Posted by Fred Scrooby on Wed, 15 Nov 2006 14:38 | #

From the linked article’s opening:

Anti-racism has become the central theme of today’s political culture, yet the obsessive concern for racial sensitivities rarely seems to be applied to the white working class. This is the one ethnic group that it is perfectly acceptable to insult and ignore and to forcibly change into another race through the twin strategies of excessive incompatible immigration on the one hand, coupled with, on the other, a whole array of laws and policies that take away the right of white protest, give all sorts of preferences to non-whites, and deliberately inculcate in whites a sense of racial unworthiness, inferiority to the Negro, guilt for “past meanness,” and moral-historical obligation to disappear as a race.  This is all carefully pre-planned and is being managed quite knowingly and deliberately by those in government on the one hand and their various extra-governmental allies and co-conspirators on the other.

Posted by Guessedworker on Wed, 15 Nov 2006 17:15 | #

Well, you can’t have everything, Fred.  The article was the most hopeful I have read in any national daily for a very long while.  I even managed to get a comment published in the thread.  Usually I am blocked.

For example, the thread-keepers for this Telegraph opinion piece on the Griffin-Collett trial and its immediate political aftermath (the piece being written by Janet Daley, a regular Jewish-American columnist) did not allow the following Guessedworker analysis:-

The jury in Leeds Crown Court saw the complete tape of Griffin speaking of an outbreak of rape of white women by Moslems in Keighley, and the defence provided for this by sections of the Koran.  The jury decided that the speech did not and was not likely to incite hatred.

So why does Janet find it necessary to ignore the jury’s verdict, take those few words of Griffin’s out of context - exactly as the BBC did - and describe them as “stupid and bigoted”?

Is this not bigotry on Janet’s part, as well as arrogance.

It is, of course, a problem for English people to have their towns and cities progressively taken away from them by aliens.  This would be a problem for any people anywhere, and there is no reason ... no historical guilt ... no moral obligation ... no Marxian inevitability ... why the English should simply, uniquely be acquiescent.

It is not hate but human nature to wish to preserve one’s own people, culture and homeland.  The BNP is asserting the unimpeachable moral right of the English to England.  This, indeed, does not “conform to what the main political parties regard as acceptable”.  So do not vote for the main parties.

I have found that in national daily threads white survivalism, even expressed in what I take to be a reasonable and unarguable form (perhaps because it is expressed that way - you never know), is not generally acceptable for publishing.  I have a file of such comments titled “The Block”.  It isn’t, I think, just a general liberal squeamishness responsible for this.  There is more at work here than that ... a definite agenda related to expressions of support for the BNP, either in the form of its aims or the Party itself.

Posted by Bill on Wed, 15 Nov 2006 18:36 | #

I too, came across the Telegraph article, (actually posted and accepted) you still have to couch your post in a diluted form if you wish to stand any chance of success.  I try and push the envelope each and every post, some you win most you don’t.  Make no mistake, since May this year (B&D) there has been a gobsmacking transformation of published comment in the national press, I sense that some titles would like to throw open the floodgates, but they are very wary, there are v. powerful forces out there.

I just get the feeling, that wtshtf it could pushing on an open door, or is that wishful thinking?

Posted by Johan Van Vlaams on Wed, 15 Nov 2006 19:31 | #

Research has revealed that in Flanders there is only one political party with an important representation of members of the white working class among the elected… Vlaams Belang.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on Wed, 15 Nov 2006 23:01 | #

“Research has revealed that in Flanders there is only one political party with an important representation of members of the white working class among the elected… Vlaams Belang.”  (—Johan)

Long live Free Flanders!

Posted by Guessedworker on Wed, 15 Nov 2006 23:51 | #

Bill, under what name did you post to the McKinstry thread.  I would like to read what you had to say.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on Fri, 17 Nov 2006 02:21 | #

Fjordman is grappling with the mystery of multiculturalism’s origin.  Here he looks at the charge that it’s the U.S.‘s fault.  (I incline toward that view.)  The best thing in this somewhat tentative piece is in the closing paragraph, in which Fjordman finally, as long last, mentions ... (wait for it ...) ... race. ... RACE!  Finally!  FINALLY!  OK, OK, he uses a euphemism (“demographic”).  Hey we all have to start somewhere, don’t we?  C’mon, guys, cut the guy some slack!

Look at it this way:  it’s a start. 

The combination of all of these factors, in addition to the resurgence of a global Islamic Jihad, is gradually creating a demographic and democratic crisis in the West. Many Westerners sense that their media and their politicians are no longer listening to them, and they are perfectly correct. Those who feel a loyalty to their culture and their nation states feel betrayed, because they are.