|
|
|
Richard Barnbrook airheads like a pro Three weeks today Londoners elect their Mayor and Assembly members for the next four years. Under the complex party list voting system, any party bettering 5% of first choice votes is thought likely to win one of the 11 indirectly elected seats on the Assembly. No one doubts that the BNP vote will pass the 5% mark. So this will be a significant first for them, and a step nearer to challenging for representation in parliament. The leader of the London party of the BNP is Richard Barnbrook, and today he was accorded a Q&A interview by the BBC News website. Considering this was the same BBC which sent in mole Jason Gwynne to “report” on the party in 2004, the questioning seems to have been pretty friendly. This unfamiliar situation begs correction. Accordingly, I have decided to report on the BNP’s steady progress towards electability, as it is expressed in Barnbrook’s bite-sized politics. I’ve cheated a little, of course, by reconstructing the questions and answers from the BBC article.
OK, well the answers to the first two questions are acceptable. But is the BNP a racist party? Any racism here belongs to those, like the BBC, who deny “real Londoners” the rights of free expression and association. The racists are the chastisers, the demonisers, the shutters-down of conversation. Racism is the taking away of London from its real people. Racism is black history month taught to white schoolchildren, while the vast achievements of our people are ignored. The English, and English Londoners in particular, are the most aggrieved, the most disadvantaged people in this country - and that’s racism. They are the ones being diplaced and dispossessed - the only ones. Racism. And yet the BBC interviewer asks if the only party endeavouring to defend them is “racist”. Alas, Barnbrook seems to have uttered not a word of that. And on the “far right” issue? Right and left belong to an outmoded and unproductive analysis. The BNP is offering the indigenous British hope for the future. The three mainstream parties are offering to bury them. Is hope far right and extremist? Is dispossession somehow not extremist - indeed, a respectable party political platform? But Barnbrook did not pursue that line. On the rather important matter of who stays and who goes, little Richard’s answer was, frankly, bloody useless. The BNP is a party of and for the indigenous peoples of these islands, and for no one else. It exists to return this country to its rightful owners. It shall not swerve from this sacred task, but shall pursue it with the utmost diligence - as well as with all the generosity and humanity which our people would expect. But pursue this it must and will. But Barnbrook didn’t say any of that, either. And then there’s Britishness. That old sore. Very popular with Mr Brown just now. But he is a Scot ruling over the English, and fearing for his legitimacy. The BNP does not waste its breath on an “identity” that was never more than a capacious bag into which, today, the government seeks to stuff Turks, Russians, Cypriots, Albanians, Chinese, Jews, Afghans ... at least 170 different peoples, all connected, supposedly, by something called British values. It’s absurd. A racist trick on Britain’s three true peoples. But, once again, that isn’t what Barnbrook told his interviewer. And as for his remarks about British Moslems, dear God, the man is perfectly hopeless. And then we come to that final remark. Here it is again: “If the other parties had done their jobs properly in the first place, this party wouldn’t exist. It’s as simple as that.” Only a man completely innocent of philosophy could utter such a statement. So ... if the mainstream parties had “done their jobs properly” there would be no call for any critique of liberalism or egalitarianism. No need for a new and natural vision of Man and society. No need of thought at all, presumably. Just drive on down the good old liberal highway to hell cos, to be honest, it hadn’t occurred to anyone that this might not be a good idea. Certainly, it hasn’t occurred to Richard Barnbrook. But that’s democracy, I suppose. Ambitious airheads talking errant nonsense at scarcely interested housewives for three weeks every four years. Comments:2
Posted by diamed on Thu, 10 Apr 2008 07:48 | # I doubt someone who isn’t even convinced of the morality of his own position can convince anyone else of it. Why can’t we have someone say: “I’m white and I’m proud of it. Our race is the most magnificent crown jewel of the earth, there is very little good to be said of humanity outside of whites, almost every great achiever in both the arts and sciences has been white and nearly 7 billion people are alive today due to white inventions, ingenuity, compassion, and fairness. Whites could have wiped out the entire rest of the world but we didn’t, instead we shared our culture and technology with others and traded peacefully with everyone. Who else would have done that? As a member of the UK, the country that personally contributed a large portion of the white race’s grandeur, I want the UK to maintain and preserve that legacy of greatness. I think our ancestors were great, and wish our descendants to be great, in an unbroken chain of allegiance to the white race, white culture, and white values. Put that in your pipe and smoke it.” 3
Posted by Bill on Thu, 10 Apr 2008 07:59 | # None of this matters, ok, so the BNP aren’t the sharpest tools in the shed, at this stage of the game all the BNP have to do is exist, it was never going to be any different. There are signs that people are beginning to get seriously P***ed off, people don’t care about the finer points of the debate, it’s only here and in the media that the minutia of the debate is of interest. All people want right now is a focal point for their anger, nothing else matters, these people are sick of having no say, the media have rammed so much sh*t down their throats they are choking on it. I repeat, all that the BNP have to do (at this stage) is to exist, to be there. Sorry for language! 4
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Thu, 10 Apr 2008 12:07 | #
Whatever for? Your language was superb. All of it. Diamed’s too. And I’d hope to see lots more of the exactly same — here and all over the ‘net. Oh, you meant letting off steam with a few ... “select words”? By God man, it’s about time! Better that way than grabbing your parliamentary representative by the lapels in the street and giving him a good shaking till he listens to you! Safer too! 5
