Friday, 23 October 2009

"Anti-fascists" to the rescue

It’s a scene reminiscent of Hitler’s Brownshirts or Mussolini’s fascist storm troopers. Violent thugs try to block a democratically-elected politician from speaking, throwing stones, smashing windows, chanting and threatening.

What do? Call the police? The police are already here trying to uphold the law, but are overwhelmed by the violent mob. Nothing else to do other than to call in some anti-fascist reinforcement then.

Oh wait! The violent mob are the anti-fascists.

Strange, no?

We’re talking here of course about the attempt by BNP leader Nick Griffin to appear on the BBC Questions and Answers programme. He’s been legally and democratically elected, and the BBC, surprisingly for them, felt that he should be given an opportunity to explain the unpopular (unpopular with the BBC, that is) views of his party. And in front of a hand-picked hostile audience.

Seems reasonable. But the ‘anti-fascists’ don't like the idea of an elected party leader, whose views they don't like, being allowed to speak in public. To my simple mind that is the essence of fascism. Close down debate by force and violence.

Yet the MSM keep referring to these yobs as ‘anti-fascist’.

Yet another reason why the blogosphere is driving these Neanderthals in the MSM into irrelevance.

51 comments: said...

The problem is, the Weimar Republic had hate speech laws. It used them freely against the Nazis. Far from stopping Hitler, they only made his day when he became Chancellor. They enabled Hitler to confront Social Democratic Party chairman Otto Wels, who stood up in the Reichstag to protest Nazi suspension of civil liberties, with a quotation from the poet Friedrich Schiller:

"'Late you come, but still you come,'" Hitler pointed at the hapless deputy. "You should have recognized the value of criticism during the years we were in opposition [when] our press was forbidden, our meetings were forbidden, and we were forbidden to speak for years on end."

W Baker said...

I listen to Radio 4 pretty regularly. I have never seen the newsreaders so exercised. (Mainly describing Robin Lustig, the World Tonight's reader.)

Lustig's knickers were so wet with the idea that the other parties had clobbered Griffin in a "debate" that when the inevitable media topic of how the BBC had seen huge ratings increases, Lustig's voice went shallow and rashly faint as he appeared to reach female climax. When it was pointed out by several casual observers that it really wasn't an exchange of ideas, but rather a public interrogation, Lustig sounded as if he'd been raped - and by his own hand.

Pretty pathetic all the way 'round.

Of course there was no debate about it. Everyone simply grilled Griffin about his views on race, immigration, etc. He did fail St. Peter's test on entrance to heaven by appearing to waffle on the Holocaust question. If you answer 5,999,999 or less, St. Pete sends you straight to hell.

Question Time is simply an establishment circle jerk. It always has been. It used to be the public servant saints from Oxbridge, now it's chock full of stupid female MP's, crusaders for buggery, and flower children who see the world imploding at the poles and swamping their Lake District getaways.

SAVANT said...

Two great posts guys. HAdn't been aware of the Weimar laws. Most interesting indeed.

And yes, the programme was just a chance for the righteous (riotious?) to show their piety by having a go at Griffin.

Still, my own view is that anyone with even a partially open mind would be put off by the spectacle. But maybe that's just me.

W Baker said...


Enlighten me. I've heard the word fascist/fascism bandied about for so long in the British Isles to describe any person out of step with the prevailing ideology and/or national narrative that I'm confused.

We always learned that fascism was the intermingling between the state and private business for a national aim, a la Mussolini. Sort of like the Pentagon and the mercenary contractor, Blackwater. Or the US telecommunications industry eavesdropping for the NSA. Private business carrying out government aims for a profit...

At what point over there do you become a fascist, as Griffin is so regularly described? What's the general taxonomy of official undesirables over there? Do you have to be described as a racist before you reach fascist level. And I'm sure Holocaust waffler is probably less bad, but equally deserving of perdition, as Holocaust deny-er? (Unsure of just how one spells one who denies the official story of any event..!)

winston said...

Yes, it's Orwell and 1984. And the beeb completely loaded the audience against him.

Viking said...

Absolutely, Savant.

I watched it this morning,and although Griffin came off badly he was grilled by two non-white audience members who were so eloquent and obviously integrated into society that they were likely the kind of gents the BNP DON'T want to expel from Britain. He could have said that but didn't. Not that he had much chance to speak.

Geert Wilders is a far better politician.

