Here's another view - a video I saw recently was the highly intriguing, if slighly controversial, TED talk by Stewart Brand on "Environmental Heresies". I'll embed it here because it is very interesting:
Early on he makes the comment: "I used to have a very romantic idea of villages, because I never lived in one". His point that people are headed from the subsistence-based, family-based, traditional villages to the freedom of the cities is a reflection on the above discussion about preserving cultures and ethnicities.
You can be as romantic and idealistic about traditional "values" and "ways of life" as you want, preserving them artificially on a grand scale is like using a rock to dam the Amazon River. Put another way, it's easy to have a misty, nostalgic view about traditional farming life before mechanisation and combine harvesters - but not enough people want to cut crops by hand to make it a sensible reality.
The BNP are an evil, hateful, ignorant, wrong party. But it's important to know where they are evil and hateful, and where they are they ignorant and wrong.
Claims that Britain and other European countries will become Islamic states aren't just based on fear, they are shockingly incorrect - many Muslims wouldn't want to live in an Islamic state just as we wouldn't want a puritan Christian state; more to the point, there are immigrants of all colours and religions coming into Britain, not just Muslims, all of them embracing the British idea. China has a huge population, whose massive growth is due to rise if/when the unpopular 1-child policy is dropped (as seen in Shanghai recently); Chinese immigrants to Britain and their children would be just as concerned about living in an Islamic state as the white people in Barking, Romford, Bradford and Leeds. Finally, as immigration increases from all parts of the globe, the secular and multi-cultural fundamentals of British society will become even more important for all these different cultures, ethnicities and religions to live side by side.
Where the BNP are simply wrong is the misguided notion that everyone will become the same "coffee-coloured race", just as so many different languages and cultures tribes have died out. At one end, to turn around to the indigenous tribes of Brazil, Africa, India and Thailand and say "you can't have the internet" just because we have a rose-tinted notion about preserving cultures is absurd, bordering on fascist. One day satellite internet will become affordable and pardon my French but f**k me they will order their 12-month broadband subscriptions in their droves. At the other end, assuming that humanity will water down into the same race if globalisation and immigration are left unchecked is as farcical as saying everyone in the same city will listen to the same kind of music, or wear the same clothes, or speak the same language.
Yes, on a long enough timeline the racial variety of the human race will decrease. This has happened for many thousands of years, from homo sapiens out-succeeding other human species (e.g. neanderthals) to the Toba catastrophe that wiped out most of the human population and, therefore, the potential human gene pool. However, even at this stage, we are thousands of years away from the human race looking uniform, and there are countless possible ethnic mixtures and combinations to go through first. And that's if everyone was forced to get sexy with people of other races - I can imagine, even hundreds of years from now, some spotty-faced descendant of Nick Griffin sulkily delcaring "well I'M not marrying a darky".
Races become minorities slowly, and slip into isolated corners slower still, and eventually disappear even slower still. Yes it'll happen, but we'll be genetically engineering our children to have green skin and blue hair long before that.