[Majorityrights Central] Empires, the Chinese Mind, a theoretical nationalism of ethnicity Posted by Guessedworker on Saturday, 14 February 2026 01:54.
[Majorityrights News] Moscow Times: Valdai residents report no sign of drones attacking Putin residence Posted by Guessedworker on Tuesday, 30 December 2025 11:33.
[Majorityrights Central] Thoughts on Mark Collett’s strategy for nationalism in the British future Posted by Guessedworker on Friday, 24 October 2025 15:01.
[Majorityrights Central] Principles, parts, processes of ethnic nationalism, Part 1: inflection? Posted by Guessedworker on Thursday, 31 July 2025 12:03.
For Britain leader Anne Marie Waters has posted a message thanking Morrissey for his support of the controversial nationalist party.
The former Smiths frontman has made headlines recently after he was seen sporting a For Britain badge while on tour in the US, before also wearing one while performing on Jimmy Fallon on US TV.
The nationalist party was founded by the anti-Islam activist Anne Marie Waters after she was defeated in the 2017 UKIP leadership election. The controversy and association for Morrissey began when he discussed accusations of racism and alleged connections between Halal meat and ISIS. He also said that London Mayor Sadiq Khan “can not talk properly”. He later issued a new statement in which he said he “despised racism and fascism” and voiced his support for Muslims, while also advocating For Britain.
Now, Waters has shared a new message of gratitude for the singer on Youtube: “Thank you so much for your support since the UKIP leadership election,” she said. “Thank you for giving us so much publicity.”
She continued: “I can tell you that the traffic to our website exploded with the story breaking of you wearing the For Britain button badge, which you have been wearing everywhere from what I can see. We have sold out of those, but the good news is we have more, and they have been selling like hot cakes, so thank you very much for doing that.”
Waters added: “Thank you, Morrissey. I hope to meet you one day. Thank you, Daily Mail. Keep up the hysterical smearing. It’s having the opposite effect. You are driving people to us.”
Explaining his support of For Britain last year, Morrissey said that he followed them as they were an upset to the status quo of Conservative and Labour governments. He strongly denied accusations of racism.
“I have been following a new party called For Britain which is led by Anne Marie Waters,” said Morrissey. “It is the first time in my life that I will vote for a political party.
Finally I have hope. I find the Tory-Labour-Tory-Labour constant switching to be pointless.
“For Britain has received no media support and have even been dismissed with the usual childish ‘racist’ accusation. I don’t think the word ‘racist’ has any meaning any more, other than to say “you don’t agree with me, so you’re a racist.” People can be utterly, utterly stupid.”
Calling for more free speech in the political realm, Morrissey continued: “Anne Marie Waters seeks open discussion about all aspects of modern Britain, whereas other parties will not allow diverse opinion. She is like a humane version of Thatcher … if such a concept could be. She is absolute leadership, she doesn’t read from a script, she believes in British heritage, freedom of speech, and she wants everyone in the UK to live under the same law.
He added: “I know the media don’t want Anne Marie Waters and they try to smear her, but they are wrong and they should give her a chance, and they should stop accusing people who want open debate as being ‘racist’. As I said previously, the left has become right-wing and the right-wing has become left – a complete switch, and this is a very unhappy modern Britain.”
Many took to Twitter to criticise Morrissey’s support of For Britain after he was seen wearing their badge.
“My former friend sporting a For Britain badge, a party violently anti-Islam, filled with ex-BNP and ex-EDL, pro-privatisation, far right and prone to exploiting tragedies to disseminate divisive anti-immigrant rhetoric online,” wrote journalist Dave Haslam on Twitter, sharing the image. “What happened to ‘It takes guts to be gentle and kind’?”
Morrissey will release his new covers album ‘California Son‘ on Friday May 25.
Scott Morrison: “I said I was going to burn for you, and I am”
He told supporters he had “always believed in miracles” as partial results showed the Liberal-National Coalition close to a majority.
Opposition Labor Party leader Bill Shorten has announced he is resigning after accepting defeat.
Exit polls had suggested a narrow Labor win for the first time in six years.
The final result of the election may not be known for some hours, but with more than 70% of votes counted the Coalition has won, or is ahead in, 74 seats in its quest for a 76-seat majority, with Labor on just 66 seats.
