Majorityrights Central > Category: British Politics

It is late 1943. It is clear that Germany will lose the war. Stalin, Churchill and Roosevelt have just attended a conference at Tehran to plan the future of the war and Europe.

What would an English traditionalist have made of the situation?

On 9th December J.R.R. Tolkien, future author of Lord of the Rings, wrote a letter to his son Christopher, who was training in the R.A.F. This is how he observed the situation:

“I must admit that I smiled a kind of sickly smile and ‘nearly curled up on the floor, and the subsequent proceedings interested me no more’, when I heard of that bloodthirsty old murderer Josef Stalin inviting all nations to join a happy family of folks devoted to the abolition of tyranny & intolerance!

“But I must also admit that in the photograph our little cherub W.S.C. [Churchill] actually looked the biggest ruffian present. Humph, well! I wonder (if we survive this war) if there will be any niche, even of sufferance, left for reactionary back numbers like me (and you).

“The bigger things get the smaller and duller and flatter the globe gets. It is getting to be all one blasted little provincial suburb.

“When they have introduced American sanitation, morale-pep, feminism, and mass production throughout the Near East, Middle East, Far East, USSR, the Pampas, el Gran Chaco [etc] ... how happy we shall be.

“But seriously: I do find this Americo-cosmopolitanism very terrifying. Qua mind and spirit, and neglecting the piddling fears of timid flesh which does not want to be shot or chopped by brutal and licentious soldiery (German or other), I am not really sure that its victory is going to be so much the better for the world as a whole and in the long run than the victory of———

“I need to you hardly add that them’s the sentiments of a good many folk - and no indication of a lack of patriotism. For I love England (not Great Britain and certainly not the British Commonwealth (grrr!)), and if I was of military age, I should, I fancy, be grousing away in a fighting service, and willing to go on to the bitter end - always hoping that things may turn out better for England than they look like doing.”

READ MORE...

Last month journalist Peter Whittle wrote an article for The Sunday Times titled “How my neighbourhood was lost to the multiculture”.

It’s the story of the transformation through foreign immigration of the London suburb of Woolwich. Whittle writes eloquently of how such immigration undoes a sense of community and undermines the particular attachments which individuals have to the places they inhabit.

According to Whittle, in the 1970s the area,

“had something that amounted to a collective identity.

“Now it appears to me fragmented, with different ethnic communities existing side-by-side, sometimes uneasily, sometimes violently and always with a sense of nothingness in the air ...

“Sometimes now, in streets I’ve used since my Sixties boyhood, I’m struck by the sense that this place no longer provides my identifiable roots, that now I am simply one of many who happen to live here, with no greater claim to it sentimentally or historically than the next man.”

Such anonymity might be what people are looking for when they choose to live in the teeming metropolitan centre, but in a suburb that has shaped much of your life, it’s a hard feeling to negotiate.”

READ MORE...

“A jury at Leeds Crown Court has cleared BNP leader Nick Griffin of two racial hatred charges and BNP activist Mark Collett of four others.

The jury has been discharged after failing to reach verdicts on the remaining charges - four against Mr Collett and two against Mr Griffin.”

BBC News report.

So, after decades of relentless misrepresentation and high-moral opprobrium from mainstream politics and the media, with never a word gain-said, twelve ordinary men and women could not be relied upon to convict Nick Griffin and Mark Collett of race hate.  The BNP pair left Leeds Crown Court this evening as free men - and men freed to speak freely on easily the greatest and most officially ignored social change in a thousand years of our history.

The Crown Prosecution Service now has to consider whether to reintroduce the two charges against Griffin and the four against Collett on which the jury could not agree.  It should take them all of twenty seconds.  The prosecution case was, frankly, feeble, relying on only one witness - Jason Gwynne, the undercover “journalist” who recorded Griffin and Collett’s speeches for the BBC documentary, The Secret Agent.  It isn’t going to get any stronger second time around.  And while this prosecution might have seemed to Labour politicians like a shot to nothing, another would plainly be malign.  The costs of a second failure would be just too great.

The long-term effects of the trial outcome will all be beneficial.  First, a little healthy respect for the instincts of jury members ought to percolate through to the Pee-Cee-addled brains of our liberal elite.  Their idea that something called “racism” is necessarily the most grievous crime imaginable is not shared by the public.  We are well into the process of seeing this toxic little word devalued.  Now, whenever it is hurled at a defender of Western Man the reply should be, “What, you mean like Griffin and Collett?”

Second, actual speech will be a little freer as a result of failed prosecution.  The precise limit of what can be safely said remains unclear, and the passage of even a damaged Religious Hate Crimes bill onto the statute books further complicates the issue.

But the importance of even partial free speech in an otherwise unfree situation is impossible to over-emphasize.  Anger exists and it is righteous.  If and when it becomes possible to publicly condemn, say, Ken Livingstone when he responds to 7/7 by praising those who come from all over the world to take the places of the dead, the left will truly be on the slide.  All suggestions of a superior morality will depart from it and the political winds will slowly change.

