Posted by Notus Wind on Sat, 21 Aug 2010 17:13 | #

GW,

What do you make these reform efforts?  I watched the video and couldn’t determine to what degree their efforts were an exercise in earnest or vanity.

Posted by Guessedworker on Sat, 21 Aug 2010 18:19 | #

The effort is worthy and the men and women involved in it are just and sincere.  These people love the party dearly and do not mean it harm.  They are not acting lightly.  For one thing, action brings them suspensions and expulsions.  But they believe that corruption, dictatorship and a nosedive in party membership exist and cannot be addressed any other way but through far-reaching reform.  In time, challenging the party with a new party may be the only available course.  But that can only come after every effort has been made, and has been seen to be made, to reform it.

So, yes, the effort should be supported.

Posted by Notus Wind on Sat, 21 Aug 2010 18:28 | #

GW,

So, yes, the effort should be supported.

Hopefully they will be successful then, as you know many of us in America think very fondly of the BNP and are impressed with what its been able to accomplish (however modest that may seem).

Posted by Bill on Sat, 21 Aug 2010 19:59 | #

GW. August 21, 2010, 05:19 PM

The effort is worthy and the men and women involved in it are just and sincere.

Agreed, but they have got to bite the bullet and change the name of the party.  The very name British National Party is an albatross too far.  Get rid.

Route one, speed things up, time is running out.

Change the name.  Just look at Blair, New Labour.  Bingo!

Everyone knows the demographic situation is getting worse by the day with no meaningful resistance.  A change of name is imperative as the existing name really does carry too much baggage.  As already said, an Albatross too far.

The name of the party itself conjures connotations worse than mentioning Nick Griffin’s name.  Every future member has got to be able to be super confident and free from what Griffin and his party represents and conjures in the minds of the media and British public.

I’m well aware, whatever name British nationalism allots itself, their enemies will continue with their relentless attacks and jibes with all things Nazi Germany.  But if the media’s connections become less and less credible, (like the taunts of racism,) then the sting will be lost and become less effective. 

I think these tactics can pay handsome dividends, inasmuch the great British public will readily see the people above, (video) as like themselves and will able to relate to British nationalism.  They’ll see their attackers for what they are, contemptibly anti British. 

Route two.

Continue down the same road.

Retain the name and spend most of one’s time fighting/denying Nazi jibes, a la Griffin.  No brainer!  Even confident guilt free members are not silly and understand that where there is smoke there’s usually fire.

A reformed but still ‘British National Party’ will continue to grow from strength to strength, but it will be a hard slog and much time will be needlessly lost.

Whichever route is chosen, it will be fascinating to see what happens, America is outstripping Britain in the white awareness stakes and thus perhaps, will be able to learn something from them to our advantage.

Above all, a reformed British national party must never cease telling it like it is.

Posted by Wandrin on Sat, 21 Aug 2010 22:30 | #

Leaving aside the internal wrangles which bring out my angry side…

I think the strategy arguments partly revolve around a mistaken attitude to the media (which i had myself to a certain extent). I think some people are being swayed to the idea that if you keep moderating then eventually the MSM will give you a fair shake and you can make more progress. That will never happen. The MSM is the primary stronghold of the enemy. Any organisation they see as a potential threat to the ongoing immigration-genocide of white people will be relentlessly attacked. In fact a nationalist party should judge itself entirely on how much the MSM attacks it. If it’s not being attacked every day it is either too moderate to be a threat to the multicult or too extreme (in the current conditions) to become large enough to threaten the multicult.

The aim is to be in the sweet spot where you are moderate enough to be continually getting new members but at the same time being constantly - daily - attacked by the MSM.

However where does that strategy go wrong?

1. The MSM is the heart of the enemy.
2. The MSM pretend to be neutral.
3. If you play the standard political game you reinforce the idea that they are neutral.
4. By treating the BBC filth with respect you are reinforcing their ability to deem you “bad”.
5. Therefore the MSM, especially the BBC, must be treated like the filth they are and attacked relentlessly on the grounds of lies, double standards, hypocrisy and anti-white racism. Their legitimacy as a judge and moral arbiter must be attacked.

I think undermining the ability of the MSM to influence people is more useful than trying to use it to spread the word. Every person who stops watching or believing the MSM is one step forward. A good TV performance is outweighed by the legitimacy you give them by treating them as neutral which they can then use to deem you “bad”. Personally i think the BNP should boycott the BBC entirely and use any other MSM apperances to attack the MSM.

(Oddly enough a partial proof of this was Griffin’s QT performance. It was a very bad performance in itself but at the same time the BBC briefly revealed their true face so overall a net positve.)

