MultiCult or InterCult? A quicker way to the European oblivion?

Posted by Guest Blogger on Sunday, 13 February 2011 00:28.

by Last Celt

Earlier this week, Horst Seehofer, the leader of the CDU’s Bavarian sister party, the CSU, said it was “obvious that immigrants from different cultures like Turkey and Arab countries, all in all, find it harder” to integrate.

“Multikulti’ is dead,” Mr Seehofer said.

Earlier this month the chancellor held talks with Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, in which the two leaders pledged to do more to improve the often poor integration record of Germany’s estimated 2.5 million-strong Turkish community.

BBC. October, 2010

Multiculturalism is pronounced dead! However, notice the call for integration; it’s too early to celebrate.

Similarly, last Saturday the British Prime Minister David Cameron declared the multicult a failure. But look at this comment of Cameron’s:

On the one hand, those on the hard right ignore this distinction between Islam and Islamist extremism, and just say that Islam and the West are irreconcilable – that there is a clash of civilizations. So, it follows: we should cut ourselves off from this religion, whether that is through forced repatriation, favoured by some fascists, or the banning of new mosques, as is suggested in some parts of Europe . These people fuel Islamophobia, and I completely reject their argument. If they want an example of how Western values and Islam can be entirely compatible, they should look at what’s happened in the past few weeks on the streets of Tunis and Cairo : hundreds of thousands of people demanding the universal right to free elections and democracy.

The true path towards the preservation of Europe is slandered as “hard right” and “fascist”. I say, “Racism, Schmacism!”

Cameron continues:

We need to think much harder about who it’s in the public interest to work with. Some organisations that seek to present themselves as a gateway to the Muslim community are showered with public money despite doing little to combat extremism. As others have observed, this is like turning to a right-wing fascist party to fight a violent white supremacist movement. So we should properly judge these organisations: do they believe in universal human rights – including for women and people of other faiths? Do they believe in equality of all before the law? Do they believe in democracy and the right of people to elect their own government? Do they encourage integration or separation? These are the sorts of questions we need to ask. Fail these tests and the presumption should be not to engage with organisations – so, no public money, no sharing of platforms with ministers at home.

It’s at least encouraging to see the state now views aliens as a threat, no longer only natives. Perhaps there’s hope for our uniting against Leviathan, thwarting divide-and-conquer? Probably not because there isn’t enough land in the UK to partition.

Next Cameron calls for the transformation of the UK into an ideological state. Native Brits who disagree with the ruling ideology, he says, don’t “belong here”:

Now, second, we must build stronger societies and stronger identities at home. Frankly, we need a lot less of the passive tolerance of recent years and a much more active, muscular liberalism. A passively tolerant society says to its citizens, as long as you obey the law we will just leave you alone. It stands neutral between different values. But I believe a genuinely liberal country does much more; it believes in certain values and actively promotes them. Freedom of speech, freedom of worship, democracy, the rule of law, equal rights regardless of race, sex or sexuality. It says to its citizens, this is what defines us as a society: to belong here is to believe in these things. Now, each of us in our own countries, I believe, must be unambiguous and hard-nosed about this defence of our liberty.

What is being preserved isn’t the British nations and Germany but liberalism. Note: Cameron still wants Turkey membership in the EU, which would bring millions of Turks into Europe - including Britain.

And so, multiculturalism is to be replaced by a fairly new [and, in Britain, Jewish - Ed] ism: interculturalism. Before looking at the new ism, let’s see what Francis has to say about multiculturalism:

Movements like “multiculturalism,” which ostensibly defends the legitimacy of many different cultural and ethnic identities, would seem to be the opposite of the abstract universalism that the managerial system prefers, but in fact the main social and political function of multiculturalism as it is deployed in schools and government policies today is to undermine white, Christian, male-oriented, bourgeois values and institutions—those, in other words, that remain the principal institutional constraints on managerial reach and power.

