UKIP in a Nutshell

Why UKIP really are a joke. A quick guide, translated into English, of the party’s online policy forum found on http://www.UKIP.org (website frequently non-functional). As of May 8th 2013. Subject to spontaneous, disorganised change.

First, Google text reads, “Libertarian, non-racist party seeking Britain’s withdrawal from the European Union.”

What we stand for?

Fear. Using absurdly dark and foreboding language, clearly designed to encourage negative emotional responses, we want you to be in fear for the very fabric of society. Salvation is exclusively linked to EU withdrawal.

  1. Restore Self Government & Democracy – anti-EU statistics and information of dubious provenance. Bring all powers back to the UK.

  2. Rebuild Prosperity – anti-EU cost reductions, truisms about the state of the economy, climate change denial, reduce government, cut taxes.

  3. Protect Our Borders & Defend Our Country – anti-EU, anti-immigration, 5 year freeze, more ridiculous fear language, dubious statistics, pro-nukes.

  4. Safeguards against crime – tough on crime, more prisons, racial profiling is fine, scrap HRA, lots of money for the police, terrifying police state sort of stuff.

  5. Care and Support for All – magically fix the NHS, simplify pensions, no benefits for non-permanent residents, revert higher education to Edwardian state, deregulate education.

  6. Our Way of Life – nationalism, pro-hunting, pro-empire, pro-smoking, anti-foreigners.

About Policy Proposals

We will change our views as and when we choose because we have no political accountability yet.

Defence

The largest section on the website. Open quote, Margaret Thatcher. Reducible to – restore the military machine of the UK to roughly “height of the empire” levels. Throw money at it until we can rule the world. Security is the foundation of society.

Energy and Fishing

Actually two individual sections, but very small. Oh my… Energy is actually a link to a policy paper… taking a very long time to load… very long time indeed….

The fishing section ‘details’ taking fishing grounds back off the EU for exclusive UK use, scrapping EU quotas, not a lot really. But we have to leave the EU!

And I can’t view the policy paper because the link doesn’t work. Desperately upset to be cheated of whiff of detailed policy. But I imagine it will be a further dose of climate change denial, cut with some grade A anti-green energy policy, pro-nuclear, pro-our “green and pleasant land” patriotic nonsense. UKIP deem the aesthetics of the nuclear cooling tower better than wind turbines. Subjective says I.

Healthcare

Emphasis on reducing NHS bureaucracy by ironically hiring a quango to hack and slash, god knows UKIP don’t have the expertise, and establishing County Health Boards to localise healthcare management, more nursing, free dentists and opticians. Almost a reasonable section.

Immigration

Do I even have to do this section?

Fine, massively reduce and regulate immigration, UK is full to bursting and they say we can’t afford all these immigrants and their welfare needs, ill-defined points system for working migrants only of value to the UK, permanent residence status only available to EU folk seven years in-country, withdraw from ECHR and ECR so we can deport all the immigrants we like. All of which requires leaving the EU. But honestly… UKIP are not xenophobes.

Same-Sex Marriage

Anti-same-sex marriage. Apparently because they’re worried about encroaching upon religious sensitivities in a nation that is in inexorable religious decline and socially progressive advancement. Separation of church and state and all that. But the gays can still have civil partnerships so UKIP are not homophobes. Rather curious issue to include as a banner policy then.

Tax

Our economic outlook is worse than even the leading credit agencies like Moody’s are saying. We need to grow so we must hugely reduce taxes for the wealthy with a flat tax (currently 25%, down from 30% two weeks ago) that imposes a massively disproportionate weight of contribution on lower to medium earners. Writes off higher taxes on the wealthy as low revenue “political taxes”, no corporate tax, lower VAT, £13k tax allowance, income tax is an anti-freedom evil, so is NI and actually all taxes for that matter. Deregulate business and markets.

Generally fairly condescending stuff about how even a drunk monkey could see how much trouble we’re in. Their solution is an impossible to fund daydream. Actually references Adam Smith’s “Wealth of Nations” as a classical source. The only one besides David Ricardo’s “The Principles of Political Economy and Taxation”. Which sort of makes sense.

—————————–

There you have it folks. No more sections. UKIP in under 700 words. Excuse me while I go and wash myself amidst these fits of laughter. It’s a shame that the genuine sentiments and discontents of so many people have only these ill-prepared sorts to express a measure of democratic protest. A litany of the worst of conservatism.

