Posted by Dan Dare on Mon, 11 Jan 2010 06:53 | #

Net immigration my arse.

What Cameroon is calling for is one out two in. For each usually well educated exasperated white Briton who goes out out two third-world darkies will slip in.

Net immigration is a completely bogus concept. Native Britons should be able to come and go as they please, whose movements have nothing whatsoever to do with ‘net’ immigration statistics. The focus should be on unwanted incomers, whose numbers must be driven down to zero as a first step and then into negative numbers.

Anyone who falls for this BluLabor con-trick waffle is a complete cretin.

Posted by Al Ross on Mon, 11 Jan 2010 07:07 | #

One might have thought that mention would have been made of the burning by Muslims of several churches in Malaysia over the use of the word Allah. Imagine the Western mainstream media wailing and gnashing of teeth if the countless provocations of “British” Muslims against the host people had resulted in one single mosque being torched.

Posted by Bill on Mon, 11 Jan 2010 13:08 | #

The Battle of Wootton Bassett.

Sounds quintessentially English don’t you think?

Posted by Dasein on Mon, 11 Jan 2010 18:54 | #

I don’t have the link at my fingertips but I believe UKIP is endorsing the same bullshit concept.

http://bnp.org.uk/2010/01/fake-ukip-party-endorses-overrunning-of-britain-by-third-world/

Posted by Guessedworker on Mon, 11 Jan 2010 19:14 | #

Basically, the Balanced Migration idea allows for one native Briton to be replaced with two Third Worlders.  But the two Third Worlders will each marry a girl/uncle from home.  So that’s four.  Then they will get their relatives over.  Then any of them of appropriate age will breed ... and breed.  Etcetera.

Society will transform at a slower pace than under the Neatheresque methods so helpfully put forward by Tony Blair’s Jews (Straw, Roche, Portes).  But it’s transformation all the same.

This slower, more neoliberal, less in-your-face pace of transformation represents only a part of the political puzzle the BNP will have to solve after April 29th (my guess for election day).  The probability is, though, that the “blokes” will auto-intoxicate on the notion of replacing the Labour Party in its white heartlands, and will not acknowledge that they have to speak to the Tory majority that has always applied in England (or even know how).  The trick, of course, is to bring the middle-classes into the party.  But I very much doubt that they are willing to do that, because they would quickly lose control of it and their personal prospects would go out of the window.

In any case, the Labour Party will revive.  If the BNP wants to progress it has to solve the riddle of the middle.

Posted by Dan Dare on Mon, 11 Jan 2010 20:21 | #

If the BNP wants to progress it has to solve the riddle of the middle.

Perhaps a good place to start would be for them to open a dialogue with you GW.

Posted by Dan Dare on Mon, 11 Jan 2010 20:23 | #

I meant to add in the above: ‘An interview with Simon Darby, perhaps?’

Posted by Armor on Mon, 11 Jan 2010 20:29 | #

Cameron: “reduce net immigration to levels recorded in the 1990s”

He sounds like the media. According to them, if immigration is stabilized at a given level, it means the demographic situation can also be described as stable.

Posted by Dan Dare on Mon, 11 Jan 2010 20:32 | #

To be honest Fred almost everyone in England in middle-class these days. The working class has dwindled away as the occupations that they once filled have disappeared. Their position in society is largely taken by a Lumpenproletariat underclass, both domestically reared and imported.

Any faction that seeks power or even simply influence has to solve the riddle of the middle. Unlike GW I don’t believe it is beyond the ken of the BNP (or any such right radical faction) to do so.

Posted by Dan Dare on Mon, 11 Jan 2010 20:37 | #

As an aside I think I’m probably fairly typical of the ‘new’ middle-classes, being a beneficiary of the 1944 Education Act and the national Health Service. I am the first male in the family who did not go down the pit on leaving school. There are millions like me with working class roots who look askance at the present ‘working class’ but it is not snobbishness that motivates, rather pity and sorrow.