Australia has mandatory voting and a record 16.4 million voters enrolled for the election, which returns a new House of Representatives and just over half of the seats in the Senate.
The result nobody predicted
By Hywel Griffith, BBC Sydney correspondent
Try finding someone who says they saw this result coming.
For well over two years, the coalition has trailed behind Labor in the opinion polls, and the assumption had been it would be Labor’s turn to govern.
But somehow Scott Morrison managed to turn things around at the 11th hour - and he did it largely on his own.
With some of his cabinet colleagues considered too toxic to appear in public on the campaign trail, ScoMo made this election about him, and his ability to be the trustworthy, daggy-dad Australia needed.
In the end, it was very, very close, but the voters decided, on balance, he deserved the fair go he craved.
In another development, controversial right-winger Fraser Anning failed to regain his Senate seat. Fraser Anning cleared over ‘egg boy’ clash.Attack victims honoured in Christchurch. While in the Senate, he had called for preference to be given to white immigrants, used the Nazi-related phrase “final solution” while discussing immigration, and blamed the Christchurch shootings on Muslim immigration.
Jonathan Portes is a Jewish economist and a big fan of mass immigration. In collaboration with the Jewish immigration minister Barbara Roche, he was central to New Labour’s successful conspiracy to open Britain’s borders to Eastern Europe and the Third World. The conspiracy was very bad for Labour’s traditional supporters in the White working-class, but very good for the rich Jewish businessmen who funded Tony Blair and dictated New Labour’s policies.
Inflammatory nonsense
But while Portes (pronounced “Port-iz”) believes in open borders, he also believes in closed mouths. In other words, he’s a big fan of censorship and doesn’t like Whites discussing racial differences and the effects of mass immigration. When the conservative philosopher Roger Scruton was sacked from a government committee for alleged anti-Semitism, Islamophobia and racism, Portes welcomed his departure and condemned him for peddling “inflammatory nonsense,” “tabloid-level ignorance and straightforward falsity.” He then went on to peddle some inflammatory nonsense of his own when he praised the heavily Jewish “Race Relations Act of 1968,” claiming that the Act “outlawed direct discrimination in housing or employment, as exemplified by signs saying ‘No blacks, no dogs, no Irish’.”
“More Blacks, More Dogs, More Irish”: SJWs exploit an urban myth
That’s how hate-filled the White English were in the 1950s and ’60s, you see: when they were offering houses or rooms for rent, they put up signs saying “No blacks, no dogs, no Irish.” Thousands of signs up and down the land. Well, hundreds, anyway. Well, they were a common sight. So common, in fact, that there’s no solid proof that they ever existed. The Irish Studies Centre (ISC) at London Metropolitan University (LMU) has a single photograph of “somewhat uncertain” “provenance” donated in the 1980s. And when the academic Steve Bruce was researching the topic in the 1990s, he “tried without success to find one and had to fake one for a book cover.” Writing in 2015, Bruce issued a “plea to Guardian readers. If “No Irish” signs were as common as is asserted, there should be plenty of them remaining in private collections, local archives and the like. … Can we please see some?” No, we can’t. Instead, we need to have faith. Dr Tony Murray, Director of the ISC at LMU, says that: “Ample evidence exists in numerous oral history interviews with both Caribbean and Irish migrants that such signs existed well into the 60s.”
An urban myth
No, that’s not “ample evidence”: it’s anecdotage. I don’t believe that such signs ever existed. They’re an urban myth peddled by people who, because they hate the English, want to believe that the English are haters. Yes, there is solid proof that English people put up signs saying “no coloureds” and “no West Indians.” But I don’t think such signs were proof of “hate.” Blacks are much more likely to be bad tenants than Whites are. Everyone who has dealings with Blacks learns this. For example, the BBC exposed non-White Asian landlords in 2013 for “discriminating” against Black tenants. Back in the 1950s, the notorious Peter Rachman (1919–62) installed violent and noisy Blacks to drive White tenants out of houses he wanted to buy or convert into flats. That’s how the English language acquired the handy word “Rachmanism,” meaning “the exploitation and intimidation of tenants by unscrupulous landlords.”
