By Peter Johnson. One of the by-products of the disintegration of the BNP has been an upsurge in the move towards misplaced political correctness by nationalists, as they have either joined other existing parties or started new ones.
Thus we have been subjected to parties which proudly claim that “It’s not about race, it’s about space” and others which use non-British Third World-origin immigrants in their literature to promote “English” nationalism.
The belief behind this move towards this move to “political correctness” is the idea that a party policy which proclaims its desire to keep Britain ethnically homogenous (or, to be blunt, majority white) is somehow unelectable and always tarred with unpleasant associations.
There are a number of angles to consider in this regard:
Firstly, a party’s electability depends not so much on its actual policies, but rather its public image, as projected by its propaganda machine and the image of its political leader.
Prior to the BNP’s collapse, the party had almost all of the correct ingredients in place. Its propaganda machine was second to none (and even managed to overcome serious gaffes by the party leadership) and is probably best reflected in the official website’s popularity rankings .
The naysayers who claim that a party’s policy “dare not say the W-word” should bear in mind that in June 2009, nearly a million Brits voted for the BNP.
If things had kept on track, that figure would by now, most likely, be even higher and the party should have been looking towards its first Westminster seats—and certainly more Euro seats.
However, without wishing to recap the disastrous internal decisions by the party leadership which effectively destroyed the highly effective team which had been created, there is no doubt that the BNP’s deathblow was struck not by the clownish staffing decisions, but rather by Nick Griffin’s disastrous appearance on Question Time.
Although Griffin, and his dwindling handful of apologists, correctly claim that it was a “lynch mob” and a “set up,” the reality remains that the BNP Chairman’s performance on that show was abysmal, amateurish embarrassing and pathetic.
Over 8 million people tuned in to that show, mostly out of interest at seeing this person who had just been (shock) elected to the European parliament.
An observer summed up the outcome: people tuned in expecting to see a British lion; instead they were confronted by an unfunny Benny Hill.
There is no doubt that the BNP’s electoral decline since then is not linked to the party’s policy, but rather the appalling image created in the person of the party’s leader.
The facts show that, properly presented, a policy which unequivocally calls for the preservation and protection of an indigenous population, can enjoy electoral success, and that it is not necessary to pretend about this all-important matter.
Secondly, any of the “new parties” which refuse to address this issue are, in fact, wasting their time. If, for example, one strips out the ethno-nationalist component of nationalist policy, one effectively ends up with another UKIP-type party.
Anyone who thinks they can achieve “electoral respectability” by dropping ethno-nationalism as a founding principle, can save themselves a whole lot of sweat and bother by simply joining UKIP or the English Democrats, instead of struggling on and starting a new (another) clone party.
Finally, and probably most importantly of all, a statement that it “is about space, not about race” is apart from being fundamentally dishonest, is in reality part of the problem.
This is the identical argument which is used even by elements of the Labour Party (see the Cross Party parliamentary committee on immigration, which consisted of Labour MP Frank Fields and some other equally forgettable Tory grandees) who argued for “balanced migration” and so on. All their arguments were also centered on the available of resources and space, rather than protecting the ethnic identity of the British people.
The reality is that a culture is created by a people, and not the other way round. Political activity which is not directed at preserving the British and European peoples’ ethnic identity, is just “conservatism” with a small “c” – and those parties and their denial of the racial basis of culture and civilisation are without doubt the single greatest cause of the immigration crisis facing Britain and Europe today.
And now, some “nationalists” want to emulate this policy! It truly belongs in the “you could not make it up department.”
At the end of the day, any political activity which is not directed at preserving the ethnic identity of the indigenous British people in Britain, and the indigenous European people in Europe, is not worth bothering about.
* Anyone who is interested in the topic of race and racial differences, can do no better than to consult the book Race by Oxford University professor John Baker.
This volume, first published in 1974 by the Oxford University Press, has recently been republished and updated to include the new discoveries about race and DNA.
Professor Baker was a zoologist of some 50 years standing, and used his incredible expertise to describes species and races (subspecies); hybrids; and those theories of evolution that allow the various groups of animals to be graded as more or less primitive or advanced.