I agree completely that it was just a piety-competition. Witness the eagerness of the protestors, panellists and audience in their attempts to out-shine each other in their disapproval.

Anonymous said...

Is it not ironic that one of the points Nick Griffin was grilled on was the holocaust, and most of the “anti-fascist” demonstrators would have agreed with him!

Anonymous said...

It was incredibly difficult for him no doubt, but Nick Griffin performed poorly.

He failed to learn the most basic rule of public discourse - if you're explaining you're losing. The ogther elementary tool for every politician is to have a statement ready to role out on any subject, and to use it no matter what the question.

Shame really

Anonymous said...


Good analysis. Just damned good. Gotta give to Griffin, though, for having balls of steel. God love him. And how can all of the screaming "anti-facists" not recognize that their beliefs and idiotic actions are ensuring their cultural and genetic demise???" I just dont' get it.

Anonymous said...

To W Baker,

I regularly enjoy reading your posts on Savant's blog. I like your style of writing. What part of the States to you hale from?

SAVANT said...

W Baker: I agree with your interpretation of fascism. Technically it would be what you say, the corporative structure, trade unions emasculated, no free press, strongly authoritarian generally, strongly nationalistic.

Of course today it means anything that the prevailing "liberal" concensus deems unacceptable.

Zngr said...

Anti-racism is the new racism, anti-fascism the new fascism, dictated by the politically correct dogma.

What the fuck is wrong with us Europeans? Jesus Christ this is getting annoying.

I was a much happier man when I did not care about politics. And it was easier back when we were left alone to live in peace and ply our trade.

But unfortunately we're not anymore.

Shame to hear Griffin wasn't entirely up to speed, but then again, when you face hostile people who are "morally on the right" they are extremely difficult to argue away as the liberal consensus dictates they are always right even when they are wrong.

It's like a typical internet straw-man argument with ad hominem attacks mixed in. But in real life! Hooray!

In Finland, the discussion about multiculturalism and immigration is hardly EVER about the issue itself. Instead, the discussion circles around the character, or lack of character, of those who wish to discuss it from a less than a positive view. There is only one correct way to discuss it: that multiculturalism is enriching and that all immigration enriches and empowers the Finnish society. If anyone dares to suggest this is not so, his or her person or motives will be attacked, instead of analytical refutation.

Example: one reason for mass immigration, we are told, is the declining “potential support ratio” (PSR), usually expressed in the ratio of individuals of working age (15-64) to the number of people of retirement age (65 and over) in a given society. Immigrants replace aging Europeans and thus help sustain welfare state. Right? Currently the PSR in Finland is roughly 1.3, that is one working adult has to support 1.3 persons. In the case of Somalis, the PSR is... 9. One working person has to support 9 Somalis. In general, the PSR of immigrants as a group is close to 2 or more. So immigrants actually further negatively impact the PSR of a Western country. Yet, when one presents this fact, instead of attempting to refute it by statistics, or explaining how this will somehow change, the messengers motives will be questioned. Why is he saying such things? Racism? Bigotry? Is he a fascist? Should we bring him to a human rights tribunal for crimes against humanity?

Recently an aged professor in Finland (being an old man, he figured out he does not have much to lose) published a book about the decline of Western civilization and the problems if immigration and multiculturalism. Which is positive on itself.

But as usual instead of meeting the facts and refuting them or even attempting to refute them, the multiculti clique attacked his person, calling him out for fear mongering, hysterics, lack of intellectual honesty, overt conservatism, fascism or maybe racial motives.

How do you discuss with people like that?

eh said...

About fascism: good question, good discussion.

But you miss the point. Or perhaps there's a forest/trees issue here.

It does not have to be defined, even less its etiology explained. It's just a smear, an ad hominem. Like racist. It's so overused it has lost all meaning.

So it means anything, everything the (acc)user wants.

Because everyone knows what someone who's called a fascist or a racist is: they're a bad person. And therefore their ideas are bad, not worth thinking about, and certainly not to be dignified with a counterargument.

It's just another way society has been dumbed down.

eh said...

Griffin is not the guy to lead the BNP if they are really serious about electoral success. Obviously. While he shows guts and has his moments, he drags around too much baggage, there's too much of a whiff of the brown-shirter about him.

Personally I think he and the party showed poor judgment by agreeing to this appearance when it was so damn apparent what it was going to be like, what the real purpose of it was.

'Most Britons actually support BNP policies'

A majority of people back the British National Party's policies, according to a poll released today.

