BNP and Ethnic Representation

[Pogue]

This isn't in discrimination because its dealing with fasicst lies.

On their website, the BNP have a section called 'Is the BNP racist?'. When you click on it, it takes you to a page with the logos of all the groups in Britain specifically formed to represent black and minority ethnic groups, such as the Black Police Officers association, and various community groups focused on various ethnic minorities. The idea its trying to get across is that loads of groups focus on one ethnicity, so why should the BNP not focus on white people alone.

I was thinking of ways to counter this, and it boiled down to two approaches revolutionaries could tae:

1. These groups representing minorities are fine, because they are minorities. They have and do suffer discrimination and for alot of them, especially migrants from overseas, having an assocaition for people from their community is helpful and neccesary. The BNP are wrong because white British people are the 'dominant' majority (for example over 90% of MPs are white british, 85% of the population, etc) so there approach is not the same and is clearly aggresive white supremacy.

2. These groups are wrong for only focusing on one colour/ethnic group and so are the BNP, although the BNP are worse for their aggressive, supremacist line.

What do you guys think? What option is best to coutner this argument? Both? Neither? A mixture?

[Pirate turtle the 11th]

I think this stems from the bullshit idea spread by the gutter press that white straight men are oppressed for being white straight men. (You get alot of these freaks on uk debate - someone who knows there shit and has time to waste would be a welcome addition)

[ls]

1. These groups representing minorities are fine, because they are minorities. They have and do suffer discrimination and for alot of them, especially migrants from overseas, having an assocaition for people from their community is helpful and neccesary. The BNP are wrong because white British people are the 'dominant' majority (for example over 90% of MPs are white british, 85% of the population, etc) so there approach is not the same and is clearly aggresive white supremacy.

The argument they use against this is "we are becoming a minority in our own country" and it's good to destroy that with the history of the immigration of Catholics.


2. These groups are wrong for only focusing on one colour/ethnic group and so are the BNP, although the BNP are worse for their aggressive, supremacist line.

That's decent.


What do you guys think? What option is best to coutner this argument?..

A mixture.

[rednordman]

This isn't in discrimination because its dealing with fasicst lies.

On their website, the BNP have a section called 'Is the BNP racist?'. When you click on it, it takes you to a page with the logos of all the groups in Britain specifically formed to represent black and minority ethnic groups, such as the Black Police Officers association, and various community groups focused on various ethnic minorities. The idea its trying to get across is that loads of groups focus on one ethnicity, so why should the BNP not focus on white people alone. Thing is though, that is exactly what they want. Segregated communities and not whole united ones. You are totally correct in that minorites should get representation, but the job of the BNP is to twist that into a solid form.

After all, how easy is it for them now just to pigeonhole minorites into different organisations, and repress them. Just because the representations are there, and makes the BNP look good, whose to say that they will be any good. Its all fine and dandy for the BNP to 'recognise' these organisations. But what good are the organisations if they will only get repressed at the end of the day or are there for show?

At the end of the day a police officer is a police officer, no matter what colour. And it should stay that way. The BNP does not want this to be the case though. They want there to be seperate union so they can put spin on it. If there was say and asian or black police union (just an example) the BNP will only throw the rhetoric back in there faces by accusing them of using the 'race card' etc. So when ever there is indeed racism, it is actually easier for them to null it down by claiming that they are just a union with an 'agenda'. or even worse, 'they cannot handle themself on there own and use an ordinary union'. They think that they are inferior so they need "a special union" to look out for them alone.

I agree with your last sentence on the quote, but, the BNP has set up the page to try and say that they are not racist and accept other representation of minorites, as if we are all equal (yet still separate by race). This is obviously a total lie as they see white british people as being superiour to other races.

You obviously know more about the BNP properganda machine than i do, but i think that the representation bit is there solely because they want people to think that other races of people can only achieve things through a 'helping representative hand' and cannot stand alone. The 'whites rights' thing is just a ploy to win support from alienated and left out white working classes. This is also a big lie as the BNP clearly do not think that a white person should ever need representation over other minorites as they are 'naturally superiour'.

