UKIP: an open letter
Saturday 10 August 2013
As you might expect, I've had a few e-mails and other communications on the Bloom affair. And I don't really care what he might have achieved – if anything. The key question for UKIP members is: "do you want to be represented by a racist oaf?". If "yes", then Bloom is the man for you.
If "no", then read Autonomous Mind. But some of the comments are a little depressing, as some of his readers still haven't got it. So let 's be clear. Bloom is a racist oaf. He wasn't strategising – speaking for effect. He speaks as he thinks, and what he said wasn't an accident. That is how he thinks.
The Daily Mirror makes some of the right points. Just because Bloom articulates some of the same views that any right-minded person might agree with does not mean that he speaks for them. A racist oaf is still a racist oaf, no matter what he says.
I would no more pick Bloom to represent my views on foreign aid (or anything else) then I would expect those who oppose meat consumption to accept Hitler as a spokesman on vegetarianism. If I was of a mind to accept vegetarianism, then one could argue that Hitler made a good case for it. But that really doesn't mean that I would want to hear his views on the subject.
And there are really no further points to be made. A racist oaf should not be tolerated in polite society – or in a liberal democracy. A politician who is a racist oaf should not be applauded, even if he says the right things – even if he gets a debate going. He should be shunned.
If "no", then read Autonomous Mind. But some of the comments are a little depressing, as some of his readers still haven't got it. So let 's be clear. Bloom is a racist oaf. He wasn't strategising – speaking for effect. He speaks as he thinks, and what he said wasn't an accident. That is how he thinks.
The Daily Mirror makes some of the right points. Just because Bloom articulates some of the same views that any right-minded person might agree with does not mean that he speaks for them. A racist oaf is still a racist oaf, no matter what he says.
I would no more pick Bloom to represent my views on foreign aid (or anything else) then I would expect those who oppose meat consumption to accept Hitler as a spokesman on vegetarianism. If I was of a mind to accept vegetarianism, then one could argue that Hitler made a good case for it. But that really doesn't mean that I would want to hear his views on the subject.
And there are really no further points to be made. A racist oaf should not be tolerated in polite society – or in a liberal democracy. A politician who is a racist oaf should not be applauded, even if he says the right things – even if he gets a debate going. He should be shunned.
Richard North 10/08/2013
Posts