Posted by Napoleon Wilson on Thu, 10 Apr 2008 12:30 | # Bill wrote: They have to be more that that in my opinion. They have to be electable as well and that’s what Nick Griffin has made them. Hopefully this coming general election will see them gain a few parliamentary seats. That should polarize the parties and see the disappearance of the utterly pointless Liberal Democrats with the BNP becoming the third force in the election after that. If or when that happens they can either become more of a proper White Nationalist party or I shall switch my support to one that is like the NPP or NF. The important thing at this stage is to just get Nationalism into parliament (even if it is watered down) and into the White publics conciousness. 6
Posted by haramzada on Thu, 10 Apr 2008 12:33 | # “Right and left” no one can comprehend. (No one even knows if they’re polar opposites.) But this isn’t the BNP’s or any single BNP spokeman’s fault. “Neither right nor left” is the backbone-inanity of National Bolshevism, Radical Traditionalism, the Nouvelle Droite in general, and so on. Jörg Hähnel said the same thing regarding the NPD — this late in the game, they’re all just quoting the safest most ambiguous line to get by. I’m not aware of any political movement in history succeeding on a platform of “neither here nor there”, but what can you do. 7
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Thu, 10 Apr 2008 12:40 | # I should add I for one like Barnbrook quite a bit and I hope he rises in the party (and of course wins lots of elections including the London mayoralty!). He needs some coaching on how to turn the tables on arrogant pro-non-white interviewers trying to trick our side into looking bad, that’s all. These toadies of the ______ (fill in the blank; I don’t want to say it too often lest I draw more fire for being repetitive) are easy to show up for what they are but you can’t think up all the rejoinders on the spur of the moment because they themselves, these slimy interviewers, have been coached beforehand by experts of the Saul Alinsky stripe, and know exactly how to fluster you and tar you with the tar brush in the eyes of the unreflective. Barnbrook needed a prior coaching session, nothing more. At the very least in fact, he’d have benefitted from reading Stanley’s and The Realist’s comments the other day on “What to say when the other side call you a ‘racist.’ ” A degree of open, guileless sincerity in a man running for office, coupled with a naïve expectation on his part of meeting with fair play, has its charm and may have worked well in the past when Brits were actually ruled by Brits, but to venture among today’s political wolves you’ll need a bit more than that to come out of the encounter in one piece. He’ll do better as he learns the tricks of the other side and exactly the best rhetorical one-liners for countering them. In this vein, what about making a link at MR’s home page going to a concise distillation of the strategies that have been put forth by Stanley, The Realist, and the best among The Realist’s commenters in his comments thread (I saw some good ones over there)? Lots of people ask about how to counter the other side’s tactics in this matter: it would be a link that would get lots of traffic. (And who knows, Barnbrook’s handlers might even log on, the night before his next interview?) 8
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Thu, 10 Apr 2008 12:52 | #
And incorporating GW’s excellent suggestions right in the present log entry of course! 9
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Thu, 10 Apr 2008 13:10 | # Napoleon Wilson, you make good points but I wouldn’t call it “White Nationalism.” I’d stay strictly away from appellations of that sort. And not only because they have too much potential shock value (which of course they do — it would be sheer insanity to refer to our stuff as White Nationalism and expect to get elected, utter lunacy). It’s sort of to do with Stanley’s and Bo’s rejection of “being named by the other side.” (And yes, here I’m well aware that I violate their recommendations in that regard every time I use the word Negro and some others but that’s a whole other discussion.) Don’t let the other side succeed in making us view ourselves as “White Nationalists” when all we are is normal folk. That’s the crux. We’re not White Nationalists. We’re ordinary decent apolitical folk who know nothing about “White Nationalism” but respectfully insist on redress of a grievance so enormous, dangerous, and unjust that it’s unprecedented, a grievance everyone will agree is legitimate and must no longer be ignored or swept under the rug from embarrassment or worse. It’s time we all had a frank look. That’s what we are, nothing to do with “White Nationalism.” Nothing. We’re normal apolitical ordinary folk who’d much rather be doing something else but we refuse until this thing receives a proper hearing and is properly addressed. When we call ourselves “White Nationalists” or even think of ourselves as that we’re sort of letting the other side name us. Don’t do that. Normalness needs no special name. Only abnormalness does. We’re normal and need no special name, thank you. 10
Posted by Englander on Thu, 10 Apr 2008 14:17 | #
11
Posted by Lurker on Thu, 10 Apr 2008 14:37 | # May I recommend “Why does 1% of the population undemocratically rule Britain?” and correspondingly “Why does 3% rule undemocratically 97% in the United States?” 12
Posted by Proofreader on Thu, 10 Apr 2008 19:42 | # With the likes of Barnbrook at the helm, the BNP could very well follow the path of the Front National to political irrelevance. 13
Posted by Guessedworker on Fri, 11 Apr 2008 00:09 | # Fred, That’s not a bad idea. Maybe I’ll open a thread on it. Englander, The Griffin clique would look upon us as Cromwell looked upon The Sealed Knot. 14
Posted by john on Fri, 11 Apr 2008 09:24 | # The BNP has training weekends, if your a member and up for it, put together a program and submit it. 15
