But he’s the key voice of Brexit, which represents 51%. He’s the only political figure speaking out against mass immigration which represents the views of many.
As for him getting airtime initially, plenty of diverse views have got airtime on the BBC as they should. UKIP had got billionaire backers too which will hold sway in the right wing press. UKIP is also an protest offshoot of the Conservative party. If some Labour MPs defected to a ‘New Labour’ offshoot party you can bet they’d get airtime.
The top paragraph was the case pre 2015/2016, but it’s a strech to suggest he is any of those things anymore.
Due to his sidelining with Trump and his stepping down of UKIP leader he has put himself into a form of political irrelevance. TV companies only reach out to him for soundbites of ‘Bretrayal’ and to put him up against the commical Alister Campbell
Trump certianly is but Farage is no where near his level! He runs a talk show on LBC now and that’s pretty much it. I’m not going to deny his importance in the (relative) rise of UKIP and in bringing about the referendum, but he crrtianly didn’t win the support of 52% of people
Not all of the 52% but let’s not pretend he didn’t make a good case for it and do well in the debates because he did. There’s a good argument that without Farage that Brexit loses. Everyone else in the UKIP party would not have resonated with the general population in the way Farage did.
In fact many preferred him to career politicians because he was seen as having genuine beliefs and actually had a career before getting into politics. Not that I agree with him or his politics.
this thread sums it all up. There is a pattern here. And I don’t believe this is just naivety ‘let’s hear both sides’. there may be an element of that but there is also an element of support
for these people.
I’ll give the BBC the benefit of the doubt for now and say it is unlikely this is an editorial slant from up top (although they have proven their untrustworthiness over Saville etc) and feel this is just personal decisions from producers of these programmes that have sympathy for these ideals making decisions from that point of view.
An interesting observation I have made in recent Indian election and made me think about the stance I have on Trump.
So in short Narendra Modi who is re-elected as PM of India yesterday or technically is in good stead for being one; He has been accused during his entire tenure for being a Hindu Nationalist.
Someone who is a divisive figure who has split the nation, marginalised the minorities and promoted hate crime, misogyny & what not.
However, He has not actively done anything of that sort. He just happens to be portrayed as a symbol of nationalism.
And this symbolism is because of people from both side of the spectrum - idiots who love him but have ill intent, and people who hate him & are attributing actions of extremist idiots onto this guy.
Modi, well he is PM again so he perhaps doesn’t care, but it made me think that if half the population who hate him, didn’t attribute those things to him; he wouldn’t have become the symbol and thereby not encouraged the extremists.
We are our own worst enemies.
Trump is also often made the symbol of white nationalism but he isn’t exactly actively encouraging any of it.
