Tuesday, 18 February 2014

EDL and UAF two sides of the same coin?

OK, I realise that just the post title will offend some reasonable, intelligent readers of this blog who support the EDL. It's unlikely that any UAF supporters are reading, but I'm sure the UAF has as many reasonable and intelligent supporters as does the EDL, and they will also be offended.

A piece by Damian Thompson in the Telegraph, with which I take issue but will leave Fisking for another day, has attracted over 3,900 comments - only some of which are relevant to Thompson's opinions.

I have often despaired of EDL's targeting of immigrants, and can't repeat too often that immigration isn't the fault of the immigrants. Terrifying poor foreigners whilst leaving the politicians responsible alone is truly reprehensible. And UAF have always struck me as being more like the Brownshirts than they would ever recognise; street thugs using fists and boots to enforce an immoral political orthodoxy. So, simple soul that I am, I see them as two sides of the same coin. 

Farage of course, in repudiating EDL, is demonstrating a moderate and democratic commitment that puts Cameron and Miliband to shame; if they repudiate UAF in the same terms they will demonstrate that they intend to fight the next election on the basis of argument and policy, not on the basis of the terror of their street-thugs.


Anonymous said...

It's more of the usual pro-CONservative party, Telegraph ranting Raedwald. I think I might have pointed out that such blind acceptance of the status quo, is precisely what caused the demise of Kodak, one of the most well known names across the world for more than a century.

The pont about "libLabCON", as I am sure you aware, is that the conflation encapsulates the recent (last 50-60 years) habit of making a set of lazy assumptions and then tinkering at the margins... They all do it, and it just costs us all a ton of money and angst.

The parties freely admit that they vie for something called "the middle ground"...

And yet in recent by-elections (admittedly not a defining test) the UKIP campaign has been more successful at attracting this constituency... those that either don't vote, or "swing", than the others, who seem to rely on an increasing number of "postal votes".

One such assumption is that by entering into a zollverein with Germany along with other similarly crippled European nation states, we are somehow defending our interests in an increasingly open (though not necessarily free) world market.

Another assumption is that the free movement of peoples both in and out of the country is a profitable exchange. That we always benefit from the immigrants that we receive and that we don't miss the the emigrants that we lose, (cuz they are all retirees that are going off to lead the ex-pat life, drinking and lounging in the sun), does not bare out the facts....

As David Craig (Snouts in the Trough) regularly points out, a large proportion of immigrants represent a drain on the welfare state... And an even larger proportion of our emigrants are some of the best minds and hands, who have recognised that there is (as it stands at the moment) bugger all future for their talents here.

In a genuine "free global market", the need for UN level trade agreements, massive tariffs, punitive behaviour by overprotective governments protecting their corporatist chums (as opposed to fast moving and responsive companies), is far less important, but our politicians are still attempting to build and bolster the daddy of all juggernauts, the European Union.

I can think of a couple of trading initiatives that prove that these things are counter productive.

Firstly, the coffee market... the second or third most traded commodity... By sending knowledgable people out to coffee farms and co-ops, the quality of coffee is continually rising...

Whereas the assumption is that we should accept the low standards of Brazilian, Vietnamese and Indonesian output, and then add all sorts of gimmicks to make it attractive to the end user.

Secondly, the recreational drug market, again one of the biggest traded groups of products...

Apparently the choice is to accept the moral outrage of our political leaders that would love to muscle in, but believe they can't because they would lose votes if they attempted to gain tribute from these activities.

Or to accept that this sort of activity is a constant throughout history, particularly amongst men, and to trade freely.

I am not suggesting that UKIP is interested in either of the above activities, merely that there is no benefit from preventing business people from doing the best deals they can, by way of protecting the interests of slow moving lowest common denominator corporations.

Anyway, I have ranted for far too long now... But I have attempted to explain why the UKIP is different, and why the others are doomed to be conflated as the "LibLabCON".

Quiet_Man said...

The EDL do not target immigrants, they are focused on extreme islamists many who were born here and radicalised here.
Farage is just plain wrong on this one.

Elby the Beserk said...

The UAF resort to violence at the drop of a hat. And that's the truth. How they have the nerve to call themselves Unite Against Fascism, God only knows. However, because the pit themselves against the EDL, this is never noted in the MSM. The Left have a predilection for violence when they don't get their own way, going back decades.

Martin said...

The "establishment" reaction to the EDL - a white working class grassroots movement has been interesting to observe. Every legal - and possibly illegal trick has been used to harass the leadership and those participating in lawful demonstrations. The police seem to have been willing and enthusiastic participants in this repression. The essential argument of those who rule over us seems to be - you can't hold a legal demonstration because others will threaten a violent counter demonstration against you - hmmmmm ! When the police refuse to uphold the law I think we know where we stand

Martin said...

BTW - I am not an EDL supporter - I am just very concerned that our liberties have been erroded and no one in the media seems to give a hoot

Martin said...

Oh and Mr Raedwald - I don't remember an occasion when the EDL organised an attack on a UAF meeting - perhaps I missed the report!