UKIP website TAKES A KIP, but for why? UKIP's website is currently out of action, but the reason for its little sit-down remains a mystery given that the domain name is not set to expire until early next year. It's been suggested elsewhere that Nigel Farage and his loony pals have failed to pay their domain renewal fees for the service hosted by 123-reg. However, …
The web site of our local rag has become infested with the bastards. Almost any story has hoards of 'kipper commentards stating how all this (the subject of the article) will be fixed when (not if) they win the election.
According to them, under a 'kipper government crime, sickness, the rising cost of living, poor housing, decaying town centres, unemployment, high taxes, corruption, poor roads, poor public transport, etc, etc, will all be things of the past and we will all be living in Farageatopia. Anyone who questions their proclamations is shouted down with a torrent of abuse.
The really scary thing is how many people are being taken in by this rhetoric. They are thoroughly pissed off with "austerity" and will get more of the same from the Conservatives and "austerity lite" from Labour. Along come the 'kippers promising utopia (albeit impractical and undeliverable) and they are lapping it up.
Of course, what would actually happen if the 'kippers got any real power is the UK would wind up in deep shit along the lines of Zimbabwe (and for similar reasons).
So your local rag is full of these people you say yet you are doing exactly the same thing here. Coming on shouting down the other man with not a shred of proof. Your just calling people names in the school playground and making up Chinese whispers..
Would you care to name these people I have "shouted down". I have derided the 'kippers because I genuinely think they are dangerous and those who follow them are fools, but as nobody here has said they support them your accusation holds no credibility. You will also note that I am extremely critical of the two major parties for creating the environment in which a party like UKIP can thrive.
Just beware. In the General Election you might get the Government you vote for. Just before you put that X in the box, imagine Farage standing outside of No 10. I don't know about you, but the thought scares the shit out of me.
Would you care to name these people I have "shouted down". I have derided the 'kippers because I genuinely think they are dangerous and those who follow them are fools, but as nobody here has said they support them your accusation holds no credibility.
You have just done it again, they support a party you do not agree with, you call them dangerous and fools (the same can be said about most parties to be honest and it seems you agree) but did not provide any backup to your statement as for why.
You will also note that I am extremely critical of the two major parties for creating the environment in which a party like UKIP can thrive.
I'm glad to hear it. I don't think any of them (all parties) have a solid plan at the moment.
Just beware. In the General Election you might get the Government you vote for. Just before you put that X in the box, imagine Farage standing outside of No 10. I don't know about you, but the thought scares the shit out of me.
This is the same in every General Election, you might get the Government you vote for. Do you really feel any of them standing outside No.10 is much better? We need a better way for the people to affect the Governement. It's not like we need an MP to ride up to London on a horse to represent us any more with the instant communication we have. The problem is getting a reliable efficient and trustworthy way of doing it.
Also I never said which way my vote would go (it's been different a lot of years based on the policies, not the people), I just think the name calling is a little silly, but then I guess that's politics.
I do find it amazing how many people fear democracy. Apart from the real hard line supporters of the parties I dont know many outsiders that vote FOR a party instead of AGAINST the others. The argument currently seems to be- vote tory to keep the economic incompetence out (lab/lib) or vote labour to get the austerity pushers out (tory/lib). The libs used to have voters for their promised utopia of infinite money and dreams but that quickly shattered and with fairly good reason.
So we have 3 options to stay in the EU as few seem to believe Cameron will offer a real choice and his negotiations were gone before they started. Considering the only 2 viable main parties (lab/con) are either considered red tories or blue labour because they all chase the middle ground (small sliver of voters who by definition sit on the status quo) we now have a potentially viable party offering something different, and that is choice, and I notice choice now seems to be branded dangerous. The politics of fear, the fear of change.
I read an interesting piece ages ago (cant remember where) discussing the possibility that WW2 brought europe a fear of the right while the cold war brought a fear of the left to the US. This seems realistic when the idea of immigration controls of developed and fully functioning countries is considered racist in this country. Unlimited EU immigration is good but no brown people please? And somehow that policy is branded NOT racist.