Posted by Bert Rustle on Fri, 11 Apr 2008 11:19 | # The BBC Radio 4 program Today (about three minutes in) had an article with a representative of the newspaper, Mr Martin, which has published a BNP advert and the UAF. Reasonable attempts were made by the presenter to keep the UAF spokeswoman on topic, which in my opinion represents a dramatic change in BBC policy. Indeed the BBC presenter did not Frame the article with the usual smears either. The newspaper spokesman Mr Martin had an Irish accent and mentioned how Sinn Fein had been brought into the political process. The UAF introduced Nazis, 1930’s etc. Mr Martin said something like ... we do not need to go back to the time before television to take our behaviour for today, it is a different environment today, we had the same dilemma with Sinn Fein ... this is the UK, not China, every voice needs to be heard ... In my opinion, a lot of work has gone into his presentation, possibly developed during the campaign to get PIRA-Sinn Fein into the political mainstream. In my opinion, the fact that this interview was broadcast on the BBC in primetime is a breakthrough for democracy in the UK. The radio interview has many illuminating arguments which may be helpful to BNP canvassers on the doorstep. In my opinion, this is the most significant broadcast on the BNP I have ever heard on the BBC. More generally, there are (ex-) communists and (ex-) CND members in the British Government and those with rather more serious convictions than speaking in public or distributing leaflets who are in prominent public positions in Ulster and many other places. Consequently I see no reason why Nick Griffin or indeed Keith Best or Jonathan Aitken should not hold similar positions. 16
Posted by Guessedworker on Fri, 11 Apr 2008 12:37 | # That was worth listening to, Bert. Thanks very much. It’s good to see white extinctionist advocacy, in the form of Sabi Dalu, unable to communicate its “moral analysis” through the usual stratagem of isolating survivalist sentiment. The whole shooting match hinges on an “Extinctionism +” scenario that gives extinctionism a pass ... just presumes it’s right and proper to write off survivalism as morally contemptible. Without the mediating BBC’s presumption, without the mediating mainstream parties acquiescence, extinctionism cannot defeat survivalism on moral grounds. It’s all down to that damned “+”. Without it, all that’s left for extinctionism is the hard threat of violence, as we saw in the Griffin/Irving debate at Oxford, or the softer face of censorship and slur. This, actually, betrays a position of great weakness. How could it be otherwise, given the true moral nature of what is being proposed? Perhaps the real function of the low-brow BNP is to shatter the “Extinctionism +” scenario, and free more thoughtful people to focus on the evil in process. 17
Posted by Bill on Fri, 11 Apr 2008 15:09 | # A measured rant I think my previous assertion that all the BNP have to do is hang in there, to exist, to be there, is essentially correct. Ever since our benevolent enemy Margaret Hodge trumpeted the BNP to fame in local elections of 2006, this is exactly what the BNP has done – it has hung in there, not only has it hung in there, it has defiantly grown, it has become a political voice to be reckoned with, it is a force which is now firmly twinkling on the radar screens of Mr Brown and his ilk, who, as I write, are heading for political oblivion. The BNP has driven its standard it into the ground, a clarion call to the people of this beleaguered nation to gather round, announcing to the good people of Britain, look we are here! This is us the BNP, we’re just like you, we’re sick of the things that you are sick off, we are sick of our country being trashed, we are sick of our country being taken from us and handed over. We are sick of being pushed aside, we are sick of strangers being given preference, we are sick of being called racist, we are sick of being called homophobes, we are sick of being referred to as the far right, we are sick to death of all of it, we are just ordinary people who only want to get on with our lives and be left alone, we are getting angry, very angry, it’s time to make a stand - we have had enough! This last two years has been a small step for mainstream politics but a giant step for the BNP. Barking and Dagenham is light years ago, the progress made by the brave people of the BNP is unbelievable, it really does take courage of a special kind for ordinary folk to stand up and be counted, knowing full well they will be vilified, spat on (literally) physically attacked, arrested on spurious hate charges and imprisoned, Winston Churchill’s words resonate here - “We shall Never Give In” Rather than being intimidated, the followers of the BNP are growing in stature by the day, the planning and organisation of those at the top must be awesome, the party has gained a professionalism and stature of a politically challenging force, a momentum has been achieved that is now unstoppable, maybe not tomorrow, but soon, a BNP candidate will be coming to a place near you. Unknown to them, our smug arrogant enemy has already lost this war, an enemy that is as so sick and twisted with evil is no match for the British people, whose values of common sense and fair play, have held true for centuries if our cause is just and right then it will be seen to be just and right, and our cause is just and right.. Who do think you are kidding Mr Brown, if you think old England’s done? I hardly watch any television, but I do watch the news programmes, (BBC News and its flagship programme Newsnight.) The BBC is the face of my enemy, and I want to know what my evil enemy looks like, what he says, how he says it, what lies he is telling today, what gloss and spin he using to fool us, to humiliate us, to deceive us, to betray us. Do you know? These people are very ordinary looking people, they could be anyone, your neighbour even, you could pass them in the street and you wouldn’t give them a second glance, and yet these are the evil scum who are the useful idiots of the authors of our plight. The irony is, we are actually paying these people handsome salaries and yet it is they who are championing our demise, we are even having to buy the rope with which to hang us with. In my earlier, post I unthinkingly referred to the BNP as not being the sharpest tools in the shed, this I regret because what I meant to say was the BNP are not yet media savvy and it shows in a poor light, they are rather naïve and defensive and always seem to be on the back foot. (But hey! who am I to talk?) The bravest thing I ever do is stroke the keyboard in the comfort of my own home. I really do believe that Gt. Britain Ltd and its people, must go on the offensive, enough of this apologising and deference, all we are doing is handing the iniative to the enemy, enough of - I’m not a racist but. It is we, who are the natural heir to the high ground for it is they who are the racist, intolerant thugs - not us. The have bamboozled us with their deconstruction and their relativism, with their no such thing as truth, their hallucinatory ravings are the product of a diseased mind of a lifetime of mind blowing substances abuse, is it any wonder ordinary folk are mesmerised. I know it is easy for me to say, but the BNP and our people must take a more determined stance in defence of our life’s view, everyone engaged in this battle must not only reject the insanity of double speak and the evil of their cause - but must counter with the rhetoric of good old common sense and fair play. The games afoot, the initiative must be wrested from the foe, it is not until the BNP tells it as it is will they really begin to win the masses over and harvest the fruits of its long hard slog - Victory. 18