The BNP has to take advantage of this resonance, tune into it, and build the intellectual basis of the party. They could do worse than to engage a guy like Jared Taylor to help them as editor.

But the YouGov survey found that many people disown the policies once they are associated with the BNP.

Because the BNP has a mountain of demonization to climb, it cannot afford too many missteps -- time is slowly but surely running out to preserve the demographic heritage of the UK.

Munin said...

Two fascinating articles:

"Labour wanted mass immigration to make UK more multicultural, says former adviser."

"I remember coming away from some discussions with the clear sense that the policy was intended - even if this wasn't its main purpose - to rub the Right's nose in diversity and render their arguments out of date."

Viking said...


what do you think of the Perussuomalaiset party? Are they a step in the right direction?

kerdasi amaq said...

If you're not a Socialist; if you're not a Communist; if you don't blindly swallow their propaganda; and finally if you have any money, and a decent job, and you are opposed to those who take these away from you, you're, ipso facto, a facist.

Zngr said...

@viking some comments about the True Finns can be found here, on Savant's blog:

So it's still 50/50. They might "sell out" completely to go mainstream (i.e. score points with majority parties and gain opportunities to work with anyone, co-operate - which might be unavoidable) or they might accept some party members oppose multiculturalism and stick with them. The latter, in my opinion, would garner them the most votes. In fact I KNOW it is so. But it would pressure the party leadership to a breaking point. They might not have the guts to see it through. If they continue to include politicians who go against the grain in these issues, the majority parties might simply refuse to co-operate with them in EVERY possible issue. This is a real problem, which I suppose the Swedish Democrats also suffer from (but to a far wider degree compared to True Finns).

It's mostly in the end about which way the discussion in public goes from now on: if criticism of mass immigration and multiculturalism becomes an accepted political view or at least not demonized to such a degree it is now, they will use this as a weapon. And there are more and more people speaking out, which is a good sign. I'm all for populism when it comes to these issues!

If the discourse is suffocated or censored like in the past, I'm afraid the party leaders will balk - again, if they see they will be attacked like the BNP, Pim Fortuyn's party or Geert Wilders. This means they will also fade as they will lose most of the new voters they gained during the past two years.

The True Finns were the ONLY party that unanimously voted against the recent foreigner law in Finland which opened the asylum system to basically everyone who want to claim it and manage to buy their way this far. Far and wide they are considered the most "nationalist" (that is, patriotic) party in Finland but we'll see where we go from here. They have some youngsters in the lineup that are electric and will become very good if they stick to their guns.

Another upstart is the Muutos 2011 ("Change 2011") movement. It will be a party quite soon. But they still lack momentum and experienced political players.

We'll see.

Right now it appears as the Perussuomalaiset are becoming more mainstream, they are going more PC. Unfortunately. They used to be a party for the elderly, nationalists and the countryside poor, but they have also become the opposition party for the silent and the technically savvy, high salary modern urban adults who despise PC politics and multiculturalism. It's up to them to retain or lose all of these groups. With shrewd thinking they can keep all of them - and get more.

I know some people from within the party who are trying to steer things the right way so I hope I'll know at least who to vote for when it comes to that in two years.

Anonymous said...

eh, you're correct about Griffin not being the guy. As you say he has too much baggage. In fact maybe the BNP itself has too much baggage. It's hard to shake off it's neo-Nazi roots, even tho' many popular parties have similar undemocratic credentials.

maybe with their increasing electoral popularity some of the main parties will borrow their ideas? I'm not hopeful.

winston said...

eh is absolutely correct. it's an interesting debating point, but otherwise no sense in trying to define fascism. As he says it's just a catch-all term of abuse which, as zngr says, can be used when the facts are inconvenient.

Cyd said...

Re: "too much baggage"

Funny, the anti-racist race replacement advocates couldn't give a flying fuck about the racialist's attempt to appear as "respectable" and "baggage free". You see, they are in it to win, which means to everyone else's detriment or demise. While we are tripping over ourselves to appear "good", "respectable" they smear us as Nazis anyway. The thing is, all of this cultural and racial tinkering via mass migrations will come to a head at some point, like it or not. People are still too comfortable and that is why they want to appear respectable.

Now I know that the issue is not the anti-racists but more the undecided. With each passing day and each atrocity that befalls us, more undecideds will be converted. It is not our job to convert everyone because that is an impossibility. There will be causalities, and probably not an insignificant amount either. This is a war we are in. Let's not kid ourselves.