Personally I dont tie myself to any party but vote for whoever seems to offer the best choice for the country. So I hang my head in shame when I read that people vote labour to stop tories or vote tories to stop labour but then complain they are the same. How can a country get like this? People vote for it. Because choice is dangerous. We want democracy but only if everyone is the same. I am amused that we want freedom and choice but only if it is the sanitised versions with no rough edges. Some people argue UKIP is part of the establishment because they are in politics (duh) and some argue they are not a real party. There seem so many conflicts over what UKIP is and so many different versions with varying exaggeration for and against I wonder who is trying to convince who of what.
But at the very least there has been some good. UKIP voters at least seem to vote FOR UKIP not necessarily AGAINST every other party. And if the other parties represented various groups of various views (not mudslinging) then maybe this dangerous party offering choice wouldnt exist. But then the dangerous situation of choice would... and that is what people seem to seriously fear- democracy.
This is summed up pretty well by some commenter above saying you might get the gov you voted for. Oh god no! That would be different. Just imagine if labour, tory or even lib had been the gov you voted for. Doing what they offered. Doing what they promise. Actually representing the voter.
It's strange isn't it, how these commenters always turn up and are always so loud? A little like the commenters that start buzzing around the moment a discussion touches on climate change or creationism.
It's almost as though there are people deliberately organising for this purpose. It smells funny to me, like people are being paid to shout down online opposition. I'm sure there is some interesting research to be done on where these comments are coming from and who is paying for them. I would guess there are a few agencies making a lot of money through this process, probably under a very innocuous "online marketing" name.
"There are so many local newspapers. And then there's the BBC's Have Your Say to shit mindless racism all over too."
The problems nowadays is that the word racism is so overused and abused it has lost much of it's original meaning and context. That's not to say that racism does not exist, but rather that it really holds little real meaning, or indeed relevance, in many contexts in which it is now used.
It's reached the point whereby it's impossible to have an adult conversation without the champagne socialists screaming 'racist' at the beginning and end of every sentence offered in retort to anything that offends their often fragile sensibilities.
Let's all act like grown-ups, accept that others are free to adopt a position that is contrary that of others.
Arguments and debates are never won by scweaming 'wacist' at every turn.
I agree with you!
However, a quick glance through the sadly now apparently no longer updated spEak You're bRanes clearly demonstrates that much of what you find on Have Your Say (and the Mail's comments, and many other places) is quite clearly racism, not to mention illiterate and retarded.
I think UKIP are a shame. I like the anti-EU thing because the EU is a wholly corrupt, undemocratic, porkbarrel-based money pit with very few redeeming features (note - the ECHR is entirely separate from the EU and almost entirely worthwhile so fuck you Farage) but they couldn't just stick to that.
Oh no, it had to be the eternal "immygrunts" ruining everything for hard-working whiterespectable British people. Because they are entirely to blame for austerity. Not the banks that shat the bed in 2007, not successive ludicrous amounts of unnecessary government borrowing, regulating and policing, not the tax system that seems to be entirely designed to fuck poor people in the ear while anyone who can afford to hire PwC (a deductible expense...) pays none at all, not the illegal, disastrous foreign wars, not restricting housing supply in order to create bubbles and give MPs a cheaper and more profitable ride on their Buy-To-Let schemes, not practically forcing kids to do expensive and mostly useless degrees in bullshit subjects from the University of Greater London (formerly Chelmsford B&Q)....
No, it wasn't any of the ruling classes with their protected and bailed out gravy trains. It was all "immygrunts". Let's pick on some brown people, that'lll make everything alright. And jobs for British people because after all, arbeit macht frei, nicht wahr?
I've noticed a similar trend here in the States that seems have floated over to you guys.. An election is not about electing the best person, it's about blame with lots of promises and no solutions:
1) find a problem.
