It seems the council election campaign has well and truly begun. All over the media is the claim of millionairess Labour minister Margaret Hodge that the non-millionaire natives of Barking are going BNP at a scary rate (wealthy Barking people are still strong anti-fascists - but they've moved to Dorset).
"Mrs Hodge said the pace of ethnic change in her area had frightened people. "What has happened in Barking and Dagenham is the most rapid transformation of a community we have ever witnessed.
"Nowhere else has changed so fast. When I arrived in 1994, it was a predominantly white, working class area. Now, go through the middle of Barking and you could be in Camden or Brixton."
Meanwhile the Telegraph is bigging up the organisation "Labour Friends of Searchlight". We're seeing here an increasing tendency to follow the US road when it comes to election expenses. LFoS is not a Labour Party organisation, will not advise people to vote Labour, just againt the BNP, and so does not break rules on election expenditure - allowing Labour to spend beyond the statutory limits in individual seats. Absent millionaires may yet play a role in Barking.
"More than 120,000 St George's Day leaflets with a picture of the England football team containing four black players have been sent out by the group, mainly to strong BNP areas in east London, the West Midlands, West Yorkshire and Lancashire.
At the last World Cup the BNP refused to support the English team because it had black players - and backed Denmark instead.
The leaflet says that as well as excluding black players such as Rio Ferdinand, the BNP would eject David Beckham, who is a quarter Jewish, and Wayne Rooney, who is of Irish descent."
While carrying no Union Flag-with-a-point-on-the-end for the BNP, this set the bs-detector stirring. What's the truth ?
It turns out
a) the BNP ran a piece when Denmark beat the French, saying that it demonstrated that multiculturalism didn't work. Classic Nazi nonsense a la "the fighting quality of a race depends upon its purity" (from Churchill's brilliant one-page precis of Mein Kampf - the closest I've got to it). The item ended with "Good luck in the next round, Denmark !" (This piece was part of a continuing debate - it seems hard to believe looking at France eight years later, but their 1998 World Cup victory was greeted by the entire liberal left as proof that France was a truly united multicultural nation.)
When they realised that the (multi-ethnic) England side was up againat Denmark in the next round, the piece was hurriedly removed (and Heskey scored as England won 3-0).
FWIW, I think black players will continue to be over-represented in top-level football - because they're better players. Skill levels may be the same among all races, but the physical differences which make West Africans and their descendants the best sprinters on the planet aren't going to go away.
b) The 'no Beckham or Rooney' stuff came, not from the BNP, but from every anti-racists favourite hate-sheet - the super soaraway Sun, which published a photo of an England squad 'under a BNP government'. This, and the pulled piece (which a/c/t Searchlight was written by Martin Wingfield, an unreconstructed ex-NF type), are the inspiration for this.
Information from (where else ?) Searchlight.
I must say that this second postcard, knocked up by Photoshop (what could Stalin have done with that), is not only dishonest, but counterproductive. It appears to show white rioters - a phenomenon so rare as to practically constitute an endangered species. While there are small groups of violent bad hats in that underworld where football violence meets politics, I don't think the average native will consider that a white mob torching their streets is terribly likely.
And if the implication is that BNP activities will cause some other group to torch their streets - well, at some point, 'don't do X or they'll riot' is going to lose its appeal as a political slogan.
The Telegraph seems to be well on board. This editorial points out that BNP policies include 'forced repatriation'.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'd thought that the main plank of the BNPs difference with the old NF was precisely that they'd accepted the practical, and maybe moral, impossibility of repatriating seven or eight million people, most of whom were born here.
Sigh. Time for the statutory disclaimer. I could never join an organisation like the BNP, being an old-fashioned type who believes in content of character, colour of eyes and all that.
But as long as the demographics all point one way, as long as continuing immigration (and continuing emigration of natives) continue to change the cultural landscape, above all as long as our white, wealthy liberal elite refuse to even think about, let alone face honestly, some of the less palatable issues raised by a multicultural society (being themselves insulated from these issues by their wealth) - then we will see politics in the UK, and particularly in England - split upon racial lines. Thet is what has happened everywhere else in the world where a nation has major ethnic divisions - and while I love the English, I can't see them being immune - they're not THAT special.
There is no sign of the pace of immigration, or native emigration, slowing. In which case the only question is which party will represent the natives. Mr Howard's my-family-were-poor-immigrants Tories might have done. Mr Cameron's born-with-a-silver-coke-spoon-up-nose Tories ?
So - a big heave this election might keep the BNP vote down. But the effort needed will be higher each time as the tide rises.