Despite a good deal of play with such ethnic heritages as those of American Indians, blacks, Hispanics, Asians, etc., the real “cultural” bonds that discipline these different groups are those created and deployed by the managerial regime—through government bureaucracy, educational manipulation, mass routinization by the economy of managerial capitalism, and disciplining by the mass media. Managerial elites can clearly afford to patronize tribal, often paleolithic, practices such as musical styles, clothing, cuisine, and religious rituals; there is little danger that such folkways will seriously interfere with real managerial control and interests, and the elite neither expects nor desires them to do so. The main use of such diversions is to embarrass and discredit their Western counterparts as repressive, genocidal, boring, and uncreative, not really to elevate primitive and Third World cultural strains into the dominant culture created and controlled by the managerial class. The multiculturalist ideology promoted by the managerial regime is supposed to remain subordinate to and controlled by the “color-blind” universalism and egalitarianism that the regime also sponsors.

Now, Francis on interculturalism:

Of course, the managerial class would have a ready answer—that the Balkanizing forces against which Gottfried warns will themselves eventually be assimilated into the managerial stewpot, that managerial techniques of social control will neutralize any such forces, that Gottfried exaggerates them anyway, and that anyone who mentions such problems is probably a “xenophobe,” if not an outright “racist.” Nevertheless, Gottfried has an entirely valid and indeed powerful point, that the dynamic of managerial power undermines its own regime. In particular, what he is alluding to in this passage is the emergence of a non-white and indeed anti-white racial consciousness among the immigrant populations and subcultures (though by no means confined to them) that does not yet fit into the managerial superculture and which has emerged in the course of the last century as an entirely independent force, the “rising tide of color,” the rebirth of non-white and anti-white racial consciousness on a mass scale.

As noted, it is of course the conceit of the managerial class that eventually the threat of Balkanization that such consciousness and the population streams that carry it will be “assimilated” into the superculture through application of its universalist policy of “color-blindness” and the disciplines of economic reward and that they present no long-term threat. What Gottfried is suggesting is that the emergence of Third World racial consciousness cannot be assimilated, that it is impervious to managerial bribery and manipulation, and that it presents a far more serious threat to the stability and functioning of the managerial regime than the masters of the regime realize or — given their ideology — are able to understand.

Brent Nelson in 1998 wrote:

Multicultural America is the label which Michael Lind applies to today’s America in his book The Next American Nation. This book presents an interpretation of American history which is unconventional but useful in understanding our situation. According to Lind’s reading of history, we are now living in the third American republic, Multicultural America, which emerged around 1965. The first republic, Anglo-America, lasted until the Civil War, and was succeeded by the second republic, Euro-America.

Each republic had its founding document. Each republic was also founded on a constitutional compromise. Anglo-America was founded on the Declaration of Independence. Its great compromise was slavery. Euro-America’s founding document was the Emancipation Proclamation. Its compromise was white supremacy based on segregation and restricted immigration. The founding document of Multicultural America is the federal statistical directive which divides the American people into five racial groups. Multicultural America’s great constitutional compromise is the federal system of racial preference. New republics emerge when the old compromise breaks down. Thus, the Civil War ended Anglo-America while the civil rights movement ended Euro-America.

The fourth American republic, according to Lind, will be Trans-America. In Trans-America all racial groups will melt down or amalgamate. Social democracy will finally triumph.

Multiculturalism and interculturalism in Britain and Germany, then, are together an attempt at bringing about Trans-Europe via stages. First aliens were brought in to destroy the native culture. Now the aliens are here, so the next phase is to bring alien culture under control and unite the two into an alien-native amalgam which will continue to absorb new immigrants.

Why would Europe destroy itself? According to managerial elite theory, such transnationalism serves the interests of the managerial elite who dominate modern societies.

Francis (same article):

As Burnham argued, the reach of managerial power is transnational and supranational; national boundaries, sovereignties, and identities present mainly obstacles to managerial power, and Burnham explicitly predicted the managerial movement away from traditional nation-states and toward supranational organization. For much the same reason, the managerial class is at best indifferent and actually hostile to most other specific identities such as those derived from class, ethnicity and race, religion, region, and gender. Managerial power is heightened by the eradication of such identities and by the triumph of a universalist ideology and ethic that celebrates such abstractions as “humankind.”