Posted by Guessedworker on Fri, 11 Apr 2008 15:37 | # Bill: This is us the BNP, we’re just like you, we’re sick of the things that you are sick off, we are sick of our country being trashed, we are sick of our country being taken from us and handed over ... The problem is that what you say is true of the membership of the party. It is not true of the ruling clique. It is not true of Nick Griffin, Lee Barnes, Arthur Kemp, Martin Wingfield, Simon Darby, Mark Collett and various others. These people cannot represent the will of the people, and some of them may even be there in order to do precisely the opposite. I exempt Barnbrook, and I understand, to a degree, why he must speak softly: elected representatives must be able to demonstrate that they will serve the whole of the electorate or they are not allowed to serve. The danger with that, as we see in Barnbrook’s BBC interview, is loss of control over principles. 19
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Fri, 11 Apr 2008 18:02 | #
We are not the far right, whatever that is. I for one have no idea what “the far right” is and don’t care what it is. I don’t know any political theory, I don’t need to know any, and I don’t want to know any. I want the race-replacement to stop so I can get back to doing the middle-of-the-road things I like. We are ordinary folk who in 1955 would have been called strictly middle of the road (and I have no more idea what that is than what far right is, except that in 1955 we’d have been called it, and as far as I’m concerned it’s 1955 right now, so we’re still it: nothing, not one jot or tittle, not so much as an atom of reality, has fundamentally changed however much the other side wishes to convince that it has: it hasn’t. It’s 1955. Right now.). In my humble opinion none of us should ever officially call himself far right, or even “right,” or accept without protest the other side’s calling him that. I consider myself first of all normal, that is, opposed to degenerateness in any of its forms gaining ascendancy over normalness in society, and second of all (if I’m forced to choose from among the conventional categories) vaguely liberal, leftish, or what is called “progressive.” So, I’m normal or, if I must choose, “progressive.” I am NOT “conservative,” or in any way “right-wing” or “far right.” I will never let the other side so categorize me. What am I doing here if I’m apolitical? What I’m doing here is someone’s forcibly changing my race, that’s what! If you starve a man and he rebels is he a communist? No, he’s furious and with reason. If you replace a white man’s race with every variety of Negro on Earth and he rebels is he a far-rightist? No, he’s furious. And with reason. 20
Posted by Nux Gnomica on Fri, 11 Apr 2008 18:48 | # Good stuff here from Larry Auster:
http://www.amnation.com/vfr/archives/010326.html And interesting stuff from the Hebrew University:
http://www.nature.com/news/2008/080404/full/news.2008.738.html 21
Posted by Bill on Fri, 11 Apr 2008 19:15 | # Fred ” I for one have no idea what “the far right” is and don’t care what it is.” In the context of my piece, Far Right is an expression of hate for no other reason than we disagree with what they stand for, it is the same with all their slurs. If you don’t agree with them your a fascist or whatever - pathetic really. GW “The problem is that what you say is true of the membership of the party. It is not true of the ruling clique.”
However, it is funny (funny strange that is) you should write that sentence, for I myself have had bad vibes ever since the B&D elections in 2006, but not having any prior dealings (as it were) with BNP I kept these thoughts to myself - that is until now of course. I have never really understood the thrust of the BNP website for instance, to me it is just as much an anti jihad website than a nationalist orientated website, and to me there is a big difference, and if I have learnt anything on my quest for what is going on today it is to spot the difference, because everything is not what it seems - in short, you have to run everything through fine filter to get the gist - and I’m not very good at that game. (but it is something at which you excel) Anti jihad websites are two a penny, the main accusation I would lay at their door is that the are not anti immigration per se, but only object to a certain type of immigrant they don’t want in their midst, which is to my mind is at odds with a nationalist website who (I suppose) should oppose all immigration. It is at this point the intellectual must step in and sort out. To go down the road of this theme, would open a whole can of worms, imaginations could run riot - as for myself, I think I’ll wait till the film comes out. 22
Posted by Bill on Fri, 11 Apr 2008 19:34 | # I knew there was something else, we’re not talking a Ribbentrop pact are we? 23
Posted by Revolution Harry on Fri, 11 Apr 2008 20:55 | # ‘It is not true of the ruling clique. It is not true of Nick Griffin, Lee Barnes, Arthur Kemp, Martin Wingfield, Simon Darby, Mark Collett and various others. These people cannot represent the will of the people, and some of them may even be there in order to do precisely the opposite’. I’m intrigued. Could you elaborate? 24
Posted by Guessedworker on Fri, 11 Apr 2008 23:52 | # Harry, It is in the nature of political movements that their service to a popular vision or ideal will, by degrees, transmogrify into service to the interests of an elite. But the situation in the BNP is worse - much worse - than that. It is clear from Nick Griffin’s deeply unsavoury response to the November Mutiny that his and his clique’s interest have always been separated from the popular cause of national renewal and reclamation which we all understand and applaud. Ultimately, the BNP never existed for the latter purpose. It existed from the beginning for Nick Griffin’s benefit, and for the benefit of those whom he has gathered round him. His long history of forcing the departure of talented people while cleaving through thin and thin to complete duds now makes sense. The BNP is his train set and no one else is allowed to play with it. This is a disaster for nationalism in this country. The party to which loyal hearts must look for national salvation - for there is no other - is utterly compromised. It will never achieve the intellectual or moral standing required to perform its historic function. When I post on anti-BNP threads in the mainstream media I still lend my support to the BNP. But I rather suspect it will peak at no more than 10-15% of electoral support, and then enter upon a decline as its flaws are exposed. Something much more heavy-weight and credible will be needed for the real job of work. 25