Posted by Angry Beard on Mon, 11 Jan 2010 20:44 | #

First of all I take exception to your derogatory term “blokes” (your commas) to describe the BNP leadership.
Fact is the BNP is led by some very capable and highly intelligent men whose overall strategic plan for the Party happens to be the correct one.
It’s the working-class who are being arse-raped by the immigration - they can actually feel, see and know what’s going on - even the silly c*nts who watch EastEnders and follow football, it’s only they are too demoralized to bother voting.
The ‘school-teacher’ classes are not the BNP’s natural base of support and never will be.
  Secondly, my gut instinct is that Labour’s vote will collapse in the next election just like it did in the euro-election (the BNP mopping up Labour’s natural base of support).The collapse in the Labour vote will exaggerate Tory seats, due to Britain’s unrepresentative voting system.This is likely to give Labour a mountain to climb in subsequent elections (perhaps taking decades to climb out of).The Labour Party that emerges - if it emerges - will be a very different beast.
Herein lies the possibility of the re-casting of British politics IF the BNP can persuade the ‘St. George flag waving scaffolders’ to vote on the basis of race (remember the actual feeling of race replacement is just around the corener) rather than class (actually Labour despises the English working class).

Posted by Guessedworker on Mon, 11 Jan 2010 22:12 | #

AngryBeard,

It is not necessary to be squeamish about this.  As it stands today, the BNP really is the Bloke’s Nation Party.  It is the party of the Daily Mail and Daily Express reader.  It is the party of the Leibfraumilch drinker, the party of the NCO class, the party of the self-employed, the party of people for whom Arthur Kemp is an intellectual.  It is the party of that yeoman stock James Bowery admires.  There is no disrespect in saying so.  It is true.

Their station in life explains their attention to the underclass as a political constituency, even notwithstanding the fact that the underclass bears the full brunt of the Third World on its back, in its pocket, between its thighs, and is the obvious place to begin with a nationalist revolution.

But here’s the gen, AngryBeard: you cannot build a national political movement out of this social class, good, honest men and women though they are.  The limits are too near.

During the eight years of David Cameron upon which we are about to commence, the BNP has to resolve the riddle of how to bring in to the party the educated middle-class, which is the political class, which is the class able to govern and able to walk on the international stage.  If that sounds like snobbery, too bad.  There is too much at stake to continue with illusions.  The middle-class is the key to political credibility, and that is the key to power.

The problem is how to attract members of a demographic who, as yet, have not lost enough to be natural allies of, or advocates for, nationalism.

Posted by Angry Beard on Mon, 11 Jan 2010 23:15 | #

Keir Hardie - Now there’s our role model.
A man who have spat in the face of Blair, Purnell, Mandelson etc.
A lanarkshire coalminer who went down the pits at age 12.
Wore a deer-stalker hat to parliament and took the derision of the toffs of high Victorianism with contempt - yes the biggest snob the world had ever produced the 19th century Eton and Oxford landed gentry with the ‘haw-haw’ accents and ‘effortless superiority’ Hardie took them on and won - well to a point until the silly bastards of the trade union movement in 1979 got too greedy.
I appreciate that Edwardian Labour had more than its fair share of Bloomsbury intellectuals, but here we had a nuine mass movement that captured the imagination of a large slice of the British electorate who passionately identified with the cause.It was whole powerbase, union branches, local parties, papers and all that developed into a well-oiled political machine in a mere 50 years when measured against the Tories’ 350 years+ plus the fact of the Tories being the inheritors of Britain’ ruling Norman caste who ran (run) Britain as their personal property since 1066.

Posted by Bill on Mon, 11 Jan 2010 23:55 | #

Earlier this evening I was reading the Telegraph’s Ambrose Evans Pritchard’s take on ‘America slides deeper into depression,’ what struck me most was the number of comments from across the pond.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/comment/ambroseevans_pritchard/6962632/America-slides-deeper-into-depression-as-Wall-Street-revels.html

There are some commentors who are pinning their salvation on a totally corrupt political system (sham democracy) bring on the elections they cry.

I fear that is what we’re doing here with the BNP, placing our faith in a utterly rigged game - I dunno.

Posted by Guessedworker on Mon, 11 Jan 2010 23:59 | #

AngryBeard,

1. The man the modern yeomen revere is not Hardie but Enoch Powell, whose personal history I am sure I need not relate in opposition to Hardie’s.