Though managerial elite theory is more accurate, capitalism is similar; and I’d like to include a comment by a leftist. Chomsky wrote:

See, capitalism is not fundamentally racist—it can exploit racism for its purposes, but racism isn’t built into it. Capitalism basically wants people to be interchangeable cogs, and differences among them, such as on the basis of race, usually are not functional. I mean, they may be functional for a period, like if you want a super-exploited workforce or something, but those situations are kind of anomalous. Over the long term, you can expect capitalism to be anti-racist - just because it’s anti-human. And race is, in fact, a human characteristic - there’s no reason why it should be a negative characteristic, but it is a human characteristic. So therefore identifications based on race interfere with the basic ideal that people should be available just as consumers and producers, interchangeable cogs who will purchase all the junk that’s produced - that’s their ultimate function, and any other properties they might have are kind of irrelevant, and usually a nuisance.

Sam Francis made a similar argument against capitalism from a conservative perspective in “Capitalism the Enemy”. Chronicles. Year 2000.

Tags: Political analysis

Comments:

Posted by Last Celt on Sun, 13 Feb 2011 05:10 | #

Merkel says German multicultural society has failed
PM’s speech at Munich Security Conference
James Edwards’s Racism, Schmacism
Cameron still wants Turkish EU membership
Francis’s “Power Trip”
Nelson’s “What Can European Americans Do Now?”
Chompsky’s Understanding power: the indispensable Chomsk
Francis’s “Capitalism the Enemy”

Posted by Penultimate Pict on Sun, 13 Feb 2011 06:20 | #

Last Celt,

You have written an interesting article and I enjoyed reading it, but I’m dismayed by the appearance of your name.

I have previously been advised by M.R.s managerial elitster, that Celts do not exist.

I eagerly await a Cameronesque explanation for this logical anomaly.

Posted by Leon Haller on Sun, 13 Feb 2011 12:37 | #

Assimilationism is indeed a much greater threat to white racial and cultural survival than multiculturalism. The latter encourages nonwhites to maintain their own historic (or often newly fabricated) ethnocultures within white majority societies. This at least has the advantage of keeping whites at something of a cultural distance, causing or allowing for greater nonwhite communal self-segregation, which in turn gives whites a better chance of staying genetically pure, as well as maintaining their own cultural continuity (not that the latter is ever easy, between commercial media as well as public educational indoctrination).

What we want is territorial/political resegregation and later nonwhite expatriation.

Posted by Guessedworker on Sun, 13 Feb 2011 16:41 | #

Penultimate,

Can we agree that web-names, at least, are “socially constructed”. Or constructed, or whatever.

Actually, I’ve noticed in recent years that the habit of promoting a language into a people - Celts - is sending its tendrils into respectable academia. No doubt, the Victorian romanticists who, I understand, started it would be delighted to contemplate the power of their illusion.

Posted by Penultimate Pict on Sun, 13 Feb 2011 16:53 | #

Can we agree that web-names, at least, are “socially constructed”.

I’ll agree, if you’ll agree that I’ve pict the ultimate pen name?

69district?

Posted by Goethe on Sun, 13 Feb 2011 21:28 | #

69district

Captcha is only trying to help.

Posted by Thunder on Sun, 13 Feb 2011 23:07 | #

Thanks for the chuckle Penultimate Pict. Grandmother McGinny would be proud of you.

Posted by Thunder on Sun, 13 Feb 2011 23:45 | #

I think I pict the wrong grandmother. McGinny was Irish. I think Grandmother Love was the Scot.

