The United Kingdom Independence Party isn't racist and it is anti-establishment?

 Yes it is! and no it isn't! Ha ha! See what I did there. I pulled the wool over your eyes. I pulled a fast one. Hee hee. I suckered you into reading my blog just by saying words that you might or might not agree with in an effort to pique your interest. Hee hee I’m so cleverJ. You Ukippers, you’re so easy to outfox.

If you are not a Ukipper then please ignore the first paragraph of this blog. In fact it might be an idea to ignore it all as I’m drunk as a skunk at the moment. Yeesh..hic... ossifer...hic.. I’m skunk as a drunk...hic. No I’m not. Yes you are. Oh no, one of my other personalities has kicked in. Fortunately it’s one of the sober ones so I’ll continue.

Actually the United Kingdom Independence Party (UKIP) isn’t comprehensively racist. It’s more selective racist. In fact the party is more anti-immigrant than racist. Along as they’re over there, they’re alright. To be more specific, it really depends on skin pigment and ancestry with UKIP. You see, if you’re of Anglo Saxon descent, in UKIP’s eyes, you’re alright. The Ukippers will deny it but we all know it’s true. Your problem is if you happen to be Eastern European or Hispanic or black African or Asian (unless you are a citizen of an economic powerhouse like China) or Romany, Slavic or Eurasian. If that’s the case then you’re persona non gratis in UKIP’s eyes. Not because of who you are but because of where you come from. And that’s the problem with UKIP supporters. They discriminate, sometimes consciously, sometimes sub-consciously, and they discriminate on the basis of race. And that makes Ukippers racist. It’s as simple as that.

Racism is a negative, generalised and stereotypical portrayal of a race or tribe where that stereotype is used as a basis for discrimination. So if you say that you wouldn't be happy if a group of Romanians moved in next door to you, if you haven’t met the Romanians in question, you must be basing your opinion on a previously held negative stereotypical view that has no basis in fact. That’s racism. I understand that we all are racists to varying degrees. It is natural to fear strangers; it is a basic survival instinct that is innate in all humans and the majority of animals. The problem arises in how you decide to rationalise these instincts. In an earlier blog I described how, when I was a child, gypsy travellers would turn up and camp on the outskirts of the council estate I lived on and we would go and fight them. So, as I've previously stated, we all fear strangers and me fighting gypsy travellers was my irrational manifestation of that fear. The difference being between me and most UKIP supporters is that I was fourteen at the time and, according to recent research, the average UKIP voter is in their forties or older, so are old enough to know better.

 Criticism of a particular person and their actions is perfectly acceptable as long as that criticism is based in fact. I myself, for example, am particularly critical of Chinese and Koreans for their brutal treatment of animals, cats and dogs included, and their predilection for eating cats and dogs. I find it disgusting and therefore I find the Chinese and Koreans who condone these horrible practices as disgusting. I’m not being general about a race, I am being specific about certain members of that race. I judge these people on their actions and I criticise a culture which considers this barbarism as acceptable. It disgusts me so I make my disgust public, but I am not being racist just because I make critical comments about the actions by people of another race, just like I’m not being racist when I condemn the French for the cruelties involved in the manufacture of fois gras, because I am criticising what they do and not who they are.

I am the child of an Irish immigrant father and an English mother. As a child I was racially abused. As a child I would be called a ‘mick’ or a ‘paddy’, a half breed or a half caste. They were all attempts to control me, persecute me or oppress me. None of my abusers really knew me other than I was of Irish descent. I was abused for who I was, not for my character or actions. I suppose you may say that explains the gypsy fighting. You see, even I can fall into the trap of racial profiling.

Now I expect any Ukippers reading this, currently have their fists balled up in a fit of rage and are puce of face. If that is the case then calm down. I have more respect for you Ukippers and your crazy anti-immigrant rhetoric and irrational fear of foreigners than I do for the Tory party, which is full of closet racists, sexists and homophobes. At least UKIP is open and honest about the fact that they dislike foreigners, working women or gays.

