Majorityrights Central > Category: British Politics

The BNP is tearing itself apart somewhat tonight.

While 2007 has seen a variety of political advances for the BNP, the party has to an extent been held back and troubled by a string of leaks and misinformation briefings to political opponents, and by internal rumour-mongering designed to damage morale and confidence in the workings of various party departments, and in the leadership generally. Had this continued the result, whether by accident or design, would have been to disrupt, perhaps fatally, our all-important drive to break through with victory in the London Assembly Elections next year.

Some months ago, a BNP Intelligence Department was set up, with one of its key initial targets being to track down the source of these problems and provide the evidence needed to expose those responsible and put an end to their subversion.

Working closely with several other BNP Departments and following discussions with the BNP’s independent auditor, our Intelligence team – headed by Lance Stewart, a long-standing British nationalist and a former high-ranking officer in the South African Police - have now completed the first stage of their investigations.

As a result, two junior level national officials, Administration Officer Kenny Smith and Group Development Officer Sadie Graham, have today been removed from their posts with immediate effect on the grounds of gross misconduct and now face disciplinary charges over alleged offences against the BNP Constitution and Code of Conduct.

The degree of damage is difficult to assess, but it will go a lot deeper than the two who have been named here, and already expelled.

These two, it is claimed, established a blog titled Enough is Enough Nick with the object of forcing Griffin to fire three others whom they accuse of gross incompetence and bringing the party into disrepute.  One of these is Mark Collett, the party’s Director of Publicity, who twice stood trial alongside Griffin and, of course, twice won.

A few moments reading this blog will apprise you of some fairly colourful histories and rumours of histories.  American nationalists will recognise the moral template.

I suppose that rumours of MI5 black ops will also now play on everyone’s mind.  A second nationalist party may well emerge.  There is, of course, room for a second one in England, but not predicated principally on fighting Labour in the Islamic North.  Its orientation towards the BNP, therefore, and towards the electorate will tell us whether those black op rumours have any substance.  Let us hope not.

Instead of regressing to narrow xenophobia, it is time to build on the Human Rights Act. The aim of our British Bill of Rights and Responsibilities will be to clarify and explain the obligations which come with rights

Jack Straw, writing in the Telegraph subsequent to Gordon Brown’s speech on Thursday announcing this forthcoming Bill of Rights and Duties.

Because liberty as it is pursued today contains not a single seed of European survival, I spend a good deal of my thinking time trying to undermine its centrality to political life.  The problem, of course, is that Man is not perfect, and the least perfect of men seem to proliferate among those ambitious for power.  Some restraint on power, then, is essential for an equitable life.  In feudal Germany there was the Comitatus.  In our time there is democracy, and there are the Bills of Rights.

But democracy has spawned a traitorous, internationalist power elite that authors all our political misfortunes.  It denies us recognition of who we are or what unites us, so thereby it can remove from us ownership of that true guarantor of survival: our homelands.

In Britain, as Jack Straw states, this treachery is to be codified in a redefinition of the rights enshrined in the English constitution since the Bill of Rights of 1689.  Crucially, this redefinition will be cast from the Human Rights Act 1998 - specifically, one expects, from the qualifications to Article 10 on freedom of expression and to Article 11 on freedom of association and assembly, and from Article 14 on prohibition of discrimination.

This will be a highly positive (or governmentally prescribed) dispensation of rights, there being little or no sign of the negative rights enshrined in America’s Bill of Rights.  Straw’s reference to responsibilities is perfectly clear.  Big government will coerce us to deny our true self as the people of England, and to be, instead, the MultiCult.  This is a duty to die – eagerly if possible or, at worst, unknowingly.

Keen to discover more about our forthcoming new duty I consulted the words of the Prime Minister Who Is Not Tony Blair, as they were spoken at the University of Westminster, Thursday 25 October 2007, and appear now on the Labour Party website.

The speech is quite refreshingly free from the usual political-aspirational double-talk.  It makes a serious play for academic learning but, happily, is a little too self-serving and reverse-reasoned to succeed.  Its historical references are there solely to represent British history as the midwife not only of liberty but all the exotica of postmodern tolerance.  Everyone from John Milton to Chief Rabbi Jonathan Sachs gets pulled into the effort.  Thereby the dour son of the manse steadfastly dilutes the heady, 70% proof intoxicant of real liberty - after all, drunkards tend to be free with their tongues, and freedom of speech is something no postmodern Prime Minister can allow.  He establishes to his own satisfaction, at least, that England is the home of happy anti-racism and, naturally, we all want much more of it.

Here, in his own words, is how he picks his path to that goal:-

READ MORE...

In October 2005 the UK government Actuary released forecasts for medium-term population growth:-

The United Kingdom population is projected to increase by 7.2 million over the period 2004 to 2031, according to a new set of UK population projections released today. The increase is equivalent to an average annual rate of growth of 0.42 per cent, or 12 per cent over the 27 years. In the longer-term, the projections suggest that the population will continue rising beyond 2031 but at a much lower rate of growth.