[Hoxhaist]

I think that most ethnocentric associations are counterproductive for the formation of unity in internationalism. I think that organizations can be formed to fight discrimination but ought to be inclusive in its membership of all people even if its mission is limited to issues facing a single community. Organizations such as that provide examples of the brotherhood of peoples as people of all races merge to fight together for equality. For any group to be organized exclusively in its membership and its mission is despicable because it undermines community and drives divisions into the heart of the nation that poison the community more than anything else. Organizations that exclusively promote and recruit members of a specific race whether they be black police officers or the BNP are subversive to the ideal of creating first a internationalist society and then a classless society. The elimination of race-based identity politics is the first major obstacle to bringing down the class identity because once everyone sees their fellow man as a fellow just as exploited by capitalism as they are, then they will unite across racial, ethnic, social, gender, or orientational lines to improve our world united in a common identity as humans.

[Young-and-angry]

The point is, whenever there is a small group, the small group defending themsleves against the larger, more powerful group is not the same as the powerful group opressing the smaller group.

Imagine a gang of from a large street constantly attacking and robbing the people from a very small street. If the small street chooses to stick together to try and stop the attacks, it doesn't mean the gang from the large street has the right to become even more agressive.

[Melbourne Lefty]

1. These groups representing minorities are fine, because they are minorities. They have and do suffer discrimination and for alot of them, especially migrants from overseas, having an assocaition for people from their community is helpful and neccesary. The BNP are wrong because white British people are the 'dominant' majority (for example over 90% of MPs are white british, 85% of the population, etc) so there approach is not the same and is clearly aggresive white supremacy.


Could be difficult if a minority ever became a majority to get them to disband "Cos you are a majority now and it aint fair".

Seriously dont defend groups that base themselves on advancing the causes of a racial group. Because if they do so that racial group, rather than class, will become their most important identity, and other racial groups will start their own groups to compete.

The modern BNP is essentially a group that has gotten in the members by becoming the society wide equiv of the Black Police Assoc.

Before they took this track they had under 500 members, now they have thousands and are challenging for a MEP.

And whenever their potential supporters look to the groups supposedly supporting the working class they find a bunch of university students prattling on about black history month [yes I am being over the top].

In other words if you support all ethnic representation groups except those that have white people, then dont be surprised if BNP groups whisper in those white peoples ears that they deserve representation for their problems as a racial group too.

[h0m0revolutionary]

1. These groups representing minorities are fine, because they are minorities. They have and do suffer discrimination and for alot of them, especially migrants from overseas, having an assocaition for people from their community is helpful and neccesary. The BNP are wrong because white British people are the 'dominant' majority (for example over 90% of MPs are white british, 85% of the population, etc) so there approach is not the same and is clearly aggresive white supremacy.


I'd largely agree with this line. I agree with the comrade before me however that there is a danger that within such orginisations that class becomes buried under a different issue, be that gender, race or otherwise.

It's not often I quote Lenin (haha) but he once said that the liberation of the oppressed "must be act the act of the oppressed themselves". So I think it's the job of revolutionaries to defend amungst minority groups the right to organise and have specific representation and to fight within for class consciousness.

This isn't just about race either, in our Unions for example we still have Womens Officers, this is because even in bourgiose equality terms a female still takes on average 5 years longer to pay off her tuition fees and will earn 3/4 of the wage a male counterpart would earn. Given that women, homosexuals, racial minorities etc will and do suffer discrimmination we must defend their right to organise along those lines.

The best thing we can do to counter separatism within these communities is to make capitalism redundant and get rid of the very system that makes it necessary for minority groups to feel suppressed above and beyond that of non-minority group workers.

Meanwhile we appreciate their plight and we fight against class-colaberation within these orginisations and win the arguments that capitalism thrives upon a divided workers movement and make sure that issues of gender, race, ability and sexuality etc are not ignored by the wider workers movement. There's nothing worse than self-proclaimed Marxists/Anarchists ignoring minority concerns.

[AlMack]

The black police officers association etc arent political parties with intentions of running the country for a start, so theres no comparison whatsoever.

Also point out that they could join such an organisation if they really wanted, but why would they? there would be no benefit for them in doing so.

A lot claim to be 'just proud of who they are, but not racist', but assertions of racial pride are based on the same assumptions of racial difference that racists & supremacists use, & still perpetuate mistrust between groups. This point also applies to minority representative groups which only really serve a positive purpose when fighting inequality

[Melbourne Lefty]

A lot claim to be 'just proud of who they are, but not racist', but assertions of racial pride are based on the same assumptions of racial difference that racists & supremacists use, & still perpetuate mistrust between groups. This point also applies to minority representative groups which only really serve a positive purpose when fighting inequality


I would argue that even when they are fighting inequality the aim of revolutionary organisations should be to promote class solidarity, not racial solidarity.