A couple of thoughts:  First, the heartiest, loudest, most joyous CONGRATULATIONS TO THE BNP ON A JOB WELL DONE!!!  Since the results came out I’ve felt GREAT, just FANTASTIC!  I LOVE YOU, BNP, LOVE YOU, LOVE YOU, LOVE YOU!

Yesterday as I was looking up the results at Google I kept seeing the BNP referred to by newspapers and news agencies as “far right” and similar lies — no surprise there of course, as that’s what the MSM always call anyone to the left of Johan Hari — when not calling them far worse — and we always knew it, naturally.  But seeing it plastered all over google like that yesterday (when I looked up “British election results BNP” what came up were the results going back several years mixed together with the new ones, so you saw many years’ worth of this sort of labeling of the party on each google page) impressed on me the importance of our side and BNP in particular refusing any such labels pinned on us by the other side.  We’re not, and the BNP isn’t, “far right” or “far” anything.  We’re middle-of-the-roaders exactly as we were in the year 1955 and as far as I’m concerned it’s still 1955.  We must never acquiesce in the BNP’s being called “far right” or “far” anything.  It’s strictly middle-of-the-road, neither “left” nor “right.” It’s “center,” a “centrist” party.

Third thing, despite what is probably an accurate and justifiable estimation by GW of how Barnbrook did ("poorly") in his post-victory speech (I haven’t seen the speech) — and this is not the first time GW has criticized Barnbrook a bit harshly and, who knows, maybe rightly? — I can’t help liking the guy, liking him a lot even.  (I also can’t help liking Nick Griffin, while admitting he’s caused problems.) Couldn’t Barnbrook benefit from a bit of coaching?  I’m sure he could and I hope the party will provide some for him.  If he smoothens out a few rough edges I see him having the potential to go far politically.

But all in all, A FANTASTIC RESULT FOR THE BNP!!!  THREE CHEERS!

Nux,

For a time I was thinking about totting up all the wild insults and overt hate-mongering on each of those three threads, to see which was the most verbally violent.  Decided there was too much to count.

One soon gets a feeling that all this noise is covering over a great, febrile nervousness.  People like Questionnaire, who made the comment you have cited, seem to be living very close to the precipice.  If the wind were to blow from the other direction they could throw over everything in an instant and switch with shocking speed to the new set of required truths.  The reality of their psyches is their emotional violence, not their political principles.  It’s all religion with them.

They ascribe to themselves qualities of compassion and conscience to which they are complete strangers.  In past times they would have carried the straw to the witch’s stake.  They are, frankly, camp guard material.

I’m gonna have that T-shirt printed up:  in large print, saying,

“I wish arrogant Jewish stupidity and sickening Jewish destructiveness weren’t kosher, but unfortunately they are, all too much so.”

Put ‘em on sale — make a million dollars, probably.

To this outsider, the BNP always seem to do just well enough (or not quite badly enough) to keep Nick Griffin and pals in their nice little earner.

Sterling work by local activists seems to be scuppered by cock-ups and lack of support.

Does this seem fair? Any lurking BNP-ers care to comment?

Stoke is the interesting one. Steady campaigning by Batkin and co. since 1999. Slow organic growth, now second biggest party with 9 seats. Seems to avoided the one step forward, two steps back of Burnley, Bradford et al. What is the difference there? And how is it to be reproduced? The BNP should have several Stoke-like councils by now.

Just a thought on a Sunday morning.

Could Boris be our man?

Tipping Point or Defining moment?

GW, I was just idly clicking hither and thither (as you do) just to get the flavour of the aftermath, (as it were) not expecting anything other than what has already been said.  Then I read the Times piece about revealed meetings Boris had had with various people, and I felt I was reading something I hadn’t met before, talk of sacking Met-chief Blair for instance, looking for evidence of corruption concerning the cheeky chappy, all heartening stuff really.  Then I had a look at a Guardian report (analysis really) of the new lab project meltdown, brutally honest I thought (some of it at least)

To an essentially political amateur (me) this post election thing (especially with regard to the BNP) has been difficult to get a handle on.  To be honest, I expected better for the BNP, and am struggling to fathom why they haven’t done better, especially in London, where enrichment has been so lavish. Bad vibes really.

Life is punctuated with defining moments, we all experience them.  Somehow, and I don’t really know why, we as a nation, are experiencing right now a defining moment, or as I recently posted, a tipping point (take your choice) - to me, it is almost palpable.

