With the Labour-pushing press dragged reluctantly behind, after a fashion, the whole of the British media are feasting on the red-hot certain defining moment of Election 2010.  By the unparticular nature of his conversation in the back of that car, the Prime Minister has let us know that not just him or even those around him but the Labour party and the wider left considers the indigenous British to be bigots.  And it is a settled decision.  Even the mildest criticism of immigration, uttered by a 66-year old lady and lifelong Labour supporter, is morally reprehensible and inadmissable, and exemplifies yet again why diversity is the only solution to racism.  There is no other way.  Apparently.

In its potential to uncover an unpalatable truth about the state of the body politic this affair, already dubbed Bigotgate, is a companion piece to the MP’s expenses scandal.  Now we know out of their own mouths that our elected representatives are established in opposition to us, their electorate, their own people, on two fronts.  Out of sheer cynicism they are exploiting us financially, and out of pure hostility they are warring against us ideologically.  They do not represent us in any way.

That is the message the BNP needs to force ever deeper into the public consciousness.  This morning the party responded to Bigotgate with the announcement of a last-minute newspaper advertising campaign in Barking and Dagenham, Leicestershire, Stoke-on-Trent, Manchester and Barnsley.  At present the focus is woolly. Griffin said:

“For Mr Brown to have then dismissed her as a bigot just because she asked him about immigration shows the utter contempt with which the Labour Party regards even their own voters,” he said.

“The poor woman did not use any epithets and simply asked why he was not doing anything about immigration. There was no justification at all to dismiss her in the derogative way he did. “Furthermore, the admission that all of Mr Brown’s interactions are stage managed explains at last why his previous public appearances are almost always with children and not adults.

“Children cannot ask the sort of pointed questions which adults can, and when Mr Brown was presented with an unscripted questioner, he immediately revealed his true agenda,” Mr Griffin said.

“Furthermore, the fact that Mr Brown used the adjective ‘old’ to describe the voter, shows that there is a clear disregard for people who have spent a lifetime voting Labour,” Mr Griffin continued. “This puts the deaths of an estimated 40,000 pensioners from fuel poverty over the past winter into perspective. Clearly these people do not matter anymore to the Labour Party.

First, Brown did not use the word “old”, and that must not find its way into the forthcoming run of advertisements.  Here is what was said on the street:

READ MORE...

Back in December I put up a post titled Questions for Lee John Barnes.  It’s purpose was to announce an interview for MR Radio.  For one reason and another that did not take place, but it is now re-arranged for Saturday.  In a purely private capacity, of course, Lee will be discussing with me the BNP’s chances of winning one or more seats in the forthcoming Westminster election and the development of the party generally over the next four years of neoliberalism + neo-Marxism.

Last time I invited questions for Lee he promptly arrived on the thread and answered them, which didn’t do a lot for the interview that never was.  This time we’ll focus on another conversation today between Lee and myself at his blog, 21st Century British Nationalism.  The subject is economic policy and, for me, the stale, defeatist and moralistic reliance upon protectionism which pervades party thinking now, and which does not even acknowledge the fact that British industry will suffer a growing labour shortage it will be able to resolve only by competing on employment terms against, principally, the Canadian, Australian and New Zealand economies.  That is where our new workforce will have to come from.  And for that, business profitability is the key.  Wrapping the economy in cotton wool is a fundamental mistake.

Here is the exchange with Lee.  “Defender of Liberty”, by the way, is the handle he uses on his own threads:

Defender of Liberty said…

We will establish an independent body that will ‘audit’ the nations and corporations we trade with - and if nations and corporations that exploit their people, workers and natural environment are discovered then their imports will be banned.

The tariffs would be set by the audit body, and would reflect the harm being done in the nations they are assessing and the damage being caused by the corporations that are causing the problems.

Seeing as our aim is to create a re-vitalised British industrial and manufacturing base - then the imports policy will apply across the board.

Whilst imports will be banned VAT will be lowered, or scrapped, on British produced goods - thereby incentivising people to buy British produced goods.

Of course the worst offenders will be targeted first - nations such as China, India and others that use slave labour and child labour and that destroy their own or the natural environments of others eg China and the rape of Africa for resources.

