Official Nicky G on QT thread...

Hm.

I thionk one thing we have to understand about this particular TV appearance is that Griffin wasn't trying to appeal to the particular audience that was there, or indeed the sort of people on this more or less London-centric forum.

Take what was said about the people that voted BNP on the show: I'm sure Griffin will have appealed to quite a few more people who identify with the 'underdog' persona he tried to affect against the other politicians, and there was also a simmering class issue. They were all firmly members of the establishment. He didn't come across like that at all.

Straw came over the worst--he had no bite and was surprisingly insecure when he spoke, but representing, rather unpersuasively, the current government on one of Griffin's main subjects. Huhne was mostly uncontroversial and a bit boring, but clearly not someone who had to justify himself on a lot of things (easy when you haven't been in government for so long). I genuinely can't remember much that he said, except for his very significant description (whether true or not) how the LibDems had reduced the BNP share of the vote in one place. Warsi was assured and persuasive (easy when you haven't been in government for so long), except for that homophobia wobble, and strict with Griffin without being overbearing. Greer had a nice line in being studiedly patronising, carried off some good jokes with good timing, but, again, was very assured.

I don't think that people who vote Griffin are likely to be very assured. They'll be full of fears, on which the BNP plays. They'll feel that Griffin did well going into such a lions' den of upper-class people. I think that even though more of his offensive, wrong, and bizarre views came out as the show went on, that he was challenged less on them towards the end. Trying to see it through the eyes of a potential BNP voter, the whole picture in the end reminded me of someone showing that he can't be persuaded by pressure and bullying (yes, the audience should have tried to lay into him less).

I thought that at times, Griffin played quite skilfully on his victim status, although that was pretty much the only thing he did well. He was extremely nervous right from the off, pretend-laughed far too much at some of the snipes directed at him, like a marginalised child desperately trying to belong with the cool kids, and obviously talked disgusting nonsense, with weak 'evidence'.

But in a TV programme especially, where apparently viewers take in very little of what is actually said, the emotional subtext plays a very important role. On that level, to a certain audience, I'm sure he will have appealed. And don't forget that this programme will probably have given him considerably better name recognition than before. The 'oxygen of publicity' is a real quality.

Overall, I don't agree with the BBC's decision to give him a platform. Yes, on the one hand you can say that had people actually read "Mein Kampf" before the NSDAP gained a double-digit vote, that much harm might have been averted. But I really don't think that there is any danger, now, of such a party ever gaining a share of the vote high enough to really threaten government in this country, or indeed in Germany. On the other hand, I don't think that that is really their aim right now. They aim to gain a solid foothold in elections other than those with very low turnout, to establish more than a fleeting presence (remember that fascistoid parties have popped up and been prohibited or have disappeared on and off in most European countries for the last couple of decades).

So, on the other hand, I certainly think that there are plenty of grounds for denying the BNP such a platform, such as their discriminatory stance against certain legally protected minorities. Denying them a platform doesn't have anything to do with denying them 'freedom of speech', a phrase that's often abused, anyway. They'll still have freedom of speech in a lot of places, they're just not given a major televised platform.

As the quotes that exist of Griffin on camera, combined with his astonishing answer that he cannot now 'explain why he held these views, or why he changed his mind' (not an attempt at an exact quote) show, the BNP are undoubtedly worried of falling further foul of anti-discrimination laws, as those would provide a legal basis, short of outright proscription of the party, of denying them such a platform. Griffin's predictably ridiculous squirmings last night showed up that strategy quite clearly, I thought. I thought what their real views are came out clearly enough, too, but again, I don't think that this was necessarily a successful programme. I didn't enjoy watching it for one second.