Posted by Penultimate Pict on Mon, 14 Feb 2011 01:29 | #

Here’s for your granny:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h5Br5R6rnQY

Posted by Celtic Foot Soldier on Mon, 14 Feb 2011 01:38 | #

There’s more to Celts than language. Even Kikipedia admits it, although I suppose they would prefer to call us Mortonites:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morton’s_toe

Posted by Wolf on Mon, 14 Feb 2011 03:56 | #

I believe integration to be even worse than multiculturalism. Like in the USA, prepare for massive affirmative action programs.

Posted by Scott on Mon, 14 Feb 2011 05:12 | #

What an INSANE thing to say!
Firstly, Tunisia and Egypt WILL descend into violent inter-factional chaos, believe me.
However, back to that statement.
Those people in Tunis and Cairo are eager for democratic freedom and elections…for THEIR OWN people!
There are not hundreds of thousands of foreign immigrants pouring ito their countries each year to be included in those potential elections!

Posted by Mike on Mon, 14 Feb 2011 07:24 | #

As one or two paleos have pointed out, it seems that left liberal Europe is now becoming more right liberal, while neocon American has turned more left liberal.

However, niether of these movements reflect an increase in either right or left liberalism among the masses. The rightward turn in Europe is an attempt to appease populist calls for restricting immigration and asserting native culture, while the left liberal movement in the US is a response to the overspending and military failures of the neoconservatives.

Interestingly the leftward turn in the US may actually benefit the traditional right, for example socialised medicine may play into the hands of immigration restricitionists while Obama’s election has energised both the mainstream and alternative right. Conversely, the right liberal shift in Europe will probably do little to reduce immigration, immigrant crime, immigrant unemployment or hostility towards the host culture. Hence after 5-10 years of right liberal failure in Europe people may actually be ready for genuine particularism.

Posted by Leon Haller on Mon, 14 Feb 2011 11:45 | #

This was an interesting post, worthy of more comments than it has received. That says something about the immaturity of the Racial Right. Post something on the Jews, however lacking in insight or importance, and hundreds of comments will materialize.

If we want to save the white race, and if MR is one of the cognitively high-octane sites devoted to that agenda, then clearly our movement still has a long way to go intellectually (let alone politically).

Posted by Andrew Neather on Mon, 14 Feb 2011 16:11 | #

I’m fairly convinced that it is the Tory Party who were, are and will be the biggest enemies of the English people (and NOT Labour), rather ironic, since the Tories are supposed to be all about ‘Englishness’.
Basically, tHe Tories have run Britain since Charles I was decapitated, (everyone else iis only on sufferance, it’s all just a big charade like Turkey, Egypt, Thailand etc with their armies running the show, with a patina of ‘democracy’ , but here it’s the Tories running the show), and by the rigged, archaic and absurd Westminster voting system they will ensure their vampire grip on Britain even after the host has expired - a case of the party that has usurped ‘Englishness’ making itslf more important than what it is supposed to defend.
The Tories have done fuck-all in the last 60 years to seriously turn back the tide of immigration, despite the expostulations of various mavericks, Monday club ‘hardmen’ (of whom Paddy O’Hannan is a wannabe) - they now seem more and more Alan B’stardlike ridiculous, and not forgetting the Wolverhampton Bulldog J. Enoch Powell esq. himself.
They’ve done fuck-all to bring in serious restrictive legislation.Fuck all to abolish the ‘commonwealth’ and all its works, fuck all to pull out of the EU (in fact, they took us in!, Mr. Hannan, you tosser).
Worst of all, by lumbering Briatin with the unrepresentative and undemocratic ‘first past the system’ (an ancient historic quirk from the days before party, and when country gentlemen elected an ‘honorable member from amongst their clique - to represent their little rotten borough’s selfish interest), they have stymied a real realignment on the ‘right’ and thus rendered impotent the ginormous hostility to race-replacement that has existed since year dot, (1948, actually and Attlee’s dick-and-balls up of a bastard act).

Posted by chris on Mon, 14 Feb 2011 17:35 | #

The Germans want to give up their last chance to save themselves from cultural oblivion. Unbelievable!

