Tuesday, 4 November 2014

Response to the "My response to a 'Kipper" article done by Matthew Wicks ‏AKA @MRWicks94

This article is a response to an article written by Matthew Wicks in reply to discussion I was having with him on Twitter.The original article can be found here: http://orangecrushmatt.blogspot.co.uk/2014/11/my-response-to-kipper.html?spref=tw

"Opposition to the EU is always usually along the lines of either democratic or national struggle; these differ in terms of positive and negative. The EU top brass is becoming increasingly complicated and is showing signs of wanting to completely override national sovereignty. That is fine to campaign against; but when Eurosceptic parties across Europe rally against immigration more than anti-democratic elements that permit mass movement across the continent then priorities are wrong."
In a democratic Nation we would have been given a choice as to whether we should sign the Lisbon Treaty and open the doors up to mass uncontrolled immigration from the EU.
When Gordon Brown signed the Lisbon Treaty we didn't have a Referendum. We didn't even have a National debate on the subject. Labour and Brown just went ahead and did it anyway.
So when you start off by saying that it is anti-democratic, I think you should take your train of thought back to when we signed the Treaty in the first place.

Here's the point though. The people haven't been heard on Open Door Immigration and we are at least 5 years away from a formal departure from the Union. The longer we leave it before departing the worse the situation is going to get.
We have David Cameron "bigging up" Turkey as a possible addition to the EU (population 77 million) not to mention the chance that Turkey will give people from other Nations Turkish ID and passports (Iraq, Iran, Syria etc...) in the same fashion that Bulgaria and Romania have been giving people from Moldova and other Nationalities not in the EU Passports and ID cards.

Let's not forget Turkey is a nation that currently borders and isn't a million miles away from countries that ISIS call home.
None of the parties predicted how many migrants would come, indeed most of the parties would admit nobody really knows the exact number that have come and where they are. Both legally and illegally.

"The article you sent me from the Huffington Post seemed to more point out groups worse than Ukip rather than highlight the far-right elements that they have flirted with recently (even if I can hand it to them for shunning Le Pen's Vichy rabble)."
Worse than UKIP?
May I suggest when you write an article you don't presume UKIP are "bad" or "worse" or on par with Far Right groups. UKIP are defined as a Right Wing party and have pretty moderate views on most things when people aren't flinging their arms in the air and claiming offence.

The article in question that I sent you was written about the most frightening Far Right parties in the EU.
The discussion in question wasn't so much about UKIP, as you well know it was about the Polish Party Congress of the New Right.
So this segment of your article is disingenuous to say the least.

You accused UKIP of making a deal with a "Nazi type racist party", I pointed out we had done a deal with 1 individual to bring the number of Nationalities up to the appropriate number.
In a perfect World we wouldn't have had to.
But in a perfect World we wouldn't have the President of the European Parliament breaking his neutrality rules and blackmailing someone into leaving UKIP's EFDD group. Something I talked about here if you are interested:

If you took a look at the non-inscrits pool you would know our choice was impossible.
If you had read the article you would have realised the point I was trying to make.
Namely nobody defined the Congress of the New Right as a Far Right party until after UKIP took a MEP from the group.
Whilst the person in question made a pretty poor joke about slapping women, something I would never support, he is happily married and his wife apparently laughed off the accusation that was levelled at him by the Polish media.
The guy in question has never made a racist or homophobic comment as far as I am aware whilst a member of the Congress of the New Right.

Now whilst his Party leader has made repugnant comments that I wholeheartedly deplore. It is worth reminding people that both Nigel Farage and Paul Nuttall have said that he and other members of his Party are not welcome. There is no "deal" with the Congress of the New Right.
We (UKIP) approached the MEP in question, and he spoke to his Party and it's leader and joined the EFDD.

There is no "deal" and there never has been one.
"Would I ever lend my support to Ukip? No. I am a left-winger with mixed views on the EU."
For the record I respect where you stand from.
I used to be center-left Lib Dem. They let me down badly and I couldn't continue to support a party of lies as Nick Clegg has turned the Lib Dems into.