2) point the finger and affix the blame.
3) Never offer a thoughtful solution
4) Goto 1 and repeat until elected.
@dogged
European parliament, like UK, is governed by conservatives ... vote for labor or commies and Europe will care for the poor. I am not saying I hope for the commies to take over, but a strong commy party makes sure the EU takes care of the poor.
The EU has always been governed by conservatives, and the UK conservatives are part of the leading fraction that governs, and have been since inception. Blame it on them.
As for corruption, all governments are corrupt, to a certain extent - corruption is how the boys and girls get into office.
'It's reached the point whereby it's impossible to have an adult conversation without the champagne socialists screaming 'racist' at the beginning and end of every sentence offered in retort to anything that offends their often fragile sensibilities.'
@I don't have a handle How many time has this situation honestly happened to you?
"How can we give £1bn [...] to Bongo Bongo land"
Now, you can write what you want, but to even consider using a derogatory word as such denotes deep sincere racism. I would never have thought of using such a term, maybe he could not remember the name of the continent ?
Besides, UKIP MEP Godfrey Bloom has absolutely no clue of international trade or humanitarian aid, for that matter. Now, it is true, we have quite phenomenally improved living standards in third world countries, just look at the decline of starvation and malnutrition over the last 20 years. However, people in the 3rd world are still starving to death; we have "products" on the market called weight watchers and slim fast.
He was then referring to corrupt governments across Africa that take large chunks of the money we allotted to their country ... just how do you think we get our natural resources so cheap, Mr Bloom ?
Now, I condemn this situation, of course, but for every £1 we give these bastards (corrupt officials), we get 5 or 10 back.
Margareth Thatcher was just as blind folded when she said "We want our money back" ... she wanted "le beurre, l'argent du beurre, et le cul de la cremiere" (excuse my French). The E.U. costs a lot of money, agreed, but 80% of our exports go to EU member states, we need the EU. We do not want to go back to borders, tariffs etc ... well, EU has a price. UK is making many times more from the EU as it is than it is contributing to it.
The world is changing, we need a big market to compete with Asian giants (India, China). Can UK ban Chinese imports on its own ? What effect will it have if they threaten to do it ? What impact does it have if a market 10 times bigger threatens to ban imports ? Right.
Imagine the EU football team, the best players of all European Nations ... unbeatable, unbeatable ... a dream team. It is exactly the same economically ... together we are bigger than China or US, GDP wise. Together we can say fuck off to whichever nation we want.
These are things UKIP does NOT understand. Their miracle solutions are mirages, in France we have the same, with Le Pen wanting a return to the <jokeAlert>sesterce</jokeAlert>.
The worst of all is, the UK education system has produced a nation of bigots. I am sorry, you really need to have lived abroad to understand what EU is all about (it is not your fault, it is what you were taught). I have met numerous Brits abroad who admitted they only just discovered what this was all about. If the UK government had any common sense back in the 80's and 90's, London would have been the European Stock Exchange, not Frankfurt. Blame Maggy!
If the French had common sense, we would have had a constitution by now, the 2008/2009 global crisis would have been much smaller a problem. We are now 18 players on a pitch with each and every one of us having a different strategy ... how are we gonna score like this ?????
Besides, Greece is richer than some Lander (Germany) or richer per capita than some Regions (France) - sure there is an equivalent in the UK, now, I do not hear much uproar in France about the poorer regions who live off the back of us ... we NEED TO stand together, we all profit from it.
We need the euro, which is a blessing ... ever noticed why it was so high for so many years ? To counter balance high energy prices, which are paid in $. Now they have fallen, the euro has been allowed to lose value, which will dope our exports. How about the pound ? Well, you know what, all exports from the UK will be more expensive in euroland ... will that help your exports ?
The really scary thing is how many people are being taken in by this rhetoric. They are thoroughly pissed off with "austerity" and will get more of the same from the Conservatives and "austerity lite" from Labour. Along come the 'kippers promising utopia (albeit impractical and undeliverable) and they are lapping it up.