Posted by MAPPY on Tue, 15 Feb 2011 01:07 | #

WARNING! LEFTIST PSYCHOBABBLE DETECTED FROM THE “CAMERON” ENTITY.

A TRANSLATION FOR HUMANS HAS BEEN PRODUCED.

THE ORIGINAL ARTICLE SHOULD READ:

“On the one hand, those on the hard medical right ignore this distinction between viruses that are not currently infecting people and viruses that are, and just say that viruses and the healthy human body are irreconcilable – that there is a clash of civilizations. So, it follows: we should cut ourselves off from these infectious agents, whether that is through vaccination, favoured by some people I will demonize as facists (though they are in no way actually connected to facism), or the banning of new infections, as is suggested in some parts of Europe . These people fuel virophobia, and I completely reject their argument. If they want an example of how a healthy human and a virus can be entirely compatible, they should look at what’s happened in the past few weeks on the streets of Tunis and Cairo : hundreds of thousands of people demanding the universal right to allow viruses to do anything they want.

Posted by Selous Scout on Tue, 15 Feb 2011 01:54 | #

That says something about the immaturity of the Racial Right. Post something on the Jews, however lacking in insight or importance, and hundreds of comments will materialize.

Perhaps it says more about trolls, troublemakers, informants, and Jewish ,operatives.

Posted by Woodshed on Tue, 15 Feb 2011 07:30 | #

Perhaps it says more about trolls, troublemakers, informants, and Jewish ,operatives.

Perhaps Leon is as you suggest. I tend to doubt it, though. However, I would suggest that Leon stop doing that which tends to raise suspicion in the minds of MR’s readers; namely: cease to criticize MR for not adhering to his personal standards of discourse sanitized for mainstream consumption when he knows full-well the purpose of this site is not primarily as a popularizer of racialism but, to the contrary, a (mostly) uncensored venue for the development of racialist ideas. The latter being the very reason Leon ostensibly enjoys posting here himself, as opposed to more censorious sites.

Also, as a man who clearly craves validation in the form of recognition, perhaps Leon should post a sample in the form of a main post of his copiously researched writing. Just a taste, is all. So we all can see if he is as good as he says he is, and that he is on the level.

Posted by Wolf on Tue, 15 Feb 2011 23:12 | #

Assimilation & Multiculturalism are both wrong!

By Steve Sailer

http://www.vdare.com/sailer/110213_byron_roth.htm

Posted by Leon Haller on Wed, 16 Feb 2011 12:16 | #

I would suggest that Leon stop doing that which tends to raise suspicion in the minds of MR’s readers; namely: cease to criticize MR for not adhering to his personal standards of discourse sanitized for mainstream consumption when he knows full-well the purpose of this site is not primarily as a popularizer of racialism but, to the contrary, a (mostly) uncensored venue for the development of racialist ideas.(woodshed)

————————

I would hardly call what I write politically sanitized. And how I write here is how I write elsewhere (which is probably why I’ve been banned from many allegedly conservative places).

I criticize the Racial Right’s less useful obsessions in the same spirit that I criticize the mainstream right’s refusal to recognize racial realities; to wit, because we are running out of the time in which it is still relatively easy to ensure the survival of our race and civilization. With only a (historically) comparatively small amount of additional immigration, I believe we will have reached a point at which it will no longer be possible for Europeans to avoid recognizing their nations as now de facto multicultural (as is the case with the US). When untraditional (nonwhite) immigrant-citizens and their native-born descendants make up 20% or more of your population(s), it becomes untenable (except in the minds of racists) to maintain the public fiction that these dark-skinned persons or communities are not part of the fabric of society. Most Europeans, ignorant of history as are whites (and all peoples) everywhere, seem now to think that Islam is part of the “European project”. That position becomes more entrenched with each passing year.