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Sat, 12 Apr 2008 16:55 | #
The side I identify with, whatever you want to call it (I call it neither left nor right but “normal”), supports all reasonable conservationism and environmental protection including assuring clean air and water, preservation of rural areas, forests, wildlife (including coastal marine life), avoidance of human overpopulation, of urban ugliness and bloating, of suburban sprawl and so on. The “pro-conservation” Sierra Club leadership (which I prefer to call neither left nor right but “degenerate”) doesn’t. JPod, a Jewish neocon (a redundant expression, like “Irish-Catholic Sinn Feiner”) feels the appropriate population size of the continental U.S. is over five hundred million while Carl Pope, a “left-winger,” and Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, and President Bush, all “conservatives” or “right-wingers,” show no sign whatsoever of disagreeing with Pope and JPod but Ron Paul, a libertarian, Steve Sailer, a “citizenist,” and Ralph Nader, a far-left-wing “populist,” do. So on this subject I draw the lines differently from “left” and “right” — and on many other subjects too ... so many, in fact, that the whole categorization has to be scrapped and re-drawn on new criteria. 27
Posted by Nux Gnomica on Sat, 12 Apr 2008 18:03 | #
That’s assuming he’s not being blackmailed. He almost certainly is being. I think he’s intellectually superior to Brown and Cameron, at least in the sense of understanding our situation better, but like them he’ll have to do what’s best for the only People who matter. See Larry Auster’s comments above. 28
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Sun, 13 Apr 2008 00:23 | #
Any idea who would be blackmailing him? You mean MI-5 in return for not going to jail for that last “hate crime” thing they tried him for? A deal was struck? 29
Posted by Guessedworker on Sun, 13 Apr 2008 00:49 | # Blackmail is something we can only speculate about, Fred. The EiE group are much closer to the action, and it’s apparent from their thread discussions that they have the same suspicions but no facts. Incidentally, I’m sure you can imagine the kind of behaviour the suspicions tend to be about. 30
Posted by Revolution Harry on Sun, 13 Apr 2008 02:00 | # As far as I’m concerned the jury’s out on Nick Griffin and I’d be more than a little suspicious of anything you read on EIE. I saw a video interview with NG a while back when he fully accepted he could only take the party so far as he had too much ‘baggage’. The actions of the EIE group leave me far more suspicious of them than NG. For all his faults (and yes, he has many) he’s bought the party a long way and created a pretty efficient machine. It’s to be hoped that someone from within the party’s new found members and supporters is able, at some point in the future, to take advantage of that. If he’s done nothing else he’s at least forced many of the issues out into the open. 31
Posted by Nux Gnomica on Sun, 13 Apr 2008 16:03 | #
http://lilith-stuff.blogspot.com/2008/04/brown-misses-school-you-can-just-tell.html Griffin has an impossible job, but he is at least helping people to see the connection between pictures #1 and #2. 32
Posted by LeedsLass on Sun, 13 Apr 2008 16:49 | # A great site, which I came to from your posting on today’s article by Nigel Hastilow in the Telegraph, so ‘thank you’. It seems to me that an Extremist party is one which just blithely carries on its merry way without listening to the electorate and, if things get a little too much for them, they bring in laws, rules, regulations to subdue dissent but under a different guise. Add to that 645 (okay, I’ll be generous, say 545) politicians who’ve discovered how good life can be on their gravy train in Parliament whilst they await their pensions with the EU, who support government policy come hell or highwater and tell me what is an ‘extremist’ party? Labour or the BNP? Conservatives or the BNP? Does anyone realise that in Wrexham yesterday the Lib/Lab/Con marched with Communists? http://www.bnp.org.uk/2008/04/12/communist-tory-labour-libdem-alliance-reveals-its-ugly-face/ I suggest people google searchlight or uaf to find out the true ‘knuckle-dragging, neanderthal thugs’ who want your vote. Under FPTP the BNP will never create a majority government (in common with the LibDems) but just wait for the May 1st elections and see how many are voted into office in the local and mayoral elections. We live in interesting times! 33
Posted by Bill on Sun, 13 Apr 2008 17:41 | # Thinking it Over Something isn’t right about the BNP, to me it doesn’t feel right, and I’ve already touched on my reasons why. See my previous Post. Do the elites perceive the BNP to be a threat? If the do, then why didn’t they quash them from the start, or was the efforts to imprison Griffin the defining moment. I think the BNP are a threat to the elites, and the elites know it too, GW’s 10 -15% share of the vote tops, hmmm - if only I was a betting man. I’ve been around long enough to know that people will vote for a chimpanzee if it’s wearing the right coloured rosette, nationalism will be the only game in town soon, 10 - 15% will be exceeded, the two party trough-fest is bust. I think a deal has gone down, ‘lay off us and we’ll give you less hassle,’ a Ribbentrop pact as I said. In reality, the BNP is in its infancy, barely off the ground, people, although feeling the slack in the rope getting tauter, have yet to feel much more pain, the inexorable shift to the BNP (or similar) will continue. A lot of people think Griffin is charismatic, I would hardly use that term myself, matey perhaps with pint in hand. What draws me to him is his feeling for his land and its traditions; I do not think he could write so feelingly about our heritage if he didn’t actually feel these things. I took another recent look at the BNP website, perhaps the ant jihad theme is not so dominant and nationalist issues are more to the fore, but I still think they are going softly-softly, people are getting peed off, I know it’s only my point of view, but I think they should put their foot on the accelerator - the time is ripe. The coming London elections will be another watershed, (like B&D) I expect the BNP to improve, (maybe substantially) but the Conservatives will be the main winners, which means the tide has gone out on the New Labour project. Is that of any use to us here? Cameron is multi-culti globaliser, so how different will things be? Oh, there’s no doubt things will be better managed by a better class of manager, but I can’t help thinking the direction will be the same, tally Ho! Globalisation Another question that arises is, as the BNP (or similar) gains in prominence, will they become a beacon for Europe? - Perhaps they will. It is my view, all of these things cannot be discussed in isolation, there are many other (external) balls in the air to be juggled that affect these matters - alas, far too many for me to pontificate on this morning. 34
