Thread: History, freedom and the British

I thought I would craft a quick response to the emergence of the British Freedom Party, which I will cross post to my own blog.

Strategically, I think the new development is premature. The next European Parliament election will be in June 2014, and quite probably the Westminster poll will be held on the same day. An electoral horizon of four years bar a few months would allow for a couple of years over which the racial-preservationist struggle could be redefined and programmatised as a national movement - we have an example before us in the EDL trying to do something similar (and doing it rather badly) - and then a bare minimum of two years could be devoted to developing the politics.

I do not say such a two-tier approach would be easy to execute. But it would be advisable to try, and the reason is obvious - the BNP is a monopoly business and it will certainly defend that monopoly by placing an electoral block on the new party, standing against it wherever it retains the human capital to do so.

But the BNP has a great weakness. It is ghettoised morally and politically because it is defined not by itself but by its opponents. The objective of a non-BNP nationalist caucus should have been to define itself, not to chase after a negatively-defined political inheritance. The first two years of its existence should have been devoted to that necessary goal.

By way of the sort of thinking that might lead to a self-defined broad movement of restoration I direct your attention to this:

http://www.democracyforum.co.uk/smal...tml#post957267

… which is BGD’s suggestion for a pressure group. I think we should incorporate that but also aim higher, and I did, in fact, suggest on another BDF thread a self-descriptive name that circumvents legal difficulties without sacrificing exclusivity: “Our Land”.

But it doesn’t matter now because the decision has been taken to launch the ***, and all the concentration remains on stealing away the BNP's brand and trying to detoxify it.

I want to close with a few words about the real size and nature of this task, and about the limitations that attend all political developments which are essentially nearsighted, reactive and utilitarian.

Freedom is a fine goal, even the particular freedom which is meant in the terms of the ***. But it is not the goal. Our objective is to save our people from the immediate danger of race-replacement, and to restore to them in perpetuity all the rights that attend sovereign peoples in their own lands.

Now, this is a substantial endeavour - just how substantial bears some consideration. For example, it’s not like saying Man will return to the moon. That’s easy. It’s been done already, and with the appropriate resources could be planned in a few months and executed in a very few years. It’s not even like saying Man will journey to Mars … or the stars. It is harder than these things. It stretches beyond what the ordinary political eye can see. It is about changing history for an entire people and, to be realistic, an entire race of men. It involves the replacement of three hundred years of liberal and, latterly, neo-Marxist thinking with new and fundamental nationalist thinking - and I am not talking about utilitarian panaceas, to quote Arthur Harris, like Lee’s culturism. It involves reversing everything that has been done to us these last sixty years. It involves changing economics, changing the global zeitgeist, changing how people live, what they think, what they value, what they love. It involves our people becoming truer to themselves and living life accordingly, so that their politics will be as organic as every other aspect of their lives. There is genuine freedom in that.

No petty political movement can generate this. But this can generate a very great political movement.

In an email a few days ago a co-blogger wrote to me:

The idea that our entire civilization has failed is a terrifying thought to most every sane man, it may be the most terrifying thought I've ever had. People deal with this through denial and scapegoating, they don't want to recognize just how serious and tragic the problem is nor do they want to put their own lives under the microscope. Fit the problem into a neat little box and then get to work, if only it were that easy.

It isn’t that easy. That is the lesson that awaits all political nationalists in modern Europe. I don’t say that piecemeal thinking, partial solutions, accomodationism can achieve nothing. But they can’t achieve everything, and it’s everything that we need.

GW

Originally Posted by Henry Palfrey

I thought I would craft a quick response to the emergence of the British Freedom Party, which I will cross post to my own blog.

Strategically, I think the new development is premature. The next European Parliament election will be in June 2014, and quite probably the Westminster poll will be held on the same day. An electoral horizon of four years bar a few months would allow for a couple of years over which the racial-preservationist struggle could be redefined and programmatised as a national movement - we have an example before us in the EDL trying to do something similar (and doing it rather badly) - and then a bare minimum of two years could be devoted to developing the politics.

The British Freedom Party is, as I am sure you know Henry my friend, not "racial preservationist" but in fact is hostile to the very concept.

I do not say such a two-tier approach would be easy to execute. But it would be advisable to try, and the reason is obvious - the BNP is a monopoly business and it will certainly defend that monopoly by placing an electoral block on the new party, standing against it wherever it retains the human capital to do so.

The BNP will be doing so as a genuinely "racial preservationist" party.

But the BNP has a great weakness. It is ghettoised morally and politically because it is defined not by itself but by its opponents. The objective of a non-BNP nationalist caucus should have been to define itself, not to chase after a negatively-defined political inheritance. The first two years of its existence should have been devoted to that necessary goal.

