John Bercow is part of the BNP’s raison d’être
Cranmer was quite chilled about that: the green benches are not the Throne of the United Kingdom; they are not sacred and the posteriors which normally grace them are certainly in no sense sanctified.
But His Grace was rather exercised by a speech the Speaker made to the assembled youth, which included these lines:
"I'm under absolutely no obligation whatsoever to be impartial as between the forces of democracy on the one hand and the forces of evil on the other... I do feel very, very, very strongly as someone from a Jewish background that the evil of the BNP is that its whole politics is based upon and driven by hate. That is a poison which we could well do without."
While Cranmer has no truck with Nick Griffin or the BNP, this attack upon a legally-constituted political party – which has a number of councillors spattered across the country, including one in the London Assembly, and has sent MEPs to Brussels with a legitimate democratic mandate – is not only wholly inappropriate, it is unprecedented. Quite what the Speaker would do if a member of the BNP were to win a seat at Westminster is not clear. It is Cranmer’s view that his manifestly partisan posturing would make his position untenable.
But other elements of his speech merit a little scrutiny, for they evidence a sub-GCSE level of comprehension. Mr Bercow has something of a reputation for spouting a patronising, sixth-form-level of debate (he does feel very, very, very strongly on some matters, just so you get the point), so perhaps he was in his element with the Youth Parliament. But since when were ‘the forces of evil’ the opposite of ‘the forces of democracy’? Are non-democracies always evil? As a decidedly undemocratic ecclesiastical monarchy, is Vatican City subject to ‘the forces of evil’? And if the anti-democratic is ‘evil’, why has Speaker Bercow not lambasted the European Union? Why is he content to preside over a Chamber which is subject to the EU’s ‘forces of evil’ without exposing and condemning its damnable malevolence?
Yet in what sense is the BNP anti-democratic? Are they not winning power in local communities and in the elections to the European Parliament by engaging in democracy and bravely knocking on doors to ask people to vote for them? And if the Speaker is opposing what has been legitimately and democratically elected, has he himself not joined the 'forces of evil'?
Speaker Bercow also has a curious reasoning which appears to allude to something significant, but may not; it is not entirely clear. Consider this:
‘...as someone from a Jewish background that the evil of the BNP is that its whole politics is based upon and driven by hate...’
Why is this a poison ‘which we could well do without’ when Speaker Bercow has not said a word about the rather more virulent poison of Islamism, about which ‘as someone from a Jewish background’ he ought to have far greater concern? While Cranmer is not aware of any anti-Semitic statements from the BNP (though there may indeed be some covert expression), it is quite a remarkable purposeful blindness on the part of the Speaker to ignore the rather overt anti-Semitic and anti-democratic ranting of the Islamists in our midst. Do they not spout a toxic totalitarian politics ‘based upon and driven by hate’? Is not this fascism a rather more pressing concern to ‘someone from a Jewish background’?
Or is Speaker Bercow so concerned to propagate his own multicultural, relativist, liberal political agenda to oppose ‘the forces of conservatism’ that he only feels the need to expose the ‘extreme Right’ as the supreme malignant force in politics? Has the Speaker not heard that the Islamists want shari’a law imposed upon us all? Has he not heard that they want to kill all of those ‘from a Jewish background’, behead the kuffar, throw homosexuals off cliffs and stone adulterous women? They want a nation in submission to Allah, on whose behalf they are the self-appointed ayatollahs of quranic jurisprudence.
By ignoring this, and by choosing instead to lecture the Youth Parliament (and thereby the country) about ‘the evil of the BNP’, Speaker Bercow appeases the real ‘forces of evil’ and thereby recruits on behalf of the one political party which dares to challenge these anti-democratic forces: Speaker Bercow's ignorance and blindness have made him part of Nick Griffin’s very raison d’être.