Moreover, as the immigrants continue to pour in, physical/military measures become ever less certain of victory. There is an enormous white traitor (antiracist/antifascist) community across Europe. There are greater numbers of hand-wringing white liberals, as well as confused conservatives (the normal people) who know the race aliens do not belong on their soil, but who can’t formulate proper intellectual rebuttals to the hegemonic discourse of antiracist tolerance, on one ideological side, and individualism (and all it has in its favor), on the other. And allied to this treason cohort plus bewildered, uncommitted, useless majority, is a huge, militant, assertive, and ever-enlarging nonwhite presence.

If matters continue in this vein much longer, national patriots might not even win a civil ethnowar. (This is rarely admitted or even broached, except, here anyway, by me.)

Thus, anything which distracts racialists from the core issue of figuring out how to stop immigration as soon as possible, as well as deport at least the illegal aliens (the obvious first steps in a broader campaign of racial/national re-assertion and domestic conquest), is a waste of time - and should be denounced as such.

I continue not to understand why recondite issues of nationalist theory are discussed when there are so many more practical matters (including intellectual ones) demanding our attention. We don’t need to figure out every social implication of racial biology, let alone the Meaning of Life, or Mind, or whatnot. we need to end the invasions of our homelands, as rapidly as possible.

Posted by anon on Wed, 16 Feb 2011 21:03 | #

Guessedworker’s online activity isn’t limited to this blog. His presence on democracyforum.co.uk and now the Telegraph is staunchly, nakedly athwart invasion politics. It doesn’t always reach the storied shores of MR is all. Nonetheless you argue for precisely the same thing in grossly different fashion. Nothing more than that. And your criticisms are coming late; there hasn’t been any Dasein-speak in a long while.

Posted by Lee John Barnes on Fri, 11 Mar 2011 12:26 | #

I thought you chaps would enjoy commenting on this - please feel free to visit my blog and leave comments.

http://leejohnbarnes.blogspot.com/

I was just reading Eddie Morrissons little screed attacking Eddy Butler on another forum when this little gem popped up mid screed ;

” Which way then Eddy? A new party? One even more ‘modernist’ than the current shambles dressed up as a party. The British Freedom Party has already gone before you on this, with its disgraceful ‘civic’ nationalism and its sell out of racial principles; its embracement of Zionism and the Pink Culture – do you really want to go that way? “

Now lets forget the irony of Eddie Morrisson lecturing people on politics, and the fact that he represents the NF a party now with less members than Klingon speakers in the UK, and address the points he makes.

1) The Freedom Party is not civic nationalist, it is CULTURAL NATIONALIST.

Now people like Eddie, who are a bit thick, may not be capable of understanding the difference so I shall explain it.

Civic Nationalism is based on the principle that wherever you come from in the world, you are British. As long as you have a little bit of paper from some civil servant that says ‘British passport’, then civic nationalism says you are a true Briton - regardless of your indigenous status, whether you can speak English, whatever your culture and whether you are an Islamist or a Zionist. Civic Nationalism supports Multi-culturalism and the replacement of the indigenous British people by colonists. UKIP is civic nationalist, as are the Tories and Labour and Lib Dems.

Cultural Nationalism on the other hand recognises the reality that cultures are created by ethnic groups. In the case of Britain, our British culture is a creation of the indigenous ethnic British - the English, Welsh, Scottish and Anglo-Irish.

Contrary to the moronic position of white nationalists, of which Eddie is one, Cultural Nationalists recognise that races do not create cultures.

If races created cultures then every white nation in the world would speak the same language and have the same white culture, and the same applies to Africa as well as Europe in that if races create cultures then all of Africa would be one black culture with one language.

But those of us who managed to intellectualy analyse the science and reality, as opposed to simply believing Nazi propaganda films from the 1930’s shown on the History Channel, realise that it is ETHNIC groups who create cultures eg the German people created a German culture and the German language, the Anglo-Saxons created England and the English language, the Zulus created the zulu culture and zulu language the Bantu created the Bantu language and culture, the French created the French language and culture.

It is not, and never has been, races that create cultures.

Cultures are created by ethnic groups.

The Freedom party manifesto states that the party will protect and ensure that the indigenous British people remain the majority in their own homeland in perpetuity and that our indigenous British culture must remain the dominant majority culture.