His book draws on physical and cultural anthropology, palaeontology, prehistoric archaeology, art history, and nineteenth-century accounts of Africans until then secluded from contact with other human groups, and book features sections on Europids; the Jews; the Celts; the Australids; the Sanids (Bushmen); and the Negrids. He also reviewed in depth the evidence on heredity and cognitive ability, and reached the measured conclusion that in certain races a greater proportion of people are capable of developing high intelligence than in others.
The final section of this book discusses why some races have achieved civilisational levels and others have not.
John Baker’s book Race (Third Edition, updated) can be found here.
2
Yes.
Question Time was more Peter Griffin, (of the ‘Family Guy’), than Nick Griffin.
A good article and an excellent book.
An extremely good article, and the message is absolutely correct. Reading it made me realise that even I myself have been “brainwashed” into believing a “watered-down nationalism” was the best way forward. It isn’t! Races are the product of evolution, and evolution is not an equal force in all living things. Some races are more advanced than others in their development, and this must – by the laws of biological science – apply equally to human races as well. It is a terrible mistake to be misled otherwise, as the result of multiracialism (the proper term for the sugary Mary Poppins euphemism “multiculturalism”) is to drag everyone down to the level of the lowest race, not elevate the lowest races to the level of the highest. If all races were equal, the first men on the moon would have been launched from somewhere like Uganda or Pakistan or any of the other countries who, if it were not for the advent and colonisation of the European and the introduction of Western ideas and abilities, would still be living in the Dark Ages, as most of them seem to be anyway. Nationalism must be about more than just politics – it must promote recognition of racial truths!
Excellent article, more like this please.
CC
Yes, it is a good article, CC. There are many good and accurate articles on this site if you look around and we don’t waste them on personal attacks on and lies about other nationalists. I see your master has accused me of ‘cutting and pasting’ off the internet for my last article. That’s true with regard to Noel Ignatiev’s quotations – but that was the whole point of that section – that he’s posting anti-white racial hatred. Maybe GA missed that, or maybe a half truth is better for his purposes.
.
As for the rest, I stated my source for most of it, which was Valleurs Actuelles. Perhaps he missed that again. In any case, at least I don’t take lies from the UAF website to write tittle-tattle about other nationalists, like he did with Keiren Trent. In fact, he’s made quite a habit of attacking other nationalists, hasn’t he? And again he lied about the project I have for the summer; it certainly isn’t some meaningless article as he stated…repeatedly…even going as far as to quote himself. I don’t know if he’s noticed, but it’s not summer yet.
.
As you remember (which my Intense Debate account will verify in case GA lies about that), I stopped writing for the site because of his attacks on other nationalists. I tried to turn a blind eye to the occasional nonsensical conspiracy theories lifted from David Icke, but attacks on genuine nationalists were too much. I feel sorry for the good writers you have on that site, such as Tim Heydon and John of Gwent, who have to associate with him. Rather like when Griffin made people choose between creating success for nationalism and exposing Griffin’s corruption, GA is making writers choose between informing the public and stopping because of GA’s stupidity and arrogance. He didn’t even realise that my last article was an appeal to get his act together and not an attack. Perhaps that rebuttal is more ‘manly’ for him, as he puts it – although I don’t consider tapping away at a keyboard to have anything to do with the subject of ‘manliness’.
Oh by the way, I hope he won’t make up any claims of having had ‘death threats’ from me like he did about other BNP members. How does it go again? ‘I have never lied to you and I never will!’
“Oh by the way, I hope he won’t make up any claims of having had ‘death threats’ from me like he did about other BNP members. How does it go again? ‘I have never lied to you and I never will!’”
You have never been privy to the information we have Dave so why state your wild guesses as some kind of fact? Maybe you should contact South Wales police who have ALL the evidence on the said individuals in Wales, as does Nick Griffin.
You did exactly the same with the Kieren Trent thing. I remember you asking me for my source (because you had no information) and I told you then that I would never reveal that, I also told you to contact Kieren and ask him directly, which I bet you didn’t do. Truth is Dave, you are wrong on both counts as all along you have had nothing to go on but your own guesses which you seem more than happy to state in this comment thread as some kind of fact.
As for ‘lying’, GA is quite correct, we have never knowingly lied to anyone on the British Resistance and we never will. It seems that the truth is just to much to handle for some people, eh Dave.
