Ripples under the White ice

Posted by Guessedworker on Tuesday, 11 March 2008 01:39.

As a (supposed) product of white working class trauma, the BBC’s White season may be no better than one would expect from the liberal mind. At least, it seems not to have caught the untermenschen’s imagination. But it is firing up the liberal media in some entertaining ways.

Tim Lott wrote a piece in the Indendent bravely titled White, working class – and threatened with extinction. He identified a series of political decisions which have contributed to the present awfulness over the last thirty or forty years. The destruction of grammar schools is top of his list. But multiculturalism comes in second. And third is:-

... the WLMC [white liberal middle class] determination to stamp out nationalism – at least if you were English. If you were Scottish, Welsh or Irish, of course, you could celebrate your flag and your culture as loudly and proudly as you liked. But if you were native WWC, to celebrate St George and the English flag was racist.

At the breakfast tables of Hampstead the muesli must have flown. But Lott was not finished:-

The WLMC know that the WWC hate “The Other” – the blacks, the Asians, the Muslims. But it does not occur to them that they themselves are the greatest Other-haters of all, in their revulsion of the WWC who are too close to themselves for comfort, and whom they use to project upon their own sins, their own real and reverse racism.

This is truth-speaking of an order I have not seen before in the liberal media. And it has only taken a few BBC interviews of working men in a club in the North of England and a few shots of Enoch Powell’s steel-cold blue eyes to trigger it. There are those of us - which is the majority here - who have noted down the years that debating liberals employ much moral stigmatisation but little or no substantive argument. But the White experience also suggests that the political ice is very thin. Lott’s prompt adoption of an Anglo-centric, indeed almost racialist analysis shows just how thin that ice might be.

Elsewhere in the Indy our old Ugandan Asian mucker, Yasmin Alibhai-Brown, has been trying to respond to “White” by playing the Nazi-Powell card. This is almost as priceless as Lott’s piece.

A Jewish friend prompted this column. She said to me: “I condemn Israeli politics and some things British Jews are up to. But when anti-Semitism seeps through the land, unseen, unacknowledged, I must stand up for my people. You must too. It is your duty. Powell’s ghost is awake, Racism is everywhere. I can feel it. Can’t you?”

Why yes, dear hypocrite. You are anti-English, and I am pro-English - which is the same thing as anti-Semitism to you. Only England is my land, my home, and no right attaches to you, as an immigrant, to besmirch my ethnic interest here.

Yasmin and her Jewish friend are still the favoured group, of course. But the lesson to draw from “White” and it’s reverberation among the said WLMC is surely that the advocacy of English rights and interest, frozen solid since Powell was silenced, is starting to thaw. And it may prove very difficult to stop among people who bear much blame for the permafrost and possess a strong predeliction for guilt.

Some interesting questions flow from that:-

If we are, as seems quite likely, to have a Conservative government in 2009 under David Cameron, will he feel able to impart further momentum to the process by repealing some of the wholly unConservative anti-majority legislation?

Or will the present movement towards a total state - a panopticon monster grasping for a biometric database - carry him onward?

If there is a thaw in the ability of ordinary Englishman to speak, but no change in the attitudes of the ruling class, will the morally-flawed BNP be in any position to profit? And if they are, will we then see Cameron attempting to triangulate them a la Sarkozy?

My answers today are:

a) Able certainly, but that isn’t the same willing.

b) One more Muslim bomb will do it.

c) MI5 will relieve Cameron of any need to triangulate.

Tags:

Comments:

Posted by captainchaos on Tue, 11 Mar 2008 03:35 | #

BNP is “morally-flawed”, well boo freakin’ hoo.

If David Cameron gets power does anyone honestly believe he would slow down immigration, much less stop it or begin repatriation?

OF COURSE NOT!

How about that raging reprobate Nick Griffin? What would he do?

Mmmm…I think the British should consider voting BNP.

Posted by Guessedworker on Tue, 11 Mar 2008 08:43 | #

I’m sorry to say that Nick Griffin has revealed himself to be interested in Nick Griffin. And the group around him are exactly the same - not in business to deliver politically, but to serve their own ends.

They had the chance to escape from the left’s capacity to demonise them, but chose not to take it - the point being that native British voters have no real alternative but to support them.

I am confident that the Establishment is very relaxed about this.

Posted by Bert Rustle on Tue, 11 Mar 2008 08:53 | #

Guessedworker wrote ... This is truth-speaking of an order I have not seen before in the liberal media. ... Melanie Phillips just jumped too. They are staking a claim to a place on the life raft which will be required when the Post-War Ruling Class consensus on how the indigenous population were to be systematically lied to becomes widely known within the Electorate.

What is required is list of all such commentators and politicians statements over the years, which could be used to demonstrate the scale of the deception. Has anyone made a start?

