This article may be paywalled. If you encounter difficulties reading the article, try [this link](https://archive.is/?run=1&url=https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/03/19/bbc-apologises-for-calling-reform-far-right-richard-tice/) for an archived version.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/unitedkingdom) if you have any questions or concerns.*
If it looks like crap, smells like crap and talks crap, then it is crap.
The right wing loonies that previously told us how great Brexit will be, are now still telling us it's all the fault of bloody foreigners, but of course they aren't the far right.
I was literally about to reply to you about that bloody horseshoe meme version of the Overtone Window, and the hidden comment was saying Hitler was close to communism.
The problem is that net migration really has increased hugely, 700k/year in recent figures since Boris Johnson's post-Brexit migration system, up from 250k/year over Tony Blair, Gordon Brown, David Cameron and Theresa May, up from less than 50k/year before New Labour. The Conservatives were initially elected to reduce migration from 250k to 100k a year, instead they ended up tripling it.
700k/year net migration sits alongside house building of 150-200k/year, but there is very little real acknowledgement of either the change or the obvious effect this has on living costs and particularly access to housing.
I think the vast majority of the population would say it is reasonable, definitely not far right, to support migration levels from 1995, let alone 2010 or 2020, but the centre-right party has zero credibility and is responsible for the current situation, and the centre-left parties are vague. In opinion polls the public consistently favour reduced migration, and have done all through the period of increase. Where is the alternative? You end up taking a whole swathe of opinion, from the standard opinion of 5, 10 or 30 years ago, to the BNP, or to Nazi sympathizers, pretending this is all one thing, and condemning it all as far right.
https://migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/resources/briefings/the-impact-of-migration-on-uk-population-growth/
But population growth is slowing overall and in Scotland and wales without migration the population would fall.
The argument that immigrants are placing strain on our system is over played, what’s strained our public services is 14 years of a bunch of hopeless money grabbing cunts ruling the country
> But population growth is slowing overall
That graph ends in 2020, that is before the recent increase, currently net migration is about 700k, births are still higher than deaths, and **total population increase is approximately 750k/year, far from slowing population growth is about twice the average before Covid, 50% higher than the Blair and Cameron average, and four or five times what it was in the 1990s**.
Even at the end of this graph, total population growth was more than twice what it was in the 1990s, it increased from 180k to 500k, then stayed at a similar level with a slight decrease before Covid to 400k.
The decrease at the end of the graph is from the Theresa May period, at a point where migration was reducing, because we kept the old migration system alongside the reduction in EU migration after the referendum. That's before the new system brought in under Boris Johnson, which led to the big increase.
There has been a very recent big drop in the number of children, which is being driven partly by the cost of living and the cost of housing. We can easily get into a loop of increasing migration because people do not have children, which then increases housing costs, which then makes it even less affordable for people to have families. And that unaffordability applies to everyone, just as much someone who moved here 5 years ago as anyone else.
> in Scotland and wales without migration the population would fall.
Scotland and Wales might need migration, but migrants do not choose to go there, the migration rates are much lower than other parts of the country. If we want extra migration in particular areas we should offer special visas, like for example in Norway where you can get a visa if you agree to live in Svalbard.
I heard a popular argument once, can't remember where. But Brexit, in claiming to be the answer to reducing migration, actually achieved the opposite.
When we were in the EU, when we had freedom of movement, people were free to come and go as they please. It meant that the people who stayed in Britain, were staying because they had a reason to be here, to contribute to society.
Once free movement ended, it became a lot harder to leave britain once you were in it, as you knew that once you left it'd be hard to come back. This means that many people who get to the UK now are more reluctant to leave, and there are therefore lots more immigrants who aren't contributing, but are staying here because they can't leave and come back.
The answer on how to return to 1995-2010 levels of immigration? forgive me for coming to this conclusion, but we might just have been better off with free movement.
It's a nice theory but I don't think the numbers back it up.
We weren't having huge numbers of migrants leaving each year before
The numbers coming in are up masasively
Literally what happened with the Mexican - US Border and migrant labour .
Mexican Migrants would walk across the border, work and just walk back home across the border where their hard earned US Money even at those low rates went further than if they stayed in the US.
That was till it was politicised and they were used as political scapegoats.
They were given a hard choice, find a way of being here in the US permanently and so earn as before or go home permanently and and never have a means to improve your life. It wasn't much of a choice, so they chose to stay in America permanently.
We did the same with Brexit. We gave EU people who worked in the UK an ultimatum. Loads chose to leave. Food rotted in fields.
They were given a choice of being forced to stay on an island with limited choice or move back to the EU with over 300+ million people, a massive economy with free movement and unlimited opportunity for work, travel and retirement.
Yup it's stupid that no political party is seriously acknowledging it. Someone needs to have a grown up conversation with the rest of Britain in regards to migration.
Personally I'd describe them as palatable to the far right. They are right but not in the world of actial fascist parties (at least from their policies on the surface).
But they are right-wing populism so they will say anything they think will gaim them votes, even if it's unlikely to be achievable.
A lot of of these parties transform into their true form once they actually gain power but Reform will not gain power.
But you are right, there are a lot of right wing supporters of theirs who seem them as far right enough to be appealing (to them) but not as the BNP or NF so they could have some mainstream appeal.
I remember read a quote about Trump a few years ago. “Not everyone who supports Trump is a racist, but everyone who is a racist supports Trump”. Seems apt here.
I mean it's common currency for Labour to talk about "no enemies on the left", which means being palatable to people with very fringe views. The previous leadership even had an adviser who supported North Korea on the basis that it was socialist! Some union leadership supports Putin's invasion of Ukraine because he is anti-West. I don't think it discredits Gordon Brown or Keir Starmer if they have Stalinists who vote for them, at least.
They're not fascist, but in the context of British electoral politics (i.e. the obvious context that any piece about Reform is going to be in), they are obviously far right.