As regards Boris, I’ll be viewing him closely, for a while at least.

Laban’s take:

http://ukcommentators.blogspot.com/2008/05/labans-election-roundup.html

is that the BNP share of the vote in London hardly went up but there was a bigger turnout, so the actual BNP vote went from 90k to 130k.

“Like Bill, I am a political amateur ... ” (—Bloke)

So are we all, Bloke. 

“ ... and have only drifted over to viewing the websites of the dark side :) relatively recently”

Welcome to the dark side then!  And thank you for your thoughts — we surely need all the help we can get figuring this mess out!

The other creeps and moral lepers walking off the stage as his, Barnbrook’s, turn came to speak was a genuinely filthy gesture on their part, sickening, far worse of course than any defect he displayed in his delivery or content, and by itself, completely apart from the other sources of emotion on this occasion, might understandably fluster someone on the spur of the moment who wasn’t expecting such insulting, appalling, undemocratic behavior.  These others who prate constantly about democracy show by almost everything they do their mailed-fisted totalitarianism.  There was one person on that stage who respected democracy, just one, and fittingly enough he was left alone by the totalitarians to deliver his speech.  So in that regard it actually turned out as it should have:  it’s not appropriate for cleanness to be surrounded by dirt.

Aftermath – Bill’s Ramble

Bill “Could Boris be our man?”

GW. “Don’t even entertain the thought”

I hear you GW - What I cannot get my head around is this, there are 60 million British people that go to make up the population of these Isles, and not one, repeat not one, of the ruling elite class has stepped up to the plate.  I simply cannot believe there is no one out there who will take the job on.

Quote of the day.  Boris.  “Don’t try and out ethnic me mate” (or some such)

Fred. “To be honest, I expected better for the BNP, and am struggling to fathom why they haven’t done better, especially in London, where enrichment has been so lavish. Bad vibes really.” (—Bill)

I hear you too Fred, my esteem for the BNP also knows no bounds, my admiration goes out to all of them, no matter what capacity, and I’m the first to admit I haven’t got the balls to do what they do, all I can do is hunker down and spread the word.  Having said that, my ardent wish is, if and when the time comes, I pray I shall not let my nation’s people down.  I think a few million have said that to themselves over the centuries.

I receive flak when I say the BNP should have done better.  I agree entirely with what you say in this regard, perhaps I should try and qualify.  The defining moment I was talking about is the British people have overwhelmingly expressed their disgust at the new labour version of RR and have given them a good kicking, New Labour are holed below the waterline and from now on are history.  This being so, my question is why did the voters look to the Tories for salvation and not the BNP Sarkozi style?

The trouble is for me I do not know the voting logistics appertaining in London, by that I mean for example, where a BNP candidate was standing against a Conservative, where did the anti RR votes go? by the looks of it they went to the Tories (I don’t really know) Obviously, if there was no BNP candidate standing, the Tory would have received most of the anti RR vote.  When I use the term anti RR vote I am addressing this audience, it goes without saying that the average punter out there wouldn’t have clue of such a translation.  In the prevailing mood of the election, where a BNP candidate was standing against a Conservative, then I would have expected a better showing for the BNP.

The BNP website has improved beyond recognition, have they got the reaction time faster?  It does seem faster to me, the content is interesting and varied, the postings are pretty good, the site is colourful without being garish in fact the BNP seem to have just about got it right, so why do I feel that when I log out there is something missing?  Ah! it is here that I get on my hobby horse, for which I have also been castigated.

Very briefly, I do not think there is any mileage in the BNP not telling it like it is, if I were a comparative newcomer to the BNP site and had read it from cover to cover I would leave the site pretty much in the dark as at the beginning.  That’s my beef.  There are no explanations for what is going on, where has all this stuff come from?  Who is behind it and why?  What does it mean for us all?  I suppose I could go on but you get the point.  In other words, (I will get some stick for this) Most of what appears on the BNP website wouldn’t look out of place in any morning tabloid.

To sum up, it is obvious the electorate will have to experience much greater pain and discomfort before they will cast their eyes in the direction of the BNP, I suppose it was always on the cards, trouble is, it will take several years which we can ill afford - time is of the essence.

Perhaps the BNP are doing so well we can lift our heads and see beyond the parochial.  We are not alone, does this mean we not in control of our own destiny?  We are part of a larger entity known as globalism, even if we succeed at local level how would this be viewed by the global big boys - Kosova?

First things first though, eh?