That should not come as a surprise - it's the same thing that kept New Labour in power even after it became clear what massive damage they were causing to the economy. In that context I am always very suspicious if politicians try to screw around with the educational system, because you you need a large volume of idiots for that to continue working. Evidently there is no supply shortage on that front :(.
In politics, "mistakes" like these are usually contrived to bring more visitors to the party's website - the photo of Farage about to bust into tears just adds to the authenticity.
Re. "It's almost as though there are people deliberately organising for this purpose."
I'm sorry that some people don't agree with you. UKIP were the largest party in the UK Euro elections so no doubt they have many activists who will find their way to any open forum discussing their party and will want to promote themselves. Given the number of people spreading disinformation about UKIP on this forum it seems only fair.
Re. "I have derided the 'kippers because I genuinely think they are dangerous and those who follow them are fools"
Thanks for your opinion, but most of the rest of the world is outside the EU and it's not dangerous for them. Moreover Britain's membership of the EU has coincided with our relative decline after reaching our zenith as an independent nation.
As for the Euro, aren't you glad we're not in it given the way things are looking right now? It was so much easier when the smaller nations could manipulate their currencies to stimulate their economy instead of being a drain on the rest of the Euro zone. I think you'd have to be unreasonably optimistic to think that joining the Euro now would be the less dangerous option.
As for blaming "immygrunts" for "ruining everything", once an area is overpopulated like many areas of Britain are, adding more immigrants reduces the standard of living for the majority. If you restrict immigration to just the beneficial ones, the effect still happens, just to a lesser degree. Any overpopulated country would benefit from freezing immigration and encouraging emigration of people who make the least contribution to society. C'est la vie!
Most of the blame for "austerity" lies with Labour for overspending in the boom years leaving the Tories to borrow even more in the lean times. The deficit will have to be paid off eventually, the longer we leave it the more debt interest there is to pay. In order to justify anti-austerity measures they have to produce more economic growth to offset not paying off debt. If you have any great suggestions I'm sure the Chancellor will love to hear them. My starter for ten would be allowing budget surpluses in government departments to be retained for the next year without having next year's budget slashed, eliminating the annual glut of wasteful spending that so often occurs. Wishful thinking....
would be allowing budget surpluses in government departments to be retained for the next year without having next year's budget slashed, eliminating the annual glut of wasteful spending that so often occurs.
It's a nice idea, but it'd take years to take effect. If they brought it in, no department would trust that it wasn't just a temporary thing, and so would still spunk the cash in case failing to do so might lead to budgets being cut a few years down the line instead (as a result of a change in Government, policies whatever).
Thanks for your opinion, but most of the rest of the world is outside the EU and it's not dangerous for them.
I don't know exactly what the OP meant, but my interpretation was that it's dangerous because UKIP seem to have no clue on a wide range of issues. Their strong focus on key areas, within a (relatively) small party comes at the cost of some of other (potentially more important) issues.
Personally, I'd hate to see UKIP get into power. I had hoped their surge in popularity might make Cameron and chums rethink a few things, but aside from small hat tips, that doesn't seem to have happened.
@ YARR
Have I ended up in a time machine ? This reads like 1932, Berlin.
>Thanks for your opinion, but most of the rest of the world is outside the EU and it's not dangerous for them.
Do 80% of their exports go to the EU ? thought not. Are the developing super powers (India, China) same size as UK (population-wise) ? UK is not even in the same league ... ouch.
What are Africa and South America trying to accomplish ?
Their implementation of EU.
Why ?
To be able to survive in the new world order which will see China and India bullying.
>Moreover Britain's membership of the EU has coincided with our relative decline after reaching our zenith as an independent nation.
Ever heard of the world wars or 1970's oil crises ? Why would UK want to join EEC, why did they try so hard, de Gaulle was vetoing UK's entry ? The steel and coal alliance was hurting UK jobs.
