Banning The NF March: A Bit Hypocritical?

[Moshulu Rob]

To qualify,

I think that if you have been employed previously for say 6 months then you should get a grace period of say 3 months to find any job you want, all benefits paid. Then, you start the three stirkes period, where the jobcenter offers you three jobs, you pick from them and if you don't want any you lose the benefits.

The money that this saves should be used to increase disability benefit, provide free childcare for all children with parents who wish to work, and decent levels of benefit for genuinly enemployed people seeking work.

[paranoid]

I'm sure it would cost the economy even more than the benefit system if all the people that were great with a brush did the accountancy work while the accountants swept up.

When did I say that their roles should switch? I said that I didn't feel that people with skills have to continue in the same field. If they can't get a job they are trained for, they should sit in a "less skilled" job in the mean time, not sit around (possibly claiming state benefits) waiting to find a job which, as Tristen rightly said, is going to be hard as they are not easy to get.

[soundian]

To qualify' date='

I think that if you have been employed previously for say 6 months then you should get a grace period of say 3 months to find any job you want, all benefits paid. Then, you start the three stirkes period, where the jobcenter offers you three jobs, you pick from them and if you don't want any you lose the benefits.

The money that this saves should be used to increase disability benefit, provide free childcare for all children with parents who wish to work, and decent levels of benefit for genuinly enemployed people seeking work.[/quote']

What happens when you strike out, how do you provide for your family then.

Crime would be the traditional method and I think we've got enough of that at the moment.

How many employers would be happy to take just anyone, especially someone that everyone else has rejected.

[Guest allsystemsfail]

But isn't "harm" subjective? I think socialism is harmful' date=' and I disagree with the methods used by the "Left" in order to achieve their aims. Does this mean that socialism should be banned? of course not, they have rights and should be allowed to persue their motive, even if I don't agree with it.

How many times does it need to be said that banning a march will just cause more problems than letting it go ahead? They banned various Republican and Loyalist terrorist groups in Northern Ireland..what happened? I don't think anyone can seriously say that banning Gerry Adams's voice from being broadcast in the UK did any good whatsoever.

Anyway, there wouldn't this outroar if the Communist party wanted to march down Union Street, so why the hypocrisy? Living in a communist state wouldn't be my ideal paradise, that's for sure.[/quote']

While I have a number of issues with the left, their agenda is not racist.

[soundian]

When did I say that their roles should switch? I said that I didn't feel that people with skills have to continue in the same field. If they can't get a job they are trained for' date=' they should sit in a "less skilled" job in the mean time, not sit around (possibly claiming state benefits) waiting to find a job which, as Tristen rightly said, is going to be hard as they are not easy to get.[/quote']

I was exaggerating for effect. What I meant was that an agressive policy like '3 strikes and your out' would put too many square pegs in round holes.

[Mr. Tristen]

Jobs may be hard to get, but a lot of the time theres no excuse for not paying your own way. Personally I've never and hopefully never will claim benefit. When things got really desperate I can always make a website, paint someones fence, clean some cars etc etc etc... most of which are day-to-day jobs and most of which pay shite, but its enough to keep the wolf from the door so to speak. Most people (especially those with a decent education) who end up enemployed just have bad money handling skills and a lack of imagination.

[Guest allsystemsfail]

I'm not comparing the Manifesto with any right wing propoganda - I'm comparing the realities.

Communism doesn't work in the vast majority of cases - I can think of two examples where it has worked to a degree - Yugoslavia' date=' because of Tito's iron rule and Cuba because of Castro's desire to see the best for his people. It's been proven time and time again to be a great idea in theory, but a bad idea in practice - and personally, I'd rather not live in a police state. It's a dangerous concept - just as dangerous as fascism, in my opinion.

Personally, what worries me more is not the NF themselves, but the people employed to protect them from the violent aspects of the socialists - it seems, on both sides, there's links to some very unsavoury people who wouldn't hesitate to use violence to achieve their aims.

Instead of turning this into the usual "should the NF be banned" debate, here's a question. If the NF decided to start supporting projects for white people, fundraising and such like, would you (meaning everyone) be offended?[/quote']

I agree, that the politics of the far left can indeed be dangerous - the dictatorship of the party, and so would have no truck with it. However, I do support many of their causes. Like me, they seek social justice. I share their disgust with capitalism, with the actions of the state. We share common aims. Where I differ from these folks is in how to achieve change.

