October 23, 2009
Second Thoughts
The morning after the night before, and I’m starting to wonder if many people were too quick to be pleased about Griffin’s apparently poor performance on Question Time. Twitter threads were mostly ecstatic about what an idiot he made of himself. Personally, I was incredibly relieved that my predictions of how poor the Question Time format would be in attempts to expose Griffin proved unfounded. I went to bed convinced that the standard “no platform” claim that you can’t expose fascists by taking them on publicly was dead in the water.
Today, I’m not so sure.
To those of us already opposed to fascism – who already knew what Nick Griffin is and what he stands for – it was a great to see him exposed up for his far-right nuttery, and to see him dig what looked like ever deeper holes through his attempts to be reasonable and blame everything on conspiracy and mis-quotation.
But in politics, perspective is everything. It’s quite possible that we avowed and established BNP-opponents saw Griffin being exposed as a liar, a racist and a conspiracy loon – but that others saw something different.
For consider the email the BNP sent out after the programme, which contained (alleged) quotes such as:
“The man’s got guts!” “At last, someone saying exactly what we all feel”. “The hand-picked audience in the studiohated what Nick had to say, but we loved it”. “I’ve never seen such political bullying on TV in my life.” “When he pointed out how all the others are racist against the English, we were all cheering”.
OK, so that’s how BNP members are supposed to have responded. Entirely predictable, I’m sure you’ll agree. But can we be sure it was just BNP members who felt that way?
The BNP email – as well as claiming that Griffin was “bullied” – goes on to state:
“Most of all though, this wasn’t a proper Question Time at all. The usual format was done away with for the first time in 30 years as the BBC over-compensated for allowing us on by setting things up for a televised lynching.
There was nothing about current affairs at all; no postal strike, nothing about the announcement that Tony Blair is about to be appointed EU President, nothing about the continued slaughter of young British soldiers in Afghanistan, nothing about the latest stages of the banking crisis and the scandal of the Government propping up corrupt banks while imposing savage cuts on essential services. On all those subjects and many more, the BNP’s nationalist position offers a real alternative to the three old internationalist parties.”
And here’s the rub: they’re right. Griffin was bullied, it was a TV lynching, and that was in no way shape or form a typical episode of Question Time. (So perhaps my original reservations still stand; if the BNP ever get to do a “normal” question time, things could be very different). Last night it was most definitely “Get Griffin”.
Of course, I have no problem with programmes that attack Griffin and the BNP per se. I’m all for exposing what he and they are. But I do have worries about tactics and implications. For let’s suppose that it wasn’t just BNP members who felt that Griffin’s treatment was unfair. Let’s suppose many of the disaffected white working class of Lancashire, Yorkshire and Humber, the Midlands, London and everywhere else tuned in to watch this special event, not least due to the enormous pre-broadcast hype. Let’s suppose that many of these people don’t normally watch Question Time.
How many of these people saw – like us – a frothing, conspiracy-spouting, uncomfortable, evasive racist? How many saw a bloke who claims to be standing up for the white working class being hounded and jeered and persecuted by the snouts-in-the-trough piggies of Westminster?
There’s (less than conclusive, to say the least) evidence that some people certainly may have felt the latter. From the BBC’s Have Your Say section (h/t to Grace):
“This was not the normal agenda of QT, it was a personal lynching by the LW PC brigade aimed at Mr Griffin personally.”
“This wasn’t Question Time, this was ‘bash the BNP in an orchestrated ambush time’. A missed opportunity to discuss important matters and policy for the various parties.”
“Absolutely pointless, none of the issues affecting the British public were addressed.”
Sure, those comments could have been posted by BNP activists. But they could quite easily have come from ordinary, angry people who after years of reading hate-filled Daily Mail or Sun lies have made the logical leap to sympathising with the BNP.
Overall, I’m inclined to believe that Griffin’s bizarre conspiracy claims (I got to 8 separate citations of conspiracy in the first 20 minutes before getting bored of counting), the fact he refused to repudiate his holocaust denying past, and his unashamed affiliations with the KKK whilst sat next to the commendable Bonnie Greer will have weighed heavily against him. I don’t think most people are stupid, and hence I’m inclined to believe most people will have been less than impressed. But Griffin did well on the issue of Iraq vis-a-vis Labour, and on immigration all three of the main parties danced a very BNP tune.
My point? Just because Griffin came across like a cornered idiot to us doesn’t mean that everyone else watching necessarily came to the same conclusions. Again, chickens should not yet be counted.