Obviously this means the strategy must be built on alternative media. I think this route is initially harder but but better long-term.

I think the overall platform of the BNP is ok. If anything they muddied the water a bit too much by going into too many details. They want “flavour” policies in most areas to indicate where they’re coming from and only stressing those which fit in with the culture war i.e attitude to crime. A complete halt to immigration being front and centre as the main plank and critically (imo) the justification for that complete halt on immigration to not be on any kind of practical grounds like being full up but on culture war grounds like…

a nation has the right to seek to preserve its own unique way of being purely for its own sake.

Lastly, i think activism should shift such that it is more social, and community activist based. I think the Hoosier nation site is a very good role model on the communtiy activist side.

http://www.hoosiernation.us/

I read somewhere that the Tories had 3 million members in the 1950s. I expect most of that was due to social club aspects. Also, reading various blogs about WN activism or the lack of it compared with lefties it suddenly struck me how much a lot of leftie activism was largely social. In leftie circles going on demos is at least partly about having a day out. Activism should as much as possible be turned into a social activity.

So, again completely ignoring the internal wrangles because it makes me want to stab people on both sides of the argument in the face…

1. The criterion for success of a nationalist party is in having both a growing membership and daily attacks from the MSM at the same time (imo).
2. Relentless cultural warfare on the moral authority of the MSM and political class - if you define the cultural hegemony as a form of religion then this a religious war, or, if you’re not from a religious background like me, a war on the psychology of conformism i.e Notus Wind

http://majorityrights.com/index.php/weblog/comments/the_molding_of_minds/

3. Rely on alternative media - be outsiders. Don’t try to adapt to the MSM in the slightest way.
4. Flavour policies in most areas - only stress the ones related to culture war i.e attitude to crime.
5. Complete halt to immigration primarily on preservation of identity grounds. This leads into the genocide argument. Only use practical arguments as extra ammo. This is a battle over who gets to decide what is right and wrong. Who is the priesthood. Them or us.
6. Electoral politics but using social and community activism as the method of electioneering.

PR systems have a lower hurdle. Doing what the BNP have been doing would probably be working in a PR system but obviously some things need to change. The above are the things i consider need to be changed.

Posted by Bill on Sun, 22 Aug 2010 12:14 | #

I see the British Democracy Forum is asking for suggestions for a name for a new nationalist party.

They ask “What would be some good names for a new Nationalist party?”

http://www.democracyforum.co.uk/bnp/80544-what-would-some-good-names-new-nationalist-party.html

My suggestion is :-  White Survival Party.

If that doesn’t make them aware of what’s at stake - nothing will.

Posted by Guessedworker on Sun, 22 Aug 2010 15:02 | #

Henry Palfrey served his ban-time out on August 15th, so I have returned to make my suggestion on the party name thread: Our Land.

Posted by Bill on Sun, 22 Aug 2010 15:38 | #

GW August 22, 2010, 02:02 PM

Henry Palfrey served his ban-time out on August 15th, so I have returned to make my suggestion on the party name thread: Our Land.

Is ‘our land’ inclusive of civically British?  If not, ‘Our land’ can be interpreted as not your land, which is not inclusive and therefore discriminatory, which means you’re a damn racist and deligitimises everything you think and say.

Only joshing.

This question is trickier than it seems.

Posted by Bill on Sun, 22 Aug 2010 15:48 | #

Fred Scrooby August 22, 2010, 12:20 PM

Call it The New British Party.

Same problem Fred, who are the British?  Nations have boundaries,  (too restrictive) does nation trump race?

When the liberals enemy is anyone who disagrees with them, as I say, it gets kinda tricky.

The enemy have hijacked our language.

Posted by Guessedworker on Sun, 22 Aug 2010 15:53 | #

Bill,

The requirement, imo, is for a rallying point for a mass movement, not simply a name for a political party and certainly not some sort of legal definition.  Our Land has the virtue of being known unto the people of the land.  It is implicit in its meanings.  It begs the question and, from the right people, receives the right answer.  It can encompass civicists and ethno-nationalists and, for the purposes of real-world survival in the age of the EHRC, does not exclude foreigners.  It is also very different to the usual nationalist and patriotic party names, and invites the perception of a fresh start.  Most of all, it appeals to the emotions, specifically to the sense of belonging.  I like it.  It would work.