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Sun, 13 Apr 2008 17:43 | #
Then FPTP may have to be scrapped. Look, the point is nothing’s impossible and what can be done can be undone. The other side didn’t get where it is today, with us completely on the ropes, by nay-saying. LeedsLass I’m not accusing you of nay-saying, I’m just making a fundamental point: we can win this thing and whatever it will take to accomplish that, we can bring about. There is nothing — nothing — that people on our side should consider impossible or “will never happen.” There’s nothing in this game that “will never happen,” nothing. Everything — everything — can happen, but may require dedication and hard work, that’s all. How does anyone imagine the other side did it? Decades of dedication and hard work, that’s how. It didn’t just drop from the sky into their lap. Replacing every white man, woman, and child in the U.K., France, Holland, Belgium, Sweden, and Norway with a Negro would have been thought “impossible” in 1955 yet it’s exactly what the other side is in the process of pulling off. While we were distracted they rolled up their sleeves and quietly set to work, never slackening for decades. Now they’re enjoying the fruits of their labor. What we want is within reach, if we do the same: roll up our sleeves, get to work, never slacken, and never say “nay,” “it’s impossible,” or “it can’t be done.” It can all be done. There’s a way to do every bit of it. In fact, it’s going to be done, the only question being whether with violence peaceably. Pray God the latter. But one way or another we’ll get there. 35
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Sun, 13 Apr 2008 17:47 | # For Yanks, “FPTP” is “First past the post” as distinct from proportional representation. 36
Posted by LeedsLass on Sun, 13 Apr 2008 18:28 | # Fred, all I am saying is that the only ones capable of changing electoral procedure are those in power. It will always be FPTP in Gt.Britain because that is our history, our constitution. Even the LibDems can’t make inroads. Proportional representation only produces weak government - would we like the 62 general elections that Italy has had in 63 years? I doubt it. The way for BNP is slow but sure. 37
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Sun, 13 Apr 2008 18:44 | # All right, point taken, LeedsLass. But I hope my central point was also gotten across — in this task that lies ahead of us, nothing is impossible. All options are “on the table,” as the political expression goes, and that means “all.” We will do what it takes, and no compromise will be struck: we demand full restoration of what’s been taken away from us and that means racially and ethnoculturally. (Sorry most of my post above wound up in italics — I didn’t mean to do that; I must’ve omitted to close an italics tag. Made me look angrier than I am, which of course is impossible, as I’m as angry as it gets.) 38
Posted by Arthur Lincoln on Sun, 13 Apr 2008 18:55 | # I have read the posts on this thread with interest and it is obvious that many of the posters have a far greater understanding of political intrigue than I do. From an ordinary working man’s perspective the leadership of the BNP at this time is not important. What is important is the fact that more and more people, from various backgrounds, are prepared to vote for them. 39
Posted by LeedsLass on Sun, 13 Apr 2008 19:47 | # Hear, hear Arthur. Common Purpose anyone? It really is time this government was shown the door. 40
Posted by Bill on Sun, 13 Apr 2008 20:50 | # Nux, In my book, Auster’s a pretty smart guy (I’m never quite sure what is standing is here) He is fully up to speed on what this is all about, but naturally views things from a different angle than we. I read one of his pieces that had me puzzled for some time, and that was, why should the Jews champion a movement (mass none white immigration into white Western nations) when by doing so would allow millions of Muslims, (who I take it are not over fond of the Jews) among their midst? This just didn’t make sense to me. Anyway, Auster wrote a piece, I think it was called ‘Why do Jews welcome Muslims to America?’ and his take was (very simply) that Jews feared Muslims less than than they feared whites (boogie man) and by means of non white immigration would dissolve WASP hegemony. Assuming this to be the case, it still doesn’t convince me, but he should know - he is a Jew. By the way, how do non whites generally view/perceive Jews? The whole business under discussion here, Liberals, Jews, Islam, Conservatism, immigration, race replacement, postmodernism (hardly discussed) Liberal guilt, Globalism (NWO) etc. etc. is a minefield littered with inconsistencies, and to untangle these inconsistencies (which you must do to make sense of any of it) is a paistaking job. (well it is for me). Here’s something else that puzzled me. Why do the the BBC champion the Palestinians against Israel? The BBC is Jew dominated, why then should they support the Palestinians, (and Hezbollah) - to me it didn’t make sense. (By the way, I’ve gravitated away from Auster here) The answer suddenly came to me, that this was another inconsistency in liberal thinking, for this is where their book of rules on victimhood kicks in. It works like this, Liberals classify Palestine as a victim ok - who says so, liberals say so, why do they say so, because Palestinians are an oppressed people, and if you are lucky enough to to be classed as an oppressed people, then you are on the gravy train to victimhood. In short, victimhood status trumps everything. Simple isn’t it? I find Auster so useful in such matters, his lazar sharp scalpel surgically cuts to the chase (pun intended) he is brilliant. Was/is he a lawyer? His insight into Liberal thinking must be unsurpassed. 41