Eddie, as a white nationalist, espouses a political model of racial nationalism that is about as popular as smallpox in most western democracies.

Eddie has to attack the Freedom Party as he is peddling this smallpox as the political brand of the NF.

Racial nationalism will never win mass support, though like the BNP and its brand of racial nationalism disguised as ethno-nationalism, it does attract enough people to keep the leaders of the NF and BNP in beer money, hot tubs, nice holidays and free meals.

Racial nationalism and ‘ethno-nationalism’ are not POPULIST political movements.

Cultural Nationalism is the future of British Nationalist politics.

2) The Freedom Party has not ‘embraced Zionism’.

In fact our position on this is clear - no man can be loyal to two masters.

A British citizen who is ‘loyal’ to Israel and Zionism, as David Cameron said he was at the meeting of the CST the other day, is a traitor to Britain and the British people.

You cannot be loyal to Zionism, or Islamism, and be a loyal British citizen.

EVERY BRITISH CITIZEN MUST BE LOYAL SOLELY TO THE BRITISH NATION AND THE BRITISH PEOPLE.

Those who embrace Zionism under the Freedom Party government will be regarded in the same way as we regard Islamists. Whilst Islamists represent a TERRORIST threat to our society, the Zionists through their networks in the UK represent an economic, political and media threat to our democratic system.

Any zionist, or Islamist, that wants to remain an agent of zionism or Islamism within the UK will have their passports revoked and they can go and live in Israel, the US or the Middle East or wherever else they can find to claim asylum once we have booted them out.

Loyalty to Zionism and Islamism is treason to Britain.

On the issue of Israel, the Freedom Party supports the right of Israel to exist as we are Nationalists.

We support Israeli nationalism, as opposed to Zionism which is Jewish National Socialism.

We also support the right of Iran to national self determination and support the right of the Palestinian people to form a nation of their own.

As nationalists we support the rights of all nations to national self determination.

As regards the Jewish and Muslim people in Britain, like all British people they will be regarded as British citizens with the same rights as all of us regardless of our race or religion.

Religion will become a private matter, instead of being something you can go to a tribunal and demand compensation for.

3) The issue of ‘Pink Culture’.

The Freedom Party supports the right of all homosexual people to equal rights in our society.

What we do not support are gay activists who demand extra rights in our society.

We will ensure that heterosexual couples can have civil partnerships as well as just gay people. Whilst gays can have a civil partnership with all the legal rights that accrue from such a civil partnership, heterosexual people are denied the right to have a civil partnership.

That is blatant sexual discrimination.

To give gays extra rights, such as the right to sue a hotel if they refuse to allow you to stay in the hotel, whilst heterosexual couples are denied the same right to sue if they are denied a room in the same hotel is sexual discrimination.

The domination of our society by the Pink Mafia of Peter Tatchell inspired Political Queers, will end under a Freedom Party government.

Gays will have EQUAL rights not EXTRA rights.

The era where the Pink Mafia can demand that the majority do as they demand will end.

4) And finally as someone has asked me how we intend to ensure Britain remains a nation with the indigenous people as the majority and with a British culture, our answer is simple.

We will deport every colonist in this country, as well as every illegal immigrant, illegal entrant and every foreign criminal regardless of their race or religion.

All aspects of alien cultures as manifested in Britain that seek to implant themselves in Britain and in our society and displace British cultural norms, will be criminalised.

That includes the Burkha, sharia law, halal and kosher food and all other non-British cultural forms.

Those that refuse to integrate into our British culture will be deported back where they came, or where their family originally came from.

Our mission is to deport enough colonists so that the indigenous British people remain the indigenous majority in perpetuity and that British culture is once again the dominant culture in Britain.

In order to do that then the politics we espouse must be populist.

We support cultural integration not racial assimilation.

Cultural Integration states that everyone who is a British citizen must be British both in loyalty and culture.