Elaine said...

I think NG appearing on QT was following in the footsteps of Le Pennn in France who came second to Sarkozy in the last GE there. Le Penn was given the same break on French television as Griffen was given on QT, so it was on the face of it a coup for free speech, until they changed the format of the programme and turned it into the NG show.

NG made some very bad mistakes. His incisive point to Jack straw was knocked down when he failed to point out to warsi that at least he was elected, she lost in the last election by almost 5000 votes, and he never hit back at her about the two men kissing or Islam at all. He really lost out there, but he was nervous, in a panel of six people five to one against him, even Dimbleby forgot his impartiality/chair position and went for him. Reminded me very much of what Gerry Adams got on RTE when first questioned on the late late show by Gaybo....very similar.

I don't think it was done for free speech, more for boosting ratings of the bbc and to savage the BNP, and influence public opinion against that party, shame iit didn't go the bbc's way.....instead the BNP got a real shot in the arm, and a poll to suggest more people would vote for them now than before. Good one.

winston said...

eh, you're correct about Griffin not being the guy. As you say he has too much baggage. In fact maybe the BNP itself has too much baggage. It's hard to shake off it's neo-Nazi roots, even tho' many popular parties have similar undemocratic credentials.

maybe with their increasing electoral popularity some of the main parties will borrow their ideas? I'm not hopeful.

SAVANT said...

Yes munin, but you're not surprised, are you? This simply could not have happened by chance. and whatever chance we in ireland had of avoiding it (not mcuh, given the useless wankers in charge) we had none once the UK became a virtual free-entry zone.

At least there's a possibility that there might be some public blame allocated, but I'm not holding my breath.

Anonymous said...

Thanks for all the supportive comments about Nick and the BNP. As a long time member I think the best way to grow the party is to join and contribute, i.e knock on doors, etc. We have lots of elderly members who do it - that's how Nick became an MEP.
As for the lynching, it was good for the party. That's all that matters. The MSM have been useful but it's boringly predictable and a lot of them are just nuts.

Munin said...

Savant - I am surprised.

A conspiracy is less common than a cock-up.

(In my own poor country the madness did not start as a conspiracy with the intention to engineer a new demography.)


Can you please explain, Savant: How did Ireland become country of choice for Nigerians? Why Nigeria??

Anonymous said...

Great Thread:
Very likely the BBC did do this as a stunt, but I hope it backfired. As Posters have said most people in Britain support the major parts of the BNP agenda. Seeing NG atttacked is seeing themselves attacked, this is actually good news. NG is not a great leader, imagine Margaret Thatcher at her height being set upon by such a baying mob, she would have had them whimpering in a minute, but that is what huge intellectual horsepower coupled with aggressive spirit will do for you.
As for defining fascism; the essence of fascism is the grasping of the authority of the state without the permission of the governed. By that definition virtually every politician in any age has been a fascist.
Ron Paul is about the only current US polician who I could say is not a fascist.

Anonymous said...

Please do not give taxes to the BBC. These weirdos are systematically, using your money to destroy YOU. If you are worried about their so-called (powerless if ignored) licence inspectors,then get rid of your TV set. You will hardly be missing much, unless you find Eastenders entertaining. Surely, a very small price to pay to put these wankers on the dole where they belong.

SAVANT said...

Hi Munin. Re Nigerians, I imagine you've read this post

Why do they like Ireland? A number of reasons. First, welfare rates are much higher than in the UK, our deporting 'system' is a laughable shambles, you are entitled, or were, to Irish citizenship if you came in pregnat, claimed asylum and then gave birth to a new cultural enricher here.

At one stage over 30% OF ALL BIRTHS in Dublin's maternity hospitals were to Africans! Once they had citizenship you could then bring in various 'family' members, so net effect you have whole regions of Irish cities now taken over by them.

SAVANT said...

anon 10.33. Glad to help. Would appreciate if you'd link to our site as traffic has gone way down since the Google thought police3 struck.

Good luck!

W Baker said...

Over here in the States the media deals with undesirables in two ways: they either ignore them at all costs, or they repeatedly fillet them until they break. Nothing new, I've seen it in Europe as well.

But this media treatment can backfire, and violently, if played correctly. And the person under scrutiny doesn't have to be blameless and without 'baggage'. When you're ignored for years, and then suddenly discovered, you have to repeatedly ask just how out of the touch the media is for missing this groundswell for years. Can the media's experts and talking heads be so intelligent when they've missed covering this or that phenomenon, etc.