[paranoid]

I was exaggerating for effect. What I meant was that an agressive policy like '3 strikes and your out' would put too many square pegs in round holes.

But I never made reference to that policy.

[soundian]

But I never made reference to that policy.

You quoted me while I was making reference to a Moshulu Rob comment on that policy.

Misunderstandings all round I think.

[Guest allsystemsfail]

This is rapidly the conclusion I am coming to too' date=' though I'm still not 100% decided where I lie on this one yet. You really have to wonder wether all the hype about how evil the BNP are is really the truth. Maybe as a PARTY their policies are.. dodgy but as individuals I think its another case. I just spoke to two friends of mine in Reading who are members, and believe me both are decent people. Neither would ever attack someone for being ethnic and so forth, they simple feel that [i']politically allowing so many imigrants into the country is a policy which needs to be stopped, one that to be honest I agree with.

I would say I am in no way racist but I still feel that allowing endless waves of imigrants to pour into the country, a huge percentage of whom are very unqualified and will simply go on to live on council estates and leach from society (don't get me wrong, a good part of our native population is doing the same, but thats an issue for another day.) Many also refuse to really adapt to British life, something I feel is also important to do when you live long term in another society. So yeah, imigration needs to become highly restricted - preferably to those who can prove they can become productive members of society, not because I don't like coloured people but because I don't like wasters. The other thing I will point out is that many of you spend 99% of your time in Aberdeen, the city with by far the lowest ethnic minoritys in the UK. If you've seen the mess places like Reading have become maybe you would feel differently. Reading these days is basically a whole bunch of council estates where the gouverment has very cleverly placed groups who have been enemys for generations just down the street from each other. The place is practically a fuckin war zone.

Anyway back on topic, yeah, you won't catch me voting for any party that advocates the persecution of coloured people, but at the same time I find many other partys out there to be equally... wrong. The SNP for starters. For me the purpose in life is to continually strive to take mankind forward.. to evolve beyond what we are, and I cannot stand any individual/group that try and de-evolve society in anyway. All of these political partys however are allowed a voice (all be it they need money to have a real chance of being heard). The BNP have grown large enough now that they CAN have a voice and doesn't that tell you something? Mostly that wether you like it or not a countable percentage of the society you live in agrees with these people no matter how you feel about it and that theres no way to STOP them having a voice. Maybe the best thing to do is listen to what they have to say, think about it, decide yes or no about voting for them and hope to concensus of voting will follow your opinions.

Oh yeah, and for god sake don't try and get them banned, you'll disturb on hell of a big hornets nest there.,

I completely understand why many feel drawn to the politics of the far right. Seeking a solution, and in desperate circumstances, many will indeed believe the NF or BNP can provide the answers they are seeking. However, such people should realise that they are mere pawns in a much larger game - a common trick called divide and rule. We got a problem? Hey, let's go blame those seeking asylum. This suits the state. Better that than they taking action against the real enemy - those who cause the real fucking problems. Better they argue amongst themselves. Coz hey, a divided working class is way easier to control.

Oh, and forget the propaganda regarding those seeking asylum. Leaching from society indeed.

And regarding your point as to folks here living in Aberdeen, and so have only a limited experience of ethnic minorities - I lived for some years in London.

We should listen to what the far right has to say? Are you so deluded? Hey, we're talking about fascists here.

And no, I do not believe they should be banned. Challenged? Yes.

[Mr. Tristen]

We should listen to what the far right has to say? Are you so deluded? Hey' date=' we're talking about fascists here.

And no, I do not believe they should be banned. Challenged? Yes.[/quote']

I agree. And again for the record, despite some of my views I am not a BNP supporter. They cross the line into racism in my opinion and thats something I want no part of, nore would I like to see them persecute my coloured friends due to their skin tones. The fact remains though, the BNP are becoming large enough to be counted as a player in the political scene. They are not going to go away just because people sign a few petitions and attend a few meetings. Let them have their say, then ignore them if you disagree, same as you would with any other party.

[Guest allsystemsfail]

I think the current system does far too little for the really needy and far too much for the lazy.

The kind of nonsense put about by the Tories. Hey, we're just trying to get the benefits to those who need it most.