The UK population will increase gradually from an estimated 59.8 million in 2004, passing 60 million in 2005 and 65 million in 2023,
to reach 67.0 million by 2031.

... The projected total population of the United Kingdom at 2031 is 1.3 million (2.0 per cent) higher than in the previous (2003-based) projections. This is due to a combination of higher
assumed levels of net migration, higher short-term birth rate assumptions and slightly higher life expectancy assumptions.

Perhaps the first point to make here is that the government actuary has apparently missed some factors trending to a shortfall in housing supply, among them the later age of marriage and the trend towards smaller houses.  However, the picture was bad enough.  It backed up the long and largely failing struggle John Prescott has had to force a major housebuilding programme on councils in the South-East (which, with London, receives 75% of all migration to the UK).  Gordon Brown made it clear earlier this month that there would be no more failure.

Gordon Brown has set out his ambition to build three million more homes across the country by 2020 to address a crisis in the supply of affordable homes.

The figure was 250,000 higher the Government’s previous target and reflects Mr Brown’s determination to make housing a top priority.

And this morning the papers carried the news that the Green Belt, that stubborn, beautiful rural abutment to urban sprawl, must begin to be sacrificed:-

READ MORE...

The BNP was vigorously chasing new writers a few months ago.  I know of two whom they approached, only to be turned down.  Here is a sample of the writing that meets the required standard of intellectual enquiry:-

The suggestion that a French President, who is of second generation Hungarian Jewish origin may be an (admittedly), unlikely candidate to receive the accolade of the most nationalist head of state, will doubtless seem controversial to the many adherents of the old style nationalist parties across Europe, who have regrettably inherited and furthermore institutionalised some degree of anti-Semitism.

However the BNP looks forward, not backward and looks beyond such blinkered vision and while acknowledging that President Nicolas Sarkozy was elected on a populist patriotic nationalist platform at the expense of the BNP’s friends in Le Pen’s Front National, there is no doubt that Le President is continuing to deliver the goods to the long suffering voters of France.

... President Sarkozy is definitely one to watch. As all of Europe faces the common enemy of militant Islam; the scourge of Marxist-liberalism; the interference of the unelected European Commission and the widespread decline of an industrial economic base, it remains to be seen whether Sarkozy’s actions are merely headline grabbing window dressing or genuine action to rescue a nation under threat from within and without. How France responds to these issues could set the scene for replication across all of Europe, including the UK.

Well, style aside, let’s strip away one or two layers of this so very forward-looking nationalist substance, and see what lurks beneath.

READ MORE...

Doreen Lawrence, OBE, mother of Saint Stephen, speaketh mutlicultural wisdom and the world doth quake:-

Boris Johnson is not an appropriate person to run a multicultural city like London.  Think of London, the richness of London, and having someone like him as mayor would destroy the city’s unity.  He is definitely not the right person to even be thinking to put his name forward.

Those people that think he is a lovable rogue need to take a good look at themselves, and look at him.  I just find his remarks very offensive.  I think once people read his views, there is no way he is going to get the support of any people in the black community.

So Boris Johnson is aiming to defeat the racial Marxist and white self-hater Ken Livingstone, and become Mayor of my sad, meaningless capital city.  Fine.  But let’s get one thing straight.  Boris is a liberal Tory.  He is on message.  Really.  His campaign team said so:-

[He] loathes racism in all its forms.

Naturally.  Don’t we all flop down and loathe, loathe, loathe five times a day, just like the jihadis?  Except one faces Eltham, of course.

Not that it does Boris any good.  He just can’t flop down enough for the likes of Labour’s black female MP’s:-

Dawn Butler and Diane Abbott, Labour MPs for Brent South and Hackney North respectively, said his views on race harked back to the 1950s.

... Ms Butler highlighted a 2002 article in which Mr Johnson referred to the Queen being greeted in Commonwealth countries by “flag-waving piccaninnies”.

She claimed he also said that he expected, during a mooted visit by Tony Blair to the Congo, that “the tribal warriors will all break out in watermelon smiles to see the big white chief”

Ms Butler, whose Brent South constituency is the most ethnically diverse in the UK, said: “These are disgraceful comments that shame Boris Johnson and shame the Conservative Party.

“This is the most offensive language of the colonial past and it shows that the Tory party is riddled with racial prejudice.

“No one with such views can be the mayor of a city with the largest black population in Britain.”

Diane Abbott, MP for Hackney North and Stoke Newington, said: “David Cameron is fooling himself if he thinks that Boris Johnson’s 1950s attitudes to race will be acceptable to Londoners, both black and white.”

Well, keep shouting, girls.  Keep pushing the racial unity line at the top of your testosterone-modulated voices.  Let’s see if you are right that English London loves its NuLab vibrancy as much as you say.  First signs are not encouraging.  The Independent leader reported a poll that gave Boris a clear lead over Livingstone.