It is not the role of government to tell people who to mate with, so we will not demand racial assimilation - regardless of what race you are as long as you British by culture and loyalty then you are a British citizen with equal rights.

It is the failure of British Nationalists to understand the fundamental reality that if immigrants are not forced to integrate into British culture that they retain their ancestral cultural norms, such as having vast numbers of kids who then represent a demographic threat to the majority of the indigenous British people, that has caused the demographic and cultural crisis in our country.

When immigrants are forced to integrate into British culture then they start having the same numbers of children as the indigenous British people, and this will ensure they do not become a demographic threat to our majority status.

Our twin policies of Integration and deportation of all colonists and illegals etc will ensure that the demographic time bomb that is ticking away in our nation is defused.

Unlike Eddie we are not in the grip of a Third Reich nostalgia.

Unlike Eddie and the NF we are not a small cult of nazis goosestepping into political insignificance.

I created the ideological model of Cultural Nationalism for the Freedom Party.

It is populist and non-racist and is supported by over half the British electorate.

When the party has dealt with the rump of malcontents that refuse to accept reality and vanish back into the political wilderness from which they have come, we can then concentrate on getting the Freedom Party known to the public.

Whilst Eddie can continue to sup from his cups of nazism and cheap cider, we will be winning the ideological debate and the hearts and minds of our people.

Posted by Captainchaos on Fri, 11 Mar 2011 13:07 | #

You cannot be loyal to Zionism, or Islamism, and be a loyal British citizen.

I find it questionable that one can be loyal to the indigenous British people and yet support the citizenship in perpetuity of muds so long these comport themselves as ‘civically British’.

Some related questions: Is the miscegenation of blonde English women with negroes in keeping with the spirit of ‘civic Britishness’? In winning the “hearts and minds” of the British people, ‘civic’ and otherwise, will you be displaying the mulatto offspring of these happy pairings on promotional posters for your burgeoning political party? If not, couldn’t that be construed as ‘racist’ and hence not in keeping with the spirit of ‘civic Britishness’?

Btw, isn’t Griffo branching out into porn these days?

Posted by Lee John Barnes on Fri, 11 Mar 2011 13:56 | #

Yet again captain, you think you can use illegal racist abuse on this site such as using the word ‘mud’ which merely ensures the owner of this site can be arrested.

Show some damned respect for GW man.

What you cannot understand captain is called ‘reality’.

You would rather attack those who would create an evolutionary leap forward and who would engage with the public and win political power via the ballot box, in pursuit of your impossible, revolutionary, despised cult of nazism.

You would rather we lose, than anything but Nazism win = pathetic.

As fotr the issue of who people have kids with = that is simply their business, it is not the business of government to force them mate with, or not with, anyone.

If you cannot see that ‘less numbers of immigrants in Britain = less probability of British people mixing with immigrants ’ - then you need a check up from the neck up.

As for Griffin - why expect a moral party when it is led by a man who has dumped morality for greed and self serving.

Posted by Hamish on Fri, 11 Mar 2011 14:09 | #

Btw, isn’t Griffo branching out into porn these days?

What the fuck?

Please tell me this is some kind of metaphor.

Posted by Bill on Wed, 04 May 2011 15:45 | #

By courtesy of Gates of Vienna via 21st Century British Nationalism. 2.5.2011

How much longer can the elites keep this from the masses?

Preparing for Ragnarök by Fjordman

I have increasingly come to suspect that Western civilization is not merely under threat, but that it is in fact already dead. It probably died many years ago; we just didn’t notice at the time. The West is currently in such an advanced state of decline that a collapse of sorts can no longer be avoided. The established momentum is too great, and the ruling oligarchs are not even trying to hit the brakes. A collapse will happen. It is only a question of how we deal with this, and whether we manage to carve out a good-sized homeland for our people afterwards.

Read all.

http://gatesofvienna.blogspot.com/2011/05/preparing-for-ragnarok.html

Comments:

Post a comment:

Existential Issues

DNA Nations

Categories

Contributors

Links

MR Central & News

Comments