If you're repeatedly and publicly rectally probed, you have to play the beaten-up underdog. Not the victim; but little guy. Most, average people will forgive a fellow for not being able to take on 5 or 10 people at once. If Griffin's smart, he'll develop some talking points, that play on ideas of 'if I or my little party is such scourge to society, why does it take so many pols and so many demonstrators to either "prove" me wrong or squash what I'm trying to say? What are you so afraid of? Are you genuinely afraid of ideas? Gosh, it's not like the BNP has the power to order tanks and planes into foreign lands to needlessly kill little brown people! Last time I checked that's what the multiculturists in the other parties were calling for. Free Yugoslavia, Iraq, and Afghanistan by culling certain portions of their populations. Just who are the real radicals here?'

Or, 'I'm simply suggesting that disparate cultures and ethnicities don't intermingle well despite their best intentions. For those suggestions, I have hundreds of people show up every where I go and threaten my life. My political opponents, however, are actively involved in slaughtering disparate cultures and ethnicities from Basra to Pakistan. -- Yes, real blood, splattered organs, crying children, homeless and raped women, and destroyed ways of life. And you're accusing me of being dangerous? Just what kind of drugs are you people on?'

W Baker said...

More quips for NG and the BNP.

'So let me see if I've got this right. We, the Americans, and the rest of NATO pay $300 million for a "democratic" election in Afghanistan. Heck, we've only dropped hundreds of billions of dollars/pounds/euros, eight years, and countless lives in that country promoting "democracy". We all figure after that long and with that much help, they're ready to shape up and act like their Western betters. Or so Mssrs Brown, Cameron, Clegg and their choirs at the BBC and the Rupert Murdoch media empire remind us at every opportunity. And even after an election that Robert Mugabe would be envious of, these same people are still beating the "democratic", one man/one vote drum in a country where tribe, family, and patriarchal decisions trump any political considerations.

And these same people demonize me and my poor little party because they claim to know how multiculturism really works? Who are you going to believe, a bunch of crazy multiculturists who, at gunpoint, have forced their ideas on millions of people all over the globe, or bunch of simple, hardworking folks from the north of England who just want to be left alone to live their lives amongst their own kind?

Hell, if I get one those exotic, sheepskin hats like Karzai wears and maybe even some snappy robes, do you think you could take it down a notch?'

eh said...

traffic has gone way down

Probably because content filters used at workplaces deny access; at least where I work that's the case, as it is for the BNP site too ('hate', 'discrimination', 'intolerance'). So I'm not sure how effective going after linked traffic from the BNP site will be. Not to mention how GOOG might view that.

(In my own poor country the madness did not start as a conspiracy with the intention to engineer a new demography.)

How do you know?

it was good for the party

I would be very surprised.

I know people who are among those I cited earlier -- they lean toward (some) BNP policies. But I don't know anyone who likes Griffin; at best they see him as unsavory, at worst they strongly dislike him, even find him repulsive. His (relatively) poor showing in these admittedly difficult circumstances did nothing to change that. Face it -- he's not a sympathetic figure. Very few people will feel sorry for him.

The whole thing was just a spectacle, with practically everyone there competing to see how many of Griffin's -- and therefore the BNP's -- teeth they could kick out. I don't seen any positives in that, because as I said Griffin is not someone people will feel sorry for.

SAVANT said...

W Baker, you're absolutely right. NG should have had these and similar 'mini speeches' ready for retelling. To hell with the specific question. That's what every pol dies.

For example it was crazy of him to say 'I am not and never was a Nazi'. That was sheer madness to get involved.

And yes, he does not cut a sympathetic figure. In short I'm amazed that given such an opportunity he wasn't better prepared.

A shame.

SAVANT said...

eh - yes, that's one good(?) reason. another is the search engine. When I typed in a string like 'Ireland, immigration, race' this site would come up in the first page. Now it's several pages back. I had been hitting up to 3,000 a day but these bastards have largely succeeded in cutting us off.

Anonymous said...

did anybody notice the near perfect silence in the audience when griffin said the labour party was drenched in the blood of a million iraqis , just 1 person applauded , muslims and blacks cheering on the butchers of muslims and blacks ! griffins father fought the nazis , jack straws father went to jail for refusing to fight ,

says all you need to know really .