One last thing to the moderator, You have just renamed BNPIdeas to The Nationalist Unity Forum and this comment thread is nothing more than an attack on the Green Arrow and our site. You also allowed Dave Yorkshire to have a pop at us in his article, Why? I also notice an article from the Zionist BFP on here along with comments attacking GA (again) from the nationalist pariah, Simon Bennett. Are we about to see an article from the Freedom ‘we don’t do race’ Democrats? This doesn’t look too good really does it?
Maybe you should of renamed it the Green Arrow/British Resistance attack Forum.
CC
{Ed’s note: The last sentence is amusing, given the fact that the “Green Arrow” has consistently, vehemently, and without cause, attacked, slandered and denigrated Andrew Brons and anyone involved with BNP Ideas, in numerous articles on his website. Possibly you should look in the mirror and honestly answer the question of who is the real trouble-causer in nationalism. You might not like the answer.}
The big difference is that we haven’t just renamed our website to ‘The Nationalist UNITY Forum’ and then declared it ‘open season’ on the most popular independent Nationalist Website in this country.
As for attacking Andrew, all we have done is point out the obvious where Andrew is concerned, and that is that he never had any intention of forming a new party but was quite willing to lead hundreds of nationalists up the garden path for months letting them all believe there was a chance of a new party being formed.
Also remember this, Andrew used to come into our Paltalk room on a regular basis and chat to us, and then he just stopped. Why did he stop talking to us…… because the lunatic fringe in Wales told him to, that’s why. He had never met these people before but was willing to swallow their lies over the people he had got to know at the British Resistance, that is not the mark of a man in our book. I would of told them to bugger off.
Our site exists to promote the Nationalist cause and point out the shortcomings of those that try and lead it down paths it shouldn’t go. We will always continue with that policy.
CC
{Ed’s note: Our final comment is that the track record of your web site speaks for itself–endless trouble-causing and malicious unwarranted attacks on anyone who does not bow down before Paul Morris. People are not fooled that easily.}
“Our site exists to promote the Nationalist cause and point out the shortcomings of those that try and lead it down paths it shouldn’t go”……….That’s a lie for starters ‘Corsham Keyboarder’. Your site exists to support Britain First and the Jim Dowson retirement fund. British Resistance website has alienated more nationalists than the combined red forces ever did. It is a huge shame that you continue to facilitate divisions amongst nationalists and play host to the extreme nazi hardcore looney fringe of nationalist keyboard warriors. You need knocking down several pegs……I’ll give Dowson his dues though. He sure knows how to manipulate your father figure Paul (GA) Morris.
Don’t worry, Tony, this particular “extreme nazi hardcore looney… nationalist keyboard warrior” is no longer welcome on TBR so you can go back to your corn flakes and daily mail. 🙂
It seems you’ve lied again, CC. I thought you were all racial nationalists over at The so-called British Resistance, as your comment suggests – but Jim Dowson and co. don’t support racial nationalism, as you remember I said all along. (Again, you can look at my Intense Debate account for confirmation). So why you attack British Freedom is beyond me. That’s the thing when you lie: you’ve got to have a good memory and be careful one lie doesn’t contradict another.
.
As the editor said, there have been articles attacking Andrew Brons, Andrew Moffatt and even someone as lowly as myself, just because we refuse to get involved with Dowson’s organisation – which, as we now know from the horse’s mouth, is a Christian fundamentalist party (rather like the Republican party in America). And what did Kieren Trent do to deserve an attack, pray tell? By the way, Trent has never admitted giving a Nazi salute – except, strangely, on leftist websites that make up all kinds of stories – which is where you lifted the story, wasn’t it? What a purportedly nationalist website is doing rumour-mongering against its own is, again, beyond me. It is all too clear how much more GA likes to engage in tittle-tattle than to help the nationalist cause.
.
Oh, and just because you claim someone has made death threats – even if it is to the police and by the very honest Green Arrow – there is need of proof and and a conviction. In any case, GA’s probably racked up so many enemies while ‘manfully’ tapping away on the internet that, if he were to receive the odd threat in anger, he would probably merit it. Well, don’t bother getting back to me; I’ll let people judge for themselves what kind of an outfit you’re running.