Posted by Dan Dare on Sun, 22 Aug 2010 18:07 | #

I think any rebranding of the BNP has to account for two realities. The first being the inevitable fragmentation of the UK which renders the concept of a British party obsolete. The Conservatives and the Lib Dems, for example, are now almost entirely England-based, while the SNP and Plaid Cymru have co-opted the nationalist mantle in Scotland and Wales.

The second point is that a re-configured party has to be sensitive to the collective psyche of the people it seeks to represent. The British are notoriously cynical and impervious to any continental fancy-talk or floweriness, and unforgiving of any hint of over-earnestness. It’s on these grounds that I regretfully pass over GW’s suggestion (while warming to it personally), and believe that it is now time for an English National Party to rise out of the ashes of the BNP.

English Nationalism is a cause whose time has come.

Posted by Wandrin on Sun, 22 Aug 2010 18:28 | #

English Nationalism is a cause whose time has come.

I think psychologically it is neccessary to build the foundations on people’s primary root identity.

I’m all for a British nationalism but i think it will work better if it’s built on the foundations of the individual national identities and then federated.

As an aside i wonder if a more decentralized federal structure would be better generally. I think one of the problems with leadership of a party like the BNP is the constant threat of infiltration leads to people only completely trusting a very small inner core. A better defence against infiltration might be to accept that it will happen and design things in such a way that it causes minimum damage e.g like bulkheads in a ship, each region (or whatever) is semi-autonomous so if one gets hijacked either by lefties or people who are too extreme (for the current conditions) there’s plausible deniability and that region can be sealed off, shut down and rebooted without effecting the whole organisation.

Just a thought.

Posted by BGD on Sun, 22 Aug 2010 19:09 | #

To me reading the tea leaves it appears that while there are certainly strong EngNat sentiments fired by surface grievances such as the West Lothian as well as taxation and distribution questions there are not (yet) loud voices for undoing the union altogether and repatriating all powers back to the various parts. I have almost never encountered them if there are.

That being the case, a more clearly federated system is likely more in line with the instincts of the population and hopefully with our beliefs. If the above is the case then any new political organisation should aim to speak for all not divide the union further.

As a side issue, what proportion of Scots and Irish live in England? A significant amount I believe.

Posted by Wandrin on Sun, 22 Aug 2010 21:14 | #

As a side issue, what proportion of Scots and Irish live in England? A significant amount I believe.

I think this illustrates the wider problem. Scots and Irish wanting to live in England while retaining their unique identity, which i don’t mind, and then English people thinking they shouldn’t have a defined root identity because that excludes people. I think losing that clear definition makes it harder to resist the multicult. Psychologically i think having all the root identities expressed and then federating within a collective group identity might be stronger - like a microcosm of a Europe-wide white nationalism.

Then again the technical problems it could cause might make things worse.

Posted by Leon Haller on Tue, 24 Aug 2010 16:16 | #

Agreed, but they have got to bite the bullet and change the name of the party.  The very name British National Party is an albatross too far.  Get rid.

Route one, speed things up, time is running out.

Change the name.  Just look at Blair, New Labour.  Bingo! (Bill)

_________________________________

How about “Britain First”? The BFP? (hahaha, I chuckle, but am serious)

or, “Britain Forever”?

or, (I’m not joking, I think this is good), “Stability Party”?

Posted by Leon Haller on Tue, 24 Aug 2010 16:26 | #

Brilliant comment from Wandrin at 8/21/10 above. Absolutely on target across the board.

Posted by Leon Haller on Tue, 24 Aug 2010 16:32 | #

“Our Land” is also an excellent suggestion. Very evocative, yet pithy. Brilliant, really. Kudos.

Posted by Leon Haller on Tue, 24 Aug 2010 18:27 | #

Wandrin,

You are very intelligent, but with an admirably commonsense style of presentation. I am surprised that I have not attended to your thoughts at greater length in the past. But I am impressed.

