Nigel and a Opportunist's Dilemma

 I'd rather not be blogging about Nigel Farage (NF) again so quickly, but the current controversy over his refusal to condemn the Southampton riots - fully justified in being regarded as disgraceful - is lacking in one respect, I think. The Prime Minister spoke accurately when he said, in reply to NF's two-tier policing" speech about the Henry Nowak murder,  in the House of Commons:

“His [Mr Farage’s] response has been to appeal for rage, rage. That’s his response to a father who has lost his son and asked for that not to happen. Exploiting this tragedy to create grievance and division would be wrong in any circumstances, but to do it when the family are expressly saying ‘please don’t’ is unforgivable. It shows exactly who he is.”

It certainly shows NF to be an opportunist, as he always has been. We have, for example, seen him attempt to exploit anti-Semitism, among other topics, to his advantage. He keeps quiet about it now, but:

"In 2017, Farage came under fire for antisemitism after an LBC interview in which he described the so-called US “Jewish lobby” as a concern of his.
He has spoken of a "new world order" and the threat of a "globalist" government, often singling out Goldman Sachs and George Soros".

He has sought to ingratiate himself with both Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin:

"Farage ... defended Trump’s infamous "grab ’em by the pu**y" comment, saying that, "men say dreadful things sometimes".
If all of us were caught out on what we’ve said on a night out after a drink, none of us would be here," he added."

As for Putin: 

"Vladimir Putin is a nationalist Russian. He wants to get back — at least I thought he wanted to get back — the Russian-speaking areas [of Ukraine] into his country," ... He (NF) said that the invasion was "abhorrent" but also "predictable", and blamed Putin’s actions on the EU and Nato provoking him".

It may be fanciful, but I am certain that, in the awful event of NF becoming Prime Minister, we would see him welcoming Trump and Putin on state visits to this country - perhaps both at the same time.

But this is not the main issue here. I said above that the main issue about NF's blathering over two-tier policing and the anger over his refusal to condemn the riots in Southampton last week is lacking an appreciation of one unspoken fact.

 

This fact is that NF is caught in a dilemma when it comes to violence of this type - but don't expect him to admit it. He cannot afford to be seen as condoning lawlessness - crime is a major Reform UK issue - but neither can he afford to alienate the angry individuals who attend such riots, or the right-wing rallies that blight our capital city periodically. Still less can he afford to upset the organisers and inciters of these events, such as Tommy Robinson, Paul Golding, Katy Hopkins, Laurence Fox, Elon Musk, etc,etc. All these extremist luminaries have supported NF and Reform UK in various ways, but in particular, at the last General Election. If they turned against him, he would lose a lot of popular (not to say populist) support. That, I believe, is why NF is so ambivalent on this issue.

But there could be another problem for NF if he condemned right-wing populist violence, even though he might not be aware of it. The extreme Right thrives on violence, be it physical or online. They are by no means averse to using violence and terror tactics against those they class as being traitors, and while NF might have bodyguards, the neo-Nazi psychopaths, of whom we see many on anti-migrant protests or "Unite the Nation" marches, could well target Reform UK members and officials. 

In other words, NF and his followers could become a persecuted minority. They might then appreciate the feelings of other such minorities, in this country and elsewhere.