[jimr]

What is the point of this continuous bickering?

I could almost understand another thread on this topic if the title of the thread was something not discussed in the many previous threads, but it's not, so I despair.

Don't ban the march, ban pointless discussions like this.

Saying that, I am very bored and its a few hours before the football's on so what the hell.

Firstly, anyone that holds up the rights and responsibilities of living in a democracy as a defence against the restrictions of peoples rights are being a tad silly. I understand when people worry about racial hatred, but banning these parties is not the answer. We should not be looking at the insitutions but the people themselves. Racists will continue to exist regardless of any crackdown on their political outlets, because the root causes of their racism are not being tackled. Education is the only way to combat racism, restricting freedoms is both pointless and counter-productive.

A ban on this march is a victory for them. They gain nothing by marching down union street displaying their weak state and lack of support. I am not saying that people should not seek to oppose these people, but it is the method that is important. A solid line of protesters lineing the route of the march in complete silence would be a far more devastating blow than a ban.

With regards to the failures of socialism, I would point out that like democracy, it is still an idea in it's infancy, ideas need to be built upon to succeed. Stalinist Russia was as socialist as Tony Blair's decision to go to war was democratic. People that look at our nation as one of the great moral peaks of the world would do well to remember that the only reason Democracy is able to shine here is by pursueing some of the most undemocratic policies on a global scale. I suppose banning the NF would be perfect really, it may better reflect just how democratic our society is.

[Guest allsystemsfail]

Examples?

What? So, you believe every person in receipt of benefits a scrounger?

[Guest allsystemsfail]

To qualify' date='

I think that if you have been employed previously for say 6 months then you should get a grace period of say 3 months to find any job you want, all benefits paid. Then, you start the three stirkes period, where the jobcenter offers you three jobs, you pick from them and if you don't want any you lose the benefits.

The money that this saves should be used to increase disability benefit, provide free childcare for all children with parents who wish to work, and decent levels of benefit for genuinly enemployed people seeking work.[/quote']

So, if you were to find yourself with no job, and so had to claim benefit, you would be quite happy after said three month period to take any job at all? That's ANY job.

Also, regarding savings made - you'll find that a rather sizeable proportion of the funds set aside for benefits sits unclaimed.

[lepeep]

...you would be quite happy after said three month period to take any job at all? That's ANY job.

yes, because it's easier to get a job if you are currently employed, so , starting at the "bottom" and working up again is a necessary evil...

I'd flip burgers if I had to, rather than sit on my ass, watching daytime telly, going for those elusive 40+ K jobs in the times I'd never get (ho ho).

Flipping burgers : possible management : more experience : better job after a year

(I am not a manger, that was just a quick example of how "any job" is better than "no job").

[lepeep]

I also know someone who was getting more benefits (money) before they took the plunge to get back into working, their "earnings" dropped by about 25 - 30% because they went back to work, but, they certainly feel better for it, more alive and "meaningful" (not in the drone like worker sense I am sure some lefties would have you believe, just a more "productive human" within society....)

[Guest allsystemsfail]

The fact remains though' date=' the BNP are becoming large enough to be counted as a player in the political scene. They are not going to go away just because people sign a few petitions and attend a few meetings. Let them have their say, then ignore them if you disagree, same as you would with any other party.[/quote']

Ignore them as you would any other political party? But, they are not like any other party. These guys are nazis, and so their attempts to organise should be resisted at every opportunity.

[jimr]

Ignore them as you would any other political party? But' date=' they are not like any other party. These guys are nazis, and so their attempts to organise should be resisted at every opportunity.[/quote']

"We must crush the fascists with an iron fist!!"

[Guest allsystemsfail]

yes' date=' because it's easier to get a job if you are currently employed, so , starting at the "bottom" and working up again is a necessary evil...

I'd flip burgers if I had to, rather than sit on my ass, watching daytime telly, going for those elusive 40+ K jobs in the times I'd never get (ho ho).

Flipping burgers : possible management : more experience : better job after a year

(I am not a manger, that was just a quick example of how "any job" is better than "no job").[/quote']

So, according to you, those in receipt of unemployment benefit do nothing at all with their time cept sit on their ass and watch daytime television? Do you actually know anyone who is unemployed? Why do you equate having a job with being active? Do you do nothing else with your life? Have you no other interests cept your job?

