| Current mood: |  curious |
BNP
In all the excitement of Boris, the media has for now overlooked the "breakthrough" by the BNP. Richard Barnbrook who came fourth in the London Mayoral election, has won a seat on the London Assembly. (I've not heard this reported by Sky News or BBC News so far). Given that Barnbrook won legitimately through the electoral process, I hope there won't be stupid protests over this. Democracy does mean that some viewpoints, unpalatable they may be, have to be heard. Anyway, I'm beginning to wonder if the BNP really are racists nowadays. Is is really tenable to be overtly racist in modern Britain? Why are they constantly demonised by default? Are the BNP lying when they say they're not racist?
I don't see anything wrong with Barnbrook's (stated) position (just looking at the words): "We're not racist at all. We do not perceive one person's religion, identity, culture or way of life as being better or worse than our own, we are simply different." He says he wants to fight to ensure that in future "every single Londoner is treated exactly the same - no political correctness and no positive discrimination. Nobody will be favoured over anyone else regardless of creed or colour." [Source: Times - BNP's man in the Assembly defends the party]
![[info]](http://p-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif){kind=small}
keith_london) wrote,