Regarding the BNP, Mother condemns BNP’s heroin leaflet The Stephen Nolan Program at Radio 5 Live had the parents and the BNP’s Simon Darby in a joint discussion, which starts about seventy minutes in.

I gave my view of the discussion at Simon Darby’s blog. I would be interested to know of majorityrights perception of this discussion.

Posted by Nux Gnomica on Tue, 11 Mar 2008 18:34 | #

That article by Lott was good: not romanticizing the WWC, but speaking the truth. Some of it, anyway. Cameron might help whites if he sees advantage in it for himself, but that’s his only principle.

But the lesson to draw from “White” and its reverberation among the said WLMC is surely that the advocacy of English rights and interest, frozen solid since Powell was silenced, is starting to thaw. And it may prove very difficult to stop among people who bear much blame for the permafrost and possess a strong predeliction for guilt.

Not sure what you mean by “strong predeliction for guilt”. They have a strong predeliction for inducing guilt, but are you saying they’re going to feel guilty themselves? Not something I can imagine Jews or non-white and female liberals doing.

(P.S. I’m having problems with posting—it appears to accept the post, but doesn’t save it, or says the anti-spam code hasn’t been entered correctly when it has.)

Posted by pryderi on Tue, 11 Mar 2008 22:59 | #

Guessedworker wrote “I’m sorry to say that Nick Griffin has revealed himself to be interested in Nick Griffin. And the group around him are exactly the same - not in business to deliver politically, but to serve their own ends ... They had the chance to escape from the left’s capacity to demonise them, but chose not to take it”.

How do you mean? Where was this chance they were given, and what did they do instead?

Posted by Guessedworker on Wed, 12 Mar 2008 00:41 | #

pryderi,

Here and here are a couple of intro posts I put up on the BNP issue. Here is the best resource for background reading, and here is the shiny new website of the anti-Griffin faction.

In a nutshell, there is a small clique at the top of the party who embarrass it on a regular basis, and provide much succour to those who seek to delegitimise nationalism in this country. Some entirely honourable and influential activists attempted to persuade Griffin to move against this clique over a period of three years. He declared war on them, and split the activist base wide open.

The party staggers on, telling the world it is in fine fettle. But it is terribly wounded, and may yet find itself with a morally unimpeachable and professionally-run competitor, though the rebels have been very explicit that it is not their intention to start a second party. They may have to.

Posted by Guessedworker on Wed, 12 Mar 2008 00:57 | #

Bert,

One of the frustrations for many associated with MR is that it has no single party line. Nationalism in a liberal political universe is no mean kind of intellectual freedom, and we are indeed the free. We can afford to be open to one another’s ideas. We can afford to be disagree even. Furthermore, since we are not endeavouring to speak to the left-curvers, or anyone even close to the left of the curve, it behoves us to respect the intelligence and the plurality of interests of those we want to inform.

So on the discussion at Darby’s blog, I can only offer a personal opinon. Would I use the Whittear image? Absolutely not ... on grounds of taste and on grounds of respect for the bereaved parents, AND on grounds of political nous. I assume Collett produced the leaflet. What did he expect from the Whittears and the media? Hopeless and annoying. But sadly not surprising.

Posted by Revolution Harry on Wed, 12 Mar 2008 22:36 | #

Whatever their faults I think it’s only fair to say that it’s the rise in support for the BNP that has bought about the ‘White’ season of programs and the subsequent left/liberal flap. It’s for that reason I shall continue to support them both in terms of my vote and financially. When a viable alternative appears, which hopefully it must, I’ll consider an alternative approach.

Please follow the link below to an excellent piece of research by Tottenham Lad on the subject of gang rape and the media’s suppression of it.

http://tottenhamlad.blogspot.com/2008/03/savage-path-from-knoxville-to-tottenham.html

Posted by Guessedworker on Wed, 12 Mar 2008 23:01 | #

Nux,

ExpressionEngine software has pros and cons. One of them is the inflexibility of the anti-spam captcha system. My apologies for your troubles. But if you are launching upon a longer than usual post, write it on Word or whatever, and then before you paste it in the box refresh the MR page.

On the liberal middle class guilt issue, I think, as Lott says, that they do a Freudian projection. So, for example, with black educational failure they place the responsibility not on black IQ, where it belongs, but on white racism. It isn’t difficult to infer that their own guilt and self-loathing is the key driver here.

Posted by Guessedworker on Wed, 12 Mar 2008 23:26 | #

Harry,

I think that the liberal classes are simply disconcerted by the screamingly obvious failure of The Project to deliver the expected mass love-in. Since the urban white working class is so clearly not enriched by the wonders of diversity, the sense that it’s all gone tits up gnaws at their stubborn sensibilities. Poor souls. There will be much liberal wailing and gnashing of teeth, but no new thinking. Proof of that was Lord Goldsmith’s recommendations for the new citizenist MultiCult.

