For many years I criticized what I perceived to be a vertical approach that stifled British National Party branches. Subservience is weakness. For many years we wasted valuable resources that could have transformed British National Party branches into debating forums to promote better activists, better representatives and better candidates.
If we had questioned more and we had criticized more, our organization could have been stronger and we could have avoided many of the pitfalls that led to a debacle that almost sunk the organization. Our meetings were organized in a such a manner that true debate was practically impossible.
Each meeting was divided in two parts and the outcome of each meeting was almost predictable. There were usually two speakers - one during each segment and before a interval there used to a be a collection and a few questions were asked. There were no real debates.
Nowadays, at least in the London Region - I cannot refer to what happens in other regions of the country - there is more debate and I very much prefer sessions with less speeches and more interaction between members.
Tribes have chiefs. Political parties have members that debate with other members. There will always be differences of opinion, there will always be arguments, but in the end differences of opinion and arguments is what democracy is all about.