Third, the BNP has had the best possible lesson in discipline and been handed a political prize.  Advocating the rights of the native majority need plainly no longer be seen as mean or hateful. It is just.  The job is getting easier.  Whether the Party can capitalise on this windfall will be revealed at the May council elections.

For now, I am very glad that Nick and Mark are free men and very pleased to congratulate them accordingly.

Racial discrimination is not supposed to happen in a modern, progressive, liberal society, is it?

So what happens when it is discovered that Scotland Yard deliberately promoted a black bodyguard to a prestigious job because of his race? Are the white bodyguards who missed out given compensation? Well, no. In fact, the black bodyguard has been awarded $70,000 in compensation for being discriminated against because he was “over-promoted”!

Strange times we live in, don’t we? Strange enough for a refugee council in Norway to propose buying camels so that nomadic refugees might feel more at home.

Not content to sit on his laurels, Alex Zeka has contributed a second article to the blog.  In this one, the new leader of the British Conservatives gets the treatment.  I’ve told Alex this is the last time I am prepared to extend the Guest Blogger facility to him.  Sorry, from now on he’ll just have to do the same as everybody else, and post the stuff himself as a full MR contributor.  I only hope he doesn’t write too noticeably better than I do.

GW

Ex-Etonian, ex-Oxonian, self-styled man of the people David Cameron has kept his political proposals very much a secret. No doubt thinking policy details simply too gauche for a fully paid up member of the aristocracy to get into, he has preferred to reassure us that he believes neither in irresponsibility nor selfishness.

Such a happy state of affairs could not last indefinitely, and the Tuesday before last (13th Dec.) one of his advisors, Nick Boles, had to “come out” in front of the Adam Smith Institute.  Not about his sexuality, you understand - that’s been known since his failed campaign for Parliament- but about his boss’s political philosophy.  Reports the Spectator’s blog:-

While the hope of many Conservatives has been that Cameron is “really” on the Right but would use better PR to sell a Thatcherite agenda, Boles made clear to the audience that they would be disappointed.

READ MORE...

Two new, perfectly contradictory currents are just now beginning to course through the British body politic.  How they will fare - if they will, indeed, survive to develop at all – cannot be known with any degree of certainty.  Both hold the potential to change this island’s politics.  But only one can fundamentally change the future that is mapped out for us today.

Much the more advanced of the two is strictly elitist in conception, in a liberal-political sense.  It cares nothing for the opinions of the people, has no connection to them and is desired by none of them.  Yet it claims democracy as its ultimate value.  It aims, then, only to capture the imagination of men of power and influence, to seduce their minds with a grand, global objective requiring the commitment of our diplomatic resources, our treasure and, if necessary, our sons’ lives.  That objective, if you have not already guessed, is to carry liberal democracy beyond its present confines and into the world.

We are, therefore, talking here about naked, unabashed neoconservatism.  All references by its supporters to other, more native political traditions are simply an illusionist’s trick, a stratagem to get around the negative, particularist associations of neoconservatism and to appeal thereby to a confused, post-Blairite centre-left.

READ MORE...

The old left of the Labour Party has bitched that “Blair is a Tory”  since 1983, when he entered parliament at the age of 30.  Certainly, since the affair of the infamous “evil eyes” poster the real Tories have hardly quibbled with this analysis, and regularly complain that New Labour steals their clothes.  For his part, Blair the consummate professional certainly affects to command the political stage from the centre, though if pressed he will qualify it as the centre-left.  Whenever the opportunity arises he chides the Tories for being “right-wing” and, of course, nasty - that’s guaranteed to put them in a hell of a bind.

But there is a problem with this notion that Blair and his Party occupy the centre ground of British politics.  It is the appalling, long-term consequence to the English, in particular, of eight years of Labour rule.  If opening the borders and letting in an uncontrolled flow of Third Worlders is the politics of the centre I’m Adolf’s uncle.

READ MORE...

“None of the candidates has yet to articulate any sense of how he would mould and lead a genuinely changed Conservative Party.  Every time the candidates attack Blair and Brown, the staple of nearly all their speeches, they confirm Labour’s dominance of the landscape, and expose their inability to do what Tony and Gordon did — take arguments about their own party back to basics and build a coherent long-term strategy to change party and country.  It sounds easy.  It wasn’t.  Not one of the Tories on offer understands the nature of what was required by Labour then, and by them now.”

Alasdair Cambell, writing in The Times about the six Tory leadership hopefuls.

Three of them - Sir Malcolm Rifkind, Dr Liam Fox and David Willetts - he writes off as plainly not leadership material.  I agree (and so, please God, will they very soon).  The remaining three - Kenneth Clarke, David Davis and David Cameron - he writes off as plainly incapable of defeating Labour at the polls.  I agree.

READ MORE...