Posted by Bill on Sun, 13 Apr 2008 21:35 | # More of an overview really The problem with what we are discussing here is that the subject matter, (RR) is so vast, it’s like the proverbial onion, multi layered, the makings of the project has been with us for decades for these people are not in a hurry, (but there does seem to be a surge on the eve of the implementation of the NWO, (Globalism) Personally, I tend to suffer from the ‘can’t see the wood for the trees’ syndrome, I get too close up and personal and that is fatal - so I force myself to step back a little and get to try to see the bigger picture. The first thing I look at is the development of the human race and it’s existence on mother earth, what I find in general terms is that from the moment we crawled out of the swamps, human development has flat-lined, by this, I mean that for tens of thousands of years of human existence and development, mans progress barely registered on the Richter scale of human development and it is for this reason (sustainable life style(s) that man has successfully navigated his existence thus far, this situation continued until recently, (actually within less time than a blink of an eye (in historical terms). In other words, human development was catapulted from hunter- gatherer to Man on the Moon within a nanosecond of historical time – how could this giant leap have come about? I find this question fascinating, there is a train of thinking that I could subscribe to quite easily, but if I ventured down this path I would be labelled a crank of the highest order, so I shall desist and keep to the orthodox route. As I was saying, within the blink of an eye the development of man was transformed and went off the graph, to what do we owe this? Well, it was of course the discovery and ability to use and develop what we now know as fossil fuels, first in the form of coal and later oil and natural gas, the ability of man to convert these fuels into an industrialised technological life-style is familiar to us all, and it is my opinion that the consequences of this ability to produce an undreamed of unsustainable life-style, is the reason we here, are participating on this blog, I’m not altogether sold on the idea that an all embracing conspiracy, plan, call it what you will, was drawn up as a blueprint for the elimination of the white race, yes, sure it has been an idea for decades and has come to pass, but I think it has been an incremental development, taking advantage as man’s technical development progressed, (mainly air travel, electronic communication, open borders, media) in short, the architects are opportunists and can spot developing situations in which they can take advantage by influencing directions that will, in turn, advance their cause, a push here, a tweak there and hey presto - they’re on a roll and ready to go. It is these technological developments that have enabled the project to come to fruition. So where am I going with dwindling supplies of fossil fuels and RR? As I see it, the very thing that allowed the project of RR to take hold will also be responsible for the unsustainability of the project, in short, Globalisation will be finished, without an abundance of cheap energy, it just isn’t viable. When availability of cheap fuel ends, what system will replace it? It is at this point anyone can take a shot and guess how many sweets there are in the jar, from here on in, it’s anybodies guess, anything could happen, maybe the millions of aliens will trudge off back from whence they came, massive die off could occur, it seems mother nature is getting pretty peed off with the way things are going, maybe the millions of words dispatched through the ether in the wee small hours on blogs like here, will have been found to be all for nought – but at least we had fun. PS. Since penning the above, I see Prozium is showing a series of video clips entitled ‘Peak Everything’ - I could have written the script. 42
Posted by Nux Gnomica on Sun, 13 Apr 2008 22:53 | #
Antisemitism may be at work, because people who have contact with Jews generally succumb to it, but their main conscious motive is that they see Israel as western and an ally of the US, oppressing ethnics. When Saddam Hussein was an ally of the US, he was opposed by the left. When he became an opponent, they began to support him. This is Auster’s article on Jews and Muslim immigration: http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=13894 Remember that Jews are not infallible. They often support things that harm their own interests. 43
Posted by Guessedworker on Sun, 13 Apr 2008 23:45 | # Bill, Postmodernism was discussed here. I would just add that Lesson One in all metapolitical adumbrations from a nationalist perspective is that everything is liberalism. Politically, the very air we breathe from the moment of our birth till they lay us in the ground is liberalism. Other than liberalism, there have been four non-religious political systems in place in part or all of the European world since the fall of Rome. These are tribalism, feudalism, Conservatism, and Fascism. If Europeans are to survive the present high crisis, we have somehow to lay our hands upon a fifth. 44
Posted by Guessedworker on Sun, 13 Apr 2008 23:56 | # I think it is fair to say that Larry Auster is not in held in the highest esteem here. I’ve had a public disagreement with him, as have many others. Like Ian Jobling and, no doubt, all the pro-Jewish slackers, he says I am a racist and a Nazi. I say he is shill, because his purpose is, first, to demonise any white American who understands the reality of Jewish ethno-centrism; and, second, to include Jews in some austero-conservative, anti-Moslem polity. 45
Posted by Count Sudoku on Mon, 14 Apr 2008 04:35 | # First, Fred’s post about how we are centerists and the opposition are extremists was excellent. They are the extremists pushing for white genocide while we are the centerists who oppose it. I’m going to plagarize that bit. Whenever one of “us” is attacked verbally this way we should immediately go on the offensive by saying something like Fred said. Second, Auster is pretty good but he has a huge blind spot regarding the jews. I recommend Bill and others in his position check out http://age-of-treason.blogspot.com/ where in March there was a huge discussion about Auster about this subject. 46
Posted by Nux Gnomica on Mon, 14 Apr 2008 11:17 | #
I don’t hold him in the highest esteem, but within his limitations he is very good. This is crimethink:
http://www.amnation.com/vfr/archives/010326.html An awakening white who accepts that—and it’s easier to accept it from an ethnic Jew—is not very far from MR. Whether he’s holding people back who might be further on without him is possible, but I can’t see it applying in every case. And when you compare him with our own dear David Aaronovitch:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2003/an/26/race.immigrationandpublicservices 47
