According to the Labour MP for Blaydon, David Anderson, on the 24th February, the BNP will "effectively be recognised as a trade union by the certification officer". Now, I'm not sure of the veracity of this assertion, or how exactly trade union recognition works, but given the white-power socialism in their manifesto, it's hardly a surprise that they might want to be a trade union.
I have to admit I was actually quite surprised when I read the BNP manifesto for the first time, it was essentially a collectivist policy platform. Nationalisation of industry, introduction of co-operatives across the farming industry.
Anyways, if anyone cares to explain how, why the BNP are about to become "effectively" recognised as a trade union, do let me know in the comments. The use of the word effectively by Anderson makes me wonder how accurate his description is.
8 comments:
Trade unions are required to be registered with the trade union certification officer. see here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
Trades_Union_Certification_Officer
The BNP registered their union: Solidarity, the union for British workers (presumably non-British workers are not welcome).
You can read more here:
http://www.stopthebnp.org.uk/
index.php?location=news&art=354
You could define the BNP as 'socialists' if you wanted to use the crude economic definition of socialist, but the more frequent understanding of socialism as also incorporating liberty, equality and fraternity (including soriety) rules them out in the eyes of what I would define as socialist.
At long last there will be a union that that is not run for the benefit of marxists. I think it is a great idea, and hopefully I will be able to join.
In this country marxist traitors have had everything their own way for far too long.
The BNP ARE socialists, nothing crude about it.
There's also nothing liberating about state slavery.
Bob piper is correct
Socialism is about equality for everybody , male female , black or white it will fuck your life up without prejudice.
Bob Piper's correct. What Dizzy calls "white-power socialism" is more accurately termed "communalism" or, go on why not, "fascism". Though it may be based on an illusion of worker interest it is of course in the interests of the few not the many, commencing with a divide and rule and common enemy format as dog-whistled by the Tory strategist Dave/id Cameron for 2005 before he became a Cuddly-Nu-Tory.
Actually Chris, Bob is not correct and neither are you. Socialism has nothing to do with liberty, and frankly saying it does fundamentally fails to understand the basis of the historical materialism upon which it is based.
Socialism is predicated on the authority of the state over the individual in th ename of the state's end. It is the absolutely anti-thesis of liberty. It's not only bollocks to say that socialism has it's foundations in liberty it's also the most rank intellectually dishonesty.
Socialism and fascism are equally wank, because they are both steeped in the totalitarian execution of power.
It's ok though Chris, one day you'll see the light and understand what liberty really is, rather than believing in quasi-scientific theories of history as the basis for your anti-liberty positions.
David Anderson appears to be talking nonsense. I've looked at the Solidarity web page at http://www.solidaritytradeunion.org
It makes it clear that the Union is open to people from all faith, ethnic and political backgrounds. It refuses to discriminate against members of the BNP on the grounds that this is a form of McCarthyism. The General Secretary of the Union is a member of Third Way (http://www.thirdway.org) who left the NF in 1989 because he disagreed with their policies! Third Way is supporting the Union and it has black, asian and Muslim members. Doesn't look like a BNP Union to me!
It is sad that an MP can be either
(a)completely tuned out politically
or
(b)finds the Truth to complex!
You are all wrong and barking up the wrong tree.
The BNP can be described as 'socialist' just as Old Labour is, or was, socialist. This is merely seeking the nationalisation of the core industries, ie. electricity, gas, water, and public transport. Beyond this they seek a mixed economy, albeit with the power of the big corporations being reduced. This is far from the old 'Militant' policy of "nationalising the top 200 monopolies", and the Communist aim of nationalising everything.
The BNPs economic policies are in no way 'Fascist' because they want no truck with the big corporations, unlike Labour and the Conservative Party, who work hand in glove with them - so why not call Labour and Tories 'Fascist'? Because they fulfill more of the requirements, ie. corporate Fascism allied with an oppressive nature. In comparison, the BNP appear quite libertarian.
Post a Comment