“It seems you’ve lied again, CC. I thought you were all racial nationalists over at The so-called British Resistance”
Not at all Dave, you’re just putting words into people’s mouth there. Our race is all that concerns us at the British Resistance, period!! That is why we attack the British Freedom Party/Freedom Democrats etc, and I’m sure we can add the soon to be formed “Freedom Party” which the EDL are forming to our list of targets, that’s right, another Zionist operation from the multicultural/Israel loving Tommy Robinson.
As for your insinuation that Britain First are a Christian Fundamentalist party, well that’s just plain rubbish. Jim’s religious views are exactly that, his views. Paul Golding is the Chairman and policy is decided by the members, Britain First is there for our people and unlike others, they have woken up to the fact that you won’t save this country through the electoral system alone, it cannot be done.
“As the editor said, there have been articles attacking Andrew Brons, Andrew Moffatt and even someone as lowly as myself, just because we refuse to get involved with Dowson’s organisation”
Oh dear Dave, you really aren’t up to speed on things are you, I’m sure Andrew and the others will squirm at that statement……. I shall say no more on that.
“Trent has never admitted giving a Nazi salute”.
Absolute rubbish Dave. There is a pattern forming here and it goes like this…… If Dave doesn’t know about it then it can’t be true. Kieren admitted it on the phone to at least two people I know personally and on both occasions he thought the incident was funny. We ran the story on Kieren because just like the idiots baring their backsides/posing with guns/writing stupid things on Facebook before an election etc, it is bad for nationalisms image in the eye’s of the public, wouldn’t you agree?
I see you have dragged the ‘threats’ up again, well as I said above about a pattern forming, If Dave doesn’t know then it can’t be true. Truth is Dave, I have over a hundred screenshots along with other stuff which we offered to Andrew so he could see for himself the level to which these individuals in Wales have sunk to, Andrew didn’t want to look but was willing to listen to them over us, despite the mountain of evidence we have on these people, including a UAF headed letter which they signed ‘Unite Against Fascism’ whilst trying to get GA evicted from his home. They then hung themselves in the comment section by bragging about it (I have the screens of that too).
So then Dave, just because you aren’t privy to something doesn’t make it false.
CC
Whilst I do share the view that the opening up of old wounds by Dave was rather an unfortunate and unnecessary act (especially for launching a so-called “Unity” forum), I also agree with the Ed’s final note too – that the BR site is not an entirely innocent party.
Nor was it all that long ago when The British Resistance website tried to be a unity site for a while, offering platforms to many controversial figures like Lee Barnes, Mark Collet, English Defense League, the (then) controversial Jim Dowson, British Freedom Party and yes, the Freedom Democrats.
They were ‘guest’ articles and guest speakers, allowed for the sake of attempting to find a way forward at the time – as are some of the ones on here. It is therefore a bit foolish for articles appear condemning this site for doing things which the author at the other site had previously done and allowed himself.
Personally, given the nature of nationalists, I think this Unity forum here will only end up serving the opposite result. The intentions are good, but the reality of achieving unity is nigh on impossible when people cannot move on from old squabbles.
People cannot seem to behave, and insist on being at each others throats. It may also serve in muddying the waters on what our traditional nationalism has been, by allowing differing groups to push their variant ideological wares here. It may need to be kept in check.
Whilst I understand Dave Yorkshire’s point in his original article, and have said some similar things myself, I do not agree with Dave when he provocatively raked all this trouble back up again. It had all actually died down and sleeping dogs should have been let lay – or at least dealt with more subtly.
If we are to be a ‘Unity Forum’, these kinds of jibes and attacks have to cease, on all sides. Let the strength of the debates and the arguments win the day, not the ‘my daddy is bigger than your daddy’ stuff that belongs on the playground.
Each side should call a silent truce and concentrate on the real merits of what we can do as a whole, irrespective of differences, where possible.
On the contrary, while I do not mind anyone disagreeing with the content of my articles, it was GA who first launched personal attacks on me – as he has on others involved with this site, or posted proxy articles attacking the people here in a deeply personal manner and for no good reason. If he cannot take it, he should not dish it out. You cannot expect a man not to defend himself against such attacks.
.
You are right that the British Resistance was once a good website and it was once an honour to write for it. Only one person changed it and that was GA. The buck stops there. I personally hope, as I have said before, that GA will get himself back on track, stop attacking other nationalists and again use the valuable resource he (along with others) has created for the good of nationalism in general. However, I suspect him to be too vindictive and full of petty spite for that. I hope I am wrong.
I agree 100% with the article. We must stop being afraid of the “R” word and throw it back in the faces of our enemies -” those who through malice or negligence have contrived the displacement of the native English from their capital city and, increasingly, from their homeland itself are guilty of a racist assault on an entire nation, and a grave crime against humanity”.
The truth of displacement, of dispossession, (only 20% of children born in Greater London last year were white British and its gathering pace in the rest of the country) is the most powerful propaganda tool we have, and we should hammer it home relentlessly. It will scare people witless when they learn just how rapidly they are losing their own country, whereas moaning about (e.g.) halal food leaves almost everyone cold.
Anyone that gives the likes of Paul Morris the time of day deserve to get their fingers burnt.
The man is no friend to nationalism – in of its forms.
He’s a parasite on the boil on the arse of nationalism.
No, they dont, Simon. There are some good people over on that site. Hopefully, they can get GA to buck his ideas up. He was once a good asset to the cause. And I don’t see how the man who took the BNP website down just before the General Election, wasting many people’s hard work, is in a position to judge.
Dave,
I’ve no wish or intention to argue with you, least of all in public, but if you still believe I took the website down then perhaps you also believe everything that Griffin and his attack dogs of the day say.
Those that matter know the truth, hence why I still have the respect of most and why they are happy to work with me and benefit from my work for free. Then we have those like you, the one’s that believed Griffin’s smear campaign and also the hate blogs against me and other good people.
If anyone on this site wants unity, then you’d better be prepared to listen to all sides and you’d also better take the blinkers off and start looking at the evidence not the smears and lies that spew from the rancid mouths of people like Morris.
” It was my intention to speak out AFTER the election. However, there was little chance of me being around for much longer than 24 hours after Nick’s ‘industry experts’ made several botched attempts to steal my legally owned designs and work, as opposed to reaching an amicable and fair solution. Rather than pay for my work, they chose to steal it. Blame THEM for the timing, not me!”
.
Now this quotation of yours from the time of the incident in question would suggest that you did take the website down. You may well have had your reasons – everyone know how corrupt Griffin is – but the hard work of ordinary activists who do the legwork for no personal reward was ruined because of the timing. If you had done it the day after, no one would have blamed you. I do not wish to sling mud – too much has been thrown around already, and my comments above will be the last about GA – but you have to realise that people have difficulty in trusting you again, Simon.
Dave,
That quote from me above was posted AFTER Griffin had repointed the BNP domain name to another server which had no website on it. Therefore, when the domain switched to his new (empty) server the whole thing would disappear as the website was still on my server where it would have remained.
He pulled the plug by switching to the new server because his new Webmaster assured him he’d be ready when it switched. He wasn’t and the whole thing collapsed.
Did you think he’d admit to this? Of course not, he blamed me and told everyone I sabotaged it!
CC says “Our race is all that concerns us at the British Resistance, period!! That is why we attack the British Freedom Party/Freedom Democrats etc,”
Er, you forgot to mention that your website:
1. Has a webmaster who is married to a Japanese woman and lives in Japan (cough cough, race above all, “14 words” etc. etc.);
2. Endlessly attacks Andrew Brons, Andrew Moffat and other people connected with BNPIdeas even though they can by no stretch of the imagination be called “zionist” traitors etc.
Face facts, the “Green Arrow” and his website is just a racially-hypocritical, muck-raking, trouble-causing, personal ego trip for Paul Morris and nothing else.
Thank you gentlemen, that’s quite enough. I am sure you all have better things to do than slag each other off on Mr Brons’s ticket.
My apologies to Mr Brons for any embarrassment caused. I shall mention no more about that ‘independent nationalist website’ that supports Britain First, which, one must stress, is a campaign organisation and will never form a political party because, in their own words, ‘if voting changed anything, it would be illegal.’
Of course it ‘s about race. Baker’s book makes it absolutely clear that those who talk about mere ‘skin colour’ deceive themselves.
‘
They unwittingly give away their subterranean attitude that if they admit anything else they might open themselves to the argument, which he pursues with such scholarship and skill, that skin colour is the flag for deeper differences including those of thinking and feeling.
‘
Those who would tell you that it is all about culture beg the question as to why individual peoples produced different cultures in the first place and could take outside influences and completely transform them to make them their own.
.
According to the left it is all just ‘accidental ‘ factors like Geography..
Unfortunately they then discount the role of geography in moulding the different races. It is a procrustian attitude which takes the facts and squeezes them into their preconceived ideology of ‘equality’; something which is found nowhere in nature.
Oddly, it is atheist leftists, those who you would think would be most appreciative of the laws of nature (since to them humans must simply large-brained animals) who most adhere to this ridiculous notion of equality
The ideology of equality is a faith and a substitute religion and those who deny it are heretics who should be metaphorically burned at the stake..
Of course “race” is important, I agree with alot of the points in this article.
Not everything is about “race” though.
Economic arguments need to be pursued as well. We need to convince people in as many ways as we can that immigration, multiculturalism and EU bureaucracy are bad for Britain.
Of course it’s right to pursue a racial argument, but to say “if it’s not about race, it’s a waste of space” is nonsense.
Protection of our green spaces, water supplies under pressure, schools at breaking point, the NHS collapsing, gridlocked roads. All our resources are at buckling, and the best arguments that resonate in these areas are about “space” and immigration numbers, inflated by high immigrant birth rates.
I was disappointed at the last BNP conference to see a ridiculous policy motion on the table to scrap both income tax and VAT (about half treasury income). Whether we like it or not the country is in debt, and a government has to make the treasury books balance. A party that doesn’t pay attention to the whole spectrum of issues will never gain credibility.
I think nationalists should always tackle race related issues, but we do really need to learn how to focus on all the issues. That includes getting the calculator out to sit down, do the sums, and make some tough decisions on our policy direction.
Really you’re asking the wrong question, we all agree that we’re patriots. We use the word nationalist for that. But are we tax and borrow and spend left-wing National Socialist nutters, or are we level headed, intelligent, National Conservatives?
This statement does not cut the mustard I’m afraid. There exists a misconception that Racialists are somehow completely ignorant of any sphere of knowledge that does not explicitly involve race. It is, of course, nonsense. Let us examine each principle in term and judge it on a racial platform:
“Economic arguments need to be pursued as well. We need to convince people in as many ways as we can that immigration, multiculturalism and EU bureaucracy are bad for Britain.”
In the first instance, Economics per se must be scrutinised. Modern economics has transcended policy and is now the religion of choice for those whose constitution is too resilient for full-blown egalitarian Liberalism. Modern economics is a fraud, a racket, a swindle. The foundation of this fraud is usury (compound interest levied upon monetary loans) and its life’s blood is a currency that is no longer a means of exchange but has become a commodity – having a perceived worth in itself. Transactions adhering to the two aforementioned cornerstones are international, serving private institutions rather than any particular nation. To further enforce the swindle, these private companies issue loans to sovereign government, at interest, therefore effectively mortgaging populations to whom the national governments are merely trustees. If this was not torrid enough, these central banks generate the loans – the money – not by productive methods but, quite literally, inventing the figures, which previously did not exist. The loan is paid back, at interest, through the taxation of the populace – who have actually earned the money through the manufacturing of goods, supply of services etc. The old adage something for nothing is reversed in this instance.
Furthermore, the practice of creating a demand for more and more consumer items, whether that be the latest gadget or a bewildering array of foodstuffs, results in the fuelling of the credit-based economic model, which is quite obviously unsustainable. No nation can continue or even prosper while it produces nothing but services and junk and purchases the aforementioned with credit, paid back at interest remember, borrowed from private entities; this is a parasitical relationship, it is not symbiotic – although it is but only in the extreme short term – and it is therefore unhealthy and destructive.
So modern economics is a scam – that is quite clear to anyone on the outside looking in, so what of “immigration, multiculturalism and EU bureaucracy”? Immigration = race, plain and simple! Mass non-White immigration results in the replacement of the native population. If race was not important, then immigration would purely be an economic consideration. But, and as I have laboured above, economics is first and foremost a means for our international masters to control nations via debt. A return to National economics would at least necessitate a re-think on the immigration issue, whether it be White or non-White. Until the entire economic structure is reconstructed, immigration is a racial issue. Multiculturalism is, similarly, a racial issue. EU bureaucracy is not, necessarily racial (unless of course we consider the open-border policies) but it is easily rectified, and Nationalism provides the simple and concise solution.
“Of course it’s right to pursue a racial argument, but to say “if it’s not about race, it’s a waste of space” is nonsense.”
This is the retort of the Civic Nationalist, the men and women who condemn “racism” because it is not a vote winner. This slavish devotion to democracy is being eroded and will continue to do so until we finally understand that reality supersedes equality, even amongst our own kind.
“Protection of our green spaces,”
Why and from what? Why have green spaces while the only bipeds enjoying them are non-White mongrels or Arab invaders?
“water supplies under pressure,”
The population is increasing – the growth areas are non-White; land is required to be concreted over which devastates traditional water recovery (hose pipe ban anyone?); various alien tribes utilise water far more that the natives due to their strange religious practices; governments adhering to flawed economic practices fritter away billions of tax-payers money (or borrow it at interest) which should be ploughed back into the country’s infrastructure.
“schools at breaking point,”
The population is increasing – the growth areas are non-White; teachers are wasting their time on pupils who language, culture, expectations and levels of IQ are radically different from the host population’s offspring.
“the NHS collapsing,”
The population is increasing – the growth areas are non-White; foreign, non-White nurses and GPs are being imported and are proving themselves incapable of providing the service we pay for, expect and require.
“gridlocked roads.“
Now we are nit-picking, but again, under our fraudulent economic pyramid-scheme, best value is far from achieved.
“All our resources are at buckling, and the best arguments that resonate in these areas are about “space” and immigration numbers, inflated by high immigrant birth rates.”
Again, racial issues!
“I was disappointed at the last BNP conference to see a ridiculous policy motion on the table to scrap both income tax and VAT (about half treasury income). Whether we like it or not the country is in debt, and a government has to make the treasury books balance. A party that doesn’t pay attention to the whole spectrum of issues will never gain credibility.”
See above in relation to destructive economics.
“I think nationalists should always tackle race related issues, but we do really need to learn how to focus on all the issues. That includes getting the calculator out to sit down, do the sums, and make some tough decisions on our policy direction.”
Again, the Civic argument and the attempt to pander to voters who do not relish uncomfortable discussions that would be in direct contrast to their decades of conditioning.
“Really you’re asking the wrong question, we all agree that we’re patriots.”
Based on the observations of the author, I would suggest that we are poles apart in this regard.
“We use the word nationalist for that.”
We use the term White Nationalist – Nationalist in its solitary manifestation is merely a precondition based on what we think we are and not what we actually are, which is a race.
“But are we tax and borrow and spend left-wing National Socialist nutters, or are we level headed, intelligent, National Conservatives?”
The language used here speaks volumes…
NickGrifford, I think you’ve read too deeply into my comment. I’m sorry if you got the impression I was trying to make nationalists seem ignorant. That was certainly not my intention.
My intention was to show how easily people can be put off when we don’t carefully consider our language and back our arguments up with the facts. Cleaning up the presentation of our message is really the point I was making.
I’ve got to say the presentation in this article and your comment put me off, and I’ve represented nationalism for 5 years on councils, led successful winning campaigns and spoke out publicly for our cause. When something puts me off, it makes me think how many other people would think the same way.
This is the “comments” section, so I don’t feel the need to write an article to re-enforce my opinion. Needless to say I think your approach is off-putting.
I’ll just say this, as a fairly successful professional in a well-paid job there’s not a “cat in hells chance” that I put my reputation and career on the line for the outlandish message being pushed by the fringe parties at the moment. That includes the BNP, BFP and the NF, and I want more than just an English Parliament, or EU withdrawal ruling out the single issue civic nationalists. I realise I’ll get crucified as a selfish egotist on here for that. But, look around how many young professionals can you count in our movement, not many, ask yourself why?
If you want a successful movement that attracts talented successful young people I suggest you read this article put forward by Durotrigian. It’s the presentational approach I would favour and I’m fairly certain many others would too, see http://nationalistunityforum.co.uk/index.php/beyond-the-fringe-building-credible-nationalist-politics-part-iii/
It doesn’t really matter as the people are not actually listening. I have decided my course of action and I look forward to being joined by more of my fellow patriots when they finally “smell the roses”.