I am fast coming to the conclusion that, Jewish activists aside, the British political Establishment does not know what it is doing about race and the future ... does not know the real precondition for a victory over the blood of its own people.

I don’t mean that it is making this up, this attack by migrant proxy, as it goes along.  It is following the general policy of the global elite.  But it is not the global elite itself, merely the executive at national level.  To paraphrase Irving Krystol, it is operating under “truths appropriate for educated adults”, not the global elite’s “truths appropriate for highly educated adults”.

There is an inherent instability to this arrangement that it is our task and privilege to exploit.  The means to do that is a real debate about the blood-reality of Establishment politics.  As the extremis mounts, it should not be, must not be beyond us to organise to that end.

The desire of the Establishment, then as now, will be for guilt-avoidance.  It will evade the terrible meaning of its politics by sheltering behind the barrier of abstract thinking.  That way “race” is an abstract, and so nation, so tradition, so everything.  It works for them today: our arguing from realities declared abstract necessarily consigns us to frustration.  This pattern we must break.  The protective outer layers of liberal self-justification, the faux-moral public breast-beating about fairness, equalness, tolerance etc, must be winnowed away.  A real debate in this context is a debate solely about ethnic survival, about real life and real death.  It is a debate in which, for example, English advocates of race replacement must be forced to answer in terms which it is by no means unrealistic to call genocide.

For this is our ground, our frame of reference in which the Establishment must defend itself against our charge of blood betrayal.  We have understood that this is a blood issue.  We have always done so ...

We must be mad, literally mad, as a nation to be permitting the annual inflow of some 50,000 dependants, who are for the most part the material of the future growth of the immigrant-descended population. It is like watching a nation busily engaged in heaping up its own funeral pyre.

Enoch Powell, from his speech to the Annual General Meeting of the West Midlands Area Conservative Political Centre, Birmingham, April 20, 1968.  It remains the last occasion on which a major public figure speaking on race has used the words “we” and “nation” to mean “we the British, owners of these isles”.  There have been no greater British patriots since, and today no man more commands the respect and affection of the aware and the loyal.

READ MORE...

I have been trying to get some perspective on the two bodies announced over the last few weeks by little Labour big man, Liam Byrne.  He is the Irishman appointed by Irish-at-heart John Reid to succeed Irishman Tom McNulty in keeping English race replacement running smoothly.  This is a job also known as Immigration Minister.  McNulty succeeded Scot Des Browne who succeeded the disgraced but apparently English Beverly Hughes who succeeded Irishman Mike O’Brien who succeeded Jewish floodgate operative Barbara Roche ... hope I didn’t miss anyone.

For six years after New Labour’s dash for Third World genes got underway, Ministers blithely and, as it turned out, wrecklessly expected multiculturalism to deliver a smooth transition to a white minority.  They have had to face a few unpleasant and unavoidable realities since.

Multiculturalism was laid to rest by Trevor Phillips in 2004.  After that, there was only the counter-terrorism route and three political policy tracks for the government to follow:-

Track One: Increase pressure on aliens to integrate (at the same time finessing into existence a civic patriotism to accomodate them).

Track Two:  Do everything possible to induce greater passivity among the natives.

Track Three:  Professionalise government handling of all initiatives to the above ends.

READ MORE...

In the English local authority elections of May 2006 the BNP scored a phenomenal success in Barking & Dagenham, a much-enriched district on the eastern edge of London.

The local Labour MP, Margaret Hodge, picked up a good deal of the blame for the BNP’s performance.  Instead of refuting its line on preferential housing allocation for migrants, she had managed to make it almost respectable for English residents to vote for the local BNP candidates.  There were calls - unheeded, naturally - for her to resign from her government post in the Department of Trade and Industry. 

Now, hard on the heels of Gordon Brown’s little eco-stratagem - the planned building of thousands of new council houses - Ms Hodge has outraged Labour supporters in the same way again.  Writing in the Observer she declares:-

A message to my fellow immigrants

In our open, tolerant country, there are, thankfully, few issues that remain taboo.  But, motivated by the fear of both legitimising racism and encouraging the extreme right, migration is one.  Yet for many voters, it continues to be a top issue.

My constituency of Barking in east London has experienced rapid change, moving from predominantly white neighbourhoods to many multiracial neighbourhoods.  At the same time, my constituents are facing other challenges.  Young families on low wages cannot afford to buy a home and the council house stock has shrunk with tenants exercising their right to buy.  These young families enjoy few choices.

... For some, it is easy to blame the new families for the frustrations they feel.  As people living in Barking see new faces and hear new languages, they often link the problems in their community with the migratory changes.  Unless we listen, we shall be unable to convince people that we are on their side as they learn to live with new neighbours in the tolerant and strong multiracial society we on the liberal left desire.  This stifled debate means we have missed the opportunity to articulate more clearly the huge benefits to our economy, our culture and the evolving nature of our Britishness that migration brings.

READ MORE...