The by-election that took place in the UK last week was the first in which the Labour Party fought under new leadership. For the benefit of US visitors, the election was caused by the resignation of the constituency’s previous MP, Tony Blair. Blair is no longer an MP.
Labour’s share of the vote was down, but this was not surprising, since the new Labour candidate was not a national figure. It is usual in the UK that when someone becomes a national party leader and especially a Prime Minister, the personal vote surges. There are two explanations for this phenomenon. One is that the person gets huge and constant publicity as a party leader/Prime Minister and the other is that many voters probably feel proud that their MP has become so famous. John Major, Mrs. Thatcher, Paddy Ashdown and other past leaders have all benefitted in this way and their successor’s vote has slumped, as things return to normal.
Given this, I would not describe the result in Sedgefield as bad for Labour, especially given that the Labour Government must be suffering from voter fatigue after 10 years of rule and many scandals. Labour’s 12,500 votes represented almost half of the voters (45%). The Liberal Democrats came second with roughly 5500 and 20%. This was not a bad result for a party of opportunists, though I suspect the party leadership expected to do much better. The Conservatives fell to third place with 4000 votes and a 14% share. This is not a good result for party leader David (hug a homo) Cameron, who has been promising that his new socially liberal agenda would bring the party many new voters. If Dave’s Tories got the ‘gay’ vote, it did not add up to much and they seem to have lost some of the non-homosexual vote in the process.
The British National Party came fourth, with almost 2500 votes and nearly 9% of the votes. The Party had never fought an election in Sedgefield before and it is not a place where the Party has built up an organization through contesting local council elections. This was a good result for the Party and its leader, Nick Griffin, who no doubt has difficulty persuading some of his more radical followers that seeking power through the ballot box is the way forward. The BNP does not contest elections on a level playing field, indeed they have to play uphill and against a strong wind the whole time. Their candidates and members are (mostly illegally) persecuted with job losses and employment victimization, they are denied meeting places because of intimidation and have to hold meetings in secret places and at secret times. They suffer organized thuggery from Leftists and they have no wealthy benefactors. Besides all of the foregoing impediments, they have to overcome the Media’s relentless campaign of destruction. This campaign from all parts of the media, national and local, includes misreporting, non reporting and demonization and allows, indeed encourages, police and public official harassment. When the BBC posted up the Sedgefield result last week it chose not to mention the BNP vote. When one considers that the BBC has taken such an interest in the Party that it has infiltrated reporters into BNP membership and secretly recorded its meetings, this erasing of the Party’s result is another example of the BBC arrogantly ignoring its public duty to tax payers. Still, on this website we are not surprised, for the BNP is the only UK party that is a threat to the political and social agenda of the Media Class.
As I said earlier, the Sedgefield result was a good one for the BNP and not losing its deposit (it is a very poor party) was a triumph in itself. Even more satisfying for Mr. Radical and Mr. Right, is the probability that the BNP was partly responsible for the Tories’ failure.
Nevertheless, the result is disappointing to us, for the BNP does, as it claims, represent the only alternative to all the other parties. This means that 90% of the electorate voted for parties that are selling out the British people, and many Sedgefield people did not bother to vote at all, even though there was a real alternative to the traitors and opportunists who infest British politics. We find this depressing. Fortunately, there is good news from other places. In June, there were several local council by-elections that the BNP fought and did well in. Since the Media will not tell you, here are some results. In Rochford’s Hockley North ward, the BNP came second with almost 30% of the vote, pushing the Lib-Dems into third place. In Havering’s St. Andrews ward the party came third with almost 19%, trouncing Labour and Lib-Dems in the process. In Manchester’s Charlestown ward the BNP came second with 25%, way, way ahead of the Lib-dems and Tories. In Calderdale’s Warley ward the BNP came fourth and ahead of Labour, with 12%, and in several other wards around the country the Party got more than 10%.
Just in case anyone thinks that this is a BNP fellow-travellers website, let me mention that the latest edition of “Voice of Freedom” (the BNP monthly newspaper) has a front page that is filled with economic nonsense. The Party, bemoaning the decline of the UK’s motor industry, advocates eliminating foreign ownership of British companies ( when other countries reciprocate, the UK will have a siege economy!) and the introduction of worker ownership through co-operatives. This kind of economic lunacy is hardly worth repudiating and along with the BNP policy of renationalizing the coal industry, suggests that the BNP looks back with nostalgia to the time when one waited for years for a telephone and almost everything else. I suppose the Party thinks we will all be happy folk-dancing, cultivating allotments and buying one brand of everything at the corner store.