Your are viewing a read-only archive of the old DiS boards. Please hit the Community button above to engage with the DiS !
Take from this what you will. Is genuine, done some checks.
My checks were to see if they've done their checks.
In conclusion: Checks.
Even though it's at the top of the very first page.
The bit about 'our nation's future leaders' makes it seem a bit unlikely that this is real.
rather than the name. if you see what i mean
why have they blanked out a load of it?
Funny how the kind of people tend to be most against Farage are into their rehabilitation and second chances, when it suits them...
If I was held to everything I did when I was young, it wouldn't be good.
However, I guess it's a very small part of a bigger jigsaw that when you put it together is a concerning picture of Farage putting a metal swastika up his bellend.
But carries on being the head of a fascist party
Do you know how hysterical it sounds when folk come out with this stuff?
who'd been criticising you online is pretty fascist.
Also AAV on Facebook had to take down the story about that story as he got a legal threat.
Yay to democracy!
Just some random butthurt councillor.
it's a UKIP elected official, acting like a little jackboot fascist. you can post logical workarounds all you like, but it doesn't change those fundamental facts.
Wouldn't do it
But would put him in a very good like
I reckon debating with fascist scum is pretty much as low as it can get, so.
70% of UK laws are made in Brussels
Mo Farah is not British
Lenny Henry should go and live in a black country
ah yes, it was just UKIP members. totally different.
see what I mean? endlessly defensive.
True you can't label a party with the sins of it's members, but there do seem to be a higher than of UKIP members with these "hysterical" views
And the 70% of laws thing? Not hysterical? Based in fact is it?
But I see your point: actually worse on some levels
he also compared Islam to Nazi Germany. He was standing for the European Parliament in Enfield.
David Wycherley was responsible for the Mo Farah comment. He was standing for a local council seat in Walsall.
David Silvester was responsible for the comments about gay marriage causing floods. He is a councillor in Henley-on-Thames.
Whilst the central party office has usually taken action against them (although in the last case they defended his right to say it, even if they didn't agree with it, lol), it does suggest some very poor screening processes, some degree of complicity in such viewpoints, or a combination of the two.
and I understand why those from even further right might be attracted to them, since they have the sheen of legitimacy. I can forgive them for it as long as they keep expelling them and sending the message that these people aren't welcome in the party.
And I'm sure this is the main thing that separates me from many of the people I'm arguing with, but I don't disagree that the councillor in the last case *does* have a right to say what he thinks. I wouldn't vote for him and I hope no-one would after that, and I'm glad they got rid, but I would rather a politician's position on these things be made clear rather than the usual evasive verbal tango most of them employ.
ah, good excuse to post this, excellent
though of course they use it for their own ends. It's an independent estimate that's come from a few different sources (you can google for yourself) including I believe the House of Commons library's research.
Funnily enough, politicians in mainland Europe have also quoted the figure positively in their electioneering as they see it as a good thing.
It would be incorrect to pin this one on UKIP.
Which UKIP uses over and over again, even when it's been shown to be bollocks
70% of EU law comes from the European Parliament
just saying that the 70% figure has been used by a wide-range of people - it's not a stat that originated with UKIP.
As an aside, and following a question you (I think it was you) asked yesterday about why the European elections are more important that Westminster ones - from the link you post above: "They [the British public]... do not know that the most powerful parliament in Europe, is the European Parliament."
That's why the Euro elections are more important, as it's where they greater power and influence lies.
OK, i'll leave you to it.
You've done exactly what UKIP did with that speech: taken a quote out of context to fit into your hypothesis
The way that UKIP use it, and by extension yourself, seems to be incorrect.
Feel free to download it from the Radio 4 website. Worth a listen.
when you have to come up with such shite as "He's since renounced such views".
utter "everyone is against us" gang mentality.
That band SUCK.
Still pretty fond of their early records
BUT the point is, endlessly defensive fans, gang mentality. except with the Manics, there's only Nicky Wire to embarrass them. UKIP have loads of people trying to do that.
followed by that Richard Nixon song, they may as well have pooed on a plate and offered that up as their next effort and it still would have been better.