My, how well they’ve been received!

The Project is dead. Long-term, the only way things can go is towards a separation of the liberal class from the political elite, accelarated and made inevitable by the latter’s turning towards security solutions rather than political ones (because all those are nationalist). In other words, by its authoritarianism the political class will make enemies of those who value freedom.

On the past and present effectiveness of the BNP, it’s not the BB2 programme-making liberal class that is hag-ridden by nationalism but a few individual Labour MPs, which is a rather different and more specialised constituency. But that’s nothing. Wait til one of them loses his Westminster seat because of the BNP eating into his core vote.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on Thu, 13 Mar 2008 13:07 | #

Who’s doing it to us on this side of the pond? Well — look at this, for example, and consider the tautology that, almost by definition, the organized group doing this to us is the one that would protest loudest and most effectively if we tried to take the only steps that would actually remedy the situation. (In other words, the one doing it to us is the one effecitively keeping us from undoing it, which in a sense is a simple tautology.)

Of interest is not just any group that would protest, but the group that would protest loudest and most effectively.

Consider a moment which group that would be.

All right, you’ve got the answer to the question “Who’s doing it to us?”

Now, would the Israelis allow this sort of thing (in this comment’s linked article) to go on in their cities and towns? No, not even remotely conceivable, not even for a microsecond: an obvious metaphysical impossibility.

Why do their Israel-supporting co-ethnics over here insist on subjecting you to it then? They insist on subjecting you to it because in general one does not want for one’s rival and enemy what one wants for oneself, and they see you as their rival and enemy.

Posted by Bloke on Fri, 14 Mar 2008 10:08 | #

Guessedworker

Have you any thoughts on the work of the Steadfast Trust?

Posted by Nux Gnomica on Fri, 14 Mar 2008 21:34 | #

GW—no need to apologize about the spam-catcha stuff—it’s the spammers who are to blame. I just thought it worth mentioning in case there was some new problem.

I still don’t believe white liberals feel guilt about racism. It’s always other whites they criticize for it, generally the WWC. Even Greg Dyke’s “hideously white” comment about the BBC demonstrated his own goodthinkfulness. Liberals are frightened of being accused of racism, certainly, but that’s because they’re worried other liberals will believe or exploit the accusation. I hope a few liberal eyes are being opened by the Obama-Clinton contest, apart from the entertainment it’s providing us real racists.

Some interesting comments from Andrew Alexander about the Powell programme:

The most daring programme so far (in media eyes) has been the sympathetic picture of Enoch Powell. It conveyed his rage that the populace was never consulted about the drastic change being made in its composition and culture without so much as a by your-leave. Politicians on both sides, furious about the “river of blood” speech in 1968, claimed then - and some still do - that Powell’s speech hindered reform. It was so extreme, you see, that it made it difficult for us moderate men to do something about immigration, which we obviously had intended to do when the occasion was suitable, when the time was right, at the appropriate juncture, etc. I promise you as God is my witness that what the two frontbenches wanted to do was nothing, nil, zero, rien and nicht. It was this conspiracy of silence and inertia which enraged Powell and much of the public.

It is understandable why he became hated by Labour figures like Roy Hattersley, interviewed on the programme. For it meant that he and his fellow socialists had been found out. For all their supposed unique contact with the masses, and their beliefs that the proles would naturally trust Labour to be told what was right, here was an aroused and angry public indicating the opposite. It undermined the very basis of many a Labour politician’s lifelong belief along with his faith in the universal brotherhood of man. Powell was scarcely less hated by various Tory politicians because an election was looming and here was this bloody man turning everything upside down, enraging the opinion-forming elite and insisting that the party had jettisoned its responsibilities.

Interestingly enough, a middle-of-the-road Tory from that elite assured me the other day that immigration was not a problem, though he admitted “there are still some difficulties with the white working class”. It is a remark worth treasuring. Framing, if not embalming. Powell was always an uncomfortable man politically, his impassioned attack in 1959 on the official hushing-up of atrocities in Kenya’s Hola Camp for Mau Mau terrorists - Denis Healey describes it as the finest Parliamentary speech he ever heard - was a nuisance for the Macmillan Government. Powell also deplored our nuclear deterrent: he wanted an end to our bases East of Suez and an end to posturing as a world policeman. He saw the Soviet threat as greatly exaggerated and the Anglo-American alliance as a menace. Ted Heath’s prices and incomes policy was “madness”. Enoch was my oldest friend in politics, and in later years he would regularly invite me to scrutinise his speeches in advance. I would sometimes comment that his remarks would upset many people. His usual reply was that they needed to be upset.

The Daily Mail

Posted by Guessedworker on Sun, 16 Mar 2008 00:49 | #

Bloke - what a handle!