Peter Rachman, an unscrupulous Jew from Poland
That definition is from the Concise Oxford English Dictionary, which describes Rachman as a “London landlord.” In fact, he was a Jew from Poland, part of the post-war influx of Eastern European Jews that also brought us the mega-fraudster Robert Maxwell (1923-91), a Jew from Czechoslovakia whose real name was Binyamin Hoch. It’s remarkable how the tiny Jewish community have supplied the world with so many financial crooks and confidence tricksters like Rachman and Hoch — compare Bernie Madoff and Michael Milken in the United States. But if you do remark this pattern, you’ll be in serious trouble. Noticing racial patterns is strictly forbidden in the intellectual Flatland of the modern West and in Britain there are now strict laws against signs like “no coloureds” and “no West Indians.” And who can we thank for these laws, which ended the right of free association and free control of private property? It was Jews like Anthony Lester and Jim Rose, who “founded the Runnymede Trust to combat racial prejudice and promote policies for overcoming racial discrimination and disadvantage.”
Predation was ended by expulsion
I described the work of the Runnymede Trust in “Barons of Bullshit.” It has an Orwellian name, because Runnymede was where, in popular legend, freedom-loving barons forced tyrannical King John to sign Magna Carta and grant his subjects protection against the monarchy and its allies. As Francis Carr Begbie has pointed out at the Occidental Observer, when the 800th anniversary of Magna Carta was celebrated in 2015, there was no mention of “two crucial paragraphs” in the charter that sought to protect gentiles against “the Jews” and their financial wiles. Patterns of Jewish predation were obvious in Britain many centuries ago, but they abruptly ended in 1290. That was when King Edward I issued an Edict of Expulsion against Britain’s Jews and they had to depart for the European mainland.
Most settled in Spain, Germany, Poland and Itlay (Venice, of course, had its own Jewish Ghetto).
The edict was not overturned until 1656.
Edward’s Edict: Jews were expelled in 1290
Jonathan Portes and other Jews would call Edward I a “hater.” I’d call him a pattern-recognizer who acted for the benefit of his White Christian subjects. But the English monarchy was briefly toppled in the seventeenth century by Oliver Cromwell, who allowed Jews back into Britain. When Jews came back, so did Jewish predation, as Charles Dickens noted when he created the Jewish master-thief Fagin in Oliver Twist (1838). I’ve also argued that Dickens created a Jewish villain in the poison-dwarf Quilp of The Old Curiosity Shop (1840) and that M.R. James attacked both Jews and Cromwell in “The Uncommon Prayer-Book” (1921). Dickens himself said: “Fagin in Oliver Twist is a Jew, because it unfortunately was true of the time to which that story refers, that that class of criminal almost invariably was a Jew.”
That’s more hate, Portes and other Jews would say. I’d say it’s more pattern-recognition. Dickens was a genius because he was so good at recognizing social, psychological and cultural patterns and then re-creating them in his stories, often embellished or exaggerated for comic or satiric effect. The Jewish genius, by contrast, is for creating seductive ideological patterns that aren’t based on reality even as they pretend to offer deep insights into reality. Jewish ideologues like Karl Marx, Sigmund Freud and Franz Boas were masters of smoke-and-mirrors, and their seductive ideologies all contributed to the egalitarian cult that rules the modern West.
Daniel Sperglord and Mangina-in-black enjoy pounding each other’s gay asses!
DanielS:
Captainchaos, while you are trying to deride mancinblack as effeminate for supporting me and MR, why don’t you instead question the wisdom of those who expect Whites to drop all concerns for every other antagonism to our system and attack the ‘pathogen’ ....markedly, it is not going to help us to separate and achieve autonomy from the pathogen if we do not also address our naive susceptibility to the pathogen or deliberate, traitorous introduction of it to our system that happens typically through vulnerabilities and entry by liberal/right wing thin or even pseudo warranted objectivism; also typically a reaction to the contradictory language games that YKW are playing in order to keep our people associated with the right, its rational blindness, mystification, confusion, short shrift of social accountability (viz. even to our people) and with it, disruption of our social systemic homeostasis? - obviously one of the chief aims of the pathogen is to break through systemic defense. Thus, it is obviously valid and important to look at our system and its vulnerabilities.