>As for blaming "immygrunts" for "ruining everything", once an area is overpopulated like many areas of Britain are, adding more immigrants reduces the standard of living for the majority....
The UK is not overpopulated, please see the the list of most densely populated nations. The Netherlands is one of them, they are well off ... ouch, I know.
Almost every idea UKIP convey is FUD. Almost every idea UKIP convey is FUD. Almost every idea UKIP convey is FUD....
I say "almost" though I must admit, I have yet to hear anything sensible from them ...
As for the euro, read my other comment ... ;-) Who will laugh comes 2016 ? Studied economics at Uni ? I have.
Hans, your comments were good but you had to spoil it right at the end by insisting you know better and have it all right just because you studied Economics. Whoop de do. I assume you saw all the problems and solutions of the world right away then?
There are many economists that know bugger all, they guess or their "forecasts" are based on flawed models. You may have a better idea where things might go having studied the subject but it does not automatically make everyone else wrong and you right just because you have.
@ Ragarath
You may need to point out the good comments made by Hans because I have read through them and I dont see it.
He mentions economics and that we do a lot of trade with the EU but I dont see the bit about the EU floundering for years and reaching deflation. Surely bad economics is to tie ourselves to a sinking ship just because its big.
He argues the UK is not overpopulated. That was it for the argument as far as I can tell. I assume he based that on available land instead of housing/public services/cultural issues.
He argues the EU is run by conservatives (not an accusation often levelled by opponents) but then he does state his desire for a 'commy' party, which is something I have heard as a concern.
He has referred to Berlin 1932 a couple of times and the wars which I feel gives clues as to why he feels the EU needs to be clung to without question or reason. However opponents of the EU used to be called eurosceptics but that word fell out of favour when the EU demonstrated itself to fail on every count the 'eurosceptics' pointed out. So much so that there is friction and rise of extreme parties due to this level of incompetence. Nationalist parties of both left and right are rising in popularity throughout Europe even with protests against Germany particularly branding them nazi's again. And Germany has recently taken a harsher view of Greece particularly for this.
I notice he even says we need the euro. It is a blessing! This is interesting economics argument as it has been a plague and doom for many people in a number of countries.
In short I dont see the good comments. With or without UKIP there is plenty argument against the EU and hans has not made one valid point in their favour that I can see
I mean good as in alternative not that they are right. Just because they are comments you do not agree with does not mean that they are automatically bad and that they should not be considered in a debate.
Different people think differently, heck it would be a much simpler world if we all did and agreed on the same thing. We would not even be having this conversation if we all agreed on if Europe was a good or bad thing for Britain.
"I mean good as in alternative not that they are right. Just because they are comments you do not agree with does not mean that they are automatically bad and that they should not be considered in a debate."
I ment it in that context. I am no fan of the EU so I am happy with an exit etc but I can appreciate another point of view if it makes sense or is a contributor to a debate. Which is why I said you would have to point out the good comments for the reasons I put in my comment. There is an argument for the EU even though I dont think it outweighs the argument to leave. He made no good argument to stay in the EU. I ripped his comments for being rubbish in every context.
So if you think he made some good ones and fancy doing so feel free to post up whatever they were because I cant find em
"Give them some credit - they've got their racists and homophobes in place."
Cut & paste from the guardian was it? FYI Ukip is currently the only party to ban former BNP members from joining. Perhaps you halfwit metro liberals should check your facts first.
'FYI Ukip is currently the only party to ban former BNP members from joining. Perhaps you halfwit metro liberals should check your facts first.'
Perhaps you right-wing loonies should, too. The Labour Party banned former BNP members from joining years ago.
"Perhaps you right-wing loonies should, too. The Labour Party banned former BNP members from joining years ago."
Sure about that? I'd double check if I were you.
And then there's this sort of thing:
http://www.miltonkeynes.co.uk/news/local/former-nazi-wins-a-labour-council-seat-1-3826439
FYI Ukip is currently the only party to ban former BNP members from joining.