Advertisements

7 Comments

Filed under Current Affairs, Politics

7 responses to “UKIP in a Nutshell

  1. Nick

    Ironically, the main objection UKIP appear to have for same-sex marriage is that couples denied marriage by the Church would pursue legal challenges in the European Court of Human Rights, a huge can of worms, legal complexity, let’s just leave well alone.

    But if we leave the ECHR and repeal the HRA, there could be no legal challenge to the Church policy, so what objection could UKIP possibly have then?

    Only thinly-veined homophobia.

    • I would agree, in all honesty. The rational arguments against equal gay rights are… well, non-existent. Objections are hard not to identify as based on prejudice. If UKIP were an accurate reflection of modern British society, and true libertarians for that matter, they would be all in favour same-sex marriage.

  2. * Of course, I meant to write “thinly-veiled”.

  3. UKIP’s employment policies are interesting too, in the sense that the party might not be so popular if those who’ve voted for them knew what they have in mind.
    UKIP would remove the requirement on employers to provide statutory sick pay, redundancy pay, maternity pay and maternity leave. No cap on working hours either.
    So it looks like new mothers, even if they could manage for a while without pay, could find they have no job to go back to.

    Employers could provide these benefits if they chose to, but would be able to pass on the perceived cost by reducing wages. As employees, we would have to weigh up the pros and cons and decide whether to accept the trade-off. Good news for employers, not so encouraging for workers.

    I can almost see the rationale for a policy like this: some employers might be more willing to take on female staff of child-bearing age they didn’t have to offer them any financial or support or job security during pregnancy. More flexible employers and a more flexible workforce.
    But I can’t escape the idea that this is a “nudge” policy designed to discourage women from taking jobs in the first place, so that they’ll stay at home like they did in the fifties and let men be the bread-winners. I think that sort of thing appeals to the kippers.

    • That’s what UKIP are trying to master really, the art of regressive policy dressed up in sheep’s clothing. “Deregulate business to help growth” sounds great until you scratch beneath the surface and see the vulnerabilities that workers are exposed to in such conditions.

  4. subwus

    Jeeeese…. spare me the nonsense please.
    The amount of articles I have read from those who have an inherent Pavlovian bias against them, that attempt to ‘understand’ or ‘explain’ UKIP is legion.
    This is another one that doesn’t cut it.
    At least as far as UKIP is concerned, Conservative Home does an authentic article on the subject:
    http://conservativehome.blogs.com/thetorydiary/2013/05/for-monday-morning-getting-to-know-u-kip-1-who-are-ukip.html

    Last year, around July, in my desperation at the state of politics in this country, I went online and was going to donate a few quid to UKIP.
    But I thought ‘what the hell’ and paid for a membership subscription instead.
    The ‘trying to herd cats’ comment from the higher command of UKIP of it’s members is undoubtably true, something which I don’t take as an insult.
    In the face of articles such as yours, keep them coming, the insults and bile make me resolutely determined to support them. Especially in the face of your opinion elsewhere that Harriet Harman would make a good leader for this country.
    Wayyyycist UKIP. Yeah right. Get on board with your other resident leftists chap. Meanwhile, over at the Daily Torygraph:
    “I’m in shock: I’ve just discovered that my mother and sister are Ukip supporters”
    http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/selenagray/100219364/im-in-shock-ive-just-discovered-that-my-mother-and-sister-are-ukip-supporters/#disqus_thread
    Yet the most highest rated and wayyycist reader comment on that article I have seen, from someone with the username ‘Nefti’, no doubt recommended from UKIP supporters (including myself) is:

    I don’t care what colour, religion, creed or sexual inclination you are.
    If you consider yourself proud to be British, vote UKIP.

    The nuances that drive supporters of UKIP, believe me, it isn’t xenophobia and racism. It is self determination. Too bad that you are so wedded to big government that you think any alternative equates to racism. Keep your UKIP denigrating articles flowing…. in the face of articles such as this and elsewhere, I will renew my membership to UKIP.
    You do UKIP a great service.

  5. I was mainly referring to the party here, I’ve been pretty consistent in my approach to supporters. guessing you’re not gonna be my no.1 fan subwus! i respectfully disagree with your position here, and will maintain my heavy handed critique of UKIP in the belief it does them no service whatsoever.

    will have a look at the articles you linked, thanks for those.

    once again, it’s important not to extrapolate to broadly from specific articles, concerning my overall views. never said harman would be a good leader of the country, just a better party leader than miliband, whom i loooooooathe, in equal part to my dislike of big government. check out a piece i wrote on TranquilSigh called The State of the State… not my best, wrote it in response to some dumbass weekly writing challenge on the Daily Post, but it’s honest and accurate to my positions.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s