Less than three years after the bail out of Scotland’s banks was supposed to have killed talk of withdrawal from the Union, Alex Salmond was able to inform the British public yesterday that during the next Holyrood parliament a referendum on independence will be put before Scots voters.  The future of the Union, of all the Westminster parties, and of political nationalism in England now all rest with a few million Scottish votes.

Salmond, as the big winner of Thursday’s varied election cycle, now has sixty-eight of his colleagues sitting at Holyrood - a feat which was supposed to have been impossible under the complex voting procedure established for the Scottish parliament.  It has also been thought impossible for the SNP to convince Scots to vote for independence - the polls show a consistent two thirds against.  But the media are treating a shift towards independence of under twenty points over the next four years as being distinctly possible, given that Salmond is now a veritable colossus in a country of political pygmies.

How the fortunes of civic nationalism in Scotland contrast with those of ethno-nationalism in the rest of the country.  The Griffin Party has won two council seats and lost all its others where elections were held.  The repeated plaint on the nationalist internet is that the movement is back to where it was before Griffin’s successful leadership bid in 1999.  But with reported debts of over £500,000, mass departure of the (relatively) able, and a nose-diving membership, it’s a lot worse than that.  It ought to be the end of Griffin and his clique.  But it appears that the party must completely wither and die before that happens.

Meanwhile, the English, obviously, voted Labour and Tory as stubbornly as ever - the latter in somewhat surprisingly firm numbers.  UKIP had a bad election night, not even managing to benefit much from disaffected BNP voters, never mind Tories.  Polarity is returning to the English voting pattern if not to the politics.  Taken with the 69% “No” vote in the AV referendum it amounts to a powerful rejection of centrism.  It is inevitable that Tory and Labour strategists will identify this factor and endeavour to spin their way towards it.  But real diversification is impossible in an age when the right must support neo-Marxist social policies and the left neoliberal economic ones.

Only nationalism opposes both, of course.  But its electoral flame was extinguished on Thursday, and though there are efforts to keep it alive via the civicist English Democrats, the culturalist British Freedom Party, the tiny and extremely nascent, ethno-nationalist English People’s Party, and the white nationalist National Front, I for one do not believe they can succeed.  I see the only hope in a sudden and saving, last-minute purification of the BNP brand.  I just don’t know what more can be done to force Griffin out of the party before it finally hits the wall.

by Alexander Baron

This morning, it was announced that Osama Bin Laden had been killed in Pakistan. Most world politicians seem to believe this is a good thing. But not Congressman Ron Paul.

The death of Osama Bin Laden was big news here in England, and even bigger in the USA, understandably. People, and especially Obama supporters, were outside the White House in the small hours calling for “Four more years”, which he will probably get. British Prime Minister David Cameron – Call Me Dave, as he is known – was among the first to congratulate Obama, along with former presidents Bill Clinton and George W. Bush.

Though the possibility or even the likelihood of Al-Qaeda striking back has not been overlooked, and we have all been put on alert, there is something else everybody seems to have overlooked in the euphoria; everybody except Congressman Ron Paul, who in a speech delivered February 24, 2010, Now It’s Assassinations, asked some embarrassing questions:

“What have we allowed ourselves to become? Are we no longer a nation of laws…have we decided that the writ of habeas corpus is not worth defending? Is torture now an acceptable tool for making us safe? Unfortunately the single answer to all of these questions from the leaders of our country and to many of our citizens appears to be yes. And now we’re told that assassination of foreigners as well as American citizens is legitimate and necessary to provide security for our people. It is my firm opinion that nothing could be further from the truth.”

READ MORE...

There was a public celebration in London today.  You can study the crowd who made it to the gates of Buckingham Palace here (click on the redirect).  They are only a small part of the million or more patriots in total, including many (equally white) tourists, who crowded central London.  The capital’s racial minorities appear to be somewhat under-represented.

The trap we carefully left alone was talking about the accepted date, because this was the day the number was stamped on to the application making it into a certificate. If Obama was to have a file number higher than the Nordyke twins, the accepted date would have needed to be either the same day or later than the accepted date of the Nordyke twins. Ooooppppps.

From the current front page of the Birthers.org website, an article titled “Sequential Anomalies or Over My Dead Body”.

This anomaly appears to be the strongest evidence of a White House conspiracy, and the only evidence for which I have not yet seen some explanation, however weak.  The strategy appears to be for the White House to remain disdainfully aloof while the liberal media, even abroad, counters where it can but chiefly pronounces on the sanity of mind of those who persist with their questions.  But it will only take one unanswered and possibly unanswerable question like the one above to corrode what gains this can deliver.  And if that happens, the further entrenchment of opposition to this presidency is inevitable.  There will never be a full and final disclosure.  Congress will never impeach or investigate Obama.  But what odds his surviving to fight for a second-term?

But ... is this scenario good for white America?  What, going forward, would be the optimum operational circumstances for White Nationalism to advance?  An exposed and shamed non-American president and a chastened Establishment?  A resurgent Republican Party, powerfully informed by populist conservative instincts (but likely led by Mitt Romney)?  Really?  The experience of political nationalism in Europe strongly suggests that a second Obama term mired in public distrust and bitterness is a certain generator of division, and division eventually turns to radicalism.

I’m not an American, and I know I miss a lot of the finer points of American political life.  But even I know that one effective opposition, if only a conservative-libertarian opposition, has been grown in Obama’s America.  WNs who aren’t attracted to the gradualism of Hunter and Co should hope to keep the black guy in the White House.  Even if he was born in darkest Mombasa, and never came closer than a snowflake to an Hawaiian maternity ward.