 As I have previously stated, racism is based in the fear of the stranger rather than facts. The more multiculturalism increases within a community so the level of racism within that community diminishes as long as there is integration. Hence the reason UKIP fails to make any inroads into London, the most multi-cultural city in Britain but also the wealthiest. And there you have the root cause to the underlying problem. Immigrants are not the problem, politicians and the poverty they inflict through their policies are the problem, because they act in mendacious and self serving ways and are happy to facilitate and encourage the scapegoating of immigrants as the reason when in fact it’s because it’s politicians, all politicians, including UKIP, who are the problem because a) they are not very good at their job, and b) more interested in serving the affairs of the ruling elite (aka, The Establishment, The Monarchy and The Corporations). UKIP converts are just expendable foot soldiers in this dirty war.

However, I do have some questions for UKIP voters. I think we can all agree now that most Ukippers are either consciously or sub-consciously racist and I do not condemn them, I just consider that their reasons are illogical. I am more concerned with why UKIP voters would support a party that appears to lack any policies whatsoever other than ones built around exiting Europe and stopping immigration from certain countries. The policies they do have are either self serving, cruel and inhumane or cretinous.

After the questions I will demonstrate why UKIP is not anti-establishment.

The questions will take a rhetorical form (that’s a question where the answer is implied within the question). Now I've provided, what some may believe to be a somewhat patronising definition of rhetorical, only because recent research has shown that the average UKIP voter is likely to be white, older and less educated, so I’m trying to be sensitive to their needs. You see, yet again I’ve fallen into the trap of believing what I read and what I am told rather than drawing my own conclusions........... making generalisations about strangers really is quite easy........... but also very lazy.

Here are my questions:

Why do UKIP voters consider that UKIP is an anti-establishment party when its leader is a privately educated, ex-city stockbroker who lives in the Home Counties?

What is UKIP’s policy on Education? Have they got one?
Do you believe it should be legal for a man to rape or assault his wife? UKIP do.
Do you believe all house building on the green belt should be stopped? UKIP do.

If you want to withdraw from the European Union, what will be the fate of the thousands of British retiree’s currently living in Spain and Portugal? Surely if they have to return to Britain, will we not have a lot of disorientated, sunburnt geriatrics, high on sangria and Werthers Originals, wandering the streets looking to buy a two day old Daily Mail?

Do you believe that the NHS should be privatised? UKIP do.

Do you really believe that Maternity Pay should be withdrawn? UKIP do.

Do you really believe that there should be a flat rate of tax, (30%- 35%?), where multi millionaires pay the same rate of tax as somebody earning £10,000 per annum. UKIP do.

Do you believe employment rights should be watered down for employees who work for small and medium businesses (holiday pay removed?) to the point where workers are nothing more than waged slaves who can be sacked at the whim of a boss?  UKIP do.

If Britain withdraws from Europe, how will UKIP replace the jobs lost when companies such as Nissan relocate to mainland Europe?

 If Britain withdraws from Europe what is UKIP’s policy for helping British companies cope with the increase in trade tariffs they will have to pay, which will inevitably lead to price increases?

Why does Nigel Farage pronounce his surname Feraj, when surely it should be pronounced rhyming with garage?

Why did 6 UKIP MEP's vote against a resolution that would prevent the illegal trade of ivory into Europe as well as leading to stockpiles of ivory being destroyed.. The MEP's were Nigel Farage, Paul Nuttall Gerrard Batten,John Stuart, William Dartmouth and Derek Roland.

Why did Nigel Farage give an endorsement for e-cigarettes? Did it have anything to do with UKIP receiving a £50,000 donation from an e-cigarette manufacturer? That appears a bit smelly. Imagine the scandal if it was discovered that a party leader from the Tories, Labour or the Libdem’s had espoused the benefits of, say, placing a bet on the Grand National, only for it to be discovered they had received a donation from the gambling industry.

This is not an exhaustive list, but, as apparently, Ukippers are supposedly less educated, I will restrict the list, as I don’t want to tire you out. Oh know I’ve done it again. This lazy stereotyping is so easy to do,...... isn’t it?

These questions, or more pertinently the answers, are the real tests for supporters of UKIP as to whether UKIP is a serious political party. At the moment the jury is out, so far out its almost invisible to the eye. Perhaps blaming immigrants for the failures in your own lives is a convenient approach; you portray yourselves as unwitting victims of devious foreigners, rather than confronting politicians who consistently fail you. Some say that once you introduce Hitler into the argument you have lost it, but using Hitler is useful shorthand for demonstrating how politicians use a vulnerable minority within society as scapegoats, with the objective of achieving their own political aims whilst hiding their failures. The only difference in the 21^st century is that politicians are much more subtle about it.