The opponents of the party will never cease to use the pejoratives that they believe serve their purposes and elicit the programmed Pavlovian response from the public. The BNP has to learn to disregard these pejoratives entirely like water off a duck's back. They are really out-dated and increasingly irrelevant slurs anyway. In some respects the Party has benefited from the media constantly telling the public that the BNP are hardline "racial preservationists" even while they do it by use of the boring "Nazi!", "Racist" sloganeering. It means the party can get along publicly explaining our many policies that do not directly touch upon immigration or racial preservation. We have that already as a given and garner many votes without risk of contravening any race hate laws by spelling it out ourselves.

By way of the sort of thinking that might lead to a self-defined broad movement of restoration I direct your attention to this:

http://www.democracyforum.co.uk/smal...tml#post957267

… which is BGD’s suggestion for a pressure group. I think we should incorporate that but also aim higher, and I did, in fact, suggest on another BDF thread a self-descriptive name that circumvents legal difficulties without sacrificing exclusivity: “Our Land”.

But it doesn’t matter now because the decision has been taken to launch the ***, and all the concentration remains on stealing away the BNP's brand and trying to detoxify it.

I am afraid that the reference to detoxification utterly confuses me! What is toxic about the BNP other than the alleged sleaze or corruption that the plants and other splitters go on about?

I want to close with a few words about the real size and nature of this task, and about the limitations that attend all political developments which are essentially nearsighted, reactive and utilitarian.

Freedom is a fine goal, even the particular freedom which is meant in the terms of the ***. But it is not the goal. Our objective is to save our people from the immediate danger of race-replacement, and to restore to them in perpetuity all the rights that attend sovereign peoples in their own lands.

"Freedom" is a vague slogan. One of those used in the French Revolution - and just for effect. You are correct about our chief objective in this struggle Henry.

Now, this is a substantial endeavour - just how substantial bears some consideration. For example, it’s not like saying Man will return to the moon. That’s easy. It’s been done already, and with the appropriate resources could be planned in a few months and executed in a very few years. It’s not even like saying Man will journey to Mars … or the stars. It is harder than these things. It stretches beyond what the ordinary political eye can see. It is about changing history for an entire people and, to be realistic, an entire race of men. It involves the replacement of three hundred years of liberal and, latterly, neo-Marxist thinking with new and fundamental nationalist thinking - and I am not talking about utilitarian panaceas, to quote Arthur Harris, like Lee’s culturism. It involves reversing everything that has been done to us these last sixty years. It involves changing economics, changing the global zeitgeist, changing how people live, what they think, what they value, what they love. It involves our people becoming truer to themselves and living life accordingly, so that their politics will be as organic as every other aspect of their lives. There is genuine freedom in that.

You can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear. The full change you talk of will happen only through pain, death and natural (or eugenic) selection. But it can begin with a racial awakening.

No petty political movement can generate this. But this can generate a very great political movement.

When the economic collapse happens, the ground should already be laid for a very great political movement - but we can't expect our enemies to let us will by democratic means alone.

Originally Posted by LogicAndFairness

When the economic collapse happens, the ground should already be laid for a very great political movement

There a number of serious problems with that proposition. Nationalists and Marxists have both been predicting the imminent collapse of global capitalism since the 1930s. It hasn't happened yet! I concede that in the immediate aftermath of the Lehmann Brothers debacle it seemed quite likely, but central bank intervention prevented systemic collapse. There is no reason to suppose that such conditions of extreme stress will occur again soon. Apocalyptic rhetoric about the "convergence of catastrophes" will no doubt one day join "Mosley or slump" in the dustbin of history.

Then, there's another thing. Why should anyone turn to a party led by an once and future bankrupt that is hopelessly insolvent and bilking its creditors for salvation from economic catastrophe? Dave Hannam for chancellor of the exchequer, anyone? Or Clive Jefferson? Pleeeeeease!

Originally Posted by Adrian D

There a number of serious problems with that proposition. Nationalists and Marxists have both been predicting the imminent collapse of global capitalism since the 1930s. It hasn't happened yet! I concede that in the immediate aftermath of the Lehmann Brothers debacle it seemed quite likely, but central bank intervention prevented systemic collapse. There is no reason to suppose that such conditions of extreme stress will occur again soon. Apocalyptic rhetoric about the "convergence of catastrophes" will no doubt one day join "Mosley or slump" in the dustbin of history.

Then, there's another thing. Why should anyone turn to a party led by an once and future bankrupt that is hopelessly insolvent and bilking its creditors for salvation from economic catastrophe? Dave Hannam for chancellor of the exchequer, anyone? Or Clive Jefferson? Pleeeeeease!