“Very briefly, I do not think there is any mileage in the BNP not telling it like it is, if I were a comparative newcomer to the BNP site and had read it from cover to cover I would leave the site pretty much in the dark as at the beginning.  That’s my beef.  There are no explanations for what is going on, where has all this stuff come from?  Who is behind it and why?  What does it mean for us all?  I suppose I could go on but you get the point.  In other words, (I will get some stick for this) Most of what appears on the BNP website wouldn’t look out of place in any morning tabloid.” (—Bill)

Excellent point, Bill, but do you know that Nick Griffin has explained all of this stuff you refer to there, all of it in detail and without exception, in his longer pieces and in his speeches?  Yes.  I haven’t time right at the moment to look for where they must be archived at the web-site (have to step out for a moment) but I’m sure they’re there.  The official BNP explanations for all the crap that’s going on are on record among the site’s archives, certainly.  In fact, Griffin’s excellent job of explaining precisely that sort of thing is a big part of why I like him so much.

Thanks for your welcome Fred.

I agree with you about Barnbrook.  I didn’t notice his speech there, but after you pointed it out, I clicked on the link.  I’ve read bits and pieces about him including an interview in the MSM but this is the first time I’ve heard him speak.

I like him.  I think he is a very good candidate for London.  He has a matey everyman style which I’ve seen in Australian politicians which is something I like and wished we had more of.  He did have emotion/passion but that is often a good thing.  One has only to think of Princess Di and Tony Blair to see how passion and emotion are something that can be used well in this day and age.  There was no teleprompter and he seemed to be speaking off the cuff and I think he did a reasonable job.  It could be improved of course, but I dont see much reason for massive criticism.  Certainly he wasn’t George Galloway Vs the US Senate, but that was different circumstances, and Galloway is one hell of a public speaker and has had plenty of practice.

He came across to me as a human being.  A human being who is passionate and angry and that is fine by me.  Certainly, to me, he was a hell of a lot better than most of the professional slime bag politicians we have.  At least he believes in something, and has obviously gone through great difficulties because of his beliefs and the party he represents.  I admire and respect that.

I suspect Guessedworker would have preferred someone more like Enoch Powell with more gravitas, but I don’t think that would go down well in today’s London political marketplace and that style would be too easy for the left/mainstream to mock.

IMHO, London and the South East are quite different culturally from the rest of the UK.  London and the South East have probably got more in common culturally (in some respects) with the Dutch (or at least Hollanders) than with the rest of Britain.  Barnbrook quite possibly wouldn’t be such a good candidate in West Yorks or the Midlands, but a good candidate for London.

Guessedworker, I didn’t know you were from Darzet, :) for some reason I thought you were originally from Saaf Lundn.  IMHO Dorset is West Country and Barnbrook wouldn’t look good there either and this may be why you don’t like him - perhaps?

Looks like it could be out with the Brit-hating Scot called Brown and in with a marxist jew called Miliband.

MILIBAND URGED TO DEPOSE BROWN

God help us.

GW

I am always willing to concede I may be wrong.

Maybe I lack imagination but I am having difficulty picturing what Barnbrook’s replacement and/or replacement speech would have looked like.  All that pops into my head is Enoch Powell and Rivers of Blood.

You haven’t said this is what you think it should have looked like, but if that is the case, one of the problems is, where do you find such people?  Do people of the calibre of Powell exist these days?  The only possibility I can think of may be Frank Eliss, (perhaps demonstrating the seriousness of the problem) but I have no idea of how he comes across on camera and in any case he said he felt the BNP were too left wing for his taste - although I expect he meant in terms of economic policy.

The top universities in recent years have produced geniuses of the calibre of Boris Johnson and Seamus Milne.  Bojo has a likeable Jeremy Clarkson quality to him but he doesn’t seem to be elder statesman material and Seamus Milne… Quite possibly if there were someone of Enoch Powell’s stature around , nowadays they would leave University and go off and run a hedge fund or something and avoid politics altogether.

In any case, is it wise to have the brains on display?  Sometimes they don’t look too good. Although lefties blame Thatcher for almost everything that is wrong with the world, the truth is she was just the front, the acceptable and electable public face.  The brains behind Thatcherism was Keith Joseph.  This may fit the KMac model but on the other hand maybe Keith Joseph just recognised his own limitations and knew that Margaret Thatcher would get the votes but the mad monk would just be ridiculed.

