Golding’s still folding as the Templars retreat

There’s a bit of a problem in Bifferland. The empire is definitely breaking up as uncle Jim Dowson desperately tries to distance himself from the monumental cock-up that is Britain First. Perhaps that’s to be expected. His original thirty grand start-up stake to launch Britain First has more than paid for itself but the pitch is getting old and tired now. He needs another angle and he needs it quick – before Folding and Dutchy finally kill the goose that lays the golden egg altogether.

The problem is simple. Out and out racism has fallen out of fashion, which leaves Britain First with a bit of a problem. In fact, their original racist angle has fallen so far out of fashion that it’s difficult to see how they could ever get back on top without a radical overhaul – especially since the recent High Court injunction against them.

BF Luton judge comments offensive extremist mosques

But before they reinvent themselves entirely we thought we’d invite them to take a little trip down memory lane. Remember this….

EBF BF white genocide

And this….

EBF BF racist genocide

Ah those were the days. This was Britain First back in the heady days when they could say what they meant. Those were the days when the racist mantras still fresh. Those were the days before the High Court told them to stop spreading racial and religious hatred.

EBF BF white genocide black history month race

Those were the days when they were quite prepared to admit their racism and religious hatred because it appealed to the uneducated and the easily led. A fool and his money is easily parted, as Britain First know only too well. But fools tend not to have bottomless pits of money and those funds seem to be running out (even allowing for Britain First’s laughably transparent, published ‘accounts’).

So Golding is folding once again. This time the Biffers’ ex BNP, ex NF leader is pretending not to be racist. So, it seems is Dutchy, the former EDL ‘angel’. Both now tell us that they’re not racist at all! How strange.

BF and racism blog screenshot

They even deny targeting any ethnic minorities…

EBF BF ban Islam ECHR blame Muslims France

BF ethnic minorities not racist screenshot

Well isn’t that nice? A loyal band of English patriots dedicated to promoting peace and harmony between all ethnic groups. Such sensitive souls. And they’re art lovers too…

Britan First draw Mohammed tweet bf ebf

They got that idea from the Fuhrer, apparently.

Golding draw Mohammed tweet bf ebf edited

And, of course – the biffers ran with it as enthusiastically as ever…

Draw mohammed comments 2 bf ebf

Its little wonder that Uncle Jim Dowson is ditching them, is it? Folding and Dutchy are surrendering to the High Court and Dowson’s other money-spinner, the Knights Templar International is condemning their deeds if not their names…

KTI condemn blasphemy draw mohammed acknowledge moderate muslim sunni

BF KTI draw Mohammed cartoon competition distancing edited

It’s odd that KTI chose to use a 5 year old picture of an early EDL rally instead of the much more appropriate Biffer screenies above. After all – those EDL lads had nothing to do with Golding’s proposed art competition. But then Dowson doesn’t want to risk alienating current BF supporters while there’s still money to be had from them. So he condemns Golding’s actions but not his name.

Either way, Folding and Dutchy are being hung out to dry and everyone knows it.

Such a shame. We’ll be sorry to see them go! They’ve been a very entertaining double act.

Rampant Sexism

The governments of fascist nations tend to be almost exclusively male-dominated. Under fascist regimes, traditional gender roles are made more rigid. Opposition to abortion is high, as is homophobia and anti-gay legislation and national policy.”

Britain First targets women because they’re perceived as easy, soft, vulnerable targets. Their recent mailshot, designed to intimidate was sent almost exclusively to women. Their most publicised campaign (to Ban the Burka) is also aimed exclusively at women.

Female sexuality is targeted and Muslim women are regularly described as little more than breeding machines. Whenever women come under the Biffer spotlight the online foamfest is filled with sexualised comments and threats of rape, genital torture and assumptions about sexual depravity. Alongside this abuse the Biffers encourage white women to have as many children as possible to combat their imagined ‘white genocide’ by out-breeding the opposition. This is exactly the same thing that Hitler did, even creating medals of motherhood based upon the numbers of Aryan children born to German mothers of ‘good racial stock’.

Fascist BF 5

There seems little doubt that Biffers view women as nothing more than sexual objects whose purpose is to breed (either little biffers or infant terrorists). The former are encouraged. The latter are condemned. But all women are denigrated by this limited, fascist view of their worth.

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

The ‘birth rate’ myth

BF EBF birth rate white genocideBritain First loves statistics. They’re flexible, they’re manipulable and they lend an air of credibility to any lie the Biffers want to spread around. Take for example the ‘Muslim birth rate’ myth. This is the scaremongering argument that Britain First trots out so regularly to try to frighten non-Muslims about an imagined Muslim takeover.

The basic argument is that since Muslim families have more babies than non-Muslim families the time will come when ‘they’ will take over the whole of society. This myth, which goes hand-in-hand with the ‘white genocide’ myth we covered earlier, isn’t just wrong, it’s downright ludicrous.