2. The landowning class paternalised the working man through the vehicle of the Whig Party, which became Palmerstone’s liberals in or around 1854, which collapsed under the marxisation of the working-class movement after WW1.  The Tory party became Peel’s Conservatives after the disaster of Reform, but had always been the party of the small man.  It was certainly not the successor of the Norman ruling caste.  Martin Hutchinson’s Great Conservatives will clarify any doubts you have on the matter.

In any case, my point is that you cannot build a political movement without the middle-class, and you certainly cannot man government without it.  I say this as the son of a woman who was one of twelve children living at the back of a butcher’s shop in a south-Midland railway town - a real old Labour family, if ever there was one.

Posted by Dan Dare on Tue, 12 Jan 2010 00:02 | #

Luxury! We used to dream of living at the back of a butcher’s. Now in my day ......

(Sorry Bill, couldn’t resist)

Posted by Dan Dare on Tue, 12 Jan 2010 00:03 | #

I meant sorry GW of course.

Posted by Guessedworker on Tue, 12 Jan 2010 00:37 | #

The Secret Policeman’s Ball, if memory serves me right, Dan.

I’ve never been able to work out why they weren’t obviously poorer.  They could afford to keep a pig in the backyard and an upright piano in the parlour!  They had their standards.  They sent the two youngest sons to technical school, and both began businesses now worth considerable sums.  One is an MBE.  Another son played for Luton Town, who were then a First Division side.  Another was an amateur artist and ran a local “book”.  Another became a head-master.  My mother ran a ballet school until she was called up, and then did her service in the naval hut at Bletchley Park.  One of her elder sisters ran a nursing home.  Another married a foreign office official and tripped the consulate circuit in south-east Asia.

It’s amazing how the family moved out of its working-class past.  No trace of it survives today, and not too many among the generations that have followed would vote Labour, I suspect.

The house is still there.  But a cousin tells me that the town is Moslem now, and parts of it are No Go areas for us.  When we reclaim it I am going to go back and knock on the door.  The number is 106 - I have not forgotten.

Posted by Bill on Tue, 12 Jan 2010 00:45 | #

Fred on class.  January 11, 2010, 07:17 PM

But that’s just me, don’t let me interrupt; carry on, everyone.  No I don’t require an answer, so don’t anyone try, I realise it’s one of those things I’ll never “get.”

My two pennarth.  The middle class of Britain have always provided the backbone of the prevailing wind of the nation’s culture.  In my young days that culture was conservative, same as America Main Street, straight, moral, honest upright folk, solid in their beliefs, you know, James Stuart types.

The sixties changed all that through the education system, the Gramsci backpackers were setting off on their long trek, the end product of higher education produced a different ilk which we now see in their prime and in our institutions and governing elites.

Britain’s middle class has gone from Churchill’s conservatism to Cameron’s liberal progressive.

Disaffected conservatives will flock to the BNP via Ukip, but liberals will take a little longer.

We here, new from the outset that nationalism would, in the end, sweep the board, it’s all down to how much pain it will take , but with liberals it will be all about being mugged by reality.

Bit rushed I’m afraid, it’s late.

Posted by Dan Dare on Tue, 12 Jan 2010 00:59 | #

Britain’s middle class has gone from Churchill’s conservatism to Cameron’s liberal progressive.

That transformation was memorably captured by Hitchens P. in the first chapter of “The Abolition of Britain” in which he contrasted the funerals of Churchill and Diana, two events that might well have happened on different planets, even though they were a mere thirty years apart.

Posted by Guessedworker on Tue, 12 Jan 2010 01:12 | #

Thank you, Fred.  I’ll buy you a beer one day, too.

Posted by Al Ross on Tue, 12 Jan 2010 02:19 | #

When the prospective candidate for the safe Conservative seat of Penrith, Rory Stewart (whom I remember as being a tousle haired tyke running around KL’s Royal Lake Club swimming pool area) was attempting, via a press interview, to inform voters of his social class he referred to himself as “lower upper - middle class”.