Arktos.com has put out a review call for the new translation of Faye’s 278-page book Pourquoi Nous Combattons.  The paperback edition appears in three days and the hardback on 5th May.

Arktos describes the book thus:

The book contains a manifesto for European political action against liberalism, ethnic self-hatred and what Faye terms Islamic ‘colonisation’, as well as an ‘Ideological Dictionary’ of 177 key terms which he believes are essential for all members of the ‘European resistance’ to comprehend and adopt in their own approaches to the problems at hand. Faye argues for the creation of a ‘Eurosiberian Bloc’ - a new, federalist Europe based on traditional, anti-globalist values which will incorporate all nations from Ireland to the farthest reaches of Russia and make itself independent of American hegemony. Faye also levels criticism against his former comrades from the European New Right, who he believes have retreated into the realm of pure theory and academic respectability.

This edition was translated and an original Foreword was added by Michael O’Meara, the famed author of New Culture, New Right, the most extensive overview of the European New Right to appear in English to date. The book also includes additional material and a Foreword by Pierre Krebs, the chairman of Thule-Seminar, one of the most prominent New Right groups in Germany.

If you are interested in writing a review for MR, please let me know.  I will arrange for a review copy to be forwarded to you.

The peremptory dismissal of Konstantin Poltoranin last week from his post of Spokesman for Russia’s Federal Migration Service presents an interesting intellectual problem.  In an interview with the BBC, Poltoranin said what all good men would say:

“What is now at stake is the survival of the white race. We feel this in Russia,” he told the BBC.

“We want to make sure the mixing of blood happens in the right way here, and not the way it has happened in Western Europe where the results have not been good.” Russia needed immigrants “of the Slavic group” more than any others, he added.

Here is the BBC video:

So, how did the ethno-masochism of the liberal mind and the desire to be “correct” settle itself on the Russian political and cultural elites in a matter of little more than twenty years?  It has done it without liberalism as a thought world having any history in the country, and without liberals actually wielding political power. It suggests that, among the elites in Russia at least, not political or philosophical ideals but the desire to make money by serving “business” and “investment” via labour-cost competitiveness is sufficient to take away all meaning of Slavic blood.

As nationalism is rising across continental Europe it is in meltdown in Britain thanks to a long litany of disastrous management errors and political and legal misjudgements by Nick Griffin.  Below the fold is a news piece that appeared on the Guardian site this morning. It is written by Matthew Taylor, who has form, and quotes the usual hostile sources.  But it has no need of mischaracterisation.  It can and does fairly and accurately describe the crisis in political nationalism in Britain.  There is no doubt about where our only viable political brand is heading.

And there is no silver lining to this political tragedy.  The Reform 2011 initiative is in limbo.  Eddy Butler, among others, is now a civic nationalist at the English Democrats. Lee’s British Freedom Party appears not to have made it to the start line.

Only the National Front has stuck to the racial nationalist faith, even while that faith has been declared illegal as a result of Griffin’s defiance of the EHRC last year.  In fact, so keen on racial nationalism is the present generation of NF folk, they call themselves a White Nationalist party.

The gainer in all this has been UKIP, a party which takes anti-nationalism to the extreme of anti-racism. It is very likely to score a significant victory in next month’s local authority elections, and may now have the kind of momentum and financial backing that will facilitate a serious General Election campaign two years from now.

Where the BNP will be in two years’ time doesn’t bear thinking about.  Griffin said at one point that he will stand down in 2013.  He may not get the chance if the current legal actions against the party and its officers for recovery of commercial debt succeed.

READ MORE...

by Alexander Baron

Imagine the following scenario; your nineteen year old daughter, the apple of your eye, announces with great fanfare that she has met the man of her dreams, and she’d like to bring him home to meet you and your good lady wife. You’re a bit surprised, because she has been a slow starter, but at the same time you are pleased. Yes, of course, you say, when? You arrange for her to bring home her first real boyfriend that weekend, and resist the temptation to ask her anything about him, like how old is he, what does he do for a living, etc. You trust in your daughter, she’s been raised correctly rather than politically correctly, and you know she doesn’t hang around with glue sniffers, junkies, binge drinkers or other undesirables.

The day comes, and you are sitting in the living room, laptop on knee, catching up with some paperwork, when the door opens, and your wife walks in. She is deathly pale. “John”, she says, “Susan is here with…him”.

You hadn’t heard the doorbell, but she has a key, and you were so engrossed in what you were doing that probably you wouldn’t have heard it ring in any case. Now though you are suddenly alert; there is something in your wife’s demeanour that warns you all is not well in the State of Denmark, and that very soon you are going to find out what.

You put aside the laptop, and as you stand up your daughter enters the room holding hands with…him.

You are confused, what day is it? June 1st, not April 1st.

“Daddy,” she beams, “this is Angus, and guess what, we’re engaged.”

This cannot be, you look at the guy, he’s white, but so is his hair. In fact he is not a day under eighty years old. You look at your wife, and smile uneasily. She shakes her head indicating that this is indeed not some sort of joke; your pride and joy really has brought home this old codger, and that what she says is true, they are indeed engaged.

How would you react? How would any parent react? You can’t be serious, my sweet. But she is. But he’s ... old. So are you, Daddy. But he’s older than me. Jesus Christ, he’s older than my father.
Can this be age-ism? Are you really so narrow-minded and bigotted? No.

What has age-ism to do with this sad state of affairs? Do you hate old people? Do you hate you own father? Do people usually hate their own grandparents, or anyone’s grandparents just because they are old?

READ MORE...