In short, it is going to be hard to take-on an enemy full throttle while you’ve got people confused, thinking you’re doing wrong, or naively “clearly” thinking that you are wrong because they are abiding by right wing/liberal (their lefts are our liberalism, rupturing our unionization when pitted against our bounds) language games, or outright stabbing us in the back because right wing pseudo objectivity serves to “excuse” why it is that they take the liberties or pay-offs afforded, and “why” we are getting destroyed in their abiding language games as “just a fact of nature” that they have no part in aiding and abetting.
I’ve been looking at this problem since the early 90s, and started to bring it to a double entry with the YKW as the chief problems to our social systemic homeostasis in 2009 ..and have been cultivating it since.
Now, regarding “pathological altruism” (the Taylor, MacDonald thing, circa, what? 2011? I never paid much attention to it) I only suggested that it may have been their naive attempt, even a misdirected attempt to look at our part, as it would likely be (misdirected), still caught up in right wing objectivism by its very means of “description and diagnosis”, but to suggest that I was part of misdirection and not taking the YKW seriously enough because I also believe it is necessary to address vulnerabilities and other antagonism (which will usually lead to their being organized to imposition upon us by YKW, true), and the fact that I recognize serious errors in Hitler’s philosophy and regime (misdirected and misdirecting headlong into disaster for Europeans, as his right wing premises would), are things that I, and Majorityrights, deserve credit for in service of European peoples, not harassment and denunciation.
And isn’t it a perfect example, wouldn’t Trump’s vanity just have him lap-up objectivist flattery and have the YKW walk right into his system, knocking his daughter up, directing his campaign to undo the Iran Deal, get him elected, and move right into Oval Office meetings to set his administration’s agenda?
The Finns Party’s Olli Kotro (L) with other ethnonationalist politicians in Milan, 8th April 2019 / Credit: Olli Kotro Twitter
The Finns Party has signed up to form a pan-European alliance with other political parties, ahead of May’s European elections. The other members are Italy’s League, Denmark’s People’s Party and Germany’s opposition party AfD.
The Finns Party’s Olli Kotro joining with Salvini
The Finns Party’s Olli Kotro, a candidate in the European Parliament elections, attended Monday afternoon’s announcement in Milan.
“Constructing a better and safer Europe with patriots!” Kotro tweeted.
Their aims are to preserve Europe’s borders, culture and history according to Italian Deputy Prime Minister Matteo Salvini.
The four parties plan to form a distinct group within the European Parliament to challenge the power of centrist parties.
“Together we will fight for a safer Europe with well-protected external borders, less immigration and a stronger cooperation to tackle terrorism and islamisation (sic)” Danish MEP Anders Vistinen wrote on Twitter.
The group needs at least 25 MEPs from seven different EU countries to be formally recognised as an official group in the European Parliament, where they’ll be known as the European Alliance for People and Nations.
At present Europe’s ethno-nationalist political parties are members of different European Parliament groupings, but the new alliance is the first step in Salvini’s attempts to bring them all together under one umbrella.
Posted by DanielS on Wednesday, 10 April 2019 05:00.
László Bogár reminds us that we are not alone.
Full House Judiciary Committee Hearing on ‘Hate Crimes’ and the Rise of ‘White Nationalism’
‘White Nationalism’ is placed in scare quotes as the enemies of White people take the liberty to render pejorative, defaming and indicting mis-definitions of White Nationalism, notably, as being synonymous with ‘supremacism’, despite the fact that White Nationalists just about always reject supremacism and define White Nationalism as we do here, as a designation for the Nationalist sovereignty of European nations and peoples; therefore, governed separatism, a means for peaceful co-existence, the multicultural diversity of human and pervasive ecology, not supremacism, imperialism, exploitation or violence.
“Many White Extremist Killers Were Inspired by Earlier Attacks” chart via New York Times
Here’s what you need to know
The attack in Christchurch, New Zealand did not happen in a vacuum. It was part of an overall increase in white nationalist violence that’s been legitimized through public officials’ extreme rhetoric in government, and effectively allowed to wreak havoc in society. In partnership with organizations such as Bend the Arc, we have been raising the red flag on the need to reject white nationalism for years. We’ve called on Congress to conduct a hearing on white nationalism. We’ve called on tech companies to do a better job of enforcing their hate speech policies online. We’ve also constantly called on the Trump administration and other elected officials to cease their extreme rhetoric as it continues to marginalize communities. Congress will be holding a hearing on Hate Crimes and the Rise of White Nationalism and we’ll be there, bringing you updates from the front lines.