"I feel I do not completely wish to leave but I do know that this country, if in the right hands, could make it as a completely autonomous nation not unlike Norway or Switzerland."
As a left winger? Who do you suggest?
Labour don't want to leave the EU.
Greens don't want to leave the EU.

You admit there needs to be change if we are going to stay in the EU. Yet change is not on offer.
Do you afford your vote to the Lib Dems?
No. They don't want to leave the EU.

Do you afford your vote to the Tories?
Whilst I am sure you are fighting back the bile in the back of your throat at the prospect. It is again worth mentioning that it's questionable whether the Tories will keep their promises with David Cameron going on record as saying he is pro-EU.
Even with the current mess, it worries me that he will claim compromise with the EU and do a "Harold Wilson", namely say he's got the EU to make a huge concession and that we no-longer need a referendum, or a vote to leave because the deal is "so much better", when in reality it won't be.

Along with the Tories plans for new souped up watching powers on the public, we seem to be taking the same route as Sweden did, which lead to discussing things like immigration being made against the law.
Whilst you might like that? I like my freedom of speech.
I also deplore suggestions made by the Tories that they will begin heavily taxing disabled persons allowances.
For me that is unforgivable.

"Are Ukip the right hands to leave it in? No."
Again you have made the mistake of making a statement of fact.
In your opinion they are not right hands.

Who are the right hands may I ask you?
Under the Tories and Labour our national debt has increased to nearly £1.4 trillion. That will go up a further £2 billion to £1.6 trillion if we pay the EU what they have demanded.

"Ukip is a jumble of right-wing ideas and a minority of its supporters hold very dangerous ideas"
I suggest you read their policies for people.
Hardly any of them are of a right wing nature. With ideas like Direct Democracy, Right to Recall, local/regional/national referendums for key decision making, local trusts controlling healthcare and many other things. Even the Right Wing tagline is becoming hard to sell.

"some racist" - Name me a party that hasn't had someone guilty of racism?
"some homophobic" - Name me a party that hasn't had someone guilty of homophobia?
"and some plain right bigoted" - Name me a party that hasn't had someone guilty of bigotry? Hell some might say this whole article and people's attitudes to concerned people who support UKIP is bigoted.

The simple fact is people who have made comments that are unacceptable have been removed.
There are obviously citable examples of people who have been swiftly removed by UKIP for making unacceptable comments. That much I am pleased by.
We also try to stop former Far Right members joining the party and are as such the only political party in the country that do so.

"These ideas are usually built on a level of misunderstanding rather than outright hate but would still prove difficult if they made up the mandate given to our country's politics."
What ideas?
Policies of UKIP or comments made by members/supporters.

If you are referring to UKIP policies.
The only one that was released in "Policies For People" (UKIP's sample of its manifesto, that has courted debate was the one about refusing entry to the UK of people on a permanent status who have HIV.
The Jury is out on that one still with many supporting it and many against it.

I don't think you can label any of the policies as being "unacceptable to this country or its politics".

"And how exactly is Ukip representing our tolerant nation on the world stage when it saves itself through allying with a party whose top brass member debates the intelligence of women and the legitimacy of Holocaust evidence?"
I think I answered this above but I shall repeat.
Robert Iwaszkiewicz joined the Group only. Not his party and certainly not his leader who made those disgraceful comments.

"I'd rather my homeland not be represented by people grouping together with that lot!"
Well as referenced in the above Huffington Post article you have 2 parties who when members of the EFD were deemed as Far Right, and then when they joined the European Conservatives and Reformists they mysteriously went back to being Right Wing and not worth mentioning.

Feel free to look up True Fins:
With its MP James Hirvisaari who was fined in 2011 for comments made on his blog about Muslims, another party members turned down an invite to the Independence Day ball because he didn't want to see gay people, and the party is linked to racism and homophobia.
Meanwhile the The Danish People's party founder Pia Kjærsgaard thinks that Denmark is not a country where immigration is welcome at all. "If they want to turn Stockholm, Gothenburg or Malmö into a Scandinavian Beirut, with clan wars, honour killings and gang rapes, let them do it. We can always put a barrier on the Øresund Bridge."
This is what UKIP rejected at the end of the last European Parliament and what the Tories have teemed up with.
That doesn't get mentioned though does it?