This is rather like a conversation between an engineer and a salesman.  The engineer says he has built this great machine that can do this and that and is the answer to so many problems.  The salesman says, well thats great but if it don’t look pretty and the public thinks it might be weird, they ain’t gonna buy it.

You’ve got to sell this stuff.

Barnbrook came across to me in his interview and with that speech as a regular bloke.  I can imagine having a pint with him in the pub and feeling totally at ease.  I can’t say that of Jack Straw, Milliband, Gordon Brown or even Boris Johnson.  I think Barnbrook may have good potential as a populist politician and he doesn’t have to be an intellectual, he just needs to be able to fend off the likes of Paxman.

The BNPs internal troubles are interesting and you seem to be suggesting that Griffen is deliberately leading them up a blind alley on behalf of MI5 and the powers that be.  I think you got this from the leader of the Libertarian Alliance, whose name escapes me at this moment.

Maybe.

One of the problems I have with this is that MI5 seem to run everything.  Lefties think they run the SWP.  The vast areas of life they are supposed to control would require some serious manpower.  Yet we don’t live in a Stasi style police state do we?  It may seem to be going in that direction but I don’t expect a knock on the door at any moment followed by a trip to the gulag just for making this post and many others like it.  That is not to say I would rule this (security service involvement as a possibility) out. I am familiar with gladio, I also understand Griffen was chummy with some people who were involved in it.  I also think the biggest 9/11 conspiracy is the official version and anyone who believes it hasn’t been paying attention. And, there were aspects of 7/7 that were interesting, but I think it is often too easy to jump to false conclusions.  You might be wrong.

What is it that makes Guardian Apostate “wide awake” in your view?  What does “wide awake” mean?

What really f*cked Labour up was the Inheritance Tax.
As British property prices rose to astronomical levels through the Blair years, the Threshold for IHT was deliberately and stubbornly left unchanged so that the ‘little people’ who happened to work hard and buy modest semis were hit.
Brown as chancellor stupidly and arrogantly refused to do anything about it (and the small sums raised), until George Osborne mentioned it a a very succesful speech at the Tory Party conference.
This of course scuttled Brown’s planned election - which seemed like a shoo-in.
Remember those days 9 months ago, Brown was stil respected as ‘Joseph Stalin’ and not ‘Mr. Bean’ and he did well after the floods and airport terrorist attacks.
Brown lost his chance and it’s been nothing but bad news since - rather unfairly in my opinion as the great bete noir - uncontrolled, massive immigration (the other main factor in the drubbing) was all Blair’s fault.
Remember David Blunkett - ‘There is no upward limit....’.

Anyway, of the defeat - “IT’S THE IMMIGRATION STUPID.”

I am amazed that of all the TV post-mortems and Brown public blubbings no-one, but no-one has mentioned immigration which amongst my circle is THE big issue.

What I think Foxbark said, Fred, is that Brown’s ascending entry to Downing Street last year, which was to be crowned by a bold decision to seek legitimacy via a November election, was scuppered by the Tory’s announcement - highly popular among the house-owning public - that they would address the iniquity of Inheritance Tax.  Brown revealed himself there and then to be the classic heavyweight fighter with a glass jaw.

Labour’s local election weak spot was not that, however.  Remember, we are talking about their supporters who switched or stayed at home - not middle-class folks who are upset at the Lisbon Treaty signing or the damned Midlothian Question or even the credit crunch and the beginnings of a drop in house prices.  No, for them, but not for the Tories because they are not in power, it was immigration.

You have to understand that immigration is not simply a race-replacment issue.  For the working-class, including settled immigrant communities, it is primarily an issue of employment at subsistence wages, or no employment at all.  “The economy stupid” is now an immigration issue.

But all that said, the moral prohibition on voting for the BNP still holds.

If that’s what Foxbark is saying, more or less, then I can agree with him.

Bloke,

On the subject of Guardian Apostate, he seems to me now to have moved beyond Laban’s very carefully staked-out ground.  I regard Laban as he regards himself, I think: as an encourager of and a conduit for apostates from the left.  He has not developed an interest in the metapolitical, ie, he hasn’t moved beyond the conventional left-right analysis.  When people begin to understand what that movement augers (a qualitatively different value system) then they have the right to claim the status of the awoken.  A classic example - and there are many - is Lurker, who provided the link to Laban’s article.  I first encountered him on Samizdata threads probably five years ago.  He used to bite a few critically radical and so-so pompous libertarian ankles, but only lightly and not in such a way that he would cop the sort of abuse I did.  I imagine he is banned there now!  That’s progress for you.