Things were simpler in the bad old days when UK passports contained the “occupation” section. Alec Douglas Home simply wrote, ‘Nobleman’.

Posted by Bill on Tue, 12 Jan 2010 08:11 | #

Why do they hate us so much?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jK4N0eqMMzE&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZGgWj2L6L3Q

Posted by Bill on Sun, 06 Jun 2010 11:17 | #

Fast forward to 6.6.2010

Cumbria Shootings.

Is this another Diana moment?  The Cumbrian shootings are starkly sandwiched between the memorial of the evacuation of Dunkirk and the Normandy landings of June 6th. 1944.

What a difference 50 years makes in the life of a nation’s culture.

Don’t get me wrong, the Cumbrian shootings incident is tragic, what else could it be?  Casual random death dealt instantly in a quiet rural backwater of Britain?  As Clinton would say, I feel your pain.

No, it is the manner in which the British liberal media report such happenings that get my goat.  Is this the same media that is up to it’s neck in cheer leading a programme of race replacement of the very same people whom they are patronising with their faux horrified sympathy?

They talk in hushed reverent tone, Orla Guerin like, they came in the night… 

All of which reminded me of how would the liberal media of today reported the armada of little ships returning with exhausted and injured survivors from Dunkirk to the south coast ports of England in May 1940?

Or how would they have reported the returning injured evacuated from the beaches of Normandy in June 1944?

The British stiff upper lip has been consigned to history, the hetero sexual male has been neutered and feminised.

To cap it all, the honest ordinary folk of Cumbria are sat in front of the cameras trying to maintain their innate dignity whilst inwardly trying to cope with their allotted 15 minutes of fame.

The dogs are still barking in Cumbria, the media has got the whole world by the balls.

Posted by Bill on Wed, 09 Jun 2010 09:24 | #

The media has given us the latest buzzword to roll off the assembly line - The deficit.

We are now dutifully parroting this latest buzzword which has been decreed by the BBC.

Apparently, Georgie Porgie has invited comments and suggestions from the citizenry as to where they would like the swinging cuts to take place.

Cameron has seamlessly taken over the NWO baton from new Labour, it’s the deficit stoopid!  Has the lot of taking Britain into Europe and the NWO been allocated to Cameron?

Cameron’s ploy is to play the bogyman, the bad good guy who is to administer the nasty tasting medicine to the terminally ill British financial system.

The elixer is to come in the form of drastic cuts, the most drastic worserist cuts ever envisaged, Cameron and Georgie are positively salivating at the mere prospect.  Why?

Could it be the ensuing result will be civil unrest big time on the streets of Britain this summer which will evolve into Britain’s 9/11?  What better excuse to declare a national emergency and suspend the democratic process?

I note NATO troops have/are being transferred from Germany to Britain, ostensibly for training purposes of course.

Apparently the Bilderbergers are behind schedule, maybe Dave’s been given his orders to get a shift on.

Posted by Lurker on Wed, 09 Jun 2010 10:36 | #

I noticed one sad little piece of emasculation in the Cumbria stroy.

A grown man reporting how he and others hid in a pub while the scary man was driving around. Makes one wonder what would have happened if the man in the pub and others had been armed themselves. Not a question that any sector of the media thought to raise, of course, at any point, a whole dimension of the issue wished out of existence.

But there was more good old control of the discourse fully on display.

On the first day the talking heads were cleary concerned - what if Bird had his guns illegally? That would have been a bit difficult. But its OK he had them legally. You could sense the collective relief.

An interview - some guy from a shooting advocacy group (not sure which org) all this guy could could do was bleat ineffectually about how we musnt control weapons any more than we do - because it would affect the British Olympic shooting team! Pathetic. The whole thing was designed to make him look as if he were an apologist for the massacre. Of course we dont know what else he said, edited out.

Other subjects, witnesses etc were given full reign to advocate banning guns, shooting etc.

Posted by Lurker on Wed, 09 Jun 2010 10:38 | #

Full rein!

Posted by Q on Thu, 10 Jun 2010 00:27 | #

“To repeat:  Bill is one of the best thread commenters in the blogosphere”

—-
Hear, hear!