[jimr]

So' date=' according to you, those in receipt of unemployment benefit do nothing at all with their time cept sit on their ass and watch daytime television? Do you actually know anyone who is unemployed? Why do you equate having a job with being active? Do you do nothing else with your life? Have you no other interests cept your job?[/quote']

Did you actually bother to read his posts, he already said that he knew someone who was unemployed. Iif you expect people to put up with all the utter drivel you write you could atleast bother to read the views of others.

[lepeep]

So' date=' according to you, those in receipt of unemployment benefit do nothing at all with their time cept sit on their ass and watch daytime television? Do you actually know anyone who is unemployed? Why do you equate having a job with being active? Do you do nothing else with your life? Have you no other interests cept your job?[/quote']

sorry, I thought you were intelligent enough to take my comments were about the people who don't take "any job", and, I assure you, people who need to be in the position to "take any job" are obviously a, lazy, b, so far up their own arse that they think "any job" ids below them.

When I was unemployed, I busted my balls to get a job, ANY JOB, just so happens, I had the gumption and Skills to get me a semi decent one (at the bottom of the greasy pole), and I've kept my head above water ever since.

I know you and I don't see eye to eye on "what's a minker", I think there are plenty of people deserving benefits, but sadly, there are plenty of people claimin so many benefits as to make a "very comfortable salary" by popping sprogs out every 10 months, etc it's NOT FAIR.

But, you being an "uber socialist" think it's everyones right NOT to work, and bleed the state dry...ask yourself, if everyone thought that way, who'd be left to pay the taxes to pay for these people ?

Don't get me wrong, there are people who need, and deserve benefits, I gladly pay my tax to help make this happen, but when you hear of Heroine addicts popping kids out like rats, and driving BMW's and Stealing anything that's not tied down, something should be done (I don't have the answer, before you smugly drop that one).

peep

[lepeep]

... Have you no other interests cept your job?

Jimr, I think you have it on the nail there, some pretty low stabs from mr System...

I liked this one quoted, I mean, it just reeks of stereotypes...

"crusty punk slanders working man with 'you are your job' jibe"

"all workers are drones"

"I don't have a job, so I am free (buy me a coffee , I am skint, my dole money comes in next tuesday, I'll pay you back, honest...in the mean time, by a copy of the Socialst worker...)"

no other interests, cept my job...

let me see, creating art every night, instead of watching the TV ?

playing bass in a band ?

doing my garden (oops, middle class pastime ! oops, shouldn't have stated that one!)

making videos for bands (Mothboy, horchata, larvae, zenopede....)

how the fuck do I manage all that ?

ahh, that'll be the WAGE I EARN so I can buy the thigs I need, to make my life more fulfilling.

tell you what, lets all just wear crass T shirts, get our nosed pierced and moan about everything, instead of doing something about it....

who's with me ?.....rar ! revolution !....(this is where the borders blur...ho ho)

[Mr. Tristen]

Ignore them as you would any other political party? But' date=' they are not like any other party. These guys are nazis, and so their attempts to organise should be resisted at every opportunity.[/quote']

You see in black and white too much. No one side in a dispute can be inherantly good or inherantly bad. They very fact a dispute exists equates to the fact that there is fear, mistrust or unacceptance of each others views on both sides of the argument. In short what I'm saying is in any given case like this, everybody is right, and everybody is also wrong. I know that seems like a really stupid argument, but well I stand by it. In this case I've had large expereince of many types of gouverment and social structures, and i soon learned that judgement of their beliefs is not really possible. Decide what you believe in. Take the best elements of all the systems you see. But don't for a second think you are right. You beliefs cannot by the nature of the word belief ever be right, merely an alternative point of view.

God I'm becoming such a pragmatist in my old age.

[soundian]

yes' date=' because it's easier to get a job if you are currently employed, so , starting at the "bottom" and working up again is a necessary evil...

I'd flip burgers if I had to, rather than sit on my ass, watching daytime telly, going for those elusive 40+ K jobs in the times I'd never get (ho ho).

Flipping burgers : possible management : more experience : better job after a year

(I am not a manger, that was just a quick example of how "any job" is better than "no job").[/quote']

Not being a manager you won't know that those elusive 40k jobs are actually sub 20k and require properly prepared presentations at the interview, not easy to do when you're flipping burgers 24/7.