We need unity now more than ever

The decision is made and the consequences, whatever they may be will be best faced as a united nation. The campaign leading up to yesterday’s referendum has been bitter and in some quarters violent. Commentators on both sides of the debate made exaggerated claims and strove hard to alienate their opposing camp. None of this was ever going to be helpful post-referendum.

EU and union flags brexitAs a staunch Remain advocate I won’t pretend that I’m not disappointed. But so what? Who gives a flying f**k about that? Emotions are irrelevant in this situation. The decision is made and Britain faces an uphill task to re-establish our identity as a nation, to re-establish our entire legal framework and to re-establish our relationship with the rest of the world.

Given that we might just have slammed the door on the international cartel that buys almost half our exports it seems certain that greater austerity is ahead. Equally worrying, especially for the low paid or those on zero-hour or casual contracts is the fact that many of their EU derived employment rights will cease to have any legal basis in UK law. Those workers who thought that their rights couldn’t be eroded any more than they already have been over the last few years may well be about to get a very large shock as they lose the protection the EU afforded them in the past.

The temptation for the Remain camp to blame the Brexiters for the sudden drop in the pound’s international value and for Brexiters to find a way to claim it’s all Remain’s fault really over the next few weeks, months and possibly years will be almost irresistible for many. The need for those workers who may soon begin to see their rights eroded to blame each other, whether they voted in or out will be equally strong. But we must avoid that temptation.

I won’t deny that I fear for this nation’s future today. But we must not fight each other. One of the most significant long-term consequences of the decision to leave the EU may well be the loss of the European Convention on Human Rights. Many of our current conservative leaders, including the Home Secretary have expressed their desire to reject both the ECHR and the British Human Rights Act that supports it in UK. This move opens the door for those who would remove those rights, potentially to replace them with an as yet unspecified ‘British Bill of Rights’. Potentially we have lost the framework that has hitherto defended the rights of working people, of religious and ethnic minorities and that has guaranteed us fair recourse to law. It’s too soon to know precisely what will happen next but the risk to our rights, especially to the rights of minority groups, to working people and to those who are out of work for whatever reason has suddenly become much more credible.

Not all Brexiters were far right sympathisers but all the far right sympathisers we interacted with were Brexiters. And there’s a reason for that. The loss of the EU means that far right groups like Britain First have just received a massive legal shot in the arm. As this country extricates itself to a greater or lesser extent from European legislation it will become easier for so-minded politicians to erode minority rights. And the thing that will make it easiest of all for them in this post-referendum Britain is sustained division.

If this nation continues to fight against itself, if we cannot find a way to come together and heal the divisions of the last few months of furious campaigning we will be too distracted in hating each other to notice the wholesale erosion of our protections.

The result is what it is. Britain, for better or worse has left the European Union. Now the task is to come together in unity.

Most people I know, be they Remain or Leave voters want to see a strong nation, not a divided one.

A house divided against itself cannot stand.


The Hanging Gardens of Bifferdom

Previously we reported on Britain First’s feigned outrage at the ‘Death of democracy’. Of course, like the famous Mark Twain obituary from the New York Journal, the reports of democracy’s demise have been greatly exaggerated.

Not to be deterred, Britain First decided to speed up democracy’s death with a little neo-nazi fervour of their own. Farage seemed content just to pretend that electoral fairness is lost. The Biffers want to kill it themselves.

EBF BF Hang all traitors politicians noose.pngIn what version of democracy is it acceptable to propose the execution of political opponents?

Really? Think about it? What sort of democratic political party thinks this is OK?

Can the Biffers be any clearer about their neo-nazism?

Vote any way you want – as long as it’s UKIP

Britain First broke the irony meter again this week! By supporting UKIP’s claim that democracy is dead they reveal not only their own anti-democratic stance but also that of their favourite political party.

Their political hero, Nigel Farage has claimed that Thursday’s Oldham West election was fixed because Asians didn’t vote for the UKIP candidate. That’s like complaining because turkeys don’t vote for Christmas (or ‘Thanksgiving’ as the American Biffers would understand it).

EBF BF UKIP Labour democracy Oldham west postal vote.pngWhat exactly does Farage’s tantrum mean for democracy though?
Not much as it happens. We’ve summarized our thoughts below…

The unelected (and unelectable) leader of a parliamentary political party has decided that since the people his party hates most have not voted for the party that hates them the most, democracy has failed. The message is clear…

It’s only democracy if UKIP wins. Otherwise it’s a fix!

Everyone loves a trier – apparently

The latest Britain First campaign is so silly it’s a joke. They’re raising a petition about a problem that will be solved well before their petition could have the slightest impact anyway.

EBF BF temporary mosque craven campaign 1

This temporary Mosque in yorkshire has hit a few problems from the locals. They don’t like the noise that inevitably emanates from a house of worship that is effectively a tent at the end of the road. Fair enough.

For their part the Mosque’s officials have explained that the delay in removing it was caused by unavoidable building delays at their permanent Mosque. They have assured the local residents that work will be completed and the temporary Mosque dismantled by the end of August.

