh yes free speech is all is cracked up to be. Who would be the person to decide who shouldn't have a voice? What if that person decided that 90% of us shouldn't have a voice? or 99% of us.

Now don't get me wrong - my comments about free speech are a little tongue-in-cheek - or at least devil's advocate - but your counter is the oft stated fallacy - I'm not suggesting that one person should decide. I'm saying society as a whole - the democractic process.

All I'm saying is that society has become so liberal, that people with either borderline illegal organisations, or people with such extremist views that are often the organisational voices behind extremist or terrorists, are often able to largely behave as they want, under the guise of free speech, and human rights.

Now we can say that that contrast allows society to see good, bad, extreme, middle-of-the-road, or whatever - but from where I'm sat, society has become so weakened over the last few decades, that very dodgy people, publically saying very dodgy things can do so, largely with impunity, to large groups of people who are likely easily influenced (for several reasons).

All I'm questioning is whether society is in an overall, better place because we're now so much more tolerant.

Personally I don't think support has increased dramatically for the BNP, proportionally less people voted for others as they were too lazy. The BNP was clever in rallying people in the hardest hit areas by using a soft target ie 'unemployment is because of foreigners' and 'your sons are dying in a war against foreigners'. It happened in the last ressession and it'll happen in the next.

This is the thing, one one hand people are saying how inept Griffin is - yet others are saying that the BNP are clever or canny.

Now I can accept that it's possible that the leader is a baffoon, but there's clever people behind the scenes (after all, look who's the mayor of London), that being the case, though, perhaps the threat is greater than purely voter apathy.

The joy of this situation is now people realise that the BNP/NF never went away. It's a rallying cry to the apathetic voters of this nation that their vote [does count and that not all parties are the same.

I don't think the apathetic care about rallying cries - after all they don't care ;-)

If we don't act on this then we have no right to complain and bitch.

Hmm...

Oh yes free speech is all is cracked up to be

See how that works? ;-)

Perhaps free speech isn't the unquestionable after all - I mean I've got you to partial rescind it "just like that" ;-)

 

[Neil]

Bit off colour that about Gordon Brown there Si even if it was a quote from Clarkson whose PC statements are few and far between. He was a pretty good chancellor

Well that's often said - but I dunno - in retrospect, was he?

and the economic crash is world wide not just down to him :?

Fair comment, it is.

I'm just not convinced his reputation as being a good chancellor has much more basis than his camp bigging him up. Was he notably better than other chancellors?

As for Mr Griffin, its obvious the majority think him a buffoon but if you banned his appearance you effectively say that censoreship is OK.

But, but, but... censorship is OK - it's accepted by gummint and society, and done all the time.

Sooner or later nobodies allowed an opinion other than the one given by the powers that be.

I don't buy that - that's all. I'm not suggesting fascism or some autocratic society - merely society gets to decide what's acceptable - but can be more forceful about it.

Another analogy about the weakening of society is loutish behaviour, misbehaviour in the youth (and at schools) these days, society has become so heightened to "human rights" that certain things largely go unchecked. Were the bad old days really so bad?

Thats my pennies worth and I'm glad I can express it

Damn you, free speech! ;-)

 

[pete_mcc]

Neil, too many s in your response for me to be bothered to read it - see, if you have nothing to say then people become apathetic...

 

[Neil]

Neil, too many s in your response for me to be bothered to read it - see, if you have nothing to say then people become apathetic...

Yet curiously not too apathetic to tell me you're not reading it...

 

[Tallpaul]

Voters aren't voting for Nick Griffin, they're voting for the councillors who take the time to go in to the communities and listen to the issues voters have. Mainstream parties won't listen to these voters as they're perceived as racist, but their racism is an extreme response to real issues. Issues that simply don't affect me or anyone I know.

Average voter turnout in 2005 was 61%, but in my area was actually 69%. The areas of poverty where the BNP get significant proportions of the votes had turnouts more like 40%!

Essentially I believe the mainstream parties have walked away from these areas, simply because the issues are too complex and difficult to address and the return in terms of votes is negligible (not worth the effort??).

How many of the 8m viewers of last nights QT do we think lived in areas where the BNP poll highly? I'd wager fook all! It was watched by middle-class people who have delighted themselves in seeing Nick Griffin be exactly what they knew he was, so today everyone is feeling all smug, warm and politically just. But it makes no difference, the BNP maintains its foothold in British politics and as long as it has that, it has the potential to slowly and insidiously produce a more electable veneer. I can't stop this, my vote is cast in an area that would never elect the BNP (really it wouldn't, I live in Cambridge!), but why doesn't the party that I do vote for do more to win votes in BNP areas??

Honestly, what can I do? :?

 

[Neil]

Voters aren't voting for Nick Griffin, they're voting for the councillors who take the time to go in to the communities and listen to the issues voters have. Mainstream parties won't listen to these voters as they're perceived as racist, but their racism is an extreme response to real issues. Issues that simply don't affect me or anyone I know.

Average voter turnout in 2005 was 61%, but in my area was actually 69%. The areas of poverty where the BNP get significant proportions of the votes had turnouts more like 40%!

Essentially I believe the mainstream parties have walked away from these areas, simply because the issues are too complex and difficult to address and the return in terms of votes is negligible (not worth the effort??).

How many of the 8m viewers of last nights QT do we think lived in areas where the BNP poll highly? I'd wager fook all! It was watched by middle-class people who have delighted themselves in seeing Nick Griffin be exactly what they knew he was, so today everyone is feeling all smug, warm and politically just. But it makes no difference, the BNP maintains its foothold in British politics and as long as it has that, it has the potential to slowly and insidiously produce a more electable veneer. I can't stop this, my vote is cast in an area that would never elect the BNP (really it wouldn't, I live in Cambridge!), but why doesn't the party that I do vote for do more to win votes in BNP areas??

Honestly, what can I do? :?

Well put.

I haven't yet watched Question Time, but I think it's mistake for middle England to sit here smugly and talk about how stupid he appeared - because if so - if he really is as bad as people are saying, that makes a bad situation even worse. The idea of eroding credibility has to be taken in context, and with a view to his audience.

As you say, I believe their standing has improved not necessarily as a sole factor of voter apathy, but of grass roots politics.