All members of the London Assembly are invited…or should the royals start playing politics and being less than ambivalent to the choices that their subjects make?

Lee, I’d be very happy for the royal family to show some balls and not invite them on the basis that they’re fascists. It would be very difficult for the BNP to fit that rejection into their liberal elite narrative.

1. As head of state the Queen should not play host to representatives of a political party who wish to see many of this country’s citizens deported for no other reason than they have the wrong colour skin.

2,3. The people of London elected that person. What is happening here is a conflict of interests isn’t it? You guys think that the Queen should be making some kind of political stand, and if she doesn’t that’s proof she’s derelict. If she does give in to you, however, she is abandoning the views of a section of her citizens as irrelevant, and that is proof that she doesn’t care about what they think and how they exercise their rights.

It’s not the nicest thing, of course, but what she’s done is invite all Assembly members…it’s the right thing to do. The wrong thing is how this is being portrayed by the OP and the media as the queen specifically inviting the BNP. If anyone is giving the BNP credibility it is not the queen but those that wish to sensationalise reality.

the royal family, as much as a can’t stand them, are expected to be bipartisan in all matters political. this is how it should be.

What an obnoxious and self-indulgent post.

You know perfectly well that she has no control over who comes to these parties, any more than she controls which party hacks get into the House of Lords.

No doubt it will be quite fun on the day.
With her team steering her away from Griffin as fast as he will be trying to chase her, it will be like Benny Hill in slow motion.

4. Sometimes the Queen and her people have to make choices. Either way, what she decides is a political statement – if she believes that a political party whose entire credo is based on blood and soil fascism (a credo that, within her lifetime, hundreds of thousands of this country’s citizens laid down their lives in defiance of) is just like any other and should be treated accordingly, then that would disappoint me greatly.

For once in my life I am with Boris Johnsoin on this one.

“then that would disappoint me greatly.”

Well be disappointed then, though it’s clearly not getting through to you that because she invites the body of assembly members doesn’t mean she is endorsing *any* party or not.

I know the Duke of Edinrburgh is old but you seem to have managed to imply that he was at Rorke’s Drift.

Anyway – I have the 1960s on the line for you, they want their misplaced ideological fervour back.

[4] I agree. An elected President would also have extended an invitation on this basis. Presumably David Semple doesn’t think that elected BNP councillors shouldn’t be allowed to take their seats, or that other councillors shouldn’t engage in debate with them. I very much doubt that Betty will be going up to either Barnbrook or Griffin and gushing over them… and I’m sure his minders will keep Phil the Greek well away from them as well. Or perhaps DS would prefer him to spit in their faces…

Not quite sure what the Queen can do in this situation – but the photo opportunity for the BNP is priceless. They will take the photo of Nick Griffin and Richard Barnbrook with the Queen, and use it everywhere to promote the idea that they are a legitimate political party, not a thinly disguised band of racist thugs. Can you imagine the captions they’ll use? “Queen endorses BNP” ; “Queen supports British people” etc etc

9. No, but she is treating the fascist, racist BNP just like any other party, when quite clearly it is not like any other party. However, for me the issue is not whether the completely insignificant and ineffective Barnbrook attends, it is whether he is able to bring Griffin with him. There is some leeway on that one I imagine as he has not been invited.

What humbug ! Lee Griffins comment at no. 1 sets out the most immediate fact.

What’s the stuff about ‘they’re German’ ? Even making this point debases a more reasoned argument for your republicanism – it’s totally irrelevant to republicanism, or as a contrast to BNP policy. As well as being a gross oversimplification.

Oh dear, oh dear. The next time you feel like venting like this you may want to wait 5 mins and re-read your article with a clear head before hitting ‘publish’.

“No, but she is treating the fascist, racist BNP just like any other party, when quite clearly it is not like any other party.”

But for the purposes of this engagement they ARE, this is the point. The british people elected them to an assembly seat. As reprehensible as we may find them to claim that they are not a legitimate party, as elected under our constitution in a fair and democratic manner, is just to ignore reality.

“However, for me the issue is not whether the completely insignificant and ineffective Barnbrook attends, it is whether he is able to bring Griffin with him.”

They get a +1, they chose to bring Nick Griffin along. No doubt the BNP are savvy enough to see the opportunity, obviously, but as the Palace have already stated it is up to the individuals invited to decide who attends in their allowance.

Frankly, I have more contempt for socialist who attend royal engagements than fascists.

And while I have no sympathy for the royals you can’t argue that they are (a) German and (b) responsible for the crimes of the British Empire at the same time.

15. I wonder if the Palace really wants pickets on the gates when the day comes. It strikes me that there is significant risk of public disorder should Nick Griffin attend this tea party.

The British people did not elect the BNP into office. A small section of the population of one part of London did that. However, I do take your point – to an extent.

“It strikes me that there is significant risk of public disorder should Nick Griffin attend this tea party.”

And that will also be the right of the British public if they so wish.

Not the “disorder” though…

In fact the party will be like Benny Hill in slow motion, with Griffin chasing Liz while she is steered away from him.

I know someone who went to one of these things – she doesn’t just wander around waiting to be approached. She does have (discreet but effective) minders. I would be amazed if Griffin got his photo-op.

“Not the “disorder” though…”

Assuming it means protest or demonstration rather than violence, of course.

I’m slightly upset that the BNP should be taking advantage of the current situation for their own electoral ends. All the hard work was done for them by the Labour Party and a good part of the labour movement. It’s dashed ungentlemanly of the BNP!

“After all, it’s well recorded that various members of the Royal Family are outright racists, and their ancestors – ironically, German immigrants – were no less so.”

Most of the English have German ancestry.

Incidently the current Queen can trace her ancestry back to Cerdic, first king of Wessex.

By the way, I hope people will be protesting equally vehemently when the Queen is required to meet foreign dicators or other persons who, unlike Griffin, are actually responsible for hundreds or thousands of deaths.

I also hope that people here will protest should a far-left extremist also be invited to attend such a gathering, I have always wondered why the left get so wound up about the far-right whereas the right don’t seem to give a sod about the far-left.

This is the problem with the monarchy.

A president will have the mandate to speak on issues like this and take a stance.

Come to think of it, haven’t Sinn Fein been to the Queen’s garden party before? Certain BNP members may have been convicted for violence or had links to Combat 18 but one could hardly accuse the BNP of being the political wing of a far-right terrorist group.

“A president will have the mandate to speak on issues like this and take a stance.”

Why? I fail to see how it would be remotely different.

The issue is not what the queen does. It’s how non-racist invitees react to the fact that they’ll be at the same do as two racist thugs. I am fairly confident that if the BNP invites remain in place, a large number of invitees will choose not to attend in order to make their feelings clear.

Of course the number will be greater if such a boycott gets decent publicity, and within the Lab party I’ll be seeking to do my little bit to promote one.

“I am fairly confident that if the BNP invites remain in place, a large number of invitees will choose not to attend in order to make their feelings clear.”

The real question is how will this be viewed by the public that are in tune with the BNP, even if not supporters? Will it make them suddenly sit up and realise they are looking at a racist party, or will it instead make them roll their eyes are the collective “elitism” or such of the other parties and their lack of respect for another democratically elected individual’s right to be there?

Nick Griffin said “It shows to people that the BNP may be controversial, but we are as much a part of the mainstream as anybody else”.
Well there we go, they are now part of the MAINSTREAM, so democracy and free speach has won out and I’m sure many posters here will be very happy at that. Of course once they have a bit more legitimacy then more people will feel easier about voting for them in the general elections, and no doubt libertarians will be even happier about that too.
I understand the Queen may not want to get involved in politics per se, but for fucks sake, someone needs to get their head round this and find a way to stop them. The BNP becoming more mainstream is too fucking scary to consider. The fuckers have already turned up at the 2018 World Cup campaign event – and by god they will be attempting to attend all that they can.
Meanwhile I shall try to bring over Louis Farrakhan fromthe Nation of Islam just on the basis of free speach and a balance to the fucking BNP.

> while I have no sympathy for the royals you can’t argue that they are (a) German and (b) responsible for the crimes of the British Empire at the same time

Why not? Most of those crimes took place since 1714.

The Palace had no choice but to invite Barnbrook, but ought to keep a veto over who the +1 is. The dangers of letting your invitees bring along just anyone should surely have been obvious long before this happened. Barnbrook’s going to be there and that’s nobody’s fault but the fools who voted for him, but the Palace has every right to tell him not to bring Griffin and I’ll be very disappointed if they don’t.

Lee, I don’t expect the Queen to act any differently. I’m just saying I would be very happy if she decided to exercise her own form of civil disobedience on this and disinvite them. Regarding the +1 situation, of course they can veto guests and they’ve obviously made a political decision not to veto Griffin, which they could have easily done based on his record.

“The BNP becoming more mainstream is too fucking scary to consider.”

Far-right parties are mainstream in France, Austria, Belgium and Switzerland. As far as I’m aware the citizens of those countries aren’t particularly scared.

Sometimes I think we imagine the BNP to be a dangerous monster about to march into power and initiate the British final solution. Unless I’m mistaken they have less support than the Greens. Even if they were to pick up more Old Labour voters and some of the more racist Tory and UKIP voters I can’t see them ever becoming a threat to this country. The nature of their ideology places a limit on how successful they can be. If they want to get above, say, 10% of the vote they’ll have to water down their policies even further so that they become nothing more than a tame populist party.

“like Benny Hill in slow motion”

Can’t wait for the bit where Griffin slaps Phil repeatedly on the top of his head.

[32] If they (the BNP) want to get above, say, 10% of the vote they’ll have to water down their policies even further so that they become nothing more than a tame populist party.

I prefer things as they are now. I would sooner the one-in-twelve 9or whatever) voters who are nakedly racist were quarantined in their own party than actively contaminating a larger one. Sadly, the forthcoming démise of Labour ensures that that is exactly what we’ll get.

Ah, c’mon, show some sympathy for a geriatric bigot – the old Duck of Ed’ll be delighted he’s finally got some chappies coming along he can be sure to have a decent chin-wag with…maybe he’s got some more daft costumes for Barnbrook to try on…or perhaps something of Harry’s…?

They’re legally entitled, and it might make the anachronistic nonsense of monarchy look a little worse, so I hope they have a right royal time.

You have to remember that republicans aren’t actually outraged by this- they are simply using it as a way to attack the monarchy.

Hence, as Lee Griffin points out, the Queen should disinvite an elected politician, thus laying her open to the charge of ‘playing politics’ and so making the republicans’ case for them.

Rumbold, surely it’s possible for republicans to be both outraged AND using it as a way to attack the monarchy?

Well, what are they really attacking them for? For not intefering in politics.

[troll]
Lee Griffin “All members of the London Assembly are invited…or should the royals start playing politics and being less than ambivalent to the choices that their subjects make?”

Ah yes, you can always rely on Lee to come to the defence of the brown shirts. It is his great calling in life to be fair to everyone, even the Nazis. He is our very own Jews for Hitler correspondent.

I can just imagine Lee being taken on a train to the death camps and pleading with the people in the cattle trucks to show a balanced view of what the Nazis were doing. For Lee it is all about the process, never the result.

The title of this piece is also very telling.

Exactly right Sally. Because worrying about the Queen’s constitutional postion being compromised is the same as cheering on wholesale slaughter.

#38 – Not taking a stand is also a political position, that’s the trouble.

I don’t give a flying fuck about the Queens constitutional position.

But thanks for playing.

The monarchy has to go. Long live the Republic of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

Tim f:

I know you don’t mean it that way, but isn’t that reasoning a bit of a Catch-22 postion?

Yes, undoubtedly. It’s not possible for the Queen to act apolitically in this situation.

Rumbold – naughty, naughty, using the all-inclusive “republicans” instead of SOME republicans, as you well know… :-))

Chris @ #44,

Agreed about the monarchy,

but,

“People’s Republic of Scotland” first for me, thanks…

Sally, please tell me you have your own blog? I would love to put it on my RSS feed.

sally your comment at #39 is out of order. Please don’t start tarring everyone you disagree with as nazis. Next time I’ll just delete it.

She’ll be back calling you a brown-shirt next, Sunny.

Stewie Griffin from Family Guy had a guest appearance in Bones tonight and frankly that was less barmy than Sally’s comment about Lee.

Sally is a national treasure, do not censor her!

This is a very stupid article to tear into Royal Family for being parasites when it is our disgusting democratically elected politicians who are the greedy pigs deserving of slaughter.

“These are people who presided (and preside!) over the bullying and butchering of how many people and nations simply because our armies are stronger and it is in the interest of our native capitalists to do so. Far from being the doting parents of the nation, the Royals personify everything that is plain evil about a class-based system of exploitation.”

Like being a republic would have made us pacific socialist country! You pathetic, witless cretin.

Hang on a minute:

“Not when there are Tories aiming to take every last penny from the working man’s pocket and the Fascists aiming to relocate half of Britain abroad just because we don’t measure up to what they consider to be British”.

You didn’t think this Semple chap was for real surely? This man has to be a Tory humourist, just like dear old Sally.

The fact remains that Lee Griffin does seem to always want to defend the right wing nuts on this site, He goes out of his way to pick fights with anyone who dares to call them on their bullshit. I could understand if he was a troll, but he does seem to like the process rather than the outcome.

Maybe it is because he believes in nothing..

Can I mention that Sally has just gone a whole post without using the words “nazi”, “brownshirt”, or indeed “fucking nazi brownshirt”.

Yes, she was warned by Sunny earlier on, but this is still some achievement.

“The fact remains that Lee Griffin does seem to always want to defend the right wing nuts on this site”

It’s a terrible conundrum for you Sally, I know, for you to even attempt to understand that some people are for democracy on this site. You may well like to do whatever you can to ensure left wing politics rules, regardless of what the public of this country wish. I wish that the views of this country is represented, regardless of how repulsive I may find those views, and would rather spend my efforts less on perverting the perspective of our democracy and more on changing those views.

“I wish that the views of this country is represented, regardless of how repulsive I may find those views,”

Just as I have always said. You stand for nothing.

Ah, the world where standing for democracy doesn’t matter. The same world that has lead us hand in hand to this current state of politics, and politicians, we now all have had our eyes open to.

If there was ever proof, sally, that you are old news and stuck in dead end, regressive ways…your “contributions” to this thread are it.