GA might not have gone the whole nine yards yet, it’s true, but he is showing that he can do it in ways that Laban probably can’t.  So perhaps I am running ahead of his progress but, well, you know, there’s more joy on the radical right over one sinner that repenteth than over ninety and nine just liberals who manage a vote for Boris.

”You have to understand that immigration is not simply a race-replacment issue.  For the working-class, including settled immigrant communities, it is primarily an issue of employment at subsistence wages, or no employment at all.  ‘The economy stupid’ is now an immigration issue.” (—GW)

Right I do understand that — as does Johann Hari, of all people, earning praise thereby from Peter Brimelow:  see here:

http://blog.vdare.com/archives/2008/05/04/bnp-wins-seat-in-london-assembly/

Of course, as is needless to point out to battle-scarred veterans of MajorityRights.com, the down side of that is brought out today in a log entry by JWH (who is also commenting on Johann Hari’s piece):

”the danger in conflating racial interests with ‘practical’ proximate concerns is that the establishment can always try and find ways of ‘dealing’ with the proximate in an aracial manner [leaving the race problem fundamentally unaddressed forever].”

( http://westbiop.blogspot.com/2008/05/price-of-proximate.html )

Not for the average guy, for whom this race business is probably a little too tricky to negotiate without making mistakes — a little too fraught with pitfalls — but for the thinkers, the ones who are broadly on our side, who are extremely concerned about what is going on — men like Laban Tall, Fjordman, and Paul Belien for example — there’s no getting around what JWH says in that log entry, and others of course have said as well, including Peter Brimelow, who said, using a metaphor:  where immigration and the national question are concerned, sooner or later “the racial nettle must be grasped.” You can’t get around it:  the only way around is through, as the saying goes.  That “nettle” metaphor is apt because race is an unpleasant thing to grasp.  But sooner or later race must be taken in hand, grasped, and mastered — mastered intellectually and mastered politically so that we dominate it, and no longer it us.  Therefore, no matter how much this particular nettle stings, we might as well grasp it and get it over with, nay we must grasp it.

Challenge for BNP leadership

These comments pretty much express my sentiments here - Bill

Fertile ground just waiting for us

”It must also be considered that gauging from the performance and percentage of the BNP vote in these latest set of elections, that include some worthy victories, the potential to make major breakthroughs across the country is simply not being exploited as it should. The electorate are very angry with the Establishment and crying out to be given the right encouragement and motivation to vote for us, yet time and time again the opportunity goes begging and we do not convert this energy into clever and astute active politics which will ultimately lead to large-scale election wins.

The Labour Party have been absolutely trounced in this years elections, they lost a staggering 9 councils and 298 councillors; and bloody good riddance to them as well. However, the Tories made huge gains in many places; so the Establishment bubble has in reality simply been pressed and forced across to a different part of that very same Establishment!
A great many of these gains could have easily been ours had we campaigned to make ourselves a truly viable alternative in the eyes of the British people. We should not underestimate the potential we have as a national political alternative, but we will only be able to exploit it if we have in place a reputable leadership, clean and free from corruption. The current leader has and will continue to push the blame away from himself and his faction of yes-men. He has blamed everyone and anything for his terrible decisions and past failures.”

Griffin scores own goals – our Party suffers

”I am in no way taking anything away from the hard fought victories that the Party activists achieved this year, on the contrary, a great many members and activists worked extremely hard as they always do come rain or shine; they all deserve a huge amount of respect from every one of us. However, we have to face up to the reality of the situation, and that situation is that we will never in a hundred years make any significant dent whatsoever in the Establishment of Lib-Lab-Con by only making a few local gains here and there once a year. If there is one luxury we do not have, it is time.
No amount of positive thinking and blind optimism will rid this country of the Establishment traitors nestled comfortably in positions of power as MP’s and MEP’s! The uncomfortable truth is that these 2008 elections for us as a national Party could frankly be best described as somewhere between fair and lacklustre. They were simply not good enough.”

Harry,

It’s a matter of letting go of the hand of nurse, I suppose.  Griffin appears to be nationalism’s greatest asset, and the best chance for our survival.  And while certain facts demonstrate that he is a liability, there is still this great void of uncertainty into which a step sans Griffin would entail.  So one understands the reluctance.

Nonetheless, it is always best when time is of the essence to act sooner rather than later.  Five years, ten years down the road, when the demographics are even more difficult, the controlling hand of the state more pervasive and nationalist progress still at snail’s pace, we will look back on an unwillingness to act now as a great failure of nerve.