The crux of the problem is not UKIP’s blatantly anti-foreigner agenda and its underlying misogyny and homophobia. As I have previously said, in this rambling and somewhat incoherent at times blog ( I did make it clear at the outset I was drunk, so you've only got yourself to blame reader), I understand the racist bit to a degree, I just question the way UKIP  supporters are channelling it. I personally think supporters of UKIP are just dupes of a small coterie of self interested individuals who, if cut in two would have ‘working for the benefit of the privileged white upper middle class establishment’ stamped all the way through them. If UKIP supporters’ really were anti-establishment you would support a left wing party such as The Socialist Workers Party or any party that supports a true meritocracy rather than this quasi meritocracy we currently inhabit. Maybe you could embrace Liberation Theory, now that would scare the bejesus out of the establishment ( hee hee see what I did there, Liberation Theory, bejesus.... brilliant), yet many UKIP supporters are staunch monarchists, and the Monarchy are about as establishment as it gets and are definitely not advocates of helping the poor break the shackles of poverty and rise up. Who would put the toothpaste on their toothbrushes in the morning?

 The cogent question will always be whether UKIP has realistic and responsible plans for government that will benefit the nation and whether those plans can bear scrutiny, or is it just a party of middle-aged, florid faced, white men in old school ties and blazers, trying to exorcise their inbred phobias about ‘darkies’, ‘chinks’, pakis,’ and ‘commies’, and are keen to break free from the manacles of a Europe that makes all our laws, spits in our food when we’re not looking and would sleep with our wives if it wasn't for the fact that they are all gay ( the Europeans, not the wives). Oh no.... guess what I just did there, yep,... that’s right.

The answers to the rhetorical questions I have posed are proof that UKIP are not really a fully formed inclusive party with workable solutions or policies for a nation, and that UKIP, like the current coalition government, is really only concerned with serving the interests of a small self perpetuating cohort of their golf and country club mates. This anti-establishment bluster is just a smokescreen. UKIP is as much a part of the establishment as a bowler hat, pinstripe suit and black umbrella. Probably Farage’s choice of dress during all those years he spent among his banker and stock broker buddies.

So to conclude this rambling odyssey with concise answers to the questions posed in the heading.

Is UKIP racist? Yes, because their policies and views are based on generalisations and stereotypes and not on facts.

Is UKIP anti-establishment? No. It is populated by ex- bankers, royalists, reactionaries, defrocked former conservatives, denizens of the Home Counties and ex-public school boys with a few working class oiks thrown in for colour. It is as establishment as the Public School System, The Military, The Monarchy and The Civil Service

Be careful what you wish for Ukippers. Be very careful what you wish for.

Footnote: I would like to make it clear that when I claim that we are all racist to varying degrees I mean all. Asian, African, Hispanic, White, Arab, Black, Slavic, Scandinavian, Afro Caribbean etc. All creeds and all colours.

Prince Charles.

I’m no supporter of the Monarchy, I’m of the ‘come the revolution’ brigade, but on his comments about Putin he was right. Putin is acting like Hitler. Hitler illegally annexed the Sudetenland to supposedly protect ethnic Germans rights in the same way Putin illegally annexed the Crimea to supposedly protect the rights of ethnic Russians. 

Facts are facts and the truth often hurts.

Facts not Populist Bul*Sh*t from the media and the BBC.

Here is what REALLY happen during the recent council elections.

Liberal Democrats lost 254 seats.
Tories lost 172 seats.
UKIP gained 128 seats.
Labour GAINED! (although you wouldn't believe it from the media coverage, particularly the BBC's), 334 seats!

Tories Lost! 12 councils.
Ukip gained none.
Labour WON! 5 councils.

and finally. Ukip's vote was 6% down! on the previous council elections.

Police Complaint.

A manager of a luxury designer handbag shop has described the police’s reaction to a £150,000 burglary at his shop as lacklustre. I think someone should tell the manager of the luxury goods shop that it’s not just the police who don’t give a sh*t about his burglary.

"Life is something that happens to you while you are busy planning other things"