Monday, 30 April 2012

Rallying Ken's supporters

I can't be bothered to write up yesterday's Ken Rally so I will just copy out my SMS commentary below.

Ken at his rally on 29 April 2012

"What does BME mean?  Diane Abbot speaking now at Ken Rally.  Owen Jones just spoke."

"4th black person has just spoken.  I got here at 6.45.  Poet, social worker, Diane Abbot, female rapper.  They seem very exercised about Educational Maintenance Grant.  White people now called 'racial minority", it seems!  Missed Tess Jowell and Sadiq Khan's speeches."

"Ken speaking now.  Slip of the tongue when he talked about the unifying antisemitic rallies Boris banned, then corrected himself and said 'anti-antisemitism rallies'."  

I rather think Nuremberg-style rallies would be rather cheering.  They need not be antisemitic either. Read the list and you will see how innocuous it all sounded.   

It can be seen that they were not specifically or even predominantly antisemitic, and seemed for the purpose of making the Germans feel better about themselves.

Adolf Hitler speaking at the 1933 Nuremberg Rally.  
1933 – The 5th Party Congress was called the "Rally of Victory" (Reichsparteitag des Sieges). The term "victory" relates to the Nazi seizure of power and the victory over the Weimar Republic. The Leni Riefenstahl film Der Sieg des Glaubens was made at this rally.

The Totenehrung (honouring of dead) at the 1934 Nuremberg Rally. SSleader Heinrich Himmler, Adolf Hitler andSA leader Viktor Lutze (from L to R) on the stone terrace in front of theEhrenhalle (Hall of Honour) in theLuitpoldarena. In the background is the crescent-shaped Ehrentribüne (literally: tribune of honour).  

1934 – The 6th Party Congress initially did not have a theme. Later it was labeled the "Rally of Unity and Strength" (Reichsparteitag der Einheit und Stärke), "Rally of Power" (Reichsparteitag der Macht), or "Rally of Will" (Reichsparteitag des Willens). The Leni Riefenstahl film Triumph des Willens was made at this rally.

Frankly, I think doing this sort of thing would be immensely cheering to the British people.  Sadly, we would probably have to get the Chinese or the North Koreans to help us organise such rallies, or we would all end up slouching around being a disgrace to ourselves.

"Apparently, the Boris buses cost £8M each.   The most expensive cable car being built at Excel Centre.  Ken promises to call revolving restaurant building Johnson Towers."

"Ken says Boris avoiding debate like the devil.  Boris could have been on SUNDAY POLITICS today but he claimed to have a family engagement, but turned out he was campaigning in Kingston.  Ken derides 'neo-liberal nonsense'."

"Ken acknowledged Boris funnier but that ain't a requirement for running London.   Boris has no initiative and had no initiatives.  He doesn't really want to run London, he wants to be the next PM.  Standing ovation, not enough seats."

I will say that the most interesting idea he mentioned was the one about pension funds being linked to property.  I don't think I really understood it all to explain it to you, but it is mentioned at and it does sound truly innovative.  And that is certainly shows that Ken does have initiative.

Go, go, go Ken, and give Boris a haircut on May 3!   

Of Satyrs and Centaurs at Garden Parties

I was at a garden party, somewhere in Malaysia.  The gardens were vast and terraced.  Malaysian children singing almost identifiable English songs could be heard.   I remember feeling a twinge of regret that I probably wouldn't be able to remember the tune or the words to ask people later what they were.

Suddenly I saw this exotic animal.  It was a creature owned by the host, who was showing it off to the guests, who had gathered round.  It was the fur at the back of it that was so charming: grey, tufty and pleasingly designed - ideal for a coat perhaps, I thought.   At the other end of this creature was a man - a white man with ginger chest hair, with a strangely vulnerable expression on his face.  This must a be a satyr, I thought.

Or was he a centaur?

Or was he a faun?

I was not actually in the garden, but standing at the threshold.  The creature spotted me and came towards me purposefully.  When he was at the threshold making to come in, I said to it (or him) "You can't come in here."  But the guests accompanying him seemed to think it was OK, and so he  took my hand and came in, as if I were the hