By Peter Mills MA. PhD. The Daily Mail, sometimes a great newspaper, is in danger of becoming hypocritical. It is filled on a daily basis with excellent and fully justified rants, seriously pointed articles and entirely valid howls of editorial protest, all of which in one way or another lament the extreme disintegration of our society and social values, the corruptness of our politicians and business magnates, and our general collapse of national standards, public finance and administrative common sense.
And yet, on a regular basis, like a strange knee-jerk reaction, it also cocks a supercilious snoot at the only kind of political movement that can remedy the very catastrophes it laments – Nationalism.
Daily Mail writer Stephen Glover, for example, in a single headline to his article on page 17 of April 12th, fully recognizes the threats Britain faces, yet in the very same sentence, extraordinarily feels the need to jump yet again on the same old and obsolete bandwagon of “putting the boot in” where the growth of European Nationalism is concerned.
The headline in question states in big black letters: “Economic crisis, a failing political class and the spectre of 1930s-style extremism across Europe.”
The Daily Mail is merely one common example of this widespread affliction of double-standards, and I have no wish to malign it or single it out, except by explaining that it is my regular newspaper and has been so since I was 17 in 1956, thus it comes to my attentions more than any other newspaper.
This same form of “knock all Nationalism regardless” is, of course, also encouraged by our successive governments, by 99% (probably more) of Fleet Street, by the TV and radio management and owners, and by all those “Establishment-leaning” institutions, movers-and-shakers and opinion-makers who, en masse, have their collective hands upon the steering wheel of the general public’s attitudes, opinions, thought-processes and world-view.
And unless this mischievous and outdated spread of mis-information can be popularly challenged and overcome, its infection of the attitudes of the general population of this country will help drag Britain down to death like some poor staggering wildebeest being eaten alive by hyenas on a television wildlife documentary.
Consider this metaphor: if a famous mathematician in a bygone era, now long dead, stated some eighty years in the past that two plus two equals seven, then it is evidently extremely difficult to convince successive generations that this is not, in fact, the correct answer to the sum, and thus everybody must be compelled to continue to believe that this is the correct answer, and to always remember to include it as correct in their own calculations, and that, because it is such a famous historical example of mathematics, this answer will remain correct and therefore unchangeable for all eternity amen.
Immediately we can see the utter fallacy of this kind of “regimented thinking” (actually, it is defined as “vertical thinking”, which is not capable of escaping the walls of its limitations, as opposed to “lateral thinking” which can adapt outwards as necessary to new ideas and facts).
If this analogy seems vague to you, then I ask you to consider the identical premise when it is applied, not to fictional mathematical opinions, but instead to the political opinions of the average British people as they are spoon-fed by the media. Eighty years ago next year, Adolf Hitler and his Nazi Party gained power in Germany, with results that everyone is familiar with. The Nazis were Fascists, a term coming into usage via the earlier rise to power of Benito Mussolini in Italy (from the Latin “fasces”, a bundle of rods tied round an axe used by the Romans as the badge of a civic magistrate). The term “Nazi” derives from “National Socialist” (Nationalsozialismus).
Thus it is the easiest thing in the world for newspapers and the general media, for politicians, reporters, editors, writers, interviewers, social commentators and all that plethora of people who speak to the nation, to equate any political party which includes the word “Nationalist” in its title, or even if it does not, which dares to promote political Nationalism in its policies and its political stance, as “Fascists”, or “Right-Wing Extremists” or even “Nazis” or “Nazi-Like”.
Thus, since it can be categorically shown that, eighty years ago, someone stated two plus two equals seven, it is regularly hammered into today’s public that two plus two must still equal seven in the present day. Present-day mathematicians are quite obviously incapable of noticing the error in the bygone equation and adopting instead a correct formula that will give accurate and much more useful results. That is the identical logic used by everyone who seeks to defame Nationalism. It is not logic. It is the application of hysterical bigotry and preferential ignorance. When it is presented on a daily basis by the media, it becomes hysterical ignorance and is entirely inexcusable.
As most people will know, the word “Tory” derives from the old Irish word “tóraidhe” (in modern Irish, tórai) which means “outlaw, robber, brigand”. However, the typical “grass-roots” members and voting supporters of the Tory Party in the present day would surely be most outraged if the British media at all levels insisted on defining them as “an outlaw party” or “a party advocating extremist brigandage”, or simply as “a band of criminals”.
Nationalists are not fascists, or right-wing extremists, or Neo-Nazis, any more than the Conservative Party are all criminals, or the Labour Party all wear cloth caps and clogs, or the Liberal Democrats are Whigs. Yes, there are doubtless some criminals amongst the Tories, and some Labour MPs might wear cloth caps; there may even be one somewhere who wears clogs; and there may even be a few Lib-Dems who fondly think of themselves as wearing powdered wigs, buckled shoes and knee-breeches. But these caricatures are generally the exception rather than the rule.
Likewise, Communism has many sub-species, but the largest countries to have been ruled by Communism are the former Soviet Union and China. The Soviet Union got its calculations wrong and collapsed, having made mistake after mistake. Communist China, on the other hand, has made mistakes in the past (haven’t we all?) but has managed to make progress and today is the second largest economy in the world, exceeded only by that of the USA – and the way western economics are heading, China may well soon overtake the US and become the world’s biggest economy.
I do not favour the rule of Communism, any more than I favour that of Nazism or Genghis Khan. My point in citing such examples is, simply and patently obviously, they show that like all things except the media, political opinions and associations must change and evolve as time passes, because those that do not will collapse and are erased from the world-scene.
Political Nationalism in today’s Europe (including Britain) is likewise, in absolute terms, not the same animal as the fascists of the 1930s. In fact, by an examination of comparative policies, it can be quite easily seen that the Nationalism of such parties as the Dutch Freedom Party of Geert Wilders and the French National Front of Marine LePen, and the striving cause of the new unified Nationalist trend in Britain, actually have far more realistic and potentially successful political strategies for solving the economic, sociological and political crisis that now grips all Europe in an iron fist.
The biggest problem of all, though, is that the voting people are forced to wear propaganda blinkers which project into their minds the false and obsolete illusion that Nationalism is a bogeyman synonymous with fascism or worse, whilst at the same time completely camouflaging the truth that it is the Iron Fist of a Europe run by secured “establishment” parties that holds everyone in the death-grip of a very real bogeyman (or gang of bogeymen)!
The Nationalist parties of Europe, including Britain, offer policies that can remedy the situation and restore the status quo of proper regional government and proper regional economies – and, come to that, of proper democratic voting such as is denied to anyone who wishes to resign from, or not vote to join in the first place, the catastrophic European Superstate. Countries such as the now-suffering Ireland, when they voted “no” to Europe in a referendum, were ordered by Europe to go back and do it again, and if necessary again, until they got it right! Is this not the working of actual fascism?
The European Union and the traditional establishment or “normal” political parties who support it are the producers of the policies that are destroying our civilization.
Nationalism, on the other hand, today offers a complete and rational set of policies that will enable a country such as Britain, or Ireland, or Greece, or Italy, or Spain, or Portugal, or….. – the list is perhaps too long to complete – to repair the damage inflicted upon them by the European Union and the “establishment” political parties who are securely in its pocket.
This is the new mathematical formula that Nationalism can offer Britain and Europe, and it is a correct and successful formula, not an outmoded grotesquery still given Frankensteinian lifeblood from the superstitious fears of past generations kept aflame by the fanning of media and political propaganda.
Until the media and the general public begin to see the truth of this, we will inevitably be seeing more lurid anachronistic headlines attempting to convince the ordinary voting people that two plus two still equals seven just as it did many generations ago.
I have news for the News – we are now in the 21st Century and things have changed, especially politics. They need to face that fact and admit it to the public.
