They called homosexuality a “disease” and blamed a series of natural disasters on the increase of “allowed homosexuality”. Seeing homosexuality as an aberration and a crime against humanity is not the only outlandish comments they have made on “individuals” who did not fit their criteria of “normality”. Disgraced but recently re-elected MEP Roger Helmer declared that the media actively encouraged homosexuality, which he deemed a lifestyle not worthy of respect.

Well done Britain, you ( the voting public) have chosen to be represented by a party that condemns homosexuality, that abhors women, that disregards any campaign for equality amongst the classes, between the genders or along racial lines. You should feel proud of yourself, because if UKIP wins the 2015 General Election, rape culture will be condoned, women will no longer enjoy a position of authority and most recently of all: compulsory abortion of all disabled children which are considered a ‘burden on the state and the home’ by the UKIP party.

Think Britain , can we really choose a party that supports such brutal policies: A party that follows a pastiche of political perspectives; right-wing, with a strong libertarian flavour and a dash of social conservatism? But UKIP was not always so condemnatory. According to UKIP founder Alan Sked , he established UKIP as “a non-sectarian, non-racist party with no prejudices against foreigners or lawful minorities of any kind” and these policies were ensued until his resignation in 1997.

Following his resignation, he has claimed that “the de facto leader of UKIP since 1999 has been a racist political failure”, referring to the current figurehead ( Nigel Farage). But is he right, has UKIP been a complete political failure? The answer is an outstanding yes. Since UKIP has come into power we have seen them laughably contradict themselves time and time again. Nigel Farage claims that its manifesto “does not discriminate against any person on the grounds of their race, religion, ethnic origin, education, beliefs, sexual orientation, class, social status, sectarianism or any other basis prescribed by law” and yet the evidence demonstrates otherwise.

So what would UKIP Britain look like should they win the General Election? Scared of immigrants? Vote UKIP. Insecure about the financial crisis? Vote UKIP. Hate the smoking ban, HS2, Brussels, travellers, burqas, regulation, tax, Boris, debt, wind farms, quangos, foreign aid, crime, Abu Qatada, tuition fees, lazy people, Muslims, foreigners, the hunting ban? Vote UKIP. In other words, they endeavour to replicate the colonialist and patriarchal system of the nineteenth century, despite our current multi-cultural state.

Could UKIP’S rise to power see the dismantling of a system which fought to revere all races? Which sought to preserve each and every individualistic identity? In Farage’s vision multiculturalism should be stifled and instead  identities and cultures should be erased as though they never existed. A process of assimilation would follow and each person would be forced to leave behind any attributes that marked them as non-British, whether it be clothing or appearance. This colonial view of Britain exposes UKIP for who they really are, bigots hell-bent on destruction. Misogynistic, patriarchal, sexist and prejudiced bigots.

Below are some more policies/laws that UKIP intend to force upon the British public, regarding immigration, education, Europe, tax, defence, health, energy and climate change, gay marriage, law and order, the economy, transport, democracy and social issues.

EUROPE: to opt-out of the EU but to keep trading links between unions.
IMMIGRATION: a five year freeze on immigration for permanent settlement – and any future migration must be strictly limited to those who can “clearly be shown to benefit the British people as a whole and our economy”. Immigrants would not be able to apply for public housing or benefits until they had paid tax for five years.
TAX: flat tax – a single combined rate of income tax and national insurance paid by all workers. It claims this would end the complexity of the current system and allow people to keep more of the money they have earned. It would also lead to a major shrinking of the size of the state, which would revert to a “safety net” for the poorest.
EDUCATION: selection by ability and would encourage the creation of new grammar schools.It also advocates the return of the student grant system to replace loans.
HEALTH: to shrink the Department of Health and hand control to locally elected County Health Boards. It would also restore “traditional” non-university training for nurses.
DEFENCE: to build more warships and carry out an urgent review of the case for replacing Trident, including the option of a new British-built nuclear missile system capable of launch from air, sea or sub-surface vessels.
ENERGY AND CLIMATE CHANGE: UKIP is sceptical about the existence of man-made climate change and would scrap all subsidies for renewable energy. It would also cancel all wind farm developments. Instead, it backs the expansion of shale gas extraction, or fracking, and a mass programme of nuclear power stations.
GAY MARRIAGE: UKIP supports the concept of civil partnerships, but opposes the move to legislate for same-sex marriage, which it says risks “the grave harm of undermining the rights of Churches and Faiths to decide for themselves whom they will and will not marry”.
LAW AND ORDER: UKIP would double prison places and protect “frontline” policing to enforce “zero tolerance” of crime.
THE ECONOMY: “tens of billions” of tax cuts, with £77bn of cuts to public expenditure to deal with the deficit.
TRANSPORT: opposes the High Speed 2 (HS2) rail line arguing it will destroy countryside for little economic gain.
SOCIAL ISSUES: opposes “political correctness” and argues that multiculturalism has “split” British society. It would legislate to allow smoking in pubs, in designated rooms, and hold local referendums on repealing the hunting ban.
DEMOCRACY: The party wants binding local and national referendums on major issues.