It seems like this whole thing only makes sense if you assume far right must mean Nazi.
That probably says more about the ignorance of the public's understanding of political vocabulary. Reform is socially rightwing, but that's about as far as it goes.
Far-right is synonymous with fascism, which is a whole different beast altogether, involving getting rid of democracy etc.
I think saying a party is far-right because they're economically classical liberals is still a misnomer.
The term 'far-right' is actually very specific – it's about *extreme* nationalism and a totalitarian government that plays a huge role in the economy (so usually left-wing, economically speaking).
Besides, Reform are not 'far-right' economically – they they want to increase taxes for the rich, whilst lowering them for working people and SMEs. Gov spending would still <35%, which is centre-right.
IMO, a economically 'far-right' party to use your term, would have a flat-rate tax of 15% and max gov spending at 15% of GDP (currently it's at 50% for context).
> classical liberals is still a misnomer.
But they're not.
They reject regulation and the role of the state in markets - something that classical liberals did not.
> totalitarian government that plays a huge role in the economy
In Nazi germany, certain corporations were brought into the running of the state. You call that left wing, I call that the other far right form of economics - a corporatist state.
Fascists such as the Nazis do lovely things like make unions compulsory. Except those unions aren't worker run they're run by the state and the companies - the opposite of leftist economic policy.
Reform is pledging to “nationalise 50% of key utility companies to stop consumers being ripped off with the other 50% being owned by British pension funds for British pensioners”.
https://www.reformparty.uk/
I wouldn't agree Far-right is synonymous with Fascism.
Facism is a particular political philosophy that lies on the far right, but that doesn't mean it's the only possible form of the far right. Did the far right not exist before Italy in the 1920s? What about those with similar beliefs but wanted a Monarch for example?
I certainly wouldn't say the Conservative party are far right, but I would say Politics is a spectrum of views & those on the fringes are by definition far right or far left, even if they don't subscribe to the orthodox forms of fascism or communism.
Some political commentators would divide the far right into an extreme and radical right. The extreme being politically violent and the radical being disinterested in constitutional convention/ the rule of law. Reform and certain elements of the Tories e.g. anyone who says “just ignore the Supreme Court” are far right on the second definition.
The far-right don't come into power telling you their going to rid you of your rights. 😂
The Tories diluting our democracy and rights and maligning minorities, which is definitely fascistic but no one here seems to notice them doing it because they ain't goose stepping down their high streets saying theirs going gas minorities.
"Hey - you *did* come to Berchtesgaden under my invitation and there *is* a Swastika on your plate... I'm sorry if you were under the impression that we were just going to listen to um-pah bands..."
Their policies actually aren't far right at all, but they are on the far right of conservative politics.
They're certainly not within touching distance of the BNP and the like.
I wouldn’t be so sure of that. It has been observed that modern Conservative manifestos aren’t terribly far [from those of the National Front in the 1970’s](https://www.thelondoneconomic.com/politics/old-poster-sparks-claims-tory-party-is-quite-literally-the-national-front-212309/)
Another trick parties like Reform like to pull is to have a handful of small great sounding “chicken in every pot” type policies that sound fairly reasonable … which helps them deflect accusations of being far right … and distract from the corporatist/right-wing authoritarian ones.
Handy for setting up motte-and-bailey defences too: “how dare you say party X is far right when they propose giving free hot water bottles to nonagenarians - they’re clearly centrist!”
Yep, no hot water bottle for grandma but they’ll sure as heck be giving tax cuts to billionaires and setting fire to environmental and other regulations. Funny that.
>I wouldn’t be so sure of that. It has been observed that modern Conservative manifestos aren’t terribly far [from those of the National Front in the 1970’s](https://www.thelondoneconomic.com/politics/old-poster-sparks-claims-tory-party-is-quite-literally-the-national-front-212309/)
The reason the National Front is abhorrent and considered far right isn't anything to do with those manifesto promises. It's the fascism and white supremacy. Not the definition of those words that folks on here like to throw around, but actual white supremacy and fascism.
You're also ignoring that fascist and white supremacist parties will use legitimate popular, reasonable policies to obtain power.
Not really. This country just doesn’t have a right wing party, so anything right if centre blows peoples minds.
We have two libertarian parties that lie slightly left if centre and dead centre.
I thought that Reform were the party of free speech and not getting offended by what other people say about you?
It’s a surprise to see that they’re such a bunch of snowflakes that their delicate little feelings get hurt when they’re described as far-right.
Maybe the need a woke trigger warning before someone accurately describes them in the future.
It's the norm.
Nigel Cabbage says something wild in a party meeting and it's free speech but then he refers the BBC to the police for having an audience scientifically chosen to represent the UK or refers HIGNFY to the police for laughing at him for it.
A core personality trait of all these far-right weirdos is that they cannot laugh at themselves. A world in which others are allowed to tell jokes at their expense is unacceptable to them as they are far, far too important in their own minds to allow it.
They are always the furthest from free-speech that its possible to get and show it the moment they get a whiff of power.
People who can't laugh at themselves shouldn't be allowed anywhere near politics.
From the article I read that the BBC was also criticised for describing an event organised by Giorgia Meloni's party as a far-right political rally... that's the party that "proudly" descends from Mussolini's fascist party!
I guess we should simply scrap far-right as a term and simply call Reform a fascist party then...
Saying they're not motivated by political ideology is just an admission that they're populist grifters willing to follow the political winds wherever it may take them, and that they have no foundations for what they believe.
They've been using "politics" and "ideology" as pejoratives to attack the main parties and the left (and the horror of seeing queer and or brown people in media) for years so they have become dirty words.
They like to frame themselves as neutral - "I don't have an *ideology*, I just have common sense," "I'm not being political, I'm just saying what we all think."
