... or it could just be that people have seen 'the left' in action in government for a number of years now, decided it isn't working, and are looking at the alternatives.
the continuation of a surprising number of conservative policies, and spending plans, were the hallmark of the early years of the blair administration. followed by an alliance between blair and a right-wing yankee administration. personally, i haven't seen anything 'left-wing' in what the labour party's done, and a great deal which is simply corrupt ('reform' of the house of lords), stupid, inept, or downright barking. a left-wing government would have done something positive for the millennium instead of wasting hundreds of millions on the dome. education and housing would have been priorities instead of downgraded. transport would have been integrated instead of fucked. even the one possible success blair had, in the six counties, was a) imo not a success, and b) much down to the work of others, notably john major, albert reynolds, gerry adams and john hume.
The success of a political party is based purely on addressing the needs of the electorate in persuading them to vote for them. Nothing more, nothing less. A lot of it may be down to 'spin' but most of it will be their policies.
no it isn't. people don't read manifestos. i've tried and given up. people vote for the best of a bad bunch, or they vote for a party to send a rocket up the establishment, be that party ukip or bnp. the bnp's a special case here, because they have received so much free publicity, because they appear as an anti-party party, and because the electorate to which they appeal has been abandoned by other parties. it's certainly not down to their ideas convincing, in the same way that the other parties don't convince.
As you seem to be concentrating on the BNP, a lot of people do see a variety of problems with the amount of immigration into the UK. Whilst "send 'em all 'ome" is not necessarily the best solution, the other extreme of "let anyone in regardless" is not the solution either. But what are the mainstream parties offering as their solutions?
immigration's a troublesome issue. there is a need to let people in: the aging population's going to need younger people in it, and if we're not prepared to breed them, where else are they going to come from? i agree that the no borders approach is stupid - however, until there's a debate about immigration in which the facts and not the fears are discussed then you're going to have a polarisation of the argument.
You do have to also remember that 'the left' is as much part of the problem; anyone talking about immigration immediately gets branded a racist, or similar, so people are now afraid to even talk about the issue, and when people are afraid to talk about the issue in normal conversation, that's when the extremes tend to come out because they aren't afraid to talk about it - and "hmm they're saying what I'm thinking" is how people respond.
no, as i mentioned it's more "hmm they're talking about what i fear". the whole of society has gone from being resilient about risk to being extremely risk averse. this manifests itself in discussions about immigration as much as it does about health and safety or terrorism.
The success of the BNP is nothing to do with big budgets, slick spin doctors, or even necessarily their policies - I'd say it's more down to mainstream politics losing touch with the electorate and being unable or unwilling to come up with a solution to counteract it.
to an extent. but the mainstream parties haven't lost touch with the electorate, not all of it. they have lost touch with large parts of the white working class, which has frankly been denigrated for many years. it's a mark imo of the tolerance of the white working class that it's taken so long for fascist parties to make any impact, and even now that impact's within a minority of the wwc.
it's true that the mainstream parties have no idea of how to combat the bnp. instead by describing them as beyond the pale they establish a clear dividing line between them and the bnp, one which the bnp has taken full advantage of. however, the bnp are very much a griffin party, not a resilient party like the conservatives or lib dems.
In fact, you could even say that the rise of the right is the result of the failure of the left through years of political correctness and fighting for an 'open doors' kind of policy. Therefore, perhaps those on the political left should be putting more effort into seeing how to make their point of view more accepted by the mainstream, rather than attacking and attempting to silence those who are, after all, only operating within the same democratic system of freedom of speech and thought as you are.
this is not about immigration as such, it is about the way in which immigration's portrayed, which is a separate thing. it is about the way in which people fear the factors which affect them in their everyday lives are going to be impacted by immigration. but the rise of the bnp offers people as many solutions to their real problems as does the continuing dominance of the major parties, which is to say none.
Or are you not pro-democracy?
what we have in this country is very far from democracy.