*take it to the music board etc*
If I choose to support Labour, I'll be supporting a party responsible for many thousands of unnecessary deaths in illegal middle Eastern wars in the last decade. If I choose to support the Tories, I'll be voting for a party seemingly determined to create a British underclass, workfare, restrictions on the media. Things you can't possibly pin on Farage, so who's the bad guy here?
to do terrible things yet doesn't make him a good guy.
You don't KNOW he'll do terrible things. We KNOW the others have.
sorry this is too much
that have had thieves and murderers as leaders, and who count criminals and ex-BNP members in their ranks.
I think you need to start looking through the left-wing rhetoric a bit more.
'Cos, y'know, representative of the views of the party as a whole
the exact point when anti-kippers have to resort to slinging mud. No answer to why it's acceptable to tar one party with the same brush but not others. Must do better.
it not really a double standard though is it
what with all of the racism and homophobia and jackboot thuggery, the rest of us barely need to try.
are you seriously trying to argue that UKIP are an alternative, or different, or above all that? Or even best of a bad bunch? Because they're none of those things.
They're right wing, neo-liberal ex-Tories (or perhaps further afield to the right) who preach uber-Thatcherite politics.
There's nothing new, or different. Farage was a public school boy, then a banker, then a Tory before UKIP. You really think he's cut from a diffeent cloth?
Don't fool yourself ffs.
I'm not beholden to UKIP; I trust Farage is a smart man and I think in the short-to-medium term, they could stave off some problems the UK is liable to have. If that doesn't happen then I withdraw my support.
In terms of jobs, economy, trade etc?
Do you really believe 26 million European people are coming to the UK looking for work~?
b) No. There's still probably too many, and there are ways in which this could be alleviated - e.g. more housing, infrastructure, a culture of people learning a foreign language and moving abroad - but until those things happen I think UKIP have shown the most determination to make sure the problem doesn't get worse in the short term.
The number of jobs in this country linked directly or indirectly to the EU is substantial. Almost all businesses support staying in
What would be the pros?
haha maybe you're racist or something unlucky
Not sure why you're pluralising illegal middle Eastern wars though.
Why he gets so much media time when there are NO UKIP MPs I don't bloody know.
There would be.
What an odd point of view.
A quick scan of Wikipedia (assuming its roughly correct) tells me:
223 local councillors
The Green Party have:
140 local councillors
Is 1 MP worth more than 7 MEPs and 83 councillors? No. So why use the number of MPs in Westminster as a barometer?
I'm aware MITS wasn't necessarily comparing UKIP and the Greens, but it illustrates my point quite nicely. Democratic representation (and power) does not start and end in Westminster.
and that's the media hype. People are talking about UKIP more as they're in the media more. They're thinking of voting for them in polls taken as they're everywhere.
Look at that cartoon I posted below.
How many people even know that no2eu exists? Also, how manay times has Farage been on Question Time compared to other politicians?
In mid 2013 he appeared 14 times on the programme since 2009 - more than any other politician. He's be on since then too, and last week.
So all this Westminster-means-less-than-we-think chat is skewing the point. Wait until the GE, then we'll see what UKIP actually means to people.
To be honest, I think they'll do fucking awful. They split the Tory vote and the Labour vote meaning they'll get a bit of pie but not enough to win seats.
We don't owe them an audience. Not to mention that's a really naff party name. Sounds like someone's Saturday project.
We don't owe no2eu an audience. But we also don't owe UKIP one, but they get it, unproportionally, from the media.
Did you read the cartoon? Did you read the statistic about Question Time? Do you not agree that UKIp have huge press coverage and they don't even have an MP?
That's the point I'm making.
Again, this is near irrelevant.
If DiS were to be believed, extra press coverage should actually kill off UKIP given how stupid they all are. The opposite has happened. UKIP are popular because of their policies, not because of their level of press coverage.
See my above about QT for example.
MPs show what the nation is thinking. It shows the power they have in government, not councils of the EU. Of course it matters.