2
Peter Mills has made a very strong point in this article, and in a very articulate manner. However, the reality of the political evolution of parties and their policies to fit the times makes no difference to the establishment and the media that guards the present political status quo. They know only too well that the BNP is not a party made up of thugs or Fascists. They must be aware of the average age of membership being well into middle age, and nearly every one of them a devout patriot who has no pretensions to anything but our own genteel good British manners and traditional way of life. The media know that the BNP are not fascist or Nazis, they merely portray us as that in order to keep the public mind focussed on the agenda of our ruling elite. Individual journalists are paid handsome salaries and pensions in order to keep them from speaking or writing the truth. Not only that but most of them are also victims of state and media propaganda. The BBC is so obviously merely a left wing mouthpiece of the establishment that laughably claims to have a policy of impartiality. I find myself watching Russian news in order to hear and see the truth of what is happening in the world now. How ironic after being told throughout the cold war that we were free and they were lied to by their media. We are now inside the new Soviet Union and the strings are all pulled not to give the truth to the masses, but to feed them propaganda. What Peter has said makes sense, but nationalism will have a hard struggle to overcome the brainwashing of years of state propaganda against it. It is our duty to try all means to demonstrate the truth, and not to fall into the trap of allowing the media to use anything we say or do as proof of their chosen lie of our fascism. That means being particular about how we present ourselves and our policies, and having a leader who can demonstrate a clean record as nothing other than a British nationalist, unlike our present chairman.
Thanks, Geoff. Do you know, I also am now watching the Russian news. Sometimes it’s quite surprisingly refreshing to get an “outsider’s view” of our own country – especially when our own news channels are controlled by establishment vested interests. Yes, Nationalism will have a hard struggle to overcome the years of brainwashing – but if we can’t do it, we won’t get anywhere beyone being an “also-ran”. We could be a very, very good “also-ran”, but there’s no use coming second or third (unless it puts us in a “Lib-Dem” situation where we can form a coalition and dictate terms for our helping to form a government). I wish we could do what Maggie Thatcher did to make the Tories electable, by hiring Saatchi & Saatchi (or any other public relations agency) to overhall and improve the Nationalist image.
A colleague of mine is the foremost example of the blind, habitual support for the Tory party and indeed, a casualty of the ignoble Tory supporting press that you are talking about in your article. Yesterday, we were discussing the question of elected mayors posed by the Conservative party. She gushed that she had heard how wonderful the Leicester mayor was on the radio whilst driving to work and that there were lots of members of the public who had rang the programme to sing his praises despite the fact that this individual is in fact a former Labour MP!
.
Then, when an elderly and respected gentleman in the office who sits behind us interjected to explain why the mayor of Leicester was not exactly a beacon of virtue, she seemed most surprised. “Oh! I didn’t know all that… I don’t even bother to look at the candidates when I vote because I always vote the same, even by proxy when I lived abroad” She said.
.
I did in fact, probe this lady about her die hard support for the Conservatives a couple of months ago after she had complained to me about feeling like a stranger in her own country when walking around Leicester. When I pointed out that it was the Conservatives in 1972, who accepted full responsibility for the re-housing of the Asians ethnically cleansed from Uganda by Idi Amin whose presence in Leicester she finds so overwhelming she sneered and smirked as she said in the most patronising manner possible, that this “was just a little, tiny, blip along the road…. You know I support some of your policies but your party will never, ever come to power…Britain is way too multicultural now and you are just going to have to accept it”. And just about stopped short of adding “so do as your told”.
.
A week later, I learned that she was not as “narrow minded” as me because I couldn’t see the benefits of a privatised NHS – private rooms with en suite?
.
That’s not the best of it. Apparently, our beloved boss is ‘new money’ unlike her parents who are ‘old money’ and know what to do with it. They bought a bit of property on the Al Garve… when it was cheap! They make frequent trips to Britain. For operations.
.
The Tory party offer her the image of success. They quaff champagne on big yachts. She wants to be Chanel no. 5 incarnate – power, money and status and nationalism for all its many virtues won’t give her that.