Now, the following is my view, and it is not one that I am going to change.  Any BNP members who happen across this site and read this can, if they wish, take themselves away and write me off as a dreamer.  I quite expect they will, because they have invested everything in the belief that they can change the world through the kind of activism they do now.  That I challenge.

So ... the future of nationalism in this country lies in the early development of two historical strategies:-

1.  The popular argument, the argument that is taken out onto the streets, must be for the morality of survival, and the moral right of the English to England.  We must tell our people the truth about their children’s future as things stand, and about the deep injustice of it and the rightness of their natural anger and revulsion at what has been and is being done to us.  Morality is the key.  The people must be inspired to understand that their natural feelings for their own people are noble, and the system that says it is shameful must be swept away.

2. There must, however, be more to it than presentation and those political calculations which always go into the serious pursuit of power.  Only high intellectualism ... only a genuine, underlying philosophy of volkish rights and interests which, in toto, describe a revolutionary alternative to advanced liberalism can provide the motive power for the long-run programme of salvation that our people need.  Such a philosophy, which does not exist as a single entity today, must encompass economics, justice, representation and the function and dispensation of power.

Frankly, any lesser approach to the problem of survival amounts to intellectual negligence.  For thinking people understand that more, much more is required than is being delivered by nationalism today.  I challenge anybody in or out of the BNP to show that I am wrong.

Guessedworker says that Boris is ‘not quite English’ (or words to that effect), be that is it may, (and it is true), somehow Boris looks, acts and talks more English than most of the English.
He is the quintessential throwback to a period before the last war, in which men of the same social standing and demeanor (real gentlefolk) actually ran Britain.
He is the Bertie Wooster of English politics.

Boris the Quintessential Englishman

Hi FB

As I was saying, I was idly stroking the keyboard on a quiet Sunday morning, not looking for anything in particular, when this thought came into my head that Boris could be our man.  I suppose I must have seen something that triggered a subliminal flash in my head, it startled me it was so clear clear - funny that.

We’re living in crazy times, and Boris seems a crazy sort of chap, I know next to nothing about him except what you see on TV, but you never know.

Oh dear, I’m back in trouble with the Guardian moderator.  Probably the black one.

The following comment was wiped from this thread to an article by an Indian woman, Rupa Huq, who is big on anti-racism and the wicked BNP:-

Oh Rupa, Rupa ...

Do be honest with yourself and with others.  Under the present marxian proscription against the native English, you can pursue your own ethnic interests in perfect confidence, and call it tolerance or decency or fairness.  You can be as “right on” as any determinedly anti-essentialist Pomo.  You can talk about the (certainly less than stellar and only sort-of) nationalists standing up alone for the English as “spreading hate” and a sign of the capital’s “shame”.  And no one - not a soul - will retort “hypocrite!”, will they?

But do you really think the English have no ethnic interests of their own?  Do you really think they are unique among all mankind in that they somehow desire only to manifest the love of Indians like you?  Never mind their own children’s English birthright?  Never mind the pain of displacement and, in the longer term, total dispossession.  All we English want, by your reading of reality, is to “celebrate diversity” and to “hate racism”.

Well, no.  We don’t.  Actually, if you were me and able, therefore, to gain the trust of ordinary English people, you would know exactly what lies beneath the seeming silence and the very English civility.  It’s not hate.  It’s outrage.  There’s no sense of shame about it.  There’s frustration on an epic scale.

We do not want to be dispossessed.  That is what you find, when you know how to ask the question.

And, of course, you would not want Indians, disparate as they are, to be dispossessed by Chinese say, or Russians and Africans.  Because, well, there are limits on where you want to celebrate diversity and to whom you would be quick to ascribe hatred.

So let me sum up.  Opposing the English voting in their own interests is YOUR interest.  You write “the seat which voted most solidly for Johnson ... returned the Conservatives’ first black London Assembly member: James Cleverly, neatly illustrating how contemporary suburbia is not exclusively white.” And that’s what’s really in your ethnic interest, isn’t it: for there to be no more English heartlands that oppose your aggression on their living space.

Rupa, let me be the first to tell you.  You are a hypocrite.

A Cambridge sociologist?  Not normally a problem.  This one doesn’t want to try anyway.  My follow-up comment has also been deleted:-

Are Londoners who vote BNP more “shameful” and “racist” than Bengalis who vote BJP or Bangladeshis who vote BNP?