Kevin said,
October 23, 2009 at 3:10 pm
I agree – it was a sort of mild sofa-style lynching, with a load of people prepared to shout at and bully another human, ironically as a stand against fascism. A poor performance by the politicians on the panel; the only person who came out looking good was Bonnie Greer.
Nick Griffin says that he wants the UK to remain a Christian country – no-one asked what he meant by that, and how his views can be reconciled with the Jesus of the Bible. See my thoughts here, if you want to, written before the event. http://theblogofkevin.wordpress.com/2009/10/22/bnp-bbc-omg-luv-asap-2b-free/
Thanks.
Grace said,
October 23, 2009 at 3:13 pm
100% agreed.
if even someone like my mum (opponent of bnp, very middle-class) can feel a little bit sympathetic towards griffin, i shudder to think what the disaffected, perhaps sitting-on-the fence working class would have thought
David Weber said,
October 23, 2009 at 6:23 pm
“And here’s the rub: they’re right.”
They aren’t. Question Time’s format has always, *always* been flexible to the audience, and this audience overwhelmingly asked questions about the BNP.
“that was in no way shape or form a typical episode of Question Time.”
Of course. Neither was the episode at the height of the Expenses Scandal. No episode is, in fact, entirely typical — it’s a feature of the show.
“How many saw a bloke who claims to be standing up for the white working class being hounded and jeered and persecuted by the snouts-in-the-trough piggies of Westminster?”
Here’s the thing; if people saw that, they’re already delusional, and perhaps the fallout — and the analysis — will cause them to question their own beliefs. Perhaps it won’t, but the fact remains that Griffin was consistently challenged on the basis of facts. It wasn’t just the politicians, it was the audience. One of the great things about QT is that it is flexible to the Audience, but not out of control — there’s a real interplay between panellists, moderator and audience in terms of the direction discussion goes. Of course, there are many downsides, mainly due to this feel — which makes it unsuitable for rigorous policy analysis and more theatrical than many forms of debate — but it’s not prone to the type of hijacking by the “political class” that the BNP would doubtless complain of.
“There’s (less than conclusive, to say the least) evidence that some people certainly may have felt the latter. From the BBC’s Have Your Say section (h/t to Grace):”
The BBC HYS section is notorious for being dominated by far-right lunatics, as are in fact many of the BBC’s opinion pages. I don’t think they’re very representative — particularly when you consider the fact that the BNP supporters would have been very mobilised yesterday.
“But Griffin did well on the issue of Iraq vis-a-vis Labour, and on immigration all three of the main parties danced a very BNP tune.”
Nonsense. The only panellist to support a cap system was Warsi. Straw supported flexible policies which respond to circumstances (he didn’t communicate this very effectively, admittedly, but that was essentially the point he was making re: vacancies in the health system etc..). Huhne hedged his bets, which annoyed me, and is probably the most obvious example of a party avoiding a controversial line, but did make some detailed policy comments (one of them wrong) and it showed that the debate exists, it’s just about, as Warsi said “resources, not race”.
“My point? Just because Griffin came across like a cornered idiot to us doesn’t mean that everyone else watching necessarily came to the same conclusions. Again, chickens should not yet be counted.”
Agreed, in that no-one should expect one edition of QT to immediately swing against the BNP. But at least the debate is being conducted more openly now, and at least people are given the chance to see Griffin exposed. If they’re deluded enough not to see that when he’s subjected to intense debate and pressure, then these people will be far harder to win around. But it doesn’t mean that we don’t have a responsibility to try.
Duncan said,
October 23, 2009 at 9:28 pm
How many saw a bloke who claims to be standing up for the white working class being hounded and jeered and persecuted by the snouts-in-the-trough piggies of Westminster?
Well put.
I really don’t see what people are getting so worked up about here though, this is essentially a side issue. To put it bluntly, few of the BNP’s core constituency watch Question Time.
The fact that Griffin was invited to appear on Question Time is a *symptom* of a long running process of normalisation not a *cause* of their increased popularity generated by a stamp of legitimacy from the BBC.
Paul Sagar said,
October 24, 2009 at 11:08 am
OK, super busy, so don’t have time to reply to comments (though David, you make some good,strong points).
Duncan:
“The fact that Griffin was invited to appear on Question Time is a *symptom* of a long running process of normalisation not a *cause* of their increased popularity generated by a stamp of legitimacy from the BBC.”
That’s probably the most intelligent – and accurate – thing that’s been written on this whole debacle.
Grace said,
October 24, 2009 at 4:26 pm
oh dear, facebook friend’s status
“BNP FOR LIFE!…Mate he had everyone against him and he stil sat there and had the bolloks to say what he felt when e.other politition there pussied it!”