UKIP is not a far right party, but that doesn't mean its voters don't hold far right sympathies.
UKIP is not a far right party, but that doesn’t mean its voters don’t hold far right sympathies
Anti-racism charity Hope Not Hate published a report yesterday stating that ‘The British far right ends 2014 in its worst state for almost 20 years’.
They base this conclusion on the fact that the two main far right groups, the BNP and the EDL, have suffered embarrassing leadership crises over the past few years that have caused them to splinter.
They point out that rallies and marches organised by the remnants of these groups and others like them in response to ISIS atrocities and the Rotherham sex abuse scandal were poorly attended, and indicate a lack of support for Islamophobic rhetoric.
But this isn’t a simple happy ending. The rise of UKIP, and the emergence of tiny but growing extreme right groups such as National Action,shows that the sentiment that saw Nick Griffin elected to the European parliament in 2009 has not gone away.
It is simply finding new outlets to express itself – whether in the less controversial form of UKIP, or in more militant groups that promise tougher changes than the collapsed BNP and EDL can currently offer.
UKIP is not a far right party, but that doesn’t mean its voters don’t hold far right sympathies. With the choice of a failing BNP and a strong UKIP, it is not surprising that people with strong anti-immigration views are willing to compromise with a party that has more power if less vehemence.
Ukip is part of the group Europe of Freedom and Democracy (EFD), which includes representatives from the Danish People’s Party, the True Finns Party, the Dutch SGP and the infamous Italian Lega Nord.
These groups all describe themselves as ‘Eurosceptic’, but are best known for views which have little to do with Europe and more to do with Muslims and Africans.
YouGov found that almost two-thirds of UKIP voters don’t mention Europe when they are asked what they feel are the most important issues facing Britain. UKIP’s founding objective has been eclipsed by its stance on immigration by its own supporters.
Most people do not like to think of themselves as racists. They usually have a list of legitimate grievances that have led them to hold prejudiced views, rather than simply a rabid hatred of people who are different.
Nevertheless, the end result is the same, and UKIP offers a voting option with less stigma attached to it than groups like the EDL which have become synonymous with violence. Furthermore, UKIP is a party with a chance.
Hope Not Hate’s report describes the conditions for racism this year in the UK as ‘favourable’ – a child sex abuse scandal in a town that was formerly a BNP stronghold, with mainly Pakistani Muslim perpetrators – but says that the far right has failed to capitalise on this.
But the Paris massacres have shown that current events are still being used to recruit people to the anti immigration cause; Nigel Farage spoke on LBC last week saying:
“We in Britain – and I’ve seen some evidence in other European countries of it too – have pursued a really rather gross policy of multiculturalism and by that, what I mean, is that we’ve encouraged people who have come from different cultures to remain within those cultures and not to integrate fully within our communities.”
The choice of language is watered down, but the tactic is the same: incite fear, unite people against minorities.
We cannot afford to be complacent about extremist views, whichever form they take. Changes in mood can be sudden and unpredictable; according to a poll by YouGov UKIP supporters in Feb 2014 comprised just over half a million former Lib Dems and 400,000 who voted for Labour last time.
Research by the Guardian found that BNP and UKIP supporters tended to come from a similar demographic; older, white working class voters who have few or no educational qualifications, and share the sense that ordinary people are being betrayed by politicians.
The report also highlights the rise of antisemitism, a problem which has received little coverage over the past few years, and shows how clandestinely hate movements can grow.
Hope Not Hate also admits that the size of a far right following does not necessarily decrease the risk they pose, pointing out the recent trend for uncoordinated ‘lone wolf’ attacks’.
In Germany this week, tens of thousands of people joined an ‘anti-Islamisation’ rally with the far right group PEGIDA. In the wake of the Paris murders, with fear and suspicion rife, we need to be more vigilant than ever about the recruitment tactics of the far right.
Ruby Stockham is a staff writer at Left Foot Forward. Follow her on Twitter
34 Responses to “We cannot afford to be complacent about the far-right”
Guest
Ah yes, the magical marxists. As you call the black faces a disaster.
And you’re evidently far right, having abandoned every single ideal you once held, lying about immigration and I’m sure you’ll cause trouble.
Guest
Ah yes, the “sense” of bigotry and of hate. Of forcing out the Jews. Of riots. Murders. Terrorism.
Mike Stallard
Was it not Humpty Dumpty who wanted the world to be what he wanted it to be? As a Western Liberal, of course, you assume that Muslims are Western Liberals.
I merely ask this: when were you personally invited to a meal with a Muslim family in their home?
damon
I’m not pedaling anyone’s line, but the thing is I’m guessing Leon is that you are one of these little leftie student types who accuse anyone who has a different view to you as being a fascist or a Ukip supporter or whatever. I did say I wasn’t particularly fussed one way or the other about immigration numbers, but stated that a rising population would cause all kinds of logistical problems. Just building large numbers of new houses isn’t so straight forward. Where will they go? We can’t build loads of houses in flood plains for example. Just shoehorning in extra units of housing into already existing neighbourhoods can have knock on negative consequences. Like increasing traffic congestion for example. Or taking away open land on the edge of existing communities. The very places that people enjoy as a resource for normal living. Where their children play and they walk their dogs. Build a hundred new houses on this land and some people will have something taken from their community.
In theory, you could increase population density and actually enhance the built environment.
But that’s not the way things are actually done in reality. So many of our new housing developments are done on the cheap without proper planning to integrate them properly into what is already there.
And the numbers coming to the UK are just too big to keep up with demand.
So what we are seeing is an increase in the houses of multiple occupancy and ”bedsitland”.
And the neighbourhoods where this takes place in the highest numbers end up looking shabby and run down. Just look at any of the most diverse boroughs that have high numbers of new poorer immigrants.
Places like Tottenham, Newham, Wembley, Tooting. New people go straight to those places and just have to squeeze in. The idea that more and more places in England need to look like East Ham is something that has people who live outside those areas, voting for Ukip etc.
It doesn’t mean I support that Leon, lt’s just an observation.
Joe Bloggs
We hear a lot about Ukip and its “Far Right: policies, though the writer of the piece replied to has said it isn’t.
We should realise that Ukip has support where immigration is not an issue; the recently retired head of the National Trust, for instance, has said that Ukip is the only hope for saving the countryside.
There are sensible policies separate from immigration which appeal to those who want the unnecessary HS2 project abandoned, but there are more.
Refer to this link:
http://www.ukip.org/policies_for_people