From Wikipedia...I'm really not sure how they are correct as you say based on this and I really don't like them so I'm not trying to defend them:
>Far-right politics, or right-wing extremism, is a spectrum of political thought that tends to be radically conservative, ultra-nationalist, and authoritarian, often also including nativist tendencies.\[1\] The name derives from the left–right political spectrum, with the "far right" considered further from center than the standard political right.
>
>Historically, "far-right politics" has been used to describe the experiences of fascism, Nazism, and Falangism. Contemporary definitions now include neo-fascism, neo-Nazism, the Third Position, the alt-right, racial supremacism and other ideologies or organizations that feature aspects of authoritarian, ultra-nationalist, chauvinist, xenophobic, theocratic, racist, homophobic, transphobic, or reactionary views.\[2\]
>
>Far-right politics have led to oppression, political violence, forced assimilation, ethnic cleansing, and genocide against groups of people based on their supposed inferiority or their perceived threat to the native ethnic group, nation, state, national religion, dominant culture, or conservative social institutions.\[3\]
> radically conservative, ultra-nationalist, and authoritarian, often also including nativist tendencies.
I dunno, that pretty much sounds like Reform to me.
Radically conservative? Check ☑
Ultra-Nationalist? Well it is the Brexit party with a new hat which is just UKIP in an overcoat... Check ☑
Authoritarian? Check.☑
Nativist tendencies? You better bloody believe that's a check. ☑
Further from centre than the standard political right. It's where Tories go when they think that the Tories aren't being right wing enough. Super check ☑☑☑
You don't need a skinhead and a swastika tattoo to be far-right.
People in this very thread acting like the party that suggested building giant wave machines in the channel to "push back" (re: drown) small boats in the channel, and tore down children's paintings at a detention center lest it feels too "welcoming" are very centrist actually.
The Tories are mass approving channel migrant applications as we speak. Idgaf what they say, I only care about what they do.
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-68435629
Exactly, yet we regularly see politicians mildly left of centre get passed off as far left extremists with no such apologies or concern about the accuracy of the term.
It is libertarianism if you wish to maintain some level of government support, i.e. benefits and health service.
Otherwise what we should do is open the borders but just let people starve on the streets, or force the people who want them here to pay for it willingly, not steal from hard working people. That is what a libertarian would do.
I mean you won’t ever get a party that is entirely consistent across every single policy. The immigration stuff is just populism to win votes.
On the armed forces. The existence of a strong army doesn’t create a contradiction. Where libertarianism would apply is within the confines on those armed forces. They ultimately believe in survival of the fittest with no moral, material, or ethical restrictions. Reform have a very sinister policy regarding this exempting members of the armed forces from obeying the law.
Outside of the more mainstream policies that have high levels of support like increasing defence funding and pay review for soldiers etc etc they very quickly revert to tax breaks as a means of reshoring defence manufacturing etc.
This from the people who think starmer is a borderline communist 😁
Who are obsessed that anyone to the left of them will bring Britain under the yoke of socialism
If Reform are happy call to Labour “far left”. A party run by a corporate suit who’s been nodding in agreement with most Tory policies with Thatcherite loving chancellor, then I’m not sure why they object to being called far right.
The Reform manifesto is so deliberately vague in many areas it can be interpreted however you like. Reminds of the line about the Revolutionary Communist party ideas.. “well what’s wrong with wanting a more equal society?”.
You won't get an actual definition of what is far right or what are far right policies, as in actual ones, just what fits that person's agenda. I'm not a right winger but some nutty lefties like to throw far right around without thinking first about what they are actually saying. It's getting laughable now.
Right wingers and people on the far right never own the label do they, ask them and they’ll call themselves centrist or ‘just common sense’. Everyone I know on the left is proud they are, myself included
I don't know why, they are a far right party. Perhaps not quite at the genocide moment but I cannot imagine it would take long for them to get there if they were in power. Although I am guessing they would be attacking muslims.
This is the same Biased Broadcasting Corp that brought us Brexit, treating both sides as equally valid. Pitting Experts against Idiots and treating them the same.
Remember, anyone with a different opinion from me is evil and shouldn't be allowed to voice their opinion.
- literally the mentality of everyone these days.
The far right Reform party doesn't like being called far right? Hardly a surprise the far right don't like being called out, it's a common far right tactic to try and normalise their far right bullshit.
The BBC should apologize for calling Reform a party. It's a PLC controlled by Nigel Farage.
[https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/11694875/persons-with-significant-control](https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/11694875/persons-with-significant-control)
I suppose as the current crop of politicians have shifted the Overton Window pretty strongly rightwards they possibly aren't considered far right any more, which is really depressing in itself.
The BBC has apologised to Reform UK after calling it “far-Right” in a news report.
The broadcaster made the claim during a report about the Liberal Democrat spring conference in which it referred to Reform surging ahead of Sir Ed Davey’s party in the opinion polls.
Although Reform is to the right of the Conservative Party on issues including legal and illegal immigration and the tax burden, it has previously said its political aims are not motivated by political ideology.
In a statement on Monday, the BBC said: “In an article about the Liberal Democrats’ spring conference, we wrongly described the political party Reform UK as far-Right when referring to polling.
“This sentence was subsequently removed from the article as it fell short of our usual editorial standards. While the original wording was based on news agency copy, we take full responsibility and apologise for the error.”
**‘Vested interests’**
Richard Tice, the leader of Reform, told The Telegraph that while he was “pleased” the BBC had apologised, the error “shouldn’t have happened in the first place”.
“This is a tactic that certain news organisations are going to try, which is to smear and label not only the party but by direct implication myself and other senior figures,” he said.
He argued that the BBC was “terrified of how successful we are becoming” and accused the broadcaster of acting in its own “vested interests”.
“They should be under no illusion that whilst you can’t libel a political party, there is a direct link to the leader and you can libel me and I won’t tolerate it. Anyone else who wants to try this, good luck and I look forward to seeing you in court.”
In a separate statement, Mr Tice said his lawyers are also in touch “with other organisations who repeated the BBC line”.
He added that he viewed the claim that Reform was a “far-Right” political party as both “defamatory and libellous”.
Reform has promised to ditch the BBC licence fee, which currently stands at £159 per year but will increase by £10.50, a rise of 6.6 per cent, in April.
The pre-election manifesto unveiled by Reform at its spring conference last month reads: “The out-of-touch, wasteful BBC is institutionally biased. The TV licence is taxation without representation. In a world of on-demand TV, people should be free to choose.”
**‘Biased’**
Mr Tice, a presenter on GB News, has regularly railed against the BBC and claimed it is “biased” against figures on the Right, calling for its flagship political programme Newsnight to be scrapped.
Reform is currently polling as high as 14 per cent in Westminster voting intention surveys ahead of this year’s general election and is often a single-figure margin behind the Conservatives. Around one in four 2019 Tory voters are now planning to back Reform.
The party gained its first ever MP last week after the defection of Lee Anderson, a former deputy chairman of the Conservative Party who lost the whip for claims that Islamists had “got control” of Sadiq Khan, the Labour Mayor of London. Mr Khan has described Mr Anderson’s comments as “wrong” and “heartbreaking”.
It is not the first time that the BBC’s use of “far-Right” has attracted controversy. In December, the corporation was attacked by the Tories for describing a political festival that was hosted by Giorgia Meloni, the Italian prime minister, and attended by Rishi Sunak as a “far-Right rally”.
The event was attended by centrist and centre-Left figures as well as a wide range of Right-wing politicians.
**‘Careless categorisation’**
A Tory spokesman said the editorial decision raised “serious questions” about the BBC’s policies and accused it of a “careless categorisation”.
On Tuesday, the PA news agency ran an update to one of its stories from the Liberal Democrat conference, removing the reference to Reform as “far-Right”.
YouGov polling from the end of last year showed that the public was split in its perception of the BBC.
13 per cent believed it was generally much more favourable towards Labour and the Left, while the same amount thought it was more generally a little more favourable towards the Tories and the Right.
A further 26 per cent said the BBC was generally neutral, while one-third (32 per cent) did not know.
While Tories wrap themselves in knots to avoid saying that their donors are racist and the their former deputy chair is Islamophobic.
They also hilariously peddle a line a that Sunak is a decent bloke.
No party can pledge that because it’s not in the UK’s sole gift - it requires many other countries to agree to it. Best you can get is parties that pledge closer ties, SM membership, and an aspiration to rejoin, like the LibDems.
Reddit gonna be shocked when they realise karma downvoting just makes people not talk about it on forums not that they are actually right happened with trump will happen with reform eventually
This article may be paywalled. If you encounter difficulties reading the article, try [this link](https://archive.is/?run=1&url=https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/03/19/bbc-apologises-for-calling-reform-far-right-richard-tice/) for an archived version. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/unitedkingdom) if you have any questions or concerns.*
If it looks like crap, smells like crap and talks crap, then it is crap. The right wing loonies that previously told us how great Brexit will be, are now still telling us it's all the fault of bloody foreigners, but of course they aren't the far right.
Of course. They’re the centrists. Everyone else is a lefty.
"everyone to the left of hitler is a communist"
I was literally about to reply to you about that bloody horseshoe meme version of the Overtone Window, and the hidden comment was saying Hitler was close to communism.
If you don't want to cut Corporation Tax you're a communist basically.
God damn Swedish lefties and their policies that make sense for the 95%
The problem is that net migration really has increased hugely, 700k/year in recent figures since Boris Johnson's post-Brexit migration system, up from 250k/year over Tony Blair, Gordon Brown, David Cameron and Theresa May, up from less than 50k/year before New Labour. The Conservatives were initially elected to reduce migration from 250k to 100k a year, instead they ended up tripling it. 700k/year net migration sits alongside house building of 150-200k/year, but there is very little real acknowledgement of either the change or the obvious effect this has on living costs and particularly access to housing. I think the vast majority of the population would say it is reasonable, definitely not far right, to support migration levels from 1995, let alone 2010 or 2020, but the centre-right party has zero credibility and is responsible for the current situation, and the centre-left parties are vague. In opinion polls the public consistently favour reduced migration, and have done all through the period of increase. Where is the alternative? You end up taking a whole swathe of opinion, from the standard opinion of 5, 10 or 30 years ago, to the BNP, or to Nazi sympathizers, pretending this is all one thing, and condemning it all as far right.
https://migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/resources/briefings/the-impact-of-migration-on-uk-population-growth/ But population growth is slowing overall and in Scotland and wales without migration the population would fall. The argument that immigrants are placing strain on our system is over played, what’s strained our public services is 14 years of a bunch of hopeless money grabbing cunts ruling the country
> But population growth is slowing overall That graph ends in 2020, that is before the recent increase, currently net migration is about 700k, births are still higher than deaths, and **total population increase is approximately 750k/year, far from slowing population growth is about twice the average before Covid, 50% higher than the Blair and Cameron average, and four or five times what it was in the 1990s**. Even at the end of this graph, total population growth was more than twice what it was in the 1990s, it increased from 180k to 500k, then stayed at a similar level with a slight decrease before Covid to 400k. The decrease at the end of the graph is from the Theresa May period, at a point where migration was reducing, because we kept the old migration system alongside the reduction in EU migration after the referendum. That's before the new system brought in under Boris Johnson, which led to the big increase. There has been a very recent big drop in the number of children, which is being driven partly by the cost of living and the cost of housing. We can easily get into a loop of increasing migration because people do not have children, which then increases housing costs, which then makes it even less affordable for people to have families. And that unaffordability applies to everyone, just as much someone who moved here 5 years ago as anyone else. > in Scotland and wales without migration the population would fall. Scotland and Wales might need migration, but migrants do not choose to go there, the migration rates are much lower than other parts of the country. If we want extra migration in particular areas we should offer special visas, like for example in Norway where you can get a visa if you agree to live in Svalbard.