"Even if I did want to leave the EU I wouldn't vote for Farage (or soon to be Carswell) to be our PM."
UKIP had an election for leadership a couple of months ago. Farage has been re-elected unopposed for a second full length term.
Granted I can see this article is rapidly devolving to rhetoric.

"They are a continuance of Tory politics; low levels of economic interference with heightened levels of conservative social attitudes."
Sorry. That is utter nonsense.
Look at the policies I spoke of above. Look at Policies For People. Only someone completely ignorant would think that?

"For a left-winger to support them just to spite the three main parties would be a betrayal of his/her beliefs."
Why would he/she need to choose to support UKIP only because he didn't think the other 3 weren't viable.
I personally came to believe long ago that had the Lib Dems kept their promises I would have probably found myself going over to UKIP anyway.
If you remove the rhetoric and ignore the media smears you find a pretty decent party which has come a long way!

"I would never support a party that shunned the non-EU ECHR"
The European Court of Human Rights has done more harm than good?
Besides why can't we keep track of our own human rights with our own human right laws.

Most people would admit that the ECHR is massively flawed. Hell it issued the European Arrest warrant on that poor cancer stricken boy recently.
"increased privatisation of the NHS (Paul Nuttall's words, not mine)"
UKIP policy is to keep the NHS free at the point of treatment and to NOT privatise the NHS:
In the article on his website Nuttall was talking about the positives that the possible pressure of impending privatisation would bring in streamlining the NHS.
The truth is it is not financially viable at present and the middle management layer needs reducing. It needs to become more cost efficient.

As for his video interview he was talking about lessening the burden on the NHS that should be carried by external institutions and units such as nursing homes.
See if you don't explain the detail you get what is so often portrayed falsely by the Labour Party.
A dishonest messing up of the truth!

"and is so committed to empty promises of democracy that it hasn't mentioned several anti-democratic institutions that we'd remain with if we were to leave the EU!"
How can you even say that?
That is such an empty line with absolutely no evidence of substance to back it up?!

All the parties have lied and been proved liars.
Only UKIP is a mainstream party that is yet to be given a chance.

"P.S. In no way have I labelled Ukip 'far right'. In no way would I label the Conservatives or Ukip far-right in terms of their policies or manifesto pledges (whatever Ukip's may hold come next May)."

You called UKIP a "Nationalist Party"
I suggest you look up the term "Nationalism. Because it doesn't line up with a party that has on several occasions said that this country is flawed and could learn from other parties.
As for "far right", I think we can all see the implication of what you think we all the rhetoric about "homophobia", "racism" and "bigotry"...

"But we must acknowledge that Ukip are certainly to the right of the Conservative Party."
Maybe on paper. But I think that's up for debate.
Many Tory MP's opposed the right to recall bill brought forward with the help of Douglas Carswell.

They negated on a "Cast Iron guarantee" to give people a referendum.
They plan to tax disabled allowances.
They have been prioritising EU migrants over rest of the world migrants, and have even been chucking decent people out of the country to counter those net numbers.

An utterly despicable act that UKIP would not tolerate. I know that for a fact as spoke to a senior UKIP rep about it a while back!
These are all traits of a pretty right wing party, meanwhile UKIP support all I listed above not to mention a points based global immigration system supported by both left and right wing parties around the world.

"In order to gain more electoral success (if you can name the position of being in coalition that) the Tories have moved closer to the middle-ground and championed the EU and liberal acts such as gay marriage; this has been at the expense of alienating a core vote whom now feel more at home with Farage's tweed shirts."
Again this statement is a bit confusing.
Do you mean middle-ground in the sense that they have moved leftward and more centralised or are you implying they have moved right to counter UKIP?
In my opinion they have moved Right of UKIP in the last 6 months.
Their attitude toward Rest of the World migrants both domestically and coming to the UK is astounding.
As is their attitude toward the disabled and the public having a choice on their MP's and the big decisions happening that face our country and the people who live in it.