Fair enough? Not for Britain First, it seems…

BF temporary mosque craven campaign 3

In truly undemocratic style they’ve launched a campaign to ask people who don’t live locally to intervene over this local planning issue. That’s not how local democracy works. Some local people have complained and their complaints should be taken seriously. They should also be balanced against all the other opinions and existing planning and legal principles affecting the local area. They should not be overwhelmed by a national and international campaign orchestrated by a group of Nazis whose only reason for taking an interest is the fact that the case involves Muslims.

EBF BF temporary mosque craven campaign 2

These people and their hate-filled, racist agenda are becoming more and more obvious every single day. We wonder why they don’t mount campaigns against temporary churches (there’s usually one or two in the country at any one time) or the sound of church bells disturbing people as they enjoy a Sunday lie in. Actually we don’t wonder at all. It’s obvious. Campaigns against temporary Christian churches wouldn’t give them an opportunity to whip up anti-Muslim sentiment.

We can’t imagine how awful it must be to inhabit the mind of a Biffer, day in and day out. There must be so much petty hatred and paranoia in there leading them to launch campaigns like this one. They really are more to be pitied than blamed.

Testing the boundary

BF compassion EBFToday in the High Court the limits of British democracy will be tested. This isn’t going to be the most important court case this nation has ever seen but it is going to be meaningful.

The case involves two relatively insignificant respondents – Paul ‘Folding’ Golding and Jayda ‘Dutchy’ Fransen. These fascist Biffers are the leaders of a half-arsed political party called Britain First. And there’s the crux of the case.

Folding and Dutchy have spent the last few years inciting as much anti-Muslim hatred and violence as they can. They’ve invaded mosques, disrupted lawful meetings, intimidated political opponents and even published names and addresses of critics. In addition they’ve ripped off charities, misused the names of fallen heroes and threatened to bury pigs heads under proposed mosque sites. They aren’t exactly typical politicians.

As leaders of Britain First they have long hidden behind their status as politicians to try to claim some sort of ‘diplomatic immunity’ from prosecution. And to an extent it’s worked. Folding has picked up the occasional fine but nothing like the prison sentence he deserves. Dutchy seems to have got off scot free – except for her tattered reputation, of course.

Today the High Court will decide if these disgusting, Nazi troublemakers can keep on causing trouble or if they will be prevented from indulging in the worst of their former activities. But that’s not really what this case symbolizes.

The High Court today has to decide if representative democracy has boundaries or if registered politicians really are ‘above the law’ as ‘Folding’ Golding seems to think.

We’ll know the answer soon enough.

Fraudulent Elections

“Sometimes elections in fascist nations are a complete sham. Other times elections are manipulated by smear campaigns against or even assassination of opposition candidates, use of legislation to control voting numbers or political district boundaries, and manipulation of the media. Fascist nations also typically use their judiciaries to manipulate or control elections.”

Now we come to the last of Britt’s fourteen characteristics of fascism. If Britain First weren’t so laughably inept it might be easier to show their attitude to the electoral process. As it is their electoral  influence is so small there’s not too much to report here. On balance though, we think that’s a good thing.

We do know that BF stood a few candidates in the early days. They came precisely nowhere in the last round of European Parliamentary elections, where they used the slogan ‘Remember Lee Rigby’ despite the late drummer’s mother’s pleas for them not to. They came nowhere again in the Roschester and Strood by election in which deputy leader Jayda “Dutchy” Fransen lost her deposit with only 56 votes. They haven’t bothered to stand in any elections since. They even bottled out of the 2015 General Election, preferring to back UKIP by intimidating Farage’s political opponents instead.

Even this brief foray into the world of legitimate politics tells us a lot about the Biffers’ attitude to the democratic process though. Here’s what we know…

Biffer candidates have no intention of fairly representing the entire electorate. Fransen was very clear in Rochester and Strood that she would oppose the needs of Muslims and other ethnic minorities. The Britain First election mailshot was so blatantly racist and discriminatory that the Royal Mail refused to deliver it.


Biffers use elections in the same way they use everything else. Elections are just opportunities to make more money for the Biffers. The election appeal to raise the money for Fransen’s deposit was painful to witness. Then there was the campaign to raise money for the election mailshot that may or may not have been printed in the numbers they claimed, the money for postage of the mailshot that was never required and the money to take the Royal Mail to court (that never happened). Finally Folding Golding earned his nickname when he and Dutchy said on record that they never wanted to run a serious campaign in Rochester & Strood, bizzarely claiming that Dutchy’s candidature was a ploy to support UKIP (from whom she probably took 56 votes). Not a penny of this money, taken under false pretences was ever refunded.

The Biffers raised funds to field 6 candidates in the 2015 General election. Then they changed their minds and fielded nobody at all. The money was never returned. The Fuhrer and his Biffers have no respect for the democratic process.

Worse than that, they are very happy to threaten, intimidate, silence and smear political opponents. We have already seen here and here how they treat anyone who engages in politics for any other faction (except UKIP). As a tiny, extremely ineffectual fledgling group of fascists they’re limited in what they can do to disrupt democracy. If they ever were granted legislative power we think it’s clear just what would happen.

Absolute power corrupts absolutely – and the Biffers are pretty corrupt already!

Based on the article ‘The 14 characteristics of Fascism’ by Lawrence Britt