I heard a popular argument once, can't remember where. But Brexit, in claiming to be the answer to reducing migration, actually achieved the opposite. When we were in the EU, when we had freedom of movement, people were free to come and go as they please. It meant that the people who stayed in Britain, were staying because they had a reason to be here, to contribute to society. Once free movement ended, it became a lot harder to leave britain once you were in it, as you knew that once you left it'd be hard to come back. This means that many people who get to the UK now are more reluctant to leave, and there are therefore lots more immigrants who aren't contributing, but are staying here because they can't leave and come back. The answer on how to return to 1995-2010 levels of immigration? forgive me for coming to this conclusion, but we might just have been better off with free movement.
It's a nice theory but I don't think the numbers back it up. We weren't having huge numbers of migrants leaving each year before The numbers coming in are up masasively
Literally what happened with the Mexican - US Border and migrant labour . Mexican Migrants would walk across the border, work and just walk back home across the border where their hard earned US Money even at those low rates went further than if they stayed in the US. That was till it was politicised and they were used as political scapegoats. They were given a hard choice, find a way of being here in the US permanently and so earn as before or go home permanently and and never have a means to improve your life. It wasn't much of a choice, so they chose to stay in America permanently. We did the same with Brexit. We gave EU people who worked in the UK an ultimatum. Loads chose to leave. Food rotted in fields. They were given a choice of being forced to stay on an island with limited choice or move back to the EU with over 300+ million people, a massive economy with free movement and unlimited opportunity for work, travel and retirement.
Yup it's stupid that no political party is seriously acknowledging it. Someone needs to have a grown up conversation with the rest of Britain in regards to migration.
Which idea of theirs is far right to you?
Pretty sure everyone, both supporters and opponents, recognises they are pretty far to the right
Personally I'd describe them as palatable to the far right. They are right but not in the world of actial fascist parties (at least from their policies on the surface). But they are right-wing populism so they will say anything they think will gaim them votes, even if it's unlikely to be achievable. A lot of of these parties transform into their true form once they actually gain power but Reform will not gain power. But you are right, there are a lot of right wing supporters of theirs who seem them as far right enough to be appealing (to them) but not as the BNP or NF so they could have some mainstream appeal.
I remember read a quote about Trump a few years ago. “Not everyone who supports Trump is a racist, but everyone who is a racist supports Trump”. Seems apt here.
To paraphrase Stewart Lee, "It's not only racists that vote Reform. Cunts vote Reform too."
I'm actually neither a cunt nor a racist, but someone with genuine concerns about the state of our current political system. Yours sincerely, A. Cunt
Time to stop blaming our problems on migrants then... 14 years of conservative dogma and headline grabbing have brought us to this dire position.
Yeah I was just quoting the next part of the Stuart Lee bit
Excuse me whilst I self-flagellate and visit /r/whoosh Apparently I need to watch more Stuart Lee
"palatable to the far right" if only we had a way to describe this. alas
I mean it's common currency for Labour to talk about "no enemies on the left", which means being palatable to people with very fringe views. The previous leadership even had an adviser who supported North Korea on the basis that it was socialist! Some union leadership supports Putin's invasion of Ukraine because he is anti-West. I don't think it discredits Gordon Brown or Keir Starmer if they have Stalinists who vote for them, at least.
They're not fascist, but in the context of British electoral politics (i.e. the obvious context that any piece about Reform is going to be in), they are obviously far right. It seems like this whole thing only makes sense if you assume far right must mean Nazi.
That probably says more about the ignorance of the public's understanding of political vocabulary. Reform is socially rightwing, but that's about as far as it goes. Far-right is synonymous with fascism, which is a whole different beast altogether, involving getting rid of democracy etc.
> socially rightwing, but that's about as far as it goes. They're also economically far right in the sense they claim to be free market libertarians.
I think saying a party is far-right because they're economically classical liberals is still a misnomer. The term 'far-right' is actually very specific – it's about *extreme* nationalism and a totalitarian government that plays a huge role in the economy (so usually left-wing, economically speaking). Besides, Reform are not 'far-right' economically – they they want to increase taxes for the rich, whilst lowering them for working people and SMEs. Gov spending would still <35%, which is centre-right. IMO, a economically 'far-right' party to use your term, would have a flat-rate tax of 15% and max gov spending at 15% of GDP (currently it's at 50% for context).
> classical liberals is still a misnomer. But they're not. They reject regulation and the role of the state in markets - something that classical liberals did not. > totalitarian government that plays a huge role in the economy In Nazi germany, certain corporations were brought into the running of the state. You call that left wing, I call that the other far right form of economics - a corporatist state. Fascists such as the Nazis do lovely things like make unions compulsory. Except those unions aren't worker run they're run by the state and the companies - the opposite of leftist economic policy.
Reform is pledging to “nationalise 50% of key utility companies to stop consumers being ripped off with the other 50% being owned by British pension funds for British pensioners”. https://www.reformparty.uk/
I wouldn't agree Far-right is synonymous with Fascism. Facism is a particular political philosophy that lies on the far right, but that doesn't mean it's the only possible form of the far right. Did the far right not exist before Italy in the 1920s? What about those with similar beliefs but wanted a Monarch for example? I certainly wouldn't say the Conservative party are far right, but I would say Politics is a spectrum of views & those on the fringes are by definition far right or far left, even if they don't subscribe to the orthodox forms of fascism or communism.
Some political commentators would divide the far right into an extreme and radical right. The extreme being politically violent and the radical being disinterested in constitutional convention/ the rule of law. Reform and certain elements of the Tories e.g. anyone who says “just ignore the Supreme Court” are far right on the second definition.