4 rudi said...

anon 1.58: I noticed that. Given the composition of the audience it should have been a real crowdpleaser. But as you said, nada.

This was stage managed to be a hatchet job on Friffin and BNP, and no support was ever going to be forthcoming.

Munin said...

Savant - it is obvious why Nigerians love Ireland. But HOW did Nigerians discover Ireland?

Ireland is the country of choice for Nigerians.

Norway is the country of choice for Bangladeshi/Pakistani.

Sweden is the country of choice för Kurds.


How did the migration of these particular peoples to these resp. countries start?

Presumably each case is different - do you know how Ireland came to the attention of especially Nigerians?


Eh asks, how I know, that the madness did not start as a conspiracy - from a political party - with the intention to engineer a new demography in my own poor country.

To the best of my knowledge the government had NO plans to engineer a new demography when immigation policy was radically altered 1975.

And surely (e.g.) USA did not change its immigration policy 1965 because the Democrats wanted to engineer a new American demography and "rub [the Republicans'] nose in diversity"?

Zngr said...

Savant, how come you are not moving the blog to another site?

I know it's a lot of trouble, and some work and history will go with it, but link it from here and see how it goes. Or something.

You would gain your lost readers back in a year.

SAVANT said...

Munin - I imagine the reason different countries attract different cultural enrichers is that the initial lot get establsihed, learn how to game the system, and get the 'folks back home' - so-called family - to come and joing the fun.

'Family reunions' constitute a massive component of any ethnic minority in Europe. So much so that several countries (e.g. Frand, Denmark) have drawn up spec ial laws and other measures to counteract it.

SAVANT said...

Hi zngr. I know I should but the thought of going through all that crap makes me weak. It also seems that WP is not very usable. But yes, I'll have to consider this move.

ramsi said...

Maybe you shud remover 'your' image as well. I've seen people keel over at the sight of it.

Anonymous said...

Zngr - "Why is he saying such things? Racism? Bigotry? Is he a fascist? Should we bring him to a human rights tribunal for crimes against humanity?"

eh "Because everyone knows what someone who's called a fascist or a racist is: they're a bad person. And therefore their ideas are bad, not worth thinking about, and certainly not to be dignified with a counter-argument."

It takes some mental discipline, but I try turn the tables around with a calm retort, such as... "If you say so. How about you?"

It momentarily puts them off their game. And remember, you're debating with sparring partners who've relinquished any/all of their abilities to independent reasoning, in addition to losing their sense of humour.

"Big Brother" wouldn't have it any other way.

leadpb said...


Funny as hell.

But hey, love the man, love the image.

OK, "endure" might be more appropriate in this case.

leadpb said...

Cyd said

"People are still too comfortable and that is why they want to appear respectable."

A good observation and I think it cuts both ways, for comfort of left and right. The former clearly are in it for the win, and we are in it for what, health reasons? Griffin didn't look too healthy to me, in mind, body or spirit. We need to be strong to project strength and before you say "Churchill", one can make up for certain deficiencies with gravitas in others.

Anonymous said...

If you removed your image traffic would go up 50%. My laptop blows a fuse every time I log on!

Anonymous said...

The original causes of all this disater, the Frankfurt School, recognized a long time ago that command of the language was everything.

Langiage IS reality.. that's why we're seeing this kind of thing now.

Anonymous said...

Very good piece on VDare about this.

Afraid that yes, the performance of NG was lamentable

henryIX said...

Have watched it and am bitterly disappointed at his performance. Surely he could see that all those questions were entirely predictable? And made his response ready in advance. Perfectly clear that was what all the others did.

Big chance missed as far as I'm concerned.

Anonymous said...

Actually, there was a free press under the Italian Facist regieme. Perhaps not a very free one under National Socialism but certainly communist and democratic socialist papers were allowed their say in Facist Italy. It is only in democratic Italy were the opposite of free speech is now the case. How ironic. Or was it just the fact that Facism has been vilified as something it simply wasn't? I'll take the latter view. Tyranny is far worse under the scorned woman of "democracy" and left-centred genocratic societies of today.

Anonymous said...

Griffin still did a good job under the circumstances. It would have been his first time on a panel in front of a large hostile responsive audience.
One should take a look at his first speech in the EU parliament and you'll notice the left arm of Griffin shaking uncontrolably. Nevertheless he did it, the rest is simple growing pains and the man is still the best for the job.
He'll learn and know for the next time how to approach the situation for maxmimum effect.