Posted by expf on Mon, 14 Apr 2008 11:37 | # Hey GW, Please check your inbox spam filter! regards 48
Posted by Bill on Mon, 14 Apr 2008 21:19 | # Acknowledgements GW - Postmodernism. Thanks for pointing out your link ‘On traction and a farewell to a political friend’ don’t know what happened there, I missed it – I’ll try and catch up, nearly 200 comments. Hmmm? I was thinking more in terms of postmodernism has been translated into politics in Liberal form and is now enshrined throughout western governments. There must be very few aspects of our lives that are not touched by postmodern thinking, and yet only a minuscule number of people are aware of this. I just wondered if there was any mileage in it if some of this was explained? I see you also think post modernism’s days are numbered - it could be no other way. When history is written, historians will be at a lost to explain how it was expected a billion people could be persuaded into committing suicide. I have visions of serious bespectacled sandal wearing liberals sat round a table discussing league tables of victim-hood, earnestly discussing who should be promoted and who should go down. If I go to jail do I automatically receive victim status? Does this really happen? Do they publish the results? (somebody must do it) GW – Auster. His is now the only anti jihad site I browse, I try and use my filter when reading him, I hear what you are saying. I find him very incisive and helpful in seeing through the fog. (He seems to have a large Brit. following.) Nux. Auster. Yes that’s the Auster piece I was referring to, he also used that article as a basis for something similar on his blog – Thanks. Anti Semitism, Liberalism. Now you tell me anti Westernism trumps victim-hood. Just when I thought I had it cracked. I’ll never get the hang of this - back to the drawing board. Count Sudoku. Yes, I have seen it, (your link above) thanks just the same. It points others in that direction who may not have seen it. 49
Posted by ben tillman on Tue, 15 Apr 2008 00:53 | #
That’s pretty funny. 50
Posted by Bill on Tue, 15 Apr 2008 21:43 | # Over at Auster’s place “Does the BNP oppose Islamization only out of electoral calculation?” 51
Posted by Captainchaos on Sat, 19 Apr 2008 18:28 | # The BNP focuses on Islam because that is a way they can fight race-replacement without explicitly doing so. 52
Posted by Bill on Sat, 19 Apr 2008 23:03 | # The Religious Left’s Dalliance with Radical Islam http://frontpagemag.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID=23E79FA8-2A51-4917-A7A3-F1C01F1417E9
53
Posted by Bill on Sun, 20 Apr 2008 17:31 | # I’m seeing more stuff like this. DT Sunday 20 April 2008
Bill is posting as puzzled Errol Flynn 1:09 Well said. I hope other people read your excellent post. And you picked up on my Morgenthau “challenge “. Yes, “like father like son ” ! Errol Flynn 1:09 Well said. I hope other people read your excellent post. And you picked up on my Morgenthau “challenge “. Yes, “like father like son ” ! awake person on April 20, 2008 4:53 PM and that is precisely what they want you and the rest of us to do remember together we stand, divided we fall Posted by Errol Flynn on April 20, 2008 4:00 PM - Tell us more, Errol. I don’t think the rumours can be dismissed as mere ‘conspiracy theories’ any more. There is something awful going on, that is for sure. The more we know, the better. Puzzled: They have our IP addresses and e-mail addresses and my activity on the internet is certainly being monitored. It would be gross denial to think otherwise. Too bad I feel I have done my little bit to try to warn people, even though it will almost certainly fall on deaf ears. I will shortly be stopping all activity on the internet, not out of fear, but because I fear for my own sanity. The burden of understanding mankind’s destiny is too much to bear.
Puzzled on April 20, 2008 4:26 PM Sure, it a case of knowing your enemy, but that too, is a two way street Errol Flynn and one or two others here. As you know (full well) the MSM is up to it’s eyeballs in the NWO, any suggestions as to why they are allowing you your head(s)? awake person (3:08 PM) ... Judaism is not a race! Nor is Islam. So, please don’t be duped yourself. I am fully aware of the strategy of “divide and conquer.” Many persons of Jewish origin are on the side of good & decency (and are opposed to Globalization) but typically these types have not amassed money, power, and political influence. Indeed, a significant percentage of my reference material has been supplied by Jewish persons. But that happy fact shouldn’t prevent some of us from finding the guts to point to obvious coincidences & associations wherever they exist. When a group label has a long history of agitating or milking the communities into which they have settled, then those who understand have a duty to educate people. It is always the minority who are actors; the innocent majority simply sit, watch, and pay the price. You don’t have to understand the relevance of my 2:41 PM post, but you will do in time; because all will be revealed if events are allowed to continue along present trajectories. Post a comment:
Next entry: The true face of Leonardo?
|
|
Existential IssuesDNA NationsCategoriesContributorsEach author's name links to a list of all articles posted by the writer. LinksEndorsement not implied. Immigration
Islamist Threat
Anti-white Media Networks Audio/Video
Crime
Economics
Education General
Historical Re-Evaluation Controlled Opposition
Nationalist Political Parties
Science Europeans in Africa
Of Note MR Central & News— CENTRAL— An Ancient Race In The Myths Of Time by James Bowery on Wednesday, 21 August 2024 15:26. (View) Slaying The Dragon by James Bowery on Monday, 05 August 2024 15:32. (View) The legacy of Southport by Guessedworker on Friday, 02 August 2024 07:34. (View) Ukraine, Israel, Taiwan … defend or desert by Guessedworker on Sunday, 14 April 2024 10:34. (View) — NEWS — Farage only goes down on one knee. by Guessedworker on Saturday, 29 June 2024 06:55. (View) |
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Thu, 10 Apr 2008 03:49 | #
Well said. They’re incomprehensible in 2008. They may once have stood for something men imagined they saw. They’re political gibberish today. Meaningless. “Hope and dispossession,” words mentioned in the log entry, I can understand. Additional terms I can understand would be, let’s say, “progress and decay,” “normalness and degenerateness,” “race and race-replacement,” “life and extinction.” These other polar opposites everyone can comprehend. “Right and left” no one can comprehend. (No one even knows if they’re polar opposites.)