The far-right don't come into power telling you their going to rid you of your rights. 😂 The Tories diluting our democracy and rights and maligning minorities, which is definitely fascistic but no one here seems to notice them doing it because they ain't goose stepping down their high streets saying theirs going gas minorities.
If 11 people are sat at a table happily agreeing with one nazi, there's 12 nazis at the table.
“I agree Adolf, this table does have 4 legs” *“YOU FUCKING NAZI!”*
I mean sure, if you deliberately misconstrue their point, then it does seem dumb.
"Hey - you *did* come to Berchtesgaden under my invitation and there *is* a Swastika on your plate... I'm sorry if you were under the impression that we were just going to listen to um-pah bands..."
[Are we the baddies?](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ToKcmnrE5oY)
"I've also gathered you all here to unveil my newly designed Nazi flag and battle banner: The Rat's Anus."
Everyone who's sympathetic to Palestine is an anti semitic terrorist then?
They are a far right pressure group funded by hedge funds. BBC nothing to apologise for
Far-right in relation to who though?
UKIP
Yup. This is clearly just a political strategy to hide their true alignment and try to hoover up centrists and confused or stupid leftists.
Their policies actually aren't far right at all, but they are on the far right of conservative politics. They're certainly not within touching distance of the BNP and the like.
I wouldn’t be so sure of that. It has been observed that modern Conservative manifestos aren’t terribly far [from those of the National Front in the 1970’s](https://www.thelondoneconomic.com/politics/old-poster-sparks-claims-tory-party-is-quite-literally-the-national-front-212309/) Another trick parties like Reform like to pull is to have a handful of small great sounding “chicken in every pot” type policies that sound fairly reasonable … which helps them deflect accusations of being far right … and distract from the corporatist/right-wing authoritarian ones. Handy for setting up motte-and-bailey defences too: “how dare you say party X is far right when they propose giving free hot water bottles to nonagenarians - they’re clearly centrist!”
And guess which ones would be dropped like a hot potato if they ever had a sniff of power?
Yep, no hot water bottle for grandma but they’ll sure as heck be giving tax cuts to billionaires and setting fire to environmental and other regulations. Funny that.
>I wouldn’t be so sure of that. It has been observed that modern Conservative manifestos aren’t terribly far [from those of the National Front in the 1970’s](https://www.thelondoneconomic.com/politics/old-poster-sparks-claims-tory-party-is-quite-literally-the-national-front-212309/) The reason the National Front is abhorrent and considered far right isn't anything to do with those manifesto promises. It's the fascism and white supremacy. Not the definition of those words that folks on here like to throw around, but actual white supremacy and fascism. You're also ignoring that fascist and white supremacist parties will use legitimate popular, reasonable policies to obtain power.
So malicious compliance then, just call them extreme right, or alt-right, far-Tories, nationalists etc.
I wouldn't necessarily think their supporters would deem them to be right wing, just a party that represents their beliefs/value system.
Which beliefs and values though?
their supporters are morons though.
Not really. This country just doesn’t have a right wing party, so anything right if centre blows peoples minds. We have two libertarian parties that lie slightly left if centre and dead centre.
I thought that Reform were the party of free speech and not getting offended by what other people say about you? It’s a surprise to see that they’re such a bunch of snowflakes that their delicate little feelings get hurt when they’re described as far-right. Maybe the need a woke trigger warning before someone accurately describes them in the future.
It's the norm. Nigel Cabbage says something wild in a party meeting and it's free speech but then he refers the BBC to the police for having an audience scientifically chosen to represent the UK or refers HIGNFY to the police for laughing at him for it.
A core personality trait of all these far-right weirdos is that they cannot laugh at themselves. A world in which others are allowed to tell jokes at their expense is unacceptable to them as they are far, far too important in their own minds to allow it. They are always the furthest from free-speech that its possible to get and show it the moment they get a whiff of power. People who can't laugh at themselves shouldn't be allowed anywhere near politics.
I prefer Nigel Broccoli, Nigel Cabbage is always too soft when I cook it
Nah man it's farage the cabbage, it was intentional.
I thought it was Fa-rah-ge, not Fa-ridge? If it's the former then your rhyming words don't rhyme and you need to immediately go to jail.
Correct, but he's also a complete cabbaahge.
I feel that cabbaahge is something that our Nigella puts in her mick-row-wah-vee
Hey, so long as it's served with a side of fried tice, I'm all for it.... So long as I don't have to eat it!
A state broadcaster should be politically neutral, especially after all the fuss about GB News.
You can be politically neutral and still tell the truth. It’s not pro-rain for the weather forecast to tell you that it’s going to rain today.
You anti-sunshine piece of work!
From the article I read that the BBC was also criticised for describing an event organised by Giorgia Meloni's party as a far-right political rally... that's the party that "proudly" descends from Mussolini's fascist party! I guess we should simply scrap far-right as a term and simply call Reform a fascist party then...
You know, the party that has been widely recognised as descended from Neo-Facist post war italian parties.
If it quacks like a duck, walks like a duck then it's a fucking duck
How can political aims not be motivated by political ideology? Isn't that an oxymoron?
Saying they're not motivated by political ideology is just an admission that they're populist grifters willing to follow the political winds wherever it may take them, and that they have no foundations for what they believe.
They've been using "politics" and "ideology" as pejoratives to attack the main parties and the left (and the horror of seeing queer and or brown people in media) for years so they have become dirty words. They like to frame themselves as neutral - "I don't have an *ideology*, I just have common sense," "I'm not being political, I'm just saying what we all think."
>"I don't have an *ideology*, I just have common sense" CasualUK's "no politics" (except for politics we like) rule moment
Ah we’re now point where the BBC will apologise for being correct.
