-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
So what's wrong with UKIP?
- Thread starter Ultimatum
- Start date
Drolefille
PolyPanGeekGirl
I don't know what your acronyms stand for, but I know that being able to say "only ___ would be opposed" is usually self-delusion as well as demonstrably false.
Erebus
Well-Known Member
Mostly the bigotry to be honest.
Oh and the fact that even saying "Nigel Farage" aloud makes you want to smack a butler with the corpse of a fox.
Yerda
Veteran Member
I worry that the party is controlled and populated by bigots.
Ultimatum
Classical Liberal
UKIP stands for United Kingdom Independence Party. Please leave this thread as you have no clue what you're talking about regarding this subject..
Bigotry? What bigotry? You're going to have to help me out as single-word descriptions with no backing make it impossibly hard to reply honestly to something.
Oh the irony!
Yerda
Veteran Member
I've missed something. Why is it ironic?
Ultimatum
Classical Liberal
Well I would say you are being a bigot. You're not looking outside of the box and confining yourself to traditionalism.
But, conversely, you could say the same thing about me.
Yerda
Veteran Member
What I'm looking at are the problems in UK society, and I don't see the answer in the form of prioritising our exit from the EU.
Ultimatum
Classical Liberal
Ah, well I would suppose you don't live in a city then?
Because when I walk 200 meters from where I live, I am greeted by a melting pot of ethnic races: a lot of the people in the area claim benefits without working, also.
This is the stark reality of what we, as taxpayers, are dealing with. Life tourism..
Erebus
Well-Known Member
Well for one thing they're against same sex marriage. That's something I could never support, everybody has a right to be miserable.
There's another great example, this time from their supporters. Do you honestly consider this a problem?
Of the UKIP supporter's I've met I'd estimate about 30% were in favour of them through a desire to leave Europe. That's fine IMO. I may not necessarily agree with the sentiment, but it's a decent enough reason to back a party I guess.
The other 70% have proved themselves to be racist, misogynistic, homophobes. I have no interest in supporting a party that caters to these people.
Last edited:
Ultimatum
Classical Liberal
Whilst it is true that UKIP have said in the past that they don't support same-sex marriage, Nigel Farrage is currently reviewing the party's policies on the matters including the issue.
Of course that's not a problem. I never said it was, or else I would be a racist. What you are failing to comprehend is the fact that most of them claim benefit without working. Please make sense of a whole person's post before making assumptions.
This is why I back the party: because we either need a referendum (which they're not giving to us, because they don't want us to say 'Yes' and indirectly affect their influence and salary)
It doesn't cater to these people. At all. Why do you think that UKIP hate BNP's policies? They are two very different parties.
You have obviously yet to find out the facts for yourself.[/QUOTE]
Rick O'Shez
Irishman bouncing off walls
But isn't Nigel Farage one of those? Seriously though, UKIP do seem a bit short on actual policies.
HonestJoe
Well-Known Member
My problem with UKIP is that it's a single issue campaign group trying to wear the clothes of a mainstream political party. They still don't seem to have built up the basis of a proper party, hence the lack of coherent policies in a lot of key areas and the unwillingness/inability to discuss pretty much anything without dragging in getting out of Europe, reducing immigration or both.
The reason why this is a concern where it isn't for all of the similar groups is their desire to and the risk of (albeit small IMO) them gaining some form of influence in national government. It's not that I disagree with their policies (though I generally do), it's that I don't think they're currently capable of achieving anything positive regardless of what their policies are. I can see them playing nothing other than a disruptive role.
The other issue with UKIP is that their rhetoric and tone continues to attract racist kooks who they don't seem willing or able to control, dissuade or distance themselves from. That suggests to me either the core of the party agrees more with the extreme views than they're willing to admit or they're simply incompetent. Neither encourages me to want them playing any part in running the country.
On top of that they have most of the problems of all the mainstream political parties such as the appearance (at least) of a upper-class white male dominance and a lack of connection with real people and embarrassing efforts to fake it (such as Farrage constantly holding a pint). They're not actually offering anything new.
The reason why this is a concern where it isn't for all of the similar groups is their desire to and the risk of (albeit small IMO) them gaining some form of influence in national government. It's not that I disagree with their policies (though I generally do), it's that I don't think they're currently capable of achieving anything positive regardless of what their policies are. I can see them playing nothing other than a disruptive role.
The other issue with UKIP is that their rhetoric and tone continues to attract racist kooks who they don't seem willing or able to control, dissuade or distance themselves from. That suggests to me either the core of the party agrees more with the extreme views than they're willing to admit or they're simply incompetent. Neither encourages me to want them playing any part in running the country.
On top of that they have most of the problems of all the mainstream political parties such as the appearance (at least) of a upper-class white male dominance and a lack of connection with real people and embarrassing efforts to fake it (such as Farrage constantly holding a pint). They're not actually offering anything new.
Rick O'Shez
Irishman bouncing off walls
I'm not sure. They do seem to have connected with a lot of "ordinary people", perhaps people who feel marginalised and not represented or understood by the political elite. It's true that Farage is good at playing his "man-of-the-people" role, but this only serves to highlight how the other party leaders are about as far as you can get from being "men-of-the-people". Did you see the TV debates between Nigel Farage and Nick Clegg? I thought Farage wiped the floor with Clegg.