Posted by james on Thu, 26 Aug 2010 10:16 | #

THIS IS MY TAKE ON THE BNP AS A MEMBER TO BE USED AT THE NEXT ELECTION. IT WILL COMPLETELY F—-K UP OUR ENEMYS THOUGHTS

BNP ADVERT
THE WHITE NATIVE RACE OF ENGLAND IS THE MOST FASICIST NAZIISM RASIST BREED ON PLANET EARTH
THEY ARE RASIST EMOTIVE BEINGS
THEY LIVE ON A SMALL ISLAND AND WILL ACHEIVE NOTHING
THAT US SHOULD RULE OVER I,IS THE BASES OF THERE THOUGHTS, FOR THIS IS WHAT THE MSM STATES IS TRUTH ,MERDOC GLOBIST TRUTH
THAT WHITE MEN ,AS BLACK MEN ,AS ISLAMIC MEN, AS CHINESE MEN , AS ALL GROUPS AS MEN IS TRUTH, THAT THE COLLECTIVE IS MORE IMPORTANT THAN I.
THAT THE COLLECTIVE OF MUTI RASIC, RELIGOUS LONDON IF THE WAY FORWARD TO ALL
EMPIRAL THOUGHTS OF ic is evil
FOR WE ARE TOLD BY THEM THAT 2+1=4 CONSERVATIVE PAERTY THOUGHTS = bnp
FOR WE ARE TOLD BY THE LABOUR PARTY THAT 4=2+1= bnp
for we are told by the liberals 2+2=5=bnp thought
this is the truth ABSOLUTE+PNP

NOW THIS IS MY REVERSE LOGIC AS A BNP MEMBER
BNP+ABSOLUTE = MATHS ALONE= TRUTH
ORWELL 2+2=4 BALANCE IN ALL THINGS
EMPIRE= EMPIRATIVISM=IC THE LAW OF NUMBERS RULES ALL THINGS
THAT I IS MORE IMPORTANT THAN US= BRITISH THINKING
THAT I SHOULD RULE OVER US
THAT WHITE MAN ,AS BLACK MAN , AS CHINESE MAN IS TRUTH
THE MEDIUM ( MATHS) OF GREEK THOUGHTS ,BASED ON M IN THE MIDDLE OF THE LETTERS ,13 LETTERS ON BOTH SIDES IS TRUTH, NOT THE MERDOC MEDIA
THEY CAN ACHEIVE ANY THING , COLONISATION OF THE SOLAR SYSTEM THEY WISH BASED ON, THE POWER OF MINDS EYE,THE FUTURE IS OPEN ONLY TO THOUSE WE BELIEVE IN MINDKIND BNP PARTY POLICY FOR WE WILL GRANT IT FORM MANAFEST DESTINY IN THE THIRD EMPIRE OF BRITION , NEXT 1000 YEARS, AT WHICH IS WHOLE IS GREATER THAN THE PARTS( LONDON IN IST PRESTENT FORM)
THAT THE BRITISH RACE WITH ITS MANY EYE COLOURS 50, MANY HAIR COLOURS,50, IS THE LEAST RASIST OF ALL ON PLANET EARTH
AVERT FOR THE BNP

Posted by Guessedworker on Thu, 26 Aug 2010 10:36 | #

You could apply for the post of BNP publicity director.  Then all our questions about the party will be answered.

Posted by Bill on Thu, 09 Sep 2010 15:56 | #

Interesting question being asked over at the British Democratic Forum.

Prof.Kevin Mcdonald interview Is there an agenda to abolish white people?

http://www.democracyforum.co.uk/bnp/81320-prof-kevin-mcdonald-interview-there-agenda-abolish-white-people.html

Posted by Armor on Thu, 09 Sep 2010 19:46 | #

Is there an agenda to abolish white people?

Last July, Nick Griffin really asked that question to the European Union Commission.
source

Ms Malmström has now given an official written answer on behalf of the Commission.
But I don’t think she understood the question in the first place.
europarl

Posted by Armor on Thu, 09 Sep 2010 19:52 | #

Sorry, my first link is incorrect.
Correction: source

Posted by Fred Scrooby on Thu, 09 Sep 2010 20:21 | #

Malmstrom completely avoided the question in her reply.  The question is deliberate, coldly-calculated methodical genocide.  She didn’t address it.  Sweeping genocide under the rug or forcing the lid down on the genocide pressure-cooker aren’t a solution, Miss Malmstrom.

Posted by james on Thu, 23 Sep 2010 03:17 | #

I have just consided,a delightful, idea, yes lets have black hybrids, in the BNP same with asians , as with whites themselves, 50 eye colours in blacks blonde blue eyed geneticly engeered 50 50 ism, in the african form,50 hair colours,  equity, balance in all things,lets see if blacks are as big a lier as we all think that they are, lets hang the so called equality commision,(shite american idea based on doctine of good intensions, liberal marxist, bum fluffism),by equity, the idea of the medium, not the merdoc media, the letter M in the middle with 13 letters on both sides , we will shite all over the lieing whores the exist in the present 5 headed hydras,THE BNP NEEDS TO BE MORE THAN A PARTY OF WORDS WE MUST ALSO BE A PARTY OF WORKS,Inplerment a policy of genetic engeering to fuck up your enemys thoughts,they want use to practise there equality, we will go one better equity,
HOW TO SCREW BNP ENEMYS.