Here are the details
It’s been over three weeks since a man opened fire in two mosques and killed 50 innocent Muslim worshippers. Since then, there’s been an increase in related hate violence, both here at home and abroad. In California, there was an attempted arson attack where graffiti referenced the New Zealand attack. In Britain, there has been a 600% increase in anti-Muslim hate crimes of almost 600%. The vast majority of those were incidents linked to the Christchurch attacks.
The increase in white nationalism has been legitimized in our government by President Trump. His long-standing affinity for white nationalist rhetoric, leaders and movements is well documented. Administration officials and members of Congress, often feign opposition of the President’s rhetoric. Yet, they continue to see through a policy agenda which is inspired by this ideology. We’ve seen white nationalists organize on social media platforms. In 2017, The Guardian released a report detailing how Facebook’s community standards allow harmful content and white supremacist ideology a space to live and escalate.
Along with national civil rights groups, we pushed tech companies to change their community guidelines. We’ve been pushing them to enforce their hate speech policies more effectively. Facebook has announced that they will ban posts, photos and other content that references white nationalism and white separatism. Still, it should not take a massacre to force a simple conversation over how to deal with these issues.
When attacks similar to Christchurch, Pittsburgh or Oak Creek occur, our message has been clear. Any response to these incidences, and to the forces which led to them, must come as part of a reaffirmation that America aspires to be pluralistic and unified. To achieve, we have to ensure any legislative or political response does not deepen already existing divides.
Here’s what we’re doing
As the first step in moving a path forward, together we have called on Congress to conduct a hearing on white nationalism. We need to have an understanding of white nationalism and its impact on communities. We need Congress to call white nationalism what it is: a threat to our domestic and national security.
We thank Chairman Nadler of the House Judiciary Committee, for his bold leadership hosting today’s hearing. Follow us on social media and join the conversation as we cover this important hearing.
Red Ice’s commentary: House Judiciary committee Hearing on Criminalizing Nationalism for White People.
White children and nothing but in a (still) White city, Warsaw, Poland. 3 April 2019.
Father who escaped Sweden with daughters allowed to stay in Poland
A Russian father escaped Sweden and traveled to Poland with his three children after they were given away to a Muslim foster family. A Warsaw court has given the family the right to stay in Poland until they have been granted refugee status.
The drama of 41-year-old Denis Lisov and his three daughters started in Sweden when his wife fell ill and had to be taken into hospital. The Swedish social services took the Russian man’s daughters away and gave them to an Arabic foster family.
Lisov could only visit his daughters once a week and only for a few hours, despite having full parental rights. All three of his children have Russian citizenship.
The Swedish social services took the Russian man’s daughters away and gave them to an Arabic foster family
Swedish authorities refused to give Lisov his children back and he decided to return to Russia with his family despite the ban. The girls were inserted into the Schengen Information System (SIS) as missing persons, which is why the Polish border guard had to detain the family when they arrived at Warsaw Chopin airport.
The Polish Ministry of Justice and the Polish proponent of children’s rights were informed of the issue. The representatives of the Swedish social services, the Arabic foster family and the Russian consul arrived at the airport.
Thanks to the help of the proponent, the Russian father agreed to apply for asylum for himself and his children in Poland. Owing to this decision, the family could not be given back to the Swedes.
“The court cannot send the minors to Sweden which they entered under their father’s care,” decided judge of the regional court in Warsaw on Wednesday afternoon. “Following the father’s hearing and due to the lack of proof confirming restriction of parental rights, as well as having in mind the minor’s well-being, the court has decided that they should remain in their father’s care.”
The notion of rules about foster families not respected
The Ministry of Justice also reminded that due to the efforts of Polish authorities, in December 2018, the Council of the European Union for Justice and Home Affairs passed the notion which foresees a uniform rule of respecting the cultural, religious and lingual identity of a child when it is given to a foster family.
The Ministry informed that so far, the law has not been respected and there have been situations in which children were given away to families of vastly different beliefs or from different cultures, as had happened in the case of Denis Lisov.