UKIP 'Diversity Carnival' Croydon - A total disaster?

[The Scientific States]

The UKIP isn't even that bad.

Yes, yes it is.

[Nadkor]

This is literally one of the most amusing things to have happened in, oh, days.

[The Serbian Empire]

The UKIP isn't even that bad.

Yes, yes it is.

It's not that bad when compared to what roams in Hungary or the BNP.

[Geilinor]

Ostroeuropa has a point. There's no point in making an argument your opponent is perfectly prepared to make for you.

The issue is that UKIP is an alliance of racists and other political factions.

It isn't a racist party.
It's a party that contains a lot of racists. That is a distinction worth making, since all parties contain some racists.

Constantly calling UKIP a racist party is slandering a lot of it's members.

Saying they are in alliance with political racism is apt.

The silent acceptance of racism among its ranks is what makes UKIP racist. I'm sure that many of the party's members aren't racist, but the public is only exposed to the controversial members.

[Grave_n_idle]

Yes, yes it is.

It's not that bad when compared to what roams in Hungary or the BNP.

The BNP and UKIP are basically fighting over the same voters. The difference is largely whether or not you are open about your racism, not whether or not you have xenophobic ideology.

[The Scientific States]

Yes, yes it is.

It's not that bad when compared to what roams in Hungary or the BNP.

No, of course not, but that doesn't mean it's not god awful.

[Parti Ouvrier]

There is very little to distinguish between the Tories and Ukip, only the latter wants to get out of the EU. Yet somehow Ukip are more objectionable? Non sequitur much?

Apparently, 'non sequitur' is a phrase you probably shouldn't use. There's no reason why that issue on it's own wouldn't be enough to make the one more objectionable than the other, so you're misusing the term.

But given that UKIP and the Conservatives differ drasticallyvery little on taxation, foreign policy, healthcare, defence... in fact, pretty much every issue on which there is any kind of stated policy - the fact that you're misusing 'non sequitur' is irrelevant. In this case, you're not just using the wrong words, you're just plain (objectively) wrong.

I still don't think your logic follows, but anyway, I'm misusing the term apparently. The only minor differences are an increase in defense spending and flat taxes (more affordable only because of the EU exit apparently).

[Grave_n_idle]

Apparently, 'non sequitur' is a phrase you probably shouldn't use. There's no reason why that issue on it's own wouldn't be enough to make the one more objectionable than the other, so you're misusing the term.

But given that UKIP and the Conservatives differ drastically on taxation, foreign policy, healthcare, defence... in fact, pretty much every issue on which there is any kind of stated policy - the fact that you're misusing 'non sequitur' is irrelevant. In this case, you're not just using the wrong words, you're just plain (objectively) wrong.

I still don't think your logic follows, but anyway, I'm misusing the term apparently.

My 'logic' is that the two differ on almost every issue, and that the difference makes the UKIP more objectionable. I'm not sure how that's not following.

[Parti Ouvrier]

I still don't think your logic follows, but anyway, I'm misusing the term apparently.

My 'logic' is that the two differ on almost every issue, and that the difference makes the UKIP more objectionable. I'm not sure how that's not following.

Except they don't! Ukip also models itself on Thatcherism.

[Geilinor]

My 'logic' is that the two differ on almost every issue, and that the difference makes the UKIP more objectionable. I'm not sure how that's not following.

Except they don't!

How do they not differ?

[Grave_n_idle]

My 'logic' is that the two differ on almost every issue, and that the difference makes the UKIP more objectionable. I'm not sure how that's not following.

Except they don't!

*shrugs*

Show me an issue (of the ones I mentioned, preferably) where they don't significantly differ in their stated policies?

[Parti Ouvrier]

Except they don't!

*shrugs*

Show me an issue (of the ones I mentioned, preferably) where they don't significantly differ in their stated policies?

'UKIP believes strongly in the principles of the NHS, which should continue to deliver care free at the point of delivery on the basis of need, not ability to pay. However, we believe NHS management is bureaucratic and wasteful, and that major reform is vital to retain and improve NHS healthcare services. UKIP will:

Make no cuts in NHS frontline health services but substantially reduce NHS waste and bureaucracy'

Barely any different from Tory rhetoric.

[Geilinor]

*shrugs*

Show me an issue (of the ones I mentioned, preferably) where they don't significantly differ in their stated policies?

'UKIP believes strongly in the principles of the NHS, which should continue to deliver care free at the point of delivery on the basis of need, not ability to pay. However, we believe NHS management is bureaucratic and wasteful, and that major reform is vital to retain and improve NHS healthcare services. UKIP will:

Make no cuts in NHS frontline health services but substantially reduce NHS waste and bureaucracy'

Barely any different from Tory rhetoric.

There are other policy areas as well. You can, however, see that the Tories have a more thought out and more detailed platform.

[Parti Ouvrier]

'UKIP believes strongly in the principles of the NHS, which should continue to deliver care free at the point of delivery on the basis of need, not ability to pay. However, we believe NHS management is bureaucratic and wasteful, and that major reform is vital to retain and improve NHS healthcare services. UKIP will:

Make no cuts in NHS frontline health services but substantially reduce NHS waste and bureaucracy'

Barely any different from Tory rhetoric.

There are other policy areas as well. You can, however, see that the Tories have a more thought out and more detailed platform.

Where, it appears they're deleted their 2010 manifesto. All that's left is vague platitudes.
http://www.conservatives.com/Plan.aspx
In that instance, however much I disagree with Ukip, Ukip is more open, honest and they have a clearer approach to cutting immigration, get out of the EU, what do the Tories say they'll also cut immigration through a renegotiation with the EU, very convincing. And people are surprised Ukip is set to get the most seats.

[The Joseon Dynasty]

This is hilarious.

[The UK in Exile]

There are other policy areas as well. You can, however, see that the Tories have a more thought out and more detailed platform.

Where, it appears they're deleted their 2010 manifesto. All that's left is vague platitudes.
http://www.conservatives.com/Plan.aspx
In that instance, however much I disagree with Ukip, Ukip is more open, honest and they have a clearer approach to cutting immigration, get out of the EU, what do the Tories say they'll also cut immigration through a renegotiation with the EU, very convincing. And people are surprised Ukip is set to get the most seats.

No they aren't. Nigel Farage has disowned the 2010 UKIP manifesto saying its nonsense and he didn't write a single word of it. All that UKIP has is vague platitudes. which does at least support position that they are no different from each other.

[Parti Ouvrier]

Where, it appears they're deleted their 2010 manifesto. All that's left is vague platitudes.
http://www.conservatives.com/Plan.aspx
In that instance, however much I disagree with Ukip, Ukip is more open, honest and they have a clearer approach to cutting immigration, get out of the EU, what do the Tories say they'll also cut immigration through a renegotiation with the EU, very convincing. And people are surprised Ukip is set to get the most seats.

No they aren't. Nigel Farage has disowned the 2010 UKIP manifesto saying its nonsense and he didn't write a single word of it. All that UKIP has is vague platitudes. which does at least support position that they are no different from each other.

I suppose you could look at like that. The problem is in this Euro-election all of the main parties' are making noises about controlling immigration, (Lib Dems being an exception).

[The Emerald Dragon]

I actually want UKIP to come into power for a few years, just to show the three main parties that they are the consequence of bad governing.

[Parti Ouvrier]

I actually want UKIP to come into power for a few years, just to show the three main parties that they are the consequence of bad governing.

Ukip's a main party too, apparently it has a larger membership than Lib Dems too! Anyway, didn't Nigel Farage say somewhere that he'd make a lousy PM, also, with FPTP, Ukip getting MPs, not going to happen.

[Britcan]

I actually want UKIP to come into power for a few years, just to show the three main parties that they are the consequence of bad governing.

Ukip's a main party too, apparently it has a larger membership than Lib Dems too! Anyway, didn't Nigel Farage say somewhere that he'd make a lousy PM, also, with FPTP, Ukip getting MPs, not going to happen.

They don't, though their membership is growing significantly faster. A few weeks ago it was reported that UKIP has just over 37,000 members while the Lib Dems have roughly 44,000.

[The UK in Exile]

I actually want UKIP to come into power for a few years, just to show the three main parties that they are the consequence of bad governing.

More bad governing?

[Mushet]

I got their manifesto through my letterbox today. On social issues, they wrote, unselfconsciously, I think:

"Political correctness is killing free speech".

Does that sound like Not-Racism to you?

Yes of course because not everyone who opposes political correctness is a racist.

Also by definition political correctness does kill free speech. The debate is over whether you think its okay to limit free speech in order to be politically correct and not cause offense.

The answer of course is theres not right not be offended and a mature free society allows bigoted people to speak and allows people a free in arm in responding.

Which is far preferable to being censored or even censoring yourself.

No it doesn't, it just applies social consequences to certain forms of speech, which is bound to happen, some words will gain connotations that are so offensive that people will socially penalize you if you use them in the wrong circumstances.

[Gauthier]

UKIP Diversity Carnival? Did the same people schedule the KKK Black History Month fair?

[Dooom35796821595]

The fact that UKIP isn't racist will be made clear if they get into office, maybe in their second term as they will clarify that White Englishman are the only real humans and everything else is an inferior species. This will also be the reason for the 'immigration detainment centers' where all the 'lower species' will be sent for 'processing'. Along with any dissenters mutants.

Magneto will not be pleased

[The Emerald Dragon]

I actually want UKIP to come into power for a few years, just to show the three main parties that they are the consequence of bad governing.

More bad governing?

Yep.