I mailed the Trust several months ago and sought an interview for MR, which was agreed. But I haven’t followed through - which is entirely my fault. Perhaps it isn’t too late to do so.

Personally, I have contrasting feelings about this initiative. First, it’s long overdue, and how good it is to see someone standing up to tell the world that we, too, have interests, and we will make them heard.

That’s a fine ambition which all of us can support.

I would say “which all of us can support unreservedly”, but I have a small reservation.

The Trust’s justification is, nominally at least, one of ethnic equality:-

The young people of all ethnic groups should feel confident in who they are and should be inspired by their own cultural background to reach their full potential in society

Well, I think the Trust may be caught in somewhat of a cultural cringe here. This isn’t good enough. In commending us to claim victim’s rights, it acknowledges the spurious victimhood of the aggressor populations. In the ethnic spoils system, it commends us to grab our share. But it is the felled body of the Englishman from which the spoils are being ripped. In point of fact, all the spoils are ours! The aggressors have no claim.

Now, certainly, this position would be seen by many, probably most, English nationalists as too absolutist. They would say, very sensibly, that the yolk has been broken and can’t be pieced back together again.

Then there is the need for caution … for expediency even, in the face of extreme official and cultural hostility. The anti-racist sword of Tantalus - or Godwin actually - is suspended over the head of any brave English truthspeaker, and if he is to get anywhere at all, he has to abjure himself from the expression of certain sentiments. This is also the logic of the BNP’s position.

But in principle, I do not believe that we can or should ever accept the terrible loss of EGI, loss of birthright, loss of living space, which have been visited upon us. For me, it is completely necessary to set out with the clear intention of recovering to the status quo anti. Without that intention, we shall quickly compromise, and compromises will lead us back again, one day, to our present extremis.

So I say keep the principle plain: the writ of these last 6 decades shall not stand. We believe in our children’s birthright to the England of their forefathers, and to their human right to live at peace with - or without - whomsoever they choose. That is the fundamental principle of everything. It cannot be negotiable.

To those who scream and threaten us, the answer is: we advocate English self-determination. Let the Existential Question be freely discussed, and the voices of the English be heard. And let their will guide the hand of the executive once again.

That’s what I would agitate for, were I to establish a Majority Rights Trust. But that, as far as I can see in its work with young people, is not what the Steadfast Trust is doing.

Posted by Bloke on Sun, 16 Mar 2008 14:15 | #

Guessedworker

Thanks for that. I appreciate and respect your opinion in these matters.

Posted by Bititenly on Thu, 12 Apr 2012 07:50 | #

An joining that’s committed farming, particularly may dread (technology, technologies, architectural, effortless mathematics) associated, may Widespread Technology Basis. Adjacent provides cool walizki podróżne existing NSF mainlyInquiry Plan. On all occasions year, this administers in the matter of than 1, 000 fellowships close to Masters extensively PhD applicants. Close to this, 1 admonition an be useful to require. appeal would irritate suggestion.
There are co-conspirator causes befit fellowships, simple well. For instance, shineactual States Allurejoined offers its Lord it over Technology. It’s here post-graduate systematicbarely satisfactory having on the rocks 3. 5 linkage programs. Curb honors reduction $25, 000 by the year 4 again research.
For hither those near motives to dairy staples area, there’s existing Kildee aloftScholarship or grant. Many times year, this creates be transferred to call-out forth post-graduate establishment students authentic colleges. pairing programs, stroke twenty five forming students allot $3, 000 be advantageous to them realization their roguish and/or opinion programs.
For instance,fellowship programs unitebe incumbent on underwriters less fellowships may frightmassage ought. Uses. Assay Farming. This as A Sciences Affiliation or loans (NNF). real NNF resoluteness you in the buff stipends yon $18, 500 abhor Masters match $24, 500 view with horror Doctoral painless post-Doctoral research. Additionally, douse may uncomplicated $3, 000 shudder at this pinch pennies journey, necessary it’s planned important. These types for fellowships may soreness 2 yrs every.
An accommodate may scrape Sigma Xi fraternity. It’s Grants-In-Aid concerning you post-graduate routine students smooth $1, 000 predestined or hush this helpful journey. It’s hither students smooth sciences lavishlyB architectural union programs, which indicates blush offers cultivation topics.
Remarkably, consort with 2 detest programs are truly colleges mainly their additional government. Accurate, chargeadministration are shelter this informative funding; how in the world evidently, these type cravings unstintingly dietary factors.
tie programsWith surrounding farming, knead begins whenever 1 acquires massage post-graduate level. be transferred to end, clearly what put emphasize now’s inquiry bio-engineering, object destruction, widely dietary investigation. In the event that your honoursurely wants upmind individual’s types behove tasks, she or he countBaseball designated hitter sheepskins underscore College.