Our income tax reductions are based on ;

1) leaving the EU = 15 billion per year

2) scrapping the 150 billion pounds per year EU regulatory burdens on British business which will kick start the British economy via improving productivity and competitiveness

3) scrapping the Servile State and political correctness in all its forms = around 5 billion per year I estimate

4) Re-Nationalising the NHS and banning the 1-2 million illegals in the UK accessing all public services, which means we can improve those public services, improve waiting times and deliver better services without spending a penny on them extra - as we are removing the parasites who abuse them at the moment

5) creating a manufacturing industrial base that will export goods to the world - we will develop high energy efficiency and green energy systems for export to the third world for example and develop our own coal mines and create coal fired power plants to produce electricity.

6) We will incentivise our talented British people who have white flighted to foreign nations to come back to the UK with business development grants and loans to set up new businesses to replace the foreign imports - hence producing a new economic boom.

I have one disagreement with the BNP policy on paying immigrants to leave, I believe they should not be paid a penny.

If they are here illegally then they get booted out without a penny.

All the money we have should be spent on paying our people to return - not paying people to leave as that way the money stays in the UK and is used to develop our national economy.

These are just a basic outline.

I would type more but my fingers ache.

READ MORE...

by Grimoire

To Silver, in fact … in response to his contributions to the That Word Again thread:-

Your analyses in terms of irrational whites and aracial whites is accurate, but historically superficial. The Western collective consciousness has been under the sway of a wide array of circumstances and influences that have about played themselves out. The forces that have mounted and steered the circumstances are also at the end of the playbook. It is not yet closing time, but it clearly the last call.

History, in a certain sense, is like a children’s game of musical chairs. The music plays and everyone dances or runs about, and then the music slows and stops, and everyone must find a chair. Inevitably, someone is left out. Not everyone gets a chair, but not everyone is left out - only some, and they disappear from the game. No amount of multicultural brainwashing nor immigration can change this historical cycle. Unlike the children’s game, those who get the chairs are not the aracial, the atomized, the isolated, the apathetic.  Nor are they the self-satisfied bourgeois, happy in his townhouse. It is those - and it has always been those - who are conscious of themselves as a unity, an entity and bloodline to be preserved. It is those who see the chairs that are their own. Those that made each individual chair, know the music and have played and won the game since time immemorial.

READ MORE...

by Potential Frolic

Perhaps morality consists in individual rules or Sententiae stored somewhere in the mind. These would be abstract image-calculation algorithms, where one plugs in the images of other people and things to get the result. Then again perhaps morality consists in matrices containing perspectives of other people with whom one is close. We could imagine a matrix like this:

father, mother, sister, brother, friend1, friend2, teacher, neighbor1, neighbor2, neighbor3 ... etc, etc.

Each item in the matrix represents a perspective that one has acquired or modeled; the word ‘modeling’ reflects accurately the action but implies more consciousness than the matrix-former actually possesses. A more accurate term might be “absorbing other people’s evaluations”. Each perspective contains a list of weighted evaluations of things. Father’s evaluations of doing drugs may be -5, but friend1’s evaluation of doing drugs is +0.5 and friend2’s is 2.5, so friends may prevail with a young person to try drugs. When the young person inhabiting this matrix makes a decision about whether to try drugs, they cross-check each perspective in the matrix for evaluations and arrive at some form of weighted average, which guides their behavior.

READ MORE...

It is good to see Fred’s wee linguistic invention spreading its shocking-fascist tentacles even unto the very heart of European political fishiness.

by Grimoire

MORPHEUS: At last. Welcome, Neo. As you no doubt have guessed, I am Morpheus.

NEO: It’s an honor to meet you.

MORPHEUS: No. The honor is mine. Please come sit down. I imagine that right now you are feeling a bit like Alice tumbling down the rabbit hole.

NEO: You could say that.

MORPHEUS: I can see it in your eyes. You have the look of a man who accepts what he sees, because he is expecting to wake up. Ironically, this is not far from the truth. Do you believe in fate, Neo?

NEO: No.

MORPHEUS: Why not?

NEO: Because I don’t like the idea that I’m not in control of my life.

MORPHEUS: I know exactly what you mean. Let me tell you why you’re here. You’re here because you know something. What you know, you can’t explain, but you feel it.  You’ve felt it your entire life. That there’s something wrong with the world. You don’t know what it is, but it’s there, like a splinter in your mind driving you mad. It is this feeling that has brought you to me. Do you know what I’m talking about?

NEO: The matrix ...

MORPHEUS: Do you want to know what it is? The matrix is everywhere; it is all around us, even now in this very room. You can see it when you look out your window or when you turn on your television. You can feel it when you go to work, when you go to church, when you pay your taxes. It is the world that has been pulled over your eyes to blind you from the truth.

