For_England

And they'll continue to stall in the elections. Who cares what he thinks? I would have thought that we need a few more people with some imagination, who can think outside the narrow box of limitations. Still silly me, I was thinking we are on the verge of losing everything forever, and that we couldn't afford a .02 increase in support per year. Sadie Graham did the same thing - put together a dosier on the techniques she used to gain the largest percentage victory for the BNP ever, and handed it to Griffin - and she claims he left it unread. I fear for the future of the country when the party that is its only hope is so short-sighted.
Still, let's hope John Walker has some stories to tell

david H

You do not really value the individual you just think you do. As soon as you come up against someone you disagree with you launch a tirade of abuse then organise them into negative collectives - "Nazi," "Fascist," "Nationalist" or, say, "hater."

david H

If John walker has some stories to tell, then what? What makes you think the party will endure? Don't go like wowbanger and be responsible for trying to destroy "our only hope."

blueblood1920

Anyone who uses Lancaster Unity as a reliable source is a sad retarded individual. They were recently bragging about having a BNP venue cancelled in Blackpool, oh guess what the meeting went ahead as normal.

For_England

Our only hope is already destroyed - for as long as Griffin and co. stay around. Do you seriously think a BNP with Griffin has any chance of taking power, because I don't? Why does it need to endure if it's just holding us back? The BNP is just an instrument to save the country, but if it fails to do what it's intended to do, it's fit for nothing. It needs to reform or self-destruct, so that there can be a real and serious nationalist opposition, before it's too late. If I thought Griffin could win power, I would support him, even though I think he'll have a Mugabe style bloodbath after winning the country, because it's the lesser of two evils (an even bigger bloodbath and civil war), but I don't want either, and I don't think the public will ever vote for him. And if Clive Potter, Walker, or the 30k legal fees don't bring him down soon, we might lose our window of opportunity with the public, and something else will come along - perhaps a fundamentally multi-cultist, civil nationalist party like UKIP, but with a tough line on immigration and Islam - then we'll be finished, and by the time the country realises they have been conned, it'll be too late. I'm sorry, but I can't countenance this sloppy and perfunctory attitude to trying to win power - the situation is extremely urgent, and it is exigent upon us that we get very serious, very soon. We can't afford anything less.

For_England

Sorry to disappoint but I haven't been on there in months.

Wowbanger TIP

Of course fascism and Nazism were only tangentially related to nationalism. That is why it was necessary to invent a new word to describe their political position. It is true that fascists adopted some elements of nationalism, but the same could be said for "communism in one country" under which definition Lenin would be a nationalist.

One of the principle difference between the two is that fascism/nazism are Imperialist doctrines, nationalism's very essence is diametrically opposed to all forms of Imperialism. True that earlier generations had layered a racial superiority issue onto conventional nationalist ideology in order to justify the existence of the European Empires, but by the outbreak of the Second World War this "white mans burden" school had been categorically rejected by mainstream nationalist thought.

Even in the murky origins of British political thought the mantra "Free born Englishman" indicates a strong connection between nationalism and political liberties.

Nationalism in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries had been closely allied to all sorts of radical liberalism. As we can see in the French and American revolutions. In 1848 nationalism was the prime motivating force behind a string of revolutions demanding democratic self determination across Europe. Unfortunately the forces of Feudalism Internationalism, in the person of Metternich, managed to reverse these revolutions promting AJP Taylors famous comment that it was "the turning point at which history failed to turn".

In the 1870's nationalism was the driving force behind the unifications of Italy and Germany. Moving both of those nations massively towards representative democracy and an event which was welcomed in the rest of Europe in much the same was as the fall of the Berlin Wall over a century later. Incidentally these events brought Giuseppe Garibaldi to prominence, the greatest revolutionary of all time and of whom Taylor said "perhaps the wholly admirable man in modern history". The cheap socialist copy of whom, Che Guevara was a pathetic reflection of the real thing, as well as a failure.

By the time of the First World War nationalism and democracy had become all but inseparable, as you will remember the allied war aims as laid down in Wilson's 14 points enshrined national democratic self determination for all as the main aim of the Allies.

In was in this context fascism pirated superficial nationalism as an attempt to sugar coat a pretty unpalatable mix of imperialism and totalitarianism. Nazism went even further adopting anti-semitism from the far left (Mussolini's brand had nothing to say on the subject) as well as promoting racial characteristics beyond the ideal of nation. Under Nazism a Dutch Aryan was to be preferred to a German with "celtic" characteristics. Another fundamental rejection of nationalist principles.

The acid test of this was the Second World War itself in which the fascist nations sans Spain took on nationalist Europe and its allies. It wasn't for a multi cultural Britain or the total domination of global capitalism and most certainly not the idea of a united Europe that motivated the almost unbelievable tenacity and awesomely violent revenge of nationalist Europe against the forces of fascism. All the nations responsible for the total annihilation of fascism motivated their people with appeals to nationalist sentiment, even supposedly communist Russia termed the battle "The Great Patriotic War".

In the post war period a shell shocked Europe was convinced by the far left and internationalist movements that nationalism had been responsible for the war. In which they were helped immeasurably by the continued infiltration of nationalist organisation by fascists trying to pull the same stunt Hitler and Mussolini had pulled off. Eventually this process of shifting blame was successful enough to dominate the entire political class. However instinctive nationalism retained substantial support among the people and this has crippled attempts to subsume nations into internationalist organizations like the EU and strip the people of the rights demanded for them by nationalism, hence Browns "British jobs for British workers" etc.

Inevitably nationalism is now on the rise once again. History's most successful political ideology was never likely to lose out in the long term to the sort of manifestly stupid rubbish peddled by internationalists. In the 1990's nationalism was the force which ripped apart the USSR, allied with its traditional cronies democracy and liberty. Much to the horror of the Left.

Today, in the low countries in particular, it is causing the Establishment nightmares from which they can't wake up. And this is during a period of unparalleled plenty when the elite have unlimited wealth to try and by off nationalist sentiment.

Nationalism has a long association with struggles against tyranny and it has generally come out on top. As long as people want to be free nationalism will be the political weapon of choice for serious, historically literate opponents of the elites everywhere.

So no I don't accept that the Axis powers were in anyway nationalist, certainly there is nothing in their behavior which suggests they were. The Allies on the other hand were classical nationalists, they even gave their conquests back to the people of those conquered nations, mostly and eventually.

Wowbanger TIP

I know, thats where I got the ideas from.

One of the most damning charges against Griffin is that he has mysteriously failed to make "best practice" "standard practice".

Even so the best BNP units I examined were only employing very standard campaigns. What could be achieved by radical agenda setting techiniques we will never know whilst Griffin is involved.

Wowbanger TIP

Mark Collett and Nicholas Griffin are at the top of my list as I may have mentioned elsewhere. Though I suspect a good old fashioned purge might be well in order.

I would also demand that every member signed a document swearing to a rejection of fascism, anti semitism and racism on the graves of their ancestors and a stack of all the major religion's holy texts. In blood. Furthermore I would dedicate one page at least of every BNP publication to a detailed refutation of fascism.

I would keep the Party name as brand recognition is the only thing the Party has going for it and there is no way the Establishment will ever allow another nationalist Party to get off the ground. Tempted to insert the word democratic and or liberal in there though. Maybe like the Conservative and Unionist Party.

I would also demand recognition as an anti-fascist organisation from whoever it is who accredits anti fascists.

david H

I am not sure that without the present leader it would not collapse. The alternatives proposed might not be strong enough. There is imense pressure on the leader and great personal danger. I doubt that foreign bloke Auty would be strong enough without bending to the establishment and wittling away the most important policies.