Latest from UKIP Daily

It is not Racist to Fight Racism

Imagine you were living in a country with a small but growing community of neo-nazis. Imagine that you were Jewish or gay, and you began to fear that this growing community posed a threat to your life and your freedom; you began to fear that your chances of being beaten up in the street were creeping upwards day by day. So you decide to do something: you go on the internet, you talk to your friends, you stand on a soapbox in the street, and you say:

“Our country has been infiltrated by a group whose views are antithetical to our values, values that have grown in the soil of nascent liberalism, values that have guaranteed our freedom for centuries. We must defend these values; we must condemn this group, and everything they stand for; we must condemn the ideology of nazism, and help our own values to overcome it”.

Now imagine that your listeners called you ‘a racist’—they called you ‘racist’ because you defended the values of liberty and tolerance against maniacal hatred—they called you a racist because you decry racists.

Does this scenario ring any bells?

We are living in an age where anyone who claims to be a defender of ‘traditional British values’ is automatically branded a racist. This problem is not helped by the presence of people who claim to defend British values without actually doing so: The British National Party, for example, does not deserve to have the word ‘British’ in its name. When I think of ‘traditional British values’, I think: democracy, liberty, freedom of speech, freedom of religion, respect for privacy and private property, a touch of stoicism, and tolerance of those who show tolerance towards us. These are the British values worth defending, and any organisation which thinks otherwise does not deserve to call itself ‘British’. A nazi who waves a British flag is still a nazi; he should remember the only reason that flag still flies is that brave defenders of liberal values were prepared to die in order to defeat his ideological ancestors (who, by the way, allied themselves with radical Islam).

UKIP is a defender of British values. Is it the only party that is willing to defend those values? The Conservative Party has always been held to do so; this is the party whose leader recently attended the funeral of a King whose country funds terrorism, executes gay people and prohibits Jews from living and working in it (as if any would want to). What about the Labour Party? This is the party who care more about being seen as politically correct than protecting children from paedophiles, and who want to restrict our freedoms almost as much as radical Islamists do. What about the Lib Dems?….Ahem….well…what about The Green Party? This is the party who have recently made it clear that anyone in this country should be free to join ISIS or Al Qaeda.

Let me pause quickly to address that particular debacle. Imagine if, during World War II, a British citizen decided to join the Nazi party. What would happen to that British citizen? Well, they probably wouldn’t be a British citizen for much longer. I believe in freedom of association, but freedom of association works in both ways. If you want to join a terrorist organisation whose aim is to exterminate people like me, then you should not be allowed to live in this country anymore. You can join ISIS and Al Qaeda—if you move to Iraq and never come back to UK.

A minority of people call UKIP racist because UKIP is brave enough to identify a problem: there is a small but growing community of extremist Muslims (with an ideology very similar to nazism, by the way), who pose a threat to our freedom and way of life. It is emphatically not the majority of Muslims (as UKIP has had to make clear again and again and again and….), but only a growing minority. UKIP is called racist because UKIP is brave enough to propose a solution: defend British values, end political correctness, stop promoting the idea that all cultures are equal, and stop treating people with kid gloves when they treat us with machetes.

Anyone who lives in this country knows what it means to enjoy freedom of speech, freedom of conscience, democracy, and private property—even if all of those things are slowly withering away. I implore every person in this country, whether they identify as Muslim, Jew, Christian, atheist, gay, straight or whatever, provided they believe in the British values of liberty, democracy and private property, to defend Western civilisation against those who wish to destroy it and those who wish to let it crumble. You are not racists. The people you are fighting are not a race but a diverse range of ideologues (ideologues whose ideology includes racism).

If you want to fight racism and fascism and homophobia and anti-semitism and socialism and illiberalism, and if you want to defend British values, support UKIP and encourage everyone you care about to do the same.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

9 Comments on It is not Racist to Fight Racism

  1. Great article, thanks!
    There’s one more point, useful when speaking to those who call one a racist for standing up and defending British values:
    those who use this now threadbare expression have lost the argument. Any further debate with them is futile and a waste of time. Their minds are closed. One should just walk away, telling them that they’ve got nothing to contribute.