UKIP have hanged themselves!
1) Godfrey Bloom sacked for sexism
2) Andre Lampitt banned for racism
3) William Henwood candidate for Lenny Henry comment / Islam-nazi
4) David Wycherley UKIP candidate said Mo Farah comment.
5) David Silvester UKIP councillor with the gay floods
And that's just some I remember or have already been mentioned.
They're "popular" in some polls. Big deal. Where's the beef? They're policies are all over the place.
I couldn't pin a single UKIP member down on twitter for well over a week about any of it. NHS / Mat leave / Ivory trade / tax.
These "policies" are non existent. All I've heard is Farage scrapped their last one and the 2015 one is pending. They're purposely vague. Just preaching nonsense.
At the moment it's like punching mist. Substance-less nonsense and this apparent popularity has had no bearing whatsoever in elections.
Nothing is proven at the moment. Popularity and policies are currently pink elephants.
I assume that was a typo: you meant "Policy" right? About the EU?
Because everything else in their manifesto is utterly bonkers
what they have is their anti-EU rhetoric, a gang mentality, and lots of horrible stuff spouted by people in fairly prominent positions that they either attempt to delete (see all the stuff on their business guy's website) or dismiss as not being "policy" (see in_limbo's multiple responses here whenever the horrible actions of members is brought up)
Getting pretty sick of the sight of him myself. If you're implying that the public are being strong-armed into supporting him by his media exposure, I don't really agree, because while there's no such thing as bad publicity, it's often in a negative, if not outright hostile light. Simple fact is he sells. He's infinitely more interesting and engaging to listen to than pretty much any other politician and whether you think he's part of the establishment or not, whether you think he's got the answers or not, he's addressing issues a lot of people think have gone unsaid for many, many years. And it doesn't matter they haven't got any MPs - they're getting their message out there more effectively than any other party at the moment. That's how change (whether you think they'll actually affect any change or not) happens. I doubt most in this thread wouldn't be complaining if a left-wing party suddenly sprung up and got wildly popular despite having no current political influence.
Well that's never got anyone in trouble, has it?
I agree he's appealing to people. With simple lies. You can't tell me this poster is true:
So there's 26m European immigrants looking for UK jobs? It's fucking nonsense. You know it is.
It's easy to whip up support talking this right wing shit. There's unemployment because of the Economy. Because of a worldwide recession caused by unscrupulous practices by banks and lack of regulation by neo-liberal, Western governments.
UKIP support all that! They're neo Liberal. They're pro light touch regulation. They're pro reducing public sector spending, cutting welfare, decreasing the state (and jobs). They're uber Thatcherite.
Surely this should all about talking the truth? If they've got such a great bunch of policies, why not explain them all in an uptodate manifesto?
If they're so fucking bang on the money, why have fear mongering lies as poster campaigns?
You keep saying 'neoliberal' and 'right wing' like anyone would agree the opposite is better. Even as someone who's been poor for much of his life, I like the benefits of living in a modern capitalist society. I don't want socialism. The EU's a great idea in principle, but it's not working. As a relatively stable nation, we'll bear the brunt if it gets worse. We're a small, population dense, stretched nation. Anyone not living a cosy middle class (or higher) suburban existence can see that. If that sounds heartless, so be it. That's the idea behind the poster, as clumsy as it is. I like the idea of a small state and don't think any good ever comes of handing over power to a huge centralized body (especially an unelected one), and it's too big and beneficial to those involved to reform.
Also, you're doing that thing of stating UKIP policies and then saying they don't actually have any.
the opposite to "neoliberal" and "right wing" is not "socialism"
Then I think you've just hit the crux of why people vote UKIP in the first place.
"You keep saying 'neoliberal' and 'right wing' like anyone would agree the opposite is better."
You're saying the alternative is not "socialism". I'm just curious as to what the alternative that nobody would agree is better is, because it's an interesting subject and you're not being especially clear.
