|
BNP successes, the effect of playing the 'race card' |
|
|
|
Issues Explained
|
|
Monday, 08 June 2009 |
The success of the British National Party (BNP) in winning two European Parliamentary seats has caused much controversy and alarm. Whilst there has been no significant rise in their vote count, their share of the vote seems to have come from a melt down in support for Labour. Nonetheless, there are serious concerns in that their reputation for blind racism and anti-semitism has been masked in recent years by a tactical attempt to focus on the Muslim community.
There are several thoughts that come to mind from these results.
Firstly, the scaremongering that is used by both political parties to bolster support for themselves will not be proportionate to their chances of gaining more power and influence. Despite the lack of trust in mainstream parties the level of support for the BNP has not risen significantly.
Secondly, European elections are under a system of proportional representation. As such all the votes of BNP supporters scattered over a huge region are pooled and consequently they gained 2 seats. Their current percentage of the vote (6.2%) is less than the Green Party (8.6%), yet both gain 2 seats in the European parliament. However, in general elections the chances of a BNP victory in even a single seat are at best remote with the first past the post system .
Thirdly, the real impact of this BNP vote will be on the other parties. History shows that Labour and the Conservative both adopt a more anti-Muslim and anti-Immigration stance when the BNP hits the headlines, playing the populist card.
Finally, the BNP success arguably exposes one of the most shaming and flawed aspects of the democratic system. Nationalism is an abhorrent political ideology, built upon the idea that one race or nation is inherently superior to another, and seeks to dominate others. It is the ideology that spawned Nazi Germany and Milosovic's Serbia and is again gaining ground in parts of Europe. There is a deeply flawed argument, that somehow if it is left to the ‘people’ to collectively decide what is good or bad that they will always decide something good. It is like the argument that the ‘market’ decides what is good - and you won't find many championing that cause these days.
Trackback(0)
 |
|