The rioting that broke out in Bradford on 7 July 2001 should perhaps have come as no surprise. In the first place, there had been plenty of precedents, with disturbances over recent weeks in Oldham, Leeds and Burnley. But it was Bradford that saw the worst of the trouble. Shops and pubs were burnt out and looted, barricades erected, bricks and petrol bombs thrown; millions of pounds of damage was done, over 300 police officers were injured and 200 jail sentences were handed down by the courts.
There were deep-rooted problems here, of which the street-fighting was merely a symptom. Economically, this was a world that had been hit by waves of de-industrialisation, most notoriously during Margaret Thatcher’s premiership, and then, after a period of stabilisation, in the late 1990s. As more and more manufacturing industry was moved to the Far East, so jobs were lost at home. In the eight years between Labour’s election victories in 1997 and 2005, manufacturing output fell from 16.8% of the UK’s economy to just 11.8%, and the impact was felt most acutely in those old towns of the Industrial Revolution in Lancashire and Yorkshire. There weren’t big, dramatic closures that attracted national attention as in the 1980s, just a steady erosion of employment as plants with dozens, rather than thousands, of workers were shut down; places like the Ondura rubber-compound factory in Keighley, or Hillcross Pharmaceuticals in Burnley.
Running alongside this were racial tensions that had again been building for many years. Back in 1989, there had been violent clashes when a meeting in Dewsbury of the British National Party (BNP) was met by an anti-racist rally, with dozens of arrests. The problems, however, were more complicated than the simple antagonism implied by that conflict. In many places, there was rivalry and sporadic fighting between Hindus and Muslims, often sparked by developments in India, as well as conflicts between British Asians and white youths, and between all these groups and the police. Even before the riots in Oldham in May 2001, police statistics showed that there were more racist attacks in the area by Asians on whites than by whites on Asians.
Which is not to say that the BNP weren’t a factor, alongside — according to Labour home secretary David Blunkett — “the Socialist Workers Party and hangers-on who made matters worse and played directly into the hands of the far-Right”. Indeed, it was the presence of the BNP that gave the riots a national significance far beyond the immediate unrest.
The party had been founded in 1982, but had amounted to very little until veteran neo-Nazi John Tyndall was voted out as leader in 1999, replaced by the less extreme figure of Nick Griffin. A 40-year-old who’d studied law at Cambridge, Griffin began to reposition the BNP, seeking to create a more electorally acceptable image, emphasising culture rather than race, talking about Europe and crime as well as immigration. His approach soon began to pay dividends.
The 2001 riots raised the party’s profile, and at the general election that June, Griffin stood in Oldham West and Royton, coming third with 16.4% of the vote. The following year, a milestone was reached when three BNP councillors were elected in Burnley. They gave their first press conference on a derelict piece of waste ground surrounded by boarded-up houses in Burnley Wood, and the deprivation of the area was clearly a major factor in the party’s growth. So too was a feeling that the political establishment had failed to remedy the situation. “I only voted for the BNP because Labour isn’t doing anything around here for whites,” said one resident. “Someone has to step in and make sure the whites get their fair share,” agreed another. “I’m disgusted with my Labour candidate. Where the hell was he when we needed him?”
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
SubscribeThis is said as though somehow unusual and observed only in this one time or place.
The reality, of course, is that this state is the normal, default state of affairs. Furthermore, where an Asian is attacked, it’s likely to be by another Asian or ethnic minority. A grossly disproportionate amount of crime, especially violent crime, is committed by ethnic minorities.
Shocking justice, but this is still going on today in certain large cities, I hear, with grooming gangs not being taken through the legal process for fear of the call of racism, in the era of BLM.
Sadly it appears nothing has changed and the Police & CPS are just going for easy targets.
It is not just grooming gangs it is drugs, tax evasion and social security fraud. The authorities dare not do anything.
Precisely. Did you hear the interview with Lady Nourse this morning ? it reduced me to tears. The CPS have all the time in the world to go for her..
Andrew Norfolk of The Times admitted on the BBC that he sat on the grooming gang story for over two years as it ‘offended his liberal sensibilites’ to report it.
If anyone were to speak the whole truth on this matter, their comment would be immediately censored.
It says it all when most of the “progressive” press and broadcasters in the UK fall over themselves about the death in custody in another continent of a violent, drug addict career criminal which resulted in a murder conviction than the rape of thousands of children, systematically covered up, in their own country.
It’s strange how the thought of rapists walking free doesn’t offend liberal sensibilities.
Mass immigration and multiculturalism always seems to end with violence, civil strife and negative consequences. Perhaps mass immigration and multiculturalism WERE NEVER A GOOD IDEA.