The hatchet job on Richard Barnbrook contained in this sickening piece,

http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/3228 ,

by some asshole named Millar over at BrusselsJournal.com, nearly gave me a severe case of projectile vomiting just now.  Don’t anyone read it unless you’ve taken a stiff dose of anti-emetic — and change out of your good clothes:  change into your gardening clothes. 

Look, that piece was unacceptable for a blog anywhere to the sane side of the Guardian, yet it was published at BrusselsJournal.com?? 

I have enormous respect for Paul Belien but helping to make the above hatchet job nauseating was Millar’s snidely smug dismissal of the idea that for Britons who, unconsulted and unwilling, are having race-replacement shoved down their throat, explicit racial concerns are somehow illegitimate!  That’s not only not right, it’s diametrically opposed to what’s right.  It’s as wrong as wrong can be.  Paul Belien needs to request from this race-replacement advocate, Millar, an explanation, a retraction, or a resignation from the blog’s staff lest BrusselsJournal.com find itself classified as become part of the pro-race-replacement blogosphere.

I was all set to really rip into the Evening Standard, really let them have it, and Tories in general along with them, for referring to the BNP as a “far-right party” in this article today.  The BNP is a middle of the road party, a centrist party, not “far right,” not “far” anything.  Centrist.  Middle of the road.  Representing ordinary middle of the road folk. Anyone referring to it as “far right” is in my view part of the race-replacement industry.  Here’s the piece: 

More than 400 protesters gathered at City Hall to register their disgust at the election of a British National Party member to the London Assembly.

Richard Barnbrook became the far-Right party’s highest profile politician when 130,000 people voted for him last week. But musicians, including members of Babyshambles, university representatives and passers-by waved placards branding him a fascist whose policies encourage hatred and division. The demonstrators marched around City Hall early yesterday evening banging drums.

A spokesman for organisers Love Music Hate Racism and Unite Against Fascism said it was the start of a campaign to force Mr Barnbrook from office that would draw on the revulsion felt by the vast majority of Londoners. Mayor Boris Johnson has refused to speak to Mr Barnbrook and all four parties look set to shun him. He gained just over the five per cent threshold needed to win one of the 11 non-geographical seats.

As my fingers were hovering over the keyboard, my brain synapses firing, my emotions getting keyed up, and I was on the verge of starting to type something that would’ve thrown Nux Gnomica into a twitching, foaming conniption fit, my eye wandered down to the selection of letters the site had chosen to put on the front page, as representative of those it had received, and it was as if an instant calm came over me.  Here are the letters: 

I voted for Boris Johnson in the Mayoral Election.

I would not have voted for the BNP in a thousand years until Boris Johnson, Ken Livingston & Brian Paddick walked off the stage before BNP Barnbrook’s speech.

It was tacky and petulant to say the least.

The following day I looked at the BNP website and its manifesto.

I discovered that I agreed with many of the things that they proposed in their manifesto:

1) A reduced, simplified and flat rate tax system.
2) Raise tax free allowance to £15,000
3) Withdrawal from the European Union
4) Renationalisation of Gas, Water, Electricity and British Rail - as it stands the customers are being ripped off.
5) Protection for British farming and manufacturing.

I already regret that I voted for Boris Johnson. From now on I will be voting for and supporting the BNP.

Many thanks to Messrs Livingston, Johnson & Paddick and the people who represent Unite Against fascism for giving me cause to seek out and examine the BNP website - if you hadn’t been so nasty about the BNP I wouldn’t have been so curious and looked at their website. Thank You.

- A Former Boris Johnson Voter, London
______

Oh dear, Londoners have spoken and they did not say what they were supposed to. I know many people who are now supporting the BNP after years of feeling neglected by the major parties. The BNP are here to stay, they were democratically elected. Live with it London!

- Liz, Chiswick, London
______

A sad day for democracy loving people everywhere. The fact that a democratically elected assembly member is being shunned by his peers in the assembly is disgusting - if the population (of London) didn’t want him there they wouldn’t have voted for him, he has the same mandate for being there as any other member. Then these closet communists decide that people are no longer entitled to be represented by who they choose, but must listen to the advice of Babyshambles (a group of drug addicts).

But actually it does quite good in showing up the undemocratic nature of the liblabcon pact and the liberal left. We need the BNP to stay the storm and show that intimidation and childish behaviour have no place in our democracy.