HonestJoe
Well-Known Member
UKIP have stirred up the underlying anti-Europe/anti-immigrant/anti-foreigner attitudes in the country and managed to hook their image on to it but that isn't the same as the party or people making a connection themselves. Nobody votes for UKIP, they vote against something else.
He's good at playing the role but that doesn't make him better. If anything, do we really want the most effective liars as out leading politicians?
I didn't see it but I'm not sure that really saying anything about the validity of UKIP. Another issue with the party is that it is (or at least appears to be) a one man show. Without Farage I doubt it would have gained anything like as high a profile as it has.
Erebus
Well-Known Member
Good to hear! Hopefully they'll change their stance then.
Sorry about making assumptions. It's just that the bit I highlighted is such a common phrase to hear from people who are a teeny, tiny little bit racist.
My mistake. I was getting confused by all the bigots who seem to support UKIP.
"Public Image" immediately springs to mind, but then again I am a cynic.
No argument here! UKIP and BNP are completely different acronyms.*
I've read enough to form an opinion. I will confess though that I do sometimes struggle to keep track of who's lying to who in British politics. Perhaps the allegations of bigotry are completely groundless. Maybe UKIP has never claimed embarrassing sums of money in expenses (despite criticising other MPs of the same behaviour).
*OK, I'll admit that was unfair. I just couldn't resist.
Yerda
Veteran Member
I do live in a city, Glasgow. It is a very cosmopolitan place with many EU and non-EU immigrants. The EU immigrants I meet are all in work. The non-EU immigrants I meet are mostly studying. Almost everyone I meet who is claiming benefits is a UK national.
Which area are you in (and what statistics have you looked at) because we seem to see a different UK when we each walk down the street?
DayRaven
Beyond the wall
This is one reason I don't trust him. The homosexual marriage stance could be anything but it shows that Farage will bend when put under pressure by the liberal-left consensus: he took a little flack and changed his mind. That isn't conviction politics and it calls into question his integrity. If he will change his position so radically on the largely unimportant question of homosexual marriage what would he do if the UK really looked like (which it doesn't) leaving the EU?
As I see it Farage is counting on the fact that the chances of Britain having a referendum are low and the chances of the secession camp winning if we had one are equally as low. He gets to play at sitting at the big boys table in Strasbourg knowing he, more or less, has a guaranteed ticket from the anti-EU voters and that there is little chance of that ending (at least whilst he is leader).
UKIP, for some reason, are seen as social conservatives (there hasn't been a genuine social conservative force in British politics for probably forty or so years).
Halcyon
Lord of the Badgers
^ This.
On a personal level, UKIP seems like the type of thing you'd get if the Daily Mail decided to transform into a political party. Really not my cup of tea.
Ultimatum
Classical Liberal
They are very short on policies, yes. The one policy they do have, however, is a very important issue that needs resolving. It is important because, let's say you're one of 4 million of our small business people, EVERY piece of employment legislation, EVERY piece of health and safety, EVERY piece of environmental legislation DOESN'T come from Westminster, it doesn't come from the people that WE elect and send there, it comes from abroad European Institutions. So it's effect on our life is now huge, and, in fact, something like 75% of our laws are now made by the institutions of the EU. Well... that is not living in a self-governing democracy.
People have tried to pass off UKIP as very extreme. And in fact, if you think about it, all throughout the history of mankind, whether it is in science, business, or politics, if you come along and challenge the consensus and say "The Emperor's got no clothes", people will ALWAYS attack you by saying you're extreme. UKIP's been through all of that: they've been called racists, xenophobic.. they've had all this stuff, all this abuse thrown at them, but do you know what? It has not stuck because it is not true. UKIP are a predominantly libertarian party, they believe in free markets, they believe in self-
government, they believe in democracy, they believe in helping small business get off the ground and establish themselves, they believe in social mobility. They are in no way an extreme party. No way. And actually if you look at it, both on the European Union question and in Britain, UKIP's view is now becoming the majority view amongst most
voters.
Here's a hint: They aren't interested on whether people are black, white, yellow, or rich: they just aren't interested in that. People are people and if they are legal UK citizens, then they are part of the same family that UKIP is part of. And, indeed, an increasing number of ethinc minority groups are starting to stand for UKIP in election.
They aren't anti-European. They are just don't like the European Union. We don't like this attempt of slowly taking away individuality and democracy from nations and states to then centralize everything within 3 institutions: the European Comission, the European Council, and the European court. We WANT a Europe of trade, cooperation, and reciprocal relationships with one another. We DON'T WANT a Europe with huge expensive beaurocratic buildings, within whom those beaurocrats receive a vast salary. We DON'T WANT rich people making our laws: that's not the Europe we want. We want to divorce ourselves from POLITICAL union and replace that with a genuine Free Trade Agreement.
"Playing the role" is a common excuse. The fact of the matter is, no one cares what you think about a person. You need to form your own views on something.
This I agree with. Farage is an incredible orator and statesman, and, without him, UKIP would not be where it is.
See above.
Every party has "bigots" that support it. All of the parties do, it's a fact. Unfortunately for UKIP, people are highlighting this bigots, holding them up to the light, and saying: "This is UKIP's view". Well it isn't.
But of course, is public image not important?
See above content.
Of course they have. Nigel Farage admitted to being paid hundreds of thousands of pounds for his position. But at least he admits it, as others don't.