Wouldn't breath out yet Adrian. The states of the world have been pushed to the edge of bankruptcy themselves in the attempt to contain the fall of from the credit crunch implosion. In the UK and US "stimulus" packages are running out of funds (last quarters rise in GDP was almost entirely due to state funded construction). Interest rates can not be held at 0% much longer. Nor can Western currencies take any more QE, the US Government is now the second largest consumer of it's own debt.

And if the cuts don't cause a double dip then the laws of economics will have to be rewritten.

And in the background in the dismal prospect of another oil spike delivering the same type of blow which shattered the economy when it was relatively healthy for no reason which we current understand.

Thanks for the reply.

Logic,

The political route is closed. I know that is hard to accept for the present generation of nationalists. But it's a fact, and in order to ensure that it is only a temporary closure we must now discern the opportunity that it offers us, and act upon it. That opportunity is to develop engagements at the level of public discourse.

First, though, let's acknowledge that, very probably, such a development could not have been instituted a decade ago. The climate was not right, and if there is one thing the Blair/Brown years achieved for nationalism it was to entrench hostility to the English in the Establishment, and make popular dissent inevitable. However, the electoral allure of this Inevitablism - the possibility of garnering protest votes - has given the illusion that the political route is viable. We now know that matters are more complicated. What would have been viable from the Brown accession on, and is more so now with the revealed nature of 21st century Conservatism, is the re-engineering of discourse - its detoxification, its de-Marxisation, its liberalisation - by a national English movement (rather than an English, or British, nationalist movement), and this is what I would like to see able people attempt to define and realise.

It would amount to a two-year break for nationalism during which the intellectually incoherent and substantially still fascistic forms of politics that have gone before can be set aside, and a new party emerge to lead the attempt to create a consensus for an English life.

I believe this, which appears to be a slow route to the mountain top, is much the faster (and probably the only) route. I am not sure that the politicals have the patience. The veterans among them, who are the most given to fascism, would hate it. But I see no real prospect of progress either through the Griffinite BNP, through Reform or through Lee's culturism.

Originally Posted by Adrian D

There a number of serious problems with that proposition. Nationalists and Marxists have both been predicting the imminent collapse of global capitalism since the 1930s. It hasn't happened yet! I concede that in the immediate aftermath of the Lehmann Brothers debacle it seemed quite likely, but central bank intervention prevented systemic collapse. There is no reason to suppose that such conditions of extreme stress will occur again soon. Apocalyptic rhetoric about the "convergence of catastrophes" will no doubt one day join "Mosley or slump" in the dustbin of history.

Then, there's another thing. Why should anyone turn to a party led by an once and future bankrupt that is hopelessly insolvent and bilking its creditors for salvation from economic catastrophe? Dave Hannam for chancellor of the exchequer, anyone? Or Clive Jefferson? Pleeeeeease!

Once our victory is as good as assured very many people who at present feel it is more than their jobs' worth will offer their expertise.

I will reply to your post Henry - but it is too late to think properly tonight!

Logic,

Once our victory is as good as assured very many people who at present feel it is more than their jobs' worth will offer their expertise

It is the classic chicken and egg problem. No victory can be "assured" until the public discourse is freed from the chiller. Public discourse cannot be freed without the participation of national figures who currently fight shy of any involvement with nationalism.

The only way that I can see to resolve this impasse is for nationalist politics to stand down to allow good men from other areas of the nation's life - men who possess the capacity to speak truths and free the discourse thereby - to step forward (by invitation, I hasten to add).

Nationalism, of course, is standing down anyway, albeit involuntarily.

I will look forward to your response tomorrow. Why do I think it will be about the continuing value of the BNP?

Originally Posted by LogicAndFairness

When the economic collapse happens, the ground should already be laid for a very great political movement - but we can't expect our enemies to let us will by democratic means alone.

That might come to pass but the public could swing left or right. In Europe we see a massive swing to the right but here in the UK the ineptitude and corruption of the BNP has destroyed people’s faith in the right. Look to our recent election results, and so you can't fall back on the favourite excuse of the sycophants PR vs FPP let’s compare like with like. EU election results, The Dutch PVV 4 out of 25 seats after 5 years since formation, The BNP 2 seats out of 72 after 28 years since formation!
Both elections at the same time, both under the same PR system. We even had the advantage over the Dutch in that we had. The expenses scandal and the sleaze buster, an unpopular and illegal war with Islamises threatening to parade empty coffins through Wooton Basset insulting our soldiers. Where was our massive swing to the right? No in the UK I'm afraid the BNP have laid the ground for a massive swing to the left post economic meltdown and all while the rest of Europe swings right. We will then inherit the flotsam and jetsam of the rest of Europe and be launched into a fourth world state.