    • Thank you, colliemum. Sadly I think you are right; most of the people who shout ‘racist’ are just venting their emotions, and not expressing any reasoned opinion. I imagine if they were forced to live under Sharia law they’d suddenly release why upholding our core values is so important.

  2. ‘Racism’ and ‘racist’ are peculiar words. They used to mean discrimination against people of a different race. The races were defined as ‘Caucasian’, ‘Negro’, ‘Mongol’. Police in America still use ‘Caucasian’ to describe a white suspect; I don’t expect they use ‘Negro’ anymore. Then sometime in the latter half of the 20th century, scientists and anthropologists dismissed these ‘races’ as unscientific and inappropriate. (Someone should tell the American cops.) So we were now all one human race without distinction. Odd, then, that the words are still bandied about by all and sundry, which means that the races which no longer exist, do still exist. The terms have even been broadened in their application, so that now an Englishman being derogatory about the French or Germans can be accused of being ‘racist’ even though they belong to the same ‘Caucasian’ race of the old days. People who criticise Islam are called ‘racist’ even though Islam is not a race but a religion. We are not allowed to dislike Islam as a set of beliefs and practices without being labelled ‘Islamophobic’. No one calls jihadis who hate this country and betray its people as ‘racists’, but isn’t that what they are? There’s a great deal of contradictory and muddled thinking, which means that using ‘racist’ as an accusation and insult is futile and meaningless. It’s just one of those ‘boo’ words used to create automatic negative reactions.

    • I personally don’t think the term ‘racism’ is entirely useless. But, even if the concept of ‘race’ has no basis in fact, it it still a concept used by people, and those people’s beliefs have consequences. If people justify their actions by spouting racist ideology then they are racists. (I know it’s difficult to precisely define ‘racist ideology’, but most of the time you know it when you hear it; hating people because of their ancestry is the essence of it).

      Indeed, the jihadists are racist. I imagine if you asked people ‘name a dangerous racist organisation’ very few of them would say ‘Hamas’ or ‘Al Qaeda’ or ‘the government of Iran’, but all of these organisations antagonise people for being non-arab and non-muslim.

      I agree that race and religion are distinct, and we should really not call someone ‘racist’ for simply criticising someone’s religion. Religion is a chosen attribute. Racists discriminate based on innate attributes. Although, discrimination based on country of birth is normally called ‘xenophobia’, rather than racism.

      • I agree: ‘xenophobia’ is the correct word for fear or dislike of another nation, rather than ‘racist’. Even ‘chauvinism’ or ‘nationalism’ would do at a pinch. Unfortunately, it is no longer ‘normal’ to use the correct word. As I said, ‘racism’ is bandied about as a catch-all term without any finer distinction. For example, a few years back a Welshman living in England took his work colleagues to a Tribunal on the grounds of ‘racist’ abuse. They had referred to him as ‘Taffy’ and made Welsh-related jokes that he objected to. The use of ‘racist’ in this context is incorrect and ludicrous. Interbred as we are on these islands, practically everyone has a mixture of English, Welsh, Irish and Scottish ancestry, to whatever degree. ‘Racist/racism’ (it used to be racialist/racialism) is now used so loosely as to be a meaningless insult thrown by those who have no credible arguments.

  3. We must fight racism with everything we have, that doesn’t mean we should lie back and allow everyone to kick sand in our faces all the time

  4. The government of Turkey has recently announced that it is unable to stop at their borders people going back and forth into the countries that surround it, many of which would be described as Terrorists . Our Prime Minister was recently in Turkey and said he looked forward to the time when the EU welcomed Turkey as a new member. This would mean a population greater than our own would be able to come to the United Kingdom some of which would not even be Turkish . Thank you Mr Cameron .

  5. Well said, I agree with every word.

Comments are closed.