This is to present a friendly front. They are BNP-lite. They know how unpopular the BNP are, so want to copy them without the bits which upset people, but as seen in "slip-ups" from members, they hold the same views. They just keep them hidden.
I (unfortunately) know of several former BNP members who now vote UKIP, and they want to join the party. UKIP know that their views appeal to the BNP crowd, because they are practically the same, but need to put distance between them to avoid alienating voters.
"This is to present a friendly front. They are BNP-lite."
And I suppose you think 60% of voters in clacton are racists/homophones/whatever?
Or just maybe there is a problem with massive immigration onto a small island with already overstretched resources and thats reflected in the rise of a party that a large proportion of the population feels reflects their views.
But then anyone with a brain knows that the london metro liberal view is no longer an intellectual viewpoint but more of a religion nowadays that must not be questioned, and anyone who thinks differently must be lambasted, vilified and generally treated as a pariah for going against the holy texts of The Guardian and Independent.
And I suppose you think 60% of voters in clacton are racists/homophones/whatever?
I would infer from the view you express that you're a UKIP supporter or at the very least sympathetic to them. You therefore probably agree with Nigel Farrage's recently expressed view that people working in the NHS should be tested to ensure that they speak English well.
With that in mind I suggest you go away and look up what "homophone" actually means!
And I suppose you think 60% of voters in Clacton are racists/homopho[b]es/whatever?
The truth is that many people do think this. The solution is to have open and free debate, but words like "racist", "loony" and "homophobe" have been used to quickly shut down discussion whenever it arises, and every time that happens, it moves us all backwards.
This post has been deleted by its author
@Jim 59
The problem is, arse-holes come in all colors, shapes and sizes.
When you refer to someone or a group of people by their ethnic background, sexuality, nationality, belief and give that person/group certain properties and you mean or infer that all members of the group are the same, good or bad, you are xenophobic.
White, yellow, black, red, Christian, Jew, Muslim, Buddhist, heterosexual, homosexual, bisexual, Aryan, Caucasian, African, Asian ... whatever ... there is no need to be a racist ... 99% of times when somebody gets called out for being a racist, there is a reason.
I would take it even further ... as a human, why would somebody who was born in a place have more rights than somebody who was born elsewhere ? Why would somebody have more rights than another, just because he had the right parents ? (I am not talking wealth, here, I mean civil rights) Tell me !
Does the birth place, parents matter ? In the UK, it matters a lot ... look, you have lords and a monarch ... most "developed" iow "educated" countries in the world did away with that bullshit centuries ago. The people seizing all belongings of the monarch ...
Ever heard of communicating vessels ? That is planet earth. The best way to describe it would be to look at earth from outer space, no borders, no nations, no bullshit.
Gods and religions
Civilization wars
Arms, flags, countries and nations
Always make us cannon fodder
"You therefore probably agree with Nigel Farrage's recently expressed view that people working in the NHS should be tested to ensure that they speak English well."
Given that medical misunderstandings can mean the difference between life and death I'd have thought anyone with an ounce of common sense would agree with it.
"With that in mind I suggest you go away and look up what "homophone" actually means!"
Picking up on typos really is the last resort of the someone who has nothing to add to a debate.
>I would infer from the view you express that you're a UKIP supporter or at the very least sympathetic to them. You therefore probably agree with Nigel Farrage's recently expressed view that people working in the NHS should be tested to ensure that they speak English well.<
Well I'm certainly not a UKIP supporter; for the record, my political views are rather to the left of any of the mainstream parties. However the ability to speak English to a reasonable level of proficiency seems like a basic requirement in any role where miscommunication can have major consequences. What's racist about that?
Yes, damn those homophones and their same-sounding words with differing meanings, taking over our dictionaries and our thesauruses, they're not as bad as the Synonyms but at least *they* make a decent curry !
(Coat, before Lenny Henry accuses me of ripping off "Go home Cone")
jira.domain.com, now offers something.jira.domain.com The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