There are two main statistics that Biffers and other far-right Nazi groups such as the National Front or the British National Party like to quote as ‘evidence’ here. Let’s look at them both in turn…

Muslims have more babies than others

The fertility rate for Muslim families is actually falling rapidly, not just in Western countries but across the world. In 1995 the average was 4.3 children per family. By 2010 that figure had fallen to around 2.9 and it still continues to fall. In Western countries such as the UK the figure is lower still when counted across the entire time of each woman’s reproductive life (the only meaningful way to calculate her fertility over time).

EBF BF birth rate white genocide 2Actually Western nations have seen this before. We saw it in the 1930s and 1940s when the influx of Jewish immigrants and other refugees fleeing from Britain First’s ideological soulmates, the Nazis, also demonstrated temporarily higher birth rates than the indigenous British population. In fact the birth rate among today’s British Muslims is falling considerably faster than it did among Jewish immigrants in the mid twentieth century.

This isn’t about religion – it’s about the dynamics of immigration and the age at which immigrant families tend to ‘up sticks’ and move. Young immigrants often wait until they’re established in their new home before having children. That doesn’t mean they necessarily will have more children than other couples over the course of a lifetime – simply that they have them after they move. First generation immigrants do tend to have more children than the indigenous population but second generation immigrants are much closer to the established norms of their host nation. That’s not really all that surprising since, having been born here, they are themselves part of that indigenous population. This explains the ‘young bulge’ in UK Muslim demographics (88% are aged under 50).

Mohammed is the most common name for new babies in UK

Well, of course it is! That’s because it’s a name given to extremely high numbers of Muslim boys. There is no equivalent name among the non-Muslim British population and so, despite the relatively low numbers of Muslim births, the incidence of this particular name is comparatively large. Imagine what the result would look like if the right wing press had published babies’ surnames instead of given names. We think that surnames like ‘Smith’, ‘Jones’ or ‘Johnston’ would appear far more prominently than any Muslim equivalent.

The reality is that the right wing press published the research data for first names because it gave the most frightening impression – not because it gave the most accurate reflection of the demographic reality. The truth is that British Muslims’ birth rates are becoming assimilated into UK norms remarkably rapidly. 2010 birth rate research showed only 1% of British babies were named Mohammed. By 2013 it had fallen to only 23rd place in its most common variant – the most popular name in that year being ‘Oliver’. The ‘first place’ claim is arrived at by adding up a number of variant spellings but even so – it’s hardly surprising. Many Muslims give their sons the name Mohammed because the name is traditionally believed to confer characteristics of the prophet onto the child. It’s not a takeover – it’s a religious custom that distorts the figures.

Mohammed may be a common name (especially with all its many variant spellings) but it’s hardly evidence of a national takeover. Far from ‘out-breeding the infidel’ the Muslim birth rate is declining as Westernised Muslims adopt the fertility rates and patterns of the rest of UK’s population.

The ‘white genocide’ myth

EBF BF white genocideBritain First are far from alone in perpetuating this particular myth. It’s a myth based upon the fact that most people know next to nothing about genetics and the interaction of dominant and recessive genes to define heritable characteristics and racial types. We don’t plan to lecture anyone on genetics here but it is worth making a few basic points.

Racial type isn’t an all or nothing situation. Each individual physical trait is decided via complex interactions of genes resulting in a range of characteristics. That’s  why children of any couple tend to get ‘their mother’s nose’ or ‘their father’s eyes’, rather than something halfway between the two. Each genetic ‘choice’ is ‘all or nothing’ (like the electoral ‘first past the post’ system) but the number of gene pairs involved is so great that the resulting set of characteristics is almost impossible to predict.

Skin colour is a little different in that there are many different genes that determine pigmentation but it’s still essentially the same idea. Many different gene pairs interact to create the familiar range of colours we see in the modern world. But each gene remains in the gene pool and can resurface in future generations – making the concept of racial genocide via interbreeding a scientific nonsense. To put it another way – it won’t happen. Advantageous genes repeat in the gene pool. In the Northern hemisphere light skins are advantageous and so those genes will persist in those areas of the world (including here in the UK).

But that’s not all that’s wrong about this particular ‘white genocide’ myth. Even though it’s not going to happen. let’s consider the implications of ‘White genocide’ by inter-breeding, just for the sake of argument.

Inter-racial mixing has continued for many hundreds and thousands of years. Ever since Homo sapiens first migrated out of Africa (yes – Africa), the ancestral home of every single modern human, we have evolved, diversified and interbred. Each slight change, each successful evolutionary adaptation has remained in the gene pool only because it was advantageous to the individuals who carried it and by extension to our species as a whole. Just as we wouldn’t feel bad because early Homo neandertalis might lament the fact that very few of their physical characteristics remain in the modern gene pool, why on earth should future generations care if they benefit from subsequent evolution?

Or should we all start protesting about men without unusually broad brow ridges and jutting jaws or refuse to marry women who don’t have even more impractically angled (and potentially fatal) birth canals?

Let’s just put this rubbish in perspective…

Any future improvement in human evolution will be no concern of ours. Just as we don’t care that our brains are bigger than the Neanderthals’, future generations won’t care that a few misguided modern Nazis would prefer them not to have evolved either.