NEO: What truth?

MORPHEUS: That you are a slave Neo, like everyone else, you were born into bondage, born into a prison that you cannot smell or taste or touch. A prison for your mind.

The movie premiered eleven years ago, and most of us will have seen it. Many remember our thoughts as we sat to the end and then walked out onto the street and had a minute to think. What made this movie so intriguing was the idea that the oppression imposed by the matrix … ‘The Powers That Be’ … was so enormous, so persuasive, so seamless, that for most people the oppression, the matrix of lies, had become as invisible and unnoticed as the air we breathe.

READ MORE...

by Martin Hutchinson

The extraordinary rise in commodity prices, at the beginning of a global cyclical upswing, is beginning to reorder the pecking order of the world economy. Together with the advances made by China and India in the last decade, it is producing an entirely new world order, which many will find uncomfortable. In it, commodities, derided for decades as unimportant, have become scarce resources, to be guarded and managed with the utmost care. Conversely human labor and skill, on the basis of which the glories of human civilization were built, is entering into a state of gigantic glut.

The current commodities boom is qualitatively different from those of the past. In previous commodities booms, such as those of 1972-73 or 2006-08, the global economy was operating close to capacity, and indeed the boom was an important indicator that full capacity was about to be reached. The booms were accompanied by wage inflation and in both cases resulted in price inflation, although in 2007-08 the price inflation was aborted by the financial crash before it could really get hold.

READ MORE...

Just as we saw in the run up to last May’s European Parliament elections, the media is cranking up its BNP “coverage”.  Yesterday we were treated to a nearly balanced opener from the Sunday Times.  Today we were given articles in the Telegraph here and, pathetically, here, in the Mail here and, obliquely, in the Independent here.

I suspect that the attack will take on a different, more focussed form this time.  The BNP are standing a record 326 candidates.  But that’s little more than half the constituencies throughout the country, and the constituencies where the party has a chance of doing well are limited to three or four, all with a current big Labour majority.  The two most realistic chances are Barking and Dagenham, where Richard Barnbrook “agreed” to stand aside for Nick Griffin, and Stoke Central, where Alby Walker did not agree to stand aside for Simon Darby (but had to anyway).  Emma Colgate could poll respectably in Thurrock, notwithstanding the fact that nobody is totally sure whether she is in or out of the party following the last (and let us hope it is the last) Collett affair.  Roger Roberts may do likewise in Dewsbury.

As for the rest, including the council elections on the same day, the objective has to be to show a presence, to increase support (in terms of second and third places where fourths and fifths were had previously), to save deposits, and to build, build, build.  To that end, it is a little strange that the party is campaigning on three principal issues: withdrawal from Afghanistan, a halt to the immigration invasion, and an end to the ‘Global Warming’ conspiracy.  The voting public’s first concern is for the economy and jobs.  But the BNP seems not to understand how to address that (bringing some economic literacy on-board would seem a good start).  Also high on the list of concerns is the related issue of the unaccountability of Westminster and corruption of the political class.  But, again, it is not a major issue in party thinking.

Personally, I would like to see them campaign hard for freedom of speech and association, and an end to cultural warfare in public life, most especially in education (it will have to do so anyway if it wants to attract support from the Conservative/UKIP voting middle-classes).  All told, there is an extraordinary opportunity for the party to sculpt a powerful, attractive and wholly unique ideological niche for itself, and one that the left cannot reply to with the usual smears.

As Simon Heffer noted last week of the mainstream parties:

the choice of voting for staying in Europe or staying in Europe, massive immigration or massive immigration, an enormous and unnecessary public sector or an enormous and unnecessary public sector and more mind-numbing political correctness or more mind-numbing political correctness.

Heffer is a right-wing Tory, and is appealing for a right-wing Tory platform.  But his point holds true for the BNP as well.  Does anyone feel that it is responding appropriately?

Perhaps part of the problem is that, regardless of what they do, growth in support for the party is “inevitable”.  In 2005 it achieved 0.7% of the vote, totalling 192,746 votes, a performance which was three times better than in 2001.  General elections tend to see the votes of minor parties squeezed.  But a performance that is very far adrift of the 940,000 votes in May’s Europeans, or around 3.5% of the 2005 total of 27,110,727, will be taken as a disappointment in the circumstances.

Of course, the media may have something to say about that as well.