Skip to content

ukip and the aesthetics of being not?

The guardian, in an article about ukip’s racism, goes:
Ukip, polling at 18% in the latest Observer/Opinion findings, said the party was “non-racist, non-sectarian” and that “any comments made by members that fail to uphold these values will be duly investigated and acted upon”.

So.. ukip is declaring itself to be non-racist while evidently, having a fair few racist party members. The idea of a “uk independence” apart, if the question is just about how a political party gets to Be, in the light of this statement, it seems, like something as:
It does not matter how the political party members think. These people that go on knocking people’s doors, leafletting, fill in party conferences, vote at times, select candidates – in fact, some candidates themselves – are not the party.
The political party, in this sequence, seems to be the person, or team, that gets to wield power in the Name of the given party..

Sort of like being a political party without the party, no? Or Being a political entity that calls itself a party without being party, but just for the privileges/affordance that Being presented as a political party gives?

Perhaps the last one is an over-assumption, however am leaving it because it seems to illustrate the sense of being while not..?

Be First to Comment

Leave a Reply