.
It is entirely our own fault. We must make ‘nationalist’ something that young people want to be.
Flower Pot, you have neatly summed up one of Nationalism’s main problems – too many people only believe what they WANT to believe. You may like this – I saw an image somewhere on the web today of David Cameron smiling at the camera, and underneath was the caption: “You might think that I’m nothing but a filthy rich, privileged, upper-class ex-Eton toff, but in reality I’m the Queen’s cousin five times removed.”
Lamentably, hedonistic materialism and racial existentialism do not correlate positively. Of course our country would be far wealthier if governed by a benevolent and responsible Nationalist regime, but it would not, for the good of the nation, promote individual excess or greed. In order to achieve these aims our people would first be required to accept this truism. It is the will of the populace that is reflected in its government and it is therefore presently impossible to ordain a rational and healthy administration.
Again we attempt to bend our inflexible truths to suit the distorted worldview that our enemies have conjured and instil in the permissive minds of our people. In doing so we simply become a part of the problem because we have not fully understood, or we are not willing to comprehensively accept, our current terrible predicament!
Maybe “anti-colonisation” would be a better term.Nationalism tends to be associated with wars from the 19th century onwards, and authoritarian regimes.Do we need an ideology/label, when 50 years ago in the West,and virtually everywhere else on the planet currently,most people were/are “nationalist” without actually using the term.
You are quite right roystonvasey. The term Nationalism has been twisted by the Marxist indoctrinated establishment and media so that it has been falsely equated with those militaristic Fascist parties in Spain, Italy and Germany in the early part of the last century. We do need to create a new name for our beliefs.Your suggestion to be called anti-colonisation is quite good, but does it say all that we truly believe in? I think not. To be against colonialism is good, and I’m sure many of our Asian and African colonisers will agree that they wouldn’t want their home countries colonised. However, people being what they are, our colonisers are not about to agree that WE shouldn’t be colonised. We need to find a new and unblemished name for our beliefs but until we have a name that everyone agrees with and will use we are unfortunately stuck with the word Nationalism for the moment.
I don’t think there’s any name possible that wouldn’t be twisted by the marxists. As for the term ‘Nationalism’. There are lots of people who haven’t a clue what that even means. Also, I don’t think the term is that toxic, or the establishment wouldn’t be replacing it with ‘far right’ implying extremism. I am starting to believe that no amount of ‘getting the message across’ is going to work. If mass immigration and colonisation and all it’s trappings haven’t yet convinced the public, then it’s going to have to be in the lap of the Gods. Don’t know what that will mean, and I wait with interest (and optimism), but one thing for sure is that their mad multicultural ‘dream’ cannot continue without terrible consequences, some of which we are starting to see, and which will inevitably gather pace. My fervent hope is that it will be the increase of Nationalism across Europe which we are starting to see in some countries. As far getting round things that may tarnish us in any way. With WW2 and the nazis in recent European history, (and neo nazis now making a comeback in places) I think that may be a complete waste of time. We’re going to have to be less sensitive to insults and not play their game.
still just a conspiracy theory?
Strictly Confidential: 1966 Bilderberg Documents Leaked, NATIONALISIM IS DANGEROUS (to the globalists)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bMFqWgTbWzU
It’s a shame you don’t have a donate button! I’d certainly donate to this excellent blog! I guess for now i’ll settle
for book-marking and adding your RSS feed to my Google account.
I look forward to fresh updates and will talk about this blog with my Facebook
group. Talk soon!
Peter is quite right in saying the Daily Mail advocate our type of policies. I think the Express does as well from time to time. As peter is saying they then write articles trashing the old party. I am sure they will try to do the same to our new party. I wonder what would happen if we did an anonymous questionnaire as in five or ten questions on the grounds of do you support the monarchy and are you in favour of Europe etc. If they answered the way I think Mail and Express readers would then we could inform them that they are so British Democratic Party and they did not know it yet. so join us.