I still think neoliberalism is strongly tied to capitalism and socialism is largely the opposite of that, but you win. Doesn't change my views on any of the rest of it though. Keep on powering the UKIP turbines with your gloriously fragranced farts though!
Neoliberalism is a form of capitalism, and a particularly vicious one at that. It's been peddled by the ruling consensus for the last thirty five years, chiefly because it further enriches them at the expense of everyone else. It's responsible for either causing or exacerbating a lot of the problems we have today - social exclusion amongst former industrial communities, moribund levels of housing construction and the affordability problems that causes, environmental issues. A continued belief in trickle-down economics is selfish at best, and juvenile at worst.
Now, you can bang on and on about how what individual UKIP members might say not being "policy", but given that there is precious little actual UKIP policy, it's the best that can be done. And most UKIP members are startling neoliberals it seems - to the right of the Tories on a lot of issues.
So I guess my question is - if UKIP are the part of the people disenfranchised by three decades of neoliberal economics, why are they still pushing it? And why are they seeking to make it even more vicious? And how can anyone who decries the current status quo genuinely think they offer any kind of an alternative?
So neoliberalism is capitalism - private ownership of capital - and socialism is public ownership of capital? Perhaps not technically opposites, but a lot closer to the mark than your original reply would suggest, no?
I don't think anyone in UKIP is claiming to be disillusioned with the UK's economic model. With a major financial centre in London I'm not sure we could survive a transition to something hugely different and keep our standard of living intact. The disillusionment comes from the perceived submission to the EU in making trade deals and laws. Is pulling out of the EU not enough of a departure from the status quo for you?
Once again, neoliberalism is a FORM of capitalism; one that favours deregulation and minimal state interference in favour of allowing the market to allocate goods and services in what, in theory, is an "efficient" manner.
Before the neoliberal hegemony took over with Thatcher, we still had capitalism - do you think we didn't, or something? The post-war consensus that took hold when Labour were elected in 1945 was just a more measured form, with a greater role played by the state as it attempted to iron out inequalities. By and large, it did a pretty decent job of this. Most of the problems we have now stem from the abandonment of this model in favour of neoliberalism.
As I've said, and as they've tried to hide, UKIP are a neoliberal party - they're MORE neoliberal than anyone we've had in charge since Thatcher. For instance, here is a list that I'm sure you've seen, of aspects of current policy they would change if they got into power: https://twitter.com/StuartLeeBrown/status/463636889333805056/photo/1
Now, again, I'm sure you can claim this isn't official policy, especially as it's since been removed, but in the absence of anything more formal, it's what any of us have to work with - you and me.It's taken directly from the website of Amjad Bashir, UKIP's "Small and Medium Business Spokesmen". And what you have here is a businessman attempting to make it easier (read: more profitable) for him to run his business, almost entirely to the expense of people who may work for him.
But UKIP aren't part of the existing establishment, right? And they're standing up for the little guy, right? But how are they doing that by scrapping the minimum wage, ending maternity/paternity leave, and making it easier to sack people?
Now, I'm not saying that the pre-1979 consensus was without problems, because it certainly had them. But my issues with the economic structure of our nation certainly have nothing to do with the EU. They have to do with it being based on a doctrine that has inequality as a foundation. It's ludicrous to think that UKIP are standing up for anyone at the bottom when they clearly want to make that economic system more prevalent.
where you're standing behind the person I'm actually talking to like the bully's lackey in some shitty '50s high school film
"Hur hur, you tell 'em Marv!"
I suppose it beats filling most threads with drivel or just being a poisonous cunt, though
I don't think there's a curse recorded in history that could match, say, your performance in the parental divorce thread for sheer vileness. Well done.
couldn't really be arsed to get into this with IL, tho
Neo liberalism is, basically, an offshoot of Ayn Rand thought about self reliance and small state and privation. Or Thatcherism / Reganism.
You know, the thing that fucks the poor up the arse. The thing that's seen hundreds of disabled people die through welfare cuts. The thing that's seen all our utilities sold off for alarmingly cheap rates, in both Thatcher's time and with the Royal Mail recently.
