Share |

Wednesday, 1 February 2012

'Hope Not Hate': Undermining Democracy

Edwin Greenwood, writer of the brilliantly humorous Dogwash blog, has today written a piece entitled ‘Off the books’ in which he draws attention to the dubious nature of two ‘Campaigns Officers’ posts advertised by the Hope Not Hate organisation on the House of Commons website w4mp. The overview appended to the post descriptions in the advertisement are very telling, and point to the fundamentally anti-democratic nature of Hope Not Hate:

This prompts Edwin Greenwood to comment:
“Whatever your view of the BNP itself, either now or at the height of its brief period of ascendancy a couple of years ago, there is something very dubious about all of this. The funding and conduct of election campaigns is subject to close supervision by the Electoral Commission. Or at least that is what applies to the candidates and their parties. And yet here is an organization spending significant sums and deploying significant resources in opposing a specific, individual party. And it does so entirely unaccountably and without limit.”
His analysis and misgivings are spot on. Read the article in full here. It seems to me that the anti-democratic intent and mode of operations of this organisation and kindred campaigns such as UAF and Searchlight merit a major exposé. Would this not serve as an excellent focus for a Channel 4 Dispatches investigation?


  1. Durotrigan - are you a fan of this guy?

  2. I remember being surprised many years ago by the journalist Nick Cohen seriously suggesting that the Post Office union tell its members to refuse to deliver election material from the BNP. What is it about the principle of freedom of speech, even for the unpleasant or non-p.c. , that so many find so difficult to understand?

  3. Am I a 'fan' of Lake? No. He is not, to the best of my knowledge, a nationalist. Why do you ask?

  4. Yes, you're right Patty: the CWU did urge its workers not to deliver publicity for the BNP, and I believe that their members did generally follow this 'recommendation'. Did this action contravene democratic principles? Certainly! Here in the UK we live in a heavily controlled and regimented 'democracy'. The Left enforce a 'no platform' policy to what they term the 'Far Right', as they know that the latter cannot be defeated by their arguments.

  5. I asked because your blog has interesting commentary about nationalist figures and I thought this might cover a 'counter-jihadist' like Lake. He is connected with the EDL, which you do comment on...

  6. That's a fair question. I've not written anything about Lake, and I'm certainly not a 'fan' of some of the things that he's said or advocated, which on occasion have veered beyond what I would deem to be the sort of politics that I could condone. Lake is best left to write about himself and his position on 4Freedoms.

    Although my blog links to some sites that define themselves as ‘counterjihad’ and some of my interests and concerns overlap with theirs, I am certainly not an advocate of military adventurism in the Muslim world. You will not catch me banging the drum for a military attack upon Iran. Much as I dislike the Iranian leadership, I've nothing against ordinary Iranians.

  7. Come to think of it Anonymous, given that both Lake and Chris Knowles (Aeneas) have recently been sacked or suspended because of their involvement with the EDL, I'll perhaps take a look at this in a piece in the coming week or so, for within the context of the post-Breivik witch-hunt it does merit some comment.


Comments that call for or threaten violence will not be published. Anyone is entitled to criticise the arguments presented here, or to highlight what they believe to be factual error(s); ad hominem attacks do not constitute comment or debate. Although at times others' points of view may be exasperating, please attempt to be civil in your responses. If you wish to communicate with me confidentially, please preface your comment with "Not for publication". This is why all comments are moderated.