- Alex, Woking, Great Britain

I guess the Evening Standard chaps aren’t bad guys after all ... (sorry for nearly flying off the handle, guys ...  Good thing I saw those letters in the nick of time!)

That’s a pretty fair summary, Bill.  If I may attach a pair of wings to certain aspects of it ...

The emergent theme from mainstream politics and from global economics is elite world domination.  There is a problem approaching, however.

The left-right strategy of tension is showing signs of electoral transparency.  Many if not most now of us know that there’s no difference between Candidate A and Candidate B.  The questions from an elites perspective are whether voter gullibleness can permanently outstay voter cynicism, and what happens if it doesn’t?

At the moment the public is still gullibly swing-voting, but only because the Party in power is so bloody awful they’ll do anything to get rid of it.  They are not voting for political ideas any longer, and that could prove fatal eventually.

Already, Belgians have discovered that they don’t need a government running things at all.  French voters have twigged that Sarkozy is not remotely as advertised, but is just another grasping little elitist.  The British electorate will rapidly twig that Prime Minister David Cameron is every bit as anti-democratic as Blair and Brown.  If Americans get Obama heaven knows what disillusion awaits.

Politics itself is looking very like a cadaver, and will not be capable of re-heats ad infinitum.

So what does happen if cynicism overcomes gullibleness?

Obviously, a demand arises for real politics.  It was always known, of course, that European peoples would grasp for some nationalist air before the end.  The expectation was that control of the political connector between nationalism and the drowning Europeans would last the course.  And so that’s where the real battle must be fought.  Can nationalism be wrested away from its present exemplars, in all their ham-fisted, anti-intellectual, anti-productive, amateurish and naive “glory”?  Because if it can, there is a chance for us.

The world, then is splitting apart.  The official narrative of democracy and progress, individual freedom and human rights is revealing itself as a simple cover for the super-concentration of power and wealth.  Pushed down into a dispossessed and deracinated enslavement, the people grasp for a helping hand.  Who will extend it to them?

Oh dear, I’m back in trouble with the Guardian moderator.  Probably the black one.

You’ve moved beyond the bounds of acceptable discourse when you talk the truth in a calm, reasonable and unanswerable fashion on CIF.

Even from her own POV Huq is wrong. Her only claim to distinction is that she ticks diversity boxes. The more “diversity” there is here, the more her market value falls. This sort of worthless academic work isn’t going to survive the wrecking of the country:

Rupa Huq teaches sociology at Kingston University where her research specialism is youth culture and pop music. Previously she was a lecturer at University of Manchester during which time she held a Leverhulme Trust Fellowship. She also stood as a Labour candidate in Chesham and Amersham in the 2005 general election.

Rupa Huq writes regularly for the Times Higher Education supplement and has written for Tribune, New Statesman, Progress magazine and Red Pepper. She is Author of the book Beyond subculture (2006, Routledge).

She has performed as a DJ at various venues from Manchester’s OKasional cafe to the Contact theatre. Her claim to pop fame is that she recorded a jingle in Bengali for the late great John Peel. The main hook was “jow Jonnie jow.”

Never mind Rupa.  How about blowing it with Livingstone.

The following comment appeared on the page for about ten minutes, I would guess.  Factwise, it owes a great deal to the Livingstone material on the I am an Englishman website, a link to which was posted here by the esteemed owner.  Sadly, facts are not part of the Guardian’s moderation criteria but “personal attacks on the writer” are.  This, I suppose, qualifies:-

At the 2007 RISE festival, radio reporter Tim Donovan asked Mayor Livingstone the following questions about the sixteen murders of teenagers in the capital so far that year:-

“Are you worried about the recent spate of teenage violence?  Is it something new and alarming?  Tony Blair said not long ago that this was a black cultural thing.  Do you agree?”

The Mayor replied, “There is an element of that, particlarly around the drug trade.  But no, you actually look now - it’s a lot of white kids stabbing other white kids, erm, and it’s become too many kids just carrying a knife.”

Of the sixteen teenage murders from January 1st to 15th July thirteen of the victims were, in fact, black, one was mixed-race and two were white.  Every single one of the murderers, without exception, was black.

Now, Mr Livingstone could not have been unaware of the incidence of lethal black violence in his city.  After all, we aren’t unaware of it ourselves?  And we are just private citizens.  Just today the BBC website reports on the sentencing of the murderers of Kodjo Yenga by two boys aged 14 and 17.

“The court heard that Kodjo went into the area after being challenged to a fight by one youth - then being ambushed by others. </