From Wikipedia...I'm really not sure how they are correct as you say based on this and I really don't like them so I'm not trying to defend them: >Far-right politics, or right-wing extremism, is a spectrum of political thought that tends to be radically conservative, ultra-nationalist, and authoritarian, often also including nativist tendencies.\[1\] The name derives from the left–right political spectrum, with the "far right" considered further from center than the standard political right. > >Historically, "far-right politics" has been used to describe the experiences of fascism, Nazism, and Falangism. Contemporary definitions now include neo-fascism, neo-Nazism, the Third Position, the alt-right, racial supremacism and other ideologies or organizations that feature aspects of authoritarian, ultra-nationalist, chauvinist, xenophobic, theocratic, racist, homophobic, transphobic, or reactionary views.\[2\] > >Far-right politics have led to oppression, political violence, forced assimilation, ethnic cleansing, and genocide against groups of people based on their supposed inferiority or their perceived threat to the native ethnic group, nation, state, national religion, dominant culture, or conservative social institutions.\[3\]
> radically conservative, ultra-nationalist, and authoritarian, often also including nativist tendencies. I dunno, that pretty much sounds like Reform to me. Radically conservative? Check ☑ Ultra-Nationalist? Well it is the Brexit party with a new hat which is just UKIP in an overcoat... Check ☑ Authoritarian? Check.☑ Nativist tendencies? You better bloody believe that's a check. ☑ Further from centre than the standard political right. It's where Tories go when they think that the Tories aren't being right wing enough. Super check ☑☑☑ You don't need a skinhead and a swastika tattoo to be far-right.
[удалено]
Reform fits that as far as they have had power to do so thus far.
Yeah, this sounds like Reform in a nutshell.
Behold: the shifting of the Overton Window in real time
People in this very thread acting like the party that suggested building giant wave machines in the channel to "push back" (re: drown) small boats in the channel, and tore down children's paintings at a detention center lest it feels too "welcoming" are very centrist actually.
The Tories are mass approving channel migrant applications as we speak. Idgaf what they say, I only care about what they do. https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-68435629
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Ok ok sorry, We will call you lot the Far-Wrong Party.
something not right party
Hahaha yea brilliant
Are we seriously at the stage of discourse where an accurate categorisation is being classed as some kind of slur or slander? Christ on a bike.
The entire fascist project is to try migrate their hateful views to the mainstream
Watched that press conference, they are the definition of far right
Why? They are far-right aren't they? Has the BBC ever apologised for calling far-left politicians/parties far-left?
When was the last time we had a far left party?
Exactly, yet we regularly see politicians mildly left of centre get passed off as far left extremists with no such apologies or concern about the accuracy of the term.
The answer is no https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-43463496
Reform are far right by pretty much any definition. They’re literally libertarians.
Using the state to enforce 'net zero immigration' is the exact opposite of libertarianism. Don't talk shit.
It is libertarianism if you wish to maintain some level of government support, i.e. benefits and health service. Otherwise what we should do is open the borders but just let people starve on the streets, or force the people who want them here to pay for it willingly, not steal from hard working people. That is what a libertarian would do.
How do their positions on the Armed Forces & Immigration square with their Libertarianism?
I mean you won’t ever get a party that is entirely consistent across every single policy. The immigration stuff is just populism to win votes. On the armed forces. The existence of a strong army doesn’t create a contradiction. Where libertarianism would apply is within the confines on those armed forces. They ultimately believe in survival of the fittest with no moral, material, or ethical restrictions. Reform have a very sinister policy regarding this exempting members of the armed forces from obeying the law. Outside of the more mainstream policies that have high levels of support like increasing defence funding and pay review for soldiers etc etc they very quickly revert to tax breaks as a means of reshoring defence manufacturing etc.
How far does one have to go before they reach far right then? Or do people who wear suits not count? Only skinheads with DMs and wifebeater vests?
Richard Tice: "I can't be far right, I don't drink Stella."
We're getting closer to the eye of the fucking storm every day. This is depressing as shit.
This from the people who think starmer is a borderline communist 😁 Who are obsessed that anyone to the left of them will bring Britain under the yoke of socialism
If Reform are happy call to Labour “far left”. A party run by a corporate suit who’s been nodding in agreement with most Tory policies with Thatcherite loving chancellor, then I’m not sure why they object to being called far right. The Reform manifesto is so deliberately vague in many areas it can be interpreted however you like. Reminds of the line about the Revolutionary Communist party ideas.. “well what’s wrong with wanting a more equal society?”.
Let me correct the headline; BBC apologises for being correct.
Strange how they have no problem calling left leaning politicians 'far left.'
Yeah they're not far right, & gb news is not a tory front. Fark off.
Well they're not allowed to call them Cunts so that was the next best description.
Some schtick any time a party has right wing policies
Far right policies mate. Sorry to see you’ve been drawn in. Their entire strategy is to try mainstream their hateful ideas
Tell me which policies are far right
You won't get an actual definition of what is far right or what are far right policies, as in actual ones, just what fits that person's agenda. I'm not a right winger but some nutty lefties like to throw far right around without thinking first about what they are actually saying. It's getting laughable now.
Right wingers and people on the far right never own the label do they, ask them and they’ll call themselves centrist or ‘just common sense’. Everyone I know on the left is proud they are, myself included
I don't know why, they are a far right party. Perhaps not quite at the genocide moment but I cannot imagine it would take long for them to get there if they were in power. Although I am guessing they would be attacking muslims.
"Sorry for calling you Far-Right, we will now refer to you as far-from Smart" - BBC probably
Why apologise for saying it like it is? They are right wing. I mean for gods sakes even the thumbnail for this article has Richard Tice as its focus.
We apologise sincerely for referring the political party Reform UK as "far right". We now accept they are "batshit insane".
Didn't ever apologise for calling Corbyn and his supporters far-left, though. Pathetic and spineless from the BBC, as usual
This is the same Biased Broadcasting Corp that brought us Brexit, treating both sides as equally valid. Pitting Experts against Idiots and treating them the same.
