The Rise of Ukip: Is This the End of a Political Era?

29/05/2014 15:52 BST | Updated 28/07/2014 10:59 BST

Many people do not vote because of a sense of hopelessness. Would my vote make a difference? Would it have an impact on government? Here's a real-life example for those cynics, skeptics and pessimists ... In Southcoates East, UKIP's victory was decided by only 9 votes. With the benefit of hindsight, would you have voted if that preordained the defeat of such party?

There was an apparent geographical division in UKIP's popularity, as new strongholds were fostered in coastal towns in the local elections with only a minority of seats in cities such as London. This is the only time in history that UKIP has pushed significantly in local elections as well as the European elections. It mounted more than 1,700 candidates in the county council elections, winning 20% of the vote in the wards where it stood, assisting to unseat at least 3 Labour, 5 Conservative and 1 Liberal Democrat local authorities. However it's polling was at 7% in London, where Labour gains were prevailing and gyrated 4 of the outer suburbs red.

Indeed, the scapegoating of immigrants is not a new phenomenon. We saw similar detrimental and damaging attempts in the 1930s through the prominence of Hitler in Nazi-Germany. Rightly so, we question whether UKIP is in fact the Nazi regime re-incarnated. With a chronological outlook, therefore, one can possibly agree. The spirit of UKIP is certainly one to be feared of in the political dynamic. It is wholeheartedly misleading, remarking a variety of peculiar ills and complications as all progressing from two causes in particular: foreigners abroad, and 'foreigners' within. None of the tribulations it distinguishes with such as; the cost of the EU, immigration, EU bureaucracy, political correctness, human rights legislation and so on, are anything less than tangible; whereas to the ordinary being such issues have to be challenged ad hoc, rather than viewing it as an outright epidemic.

It has come to the forefront that far-right parties have managed to excel in other EU countries and thus this issue is not solely concentrated within the UK. In response to the global economic disturbances, we have seen the birth and growth of some anti-immigrant and Nationalist parties in Sweden, France and, of course, Greece. Therefore it is not surprising that here, in Britain, we have witnessed spiraling support for UKIP, a nationalist anti-immigrant party. The party's campaign against EU immigration is targeting hostility specifically towards Romanians and Bulgarians; the impression being that if the UK refuses access to people from Eastern Europe then all the country's ills will be disentangled: the economy will flourish and unemployment will dispel; the NHS will be spared; and crime will come to a dramatic end. What they do not understand is that there is a fine line between Patriotism and Nationalism since the two are categorically and unequivocally distinct. However UKIP's 'charismatic' leader, Farage, seems to have forgotten that there is a striking disparity between the two. As Charles de Gaulle once said, "Patriotism is when love of your own people comes first; nationalism, when hate for people other than your own comes first". Surely, the party's call for an "end to support for multiculturalism and promote one, common British culture" is relatively dangerous through this perspective?

Nevertheless, it is worthy to note that by giving a political platform for parties like the UKIP we allow racists to feel far more comfortable since the party's xenophobic drivel countenances for such derogatory opinions to be expressed publicly. Despite admitting that there were 'some idiots' in the party, Farage has defended UKIP against claims of racism and other controversial and offensive remarks expressed by candidates and supporters continuously. For instance, Harry Perry who was standing for the party in Stockport published extreme and offensive views on Twitter describing Homosexuality as 'an abomination before God', David Cameron a ' gay-loving nutcase' and Muslims 'the devil's children'. Thus appearing to be a cultivating problem within the party's domain, recently, UKIP Councillor, Dave Small faced suspension within a week of being elected to Redditch Borough Council after making a series of homophobic and racist Facebook posts and then had the audacity to protest that he "shall never apologise to the poofs and perverts and certainly not the foreigners". Moreover, before the party's notoriety, candidate Geoffrey Clarke was suspended after demanding necessary abortion of unborn babies with Down's syndrome. Furthermore, members of the party maintained that the floods at the beginning of the year were caused by gay marriages; these are just a fraction of the disgrace that have been short-listed. Therefore it seems clear to the ordinary mind that the barrage of racist, homophobic amongst other discriminatory comments that have been explicitly aired by UKIP candidates and supporters is a fact that misfortunes Farage's defensive attitude.

By all means, Farage can disown some of the candidates, suspend or even distance himself away from them. However, the inexorable reality is that these are HIS policies, which act as the wheel of motivation, influencing the party's candidates and members and allowing those who discriminate to feel comfortable to express their prejudicial views in the public sphere.