The thing that's closing A&E wards, the thing that's privitising parts of the NHS, the thing that's enthusiastically pushed for deregulation and caused a worldwide economic collapse, the thing that sold off the council housing and replaced it with *nothing* so there's a housing crisis.
To suggest that the poor benefit from neo-liberalism is a complete and utter misnomer.
But this is now the political norm. The consensus. Unions were smashed under Thatcher. Labour stopped being left wing since Blair. The Lib dems became Tories in 2010 and oversaw tripling uni fees, hospital closures and educational grants for the poor.
And UKIP are neo-liberal too. They're no alternative. They're establishment. Very much the same as everyone else. But if you think the Tories have been brutal with austerity, you wait to see what UKIP would do.
Re: UKIP policies, I'm going by what they say, but of course, their rebuttle is "we don't have an official manfiesto". So what can one do? You have to fight them on one level or another, not just shrug and say "no manifesto so ok".
Projectile vomiting and misbeahving with a crucifix front page party policies?
who have about the same level of influence but about 1/100th of the media profile?
You're fooling yourself if you think Farage is saying anything new or interesting or appealing to a set of people the mainstream parties are ignoring. This groundswell of support is just like the one the BNP had in the first part of the last decade, before they spectacularly imploded. UKIP have the advantage of a less tainted background to work from, which is likely why they're not just hoovering up most of their voters but also some from the more middle ground.
Immigration's been off the table for ages. The reaction on both sides to UKIP bringing it up should tell you that they clearly are saying something 'new and interesting'.
Greens have no media profile, because they have no media-savvy politicians. Simple as.
The Green Party has different sections for England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland.
Green vs UKIP
1 MP vs 0 Mps
1 Lord vs 3 Lords
2 MEPs vs 9 MEPs
2 GLA members vs 0 GLA members
2 MSPs vs 0 MSPs
1 MLA vs 1 MLA
156 councillors vs 147 councillors
The disparity in the coverage afforded to UKIP and the Green Party is not reflected in the success they've achieved in elections.
this IS a turn-up for the books
He'd never embarrass them.
"The party put forward no candidates in the 2010 General Election in the United Kingdom."
didn't last long before he was expelled.
Guesses below as to what he was expelled for......
'obvious but wrong' answer
Alo cause he was stealing projectors?
putting other people's things up his bum
incorrectly reheating rice
that posh right-wing children have
we'll always have this
still, he was fine afterwards, right? right?
I get upset thinking about how it didn't kill him
His frankness about his thoughts during the crash is the only thing that has impressed me about him (from the Graun's interview):
"Well, it was horrible. Yeah. It's one of those things I still think about." He can remember "every single millisecond of it", and thought he was going to die. What went through his mind? "All sorts of things that shouldn't have done," he laughs. "I'm not going to tell you." Go on. "Well, I thought a bit about things I'd done well, things I'd done badly. I thought about all the different girlfriends I've had, you know, about different forks in the road at different times." Was he seized by regrets? "Well, we all have regrets in our life – but I'm married, you see," he laughs, "so I can't answer that."
He thought about phoning his wife. "But then I reasoned that probably that phone call would haunt them." If he had called, he would have said: "Sorry I've been such an appalling husband and a not very good father. But how would that help? It wouldn't have helped. So I just sat there quietly. And then when the end comes, and you're careering towards the earth, there's almost a sense of resignation. Let's hope it's over quickly."
He came to rest upside down, his head two inches from the ground – "That was the difference between snapping my neck and not." Covered in fuel oil, he thought he was about to burn to death. "And that was terrible. And I thought, nobody will ever know I survived this crash. And then, after a few minutes, it hadn't caught fire, and I began to think it might be OK. But I couldn't breathe, I just could not breathe. And I thought, you know, all those years of smoking – if I get out of this I'll never touch another cigarette as long as I live, I'll be a really good person. If I get out of this I'm going to live such a good life, I'm going to be such a good person." And has he kept any of his promises? "No! None of them."
because they were gunning for him so hard that I almost felt defensive about him. If Caroline Lucas went on and had to tolerate 30 minutes of tree-hugger jibes they'd be a hoo-ha.
Anyway, the point is (if there is one at all) is that people are so desperate to jump up and down shouting 'nnnnghhh thicko' at Farage and UKIP supporters that accusations of liberal media bias and lefty/liberal selective deafness start to ring true. It all plays into Farage's hands in his nonsense 'man of the people/speaker of truth to kings' guise. Stop it.
of those that oppose them.
The man's a cretin, but giving him enough rope to hang himself is a much better idea than trying ridicule him at every step.
and hasn't yet hung himself.
Once the General Election comes round him and his party will be under proper scrutiny. I would be very surprised if UKIP won any seats at all.
but winning seats at Westminster has never really been UKIP's goal, so it wouldn't really be that big a deal.
Think about their voters. Mostly Tories and right wing fringe voters, some Labour who are against Europe. A tiny handful of disillusioned Lib Dem voters looking for a new home.
I can't see how this is going to translate into sweeping gains.
After the GE, they'll be seen as a joke / a blip.
Literally, everyone's saying they're a big deal before they've even run the fucking race. Forget the EU elections, most people don't even know their MEP, it's MPs that matter. It's the proof in the pudding and all this bullshit bluster will calm down.
Worst comes to the worst, they win a few seats like the Respect party did, but this will be from Tories, and that's good in my good. Splits the right's vote.
Absolutely incorrect. The European institutions (if not necessarily MEPs) wield far more power and influence than Westminster. Just because people don't understand how the EU works or can't name their MEP doesn't make this any less true.
And again, to judge UKIP on how many MPs they manage to get at a general election is dishonest - they have never stated this as their goal, so why benchmark them in this way?
I know how the EU works, I had to study it. I know about its democratic deficit and cost and I'm not a fan, but I like the principle of it.
All I'm saying is let's see how this media frenzy and supposed popularity translates. Until it does, it's nothing but bluster. Like a boxer being talked up before a big fight.
Whether the turnout is 10% or 100%, those institutions have the same remit.
And to use your boxer analogy, you're all sitting in the 02 waiting for Farage to arrive, when he's actually fighting over at Wembley Arena.
and popularity are two different things and I think we're discussing both as one thing and it's becoming nonsensical.
Basically, the guy looks like a frog. HAPPY NOW? YOU MADE ME SAY IT.
They need power at Westminister to achieve that, or some influence over the party in power.
There is no way they'd get the referendum without a large impact at GE 2015
The party itself is doing a pretty good job of it though.
He always has rather dapper looking trousers.
just comprised of people who act like fascists
to want to protect a largely older set of supporters from the thugs UAF so often prove themselves to be.
If you think this is about preventing name-calling you're incredibly naive.
can't you just try and be a little bit fun?
he doesn't like that
I'm sticking up for a cunt
You're sticking up for some cunts
Only time will tell if we've chosen the right cunt.
when he got flooded out last christmas and no-one in his village would put his family up.
because they're cunts.
At this rate UKIP could open several launderettes
^ most important issue in this thread.
But that hasn't stopped almost every single person I have met who professes to "vote UKIP" from being a total dafty...
The difference between him and the rest, though, is that he knows to keep a lid on them when in public and when acting in an official capacity. Somewhat ironic, considering his braggadocio over not being a "career politician"...
He's a reconstructed neo-livberal thatcherite. Not racist, but I can't see him giving a shit about anyone.
I don't think his dislike of people who aren't like him and his friends ad his lack of empathy are particularly limited to the colour of someone's skin.
Oh well, click my link if the thought of giving any hits to Guido makes you retch.
Just seen a great tweet on this:
"For UKIP the chickens of trying to be a libertarian party for young people & social conservative party for older people coming home to roost"
C'MON GORGEOUS GEORGE
UKIP aren't like the Greens
they're like Respect!
loudmouth, experienced politician frontman
basically a single issue party, with embarrassing attempts to move outside that bracket
loads of idiots at the back messing things up
Solid day for The Fuhrer and co.