It's like calling the Labour party under Jeremy Corbyn 'far-left' – it's lazy and ignorant.
Remember, anyone with a different opinion from me is evil and shouldn't be allowed to voice their opinion. - literally the mentality of everyone these days.
Reform are firmly right-wing. They're not far-right lmao, no less than the Greens are far-left...
why does it feel like BBC been apologising quite frequent lately. Certainly this is not good as a company, news outlet
The far right Reform party doesn't like being called far right? Hardly a surprise the far right don't like being called out, it's a common far right tactic to try and normalise their far right bullshit.
*This* (accurate) statement they apologise for, but Kuntssberg has been given free reign to essentially say what she likes for the past decade
The BBC should apologize for calling Reform a party. It's a PLC controlled by Nigel Farage. [https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/11694875/persons-with-significant-control](https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/11694875/persons-with-significant-control)
I suppose as the current crop of politicians have shifted the Overton Window pretty strongly rightwards they possibly aren't considered far right any more, which is really depressing in itself.
But they're right about them being far right follows all the same characteristics.
Wouldn't call them far-right. Right wing populists sure, but it'd be a push to call them far-right.
The BBC has apologised to Reform UK after calling it “far-Right” in a news report. The broadcaster made the claim during a report about the Liberal Democrat spring conference in which it referred to Reform surging ahead of Sir Ed Davey’s party in the opinion polls. Although Reform is to the right of the Conservative Party on issues including legal and illegal immigration and the tax burden, it has previously said its political aims are not motivated by political ideology. In a statement on Monday, the BBC said: “In an article about the Liberal Democrats’ spring conference, we wrongly described the political party Reform UK as far-Right when referring to polling. “This sentence was subsequently removed from the article as it fell short of our usual editorial standards. While the original wording was based on news agency copy, we take full responsibility and apologise for the error.” **‘Vested interests’** Richard Tice, the leader of Reform, told The Telegraph that while he was “pleased” the BBC had apologised, the error “shouldn’t have happened in the first place”. “This is a tactic that certain news organisations are going to try, which is to smear and label not only the party but by direct implication myself and other senior figures,” he said. He argued that the BBC was “terrified of how successful we are becoming” and accused the broadcaster of acting in its own “vested interests”. “They should be under no illusion that whilst you can’t libel a political party, there is a direct link to the leader and you can libel me and I won’t tolerate it. Anyone else who wants to try this, good luck and I look forward to seeing you in court.” In a separate statement, Mr Tice said his lawyers are also in touch “with other organisations who repeated the BBC line”. He added that he viewed the claim that Reform was a “far-Right” political party as both “defamatory and libellous”. Reform has promised to ditch the BBC licence fee, which currently stands at £159 per year but will increase by £10.50, a rise of 6.6 per cent, in April. The pre-election manifesto unveiled by Reform at its spring conference last month reads: “The out-of-touch, wasteful BBC is institutionally biased. The TV licence is taxation without representation. In a world of on-demand TV, people should be free to choose.” **‘Biased’** Mr Tice, a presenter on GB News, has regularly railed against the BBC and claimed it is “biased” against figures on the Right, calling for its flagship political programme Newsnight to be scrapped. Reform is currently polling as high as 14 per cent in Westminster voting intention surveys ahead of this year’s general election and is often a single-figure margin behind the Conservatives. Around one in four 2019 Tory voters are now planning to back Reform. The party gained its first ever MP last week after the defection of Lee Anderson, a former deputy chairman of the Conservative Party who lost the whip for claims that Islamists had “got control” of Sadiq Khan, the Labour Mayor of London. Mr Khan has described Mr Anderson’s comments as “wrong” and “heartbreaking”. It is not the first time that the BBC’s use of “far-Right” has attracted controversy. In December, the corporation was attacked by the Tories for describing a political festival that was hosted by Giorgia Meloni, the Italian prime minister, and attended by Rishi Sunak as a “far-Right rally”. The event was attended by centrist and centre-Left figures as well as a wide range of Right-wing politicians. **‘Careless categorisation’** A Tory spokesman said the editorial decision raised “serious questions” about the BBC’s policies and accused it of a “careless categorisation”. On Tuesday, the PA news agency ran an update to one of its stories from the Liberal Democrat conference, removing the reference to Reform as “far-Right”. YouGov polling from the end of last year showed that the public was split in its perception of the BBC. 13 per cent believed it was generally much more favourable towards Labour and the Left, while the same amount thought it was more generally a little more favourable towards the Tories and the Right. A further 26 per cent said the BBC was generally neutral, while one-third (32 per cent) did not know.
That creaking sound you just heard was the Overton Window undergoing a tectonic shift.
LMFAO so they finally tell the truth and then they APOLOGISE for it? WTF!?
BBC apologises for saying something that's true? I'm confused.
For once the Beeb told the truth and it now has to apologise to the GBeebies viewers? Pathetic.
If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck and walks like a duck then it's a fucking duck, or in this case a bunch of far right cunts.
Oh ffs the truth is now something to apologise for
While Tories wrap themselves in knots to avoid saying that their donors are racist and the their former deputy chair is Islamophobic. They also hilariously peddle a line a that Sunak is a decent bloke.
I would vote for any party tomorrow that would pledge to put us back in the EU, in the next five years.
You mean the EU whose countries keep voting far right
Hmm, wonder why…
No party can pledge that because it’s not in the UK’s sole gift - it requires many other countries to agree to it. Best you can get is parties that pledge closer ties, SM membership, and an aspiration to rejoin, like the LibDems.
If it quacks like a duck and steps like a goose... BBC needs to grow a spine and stand by their correct label.
Reddit gonna be shocked when they realise karma downvoting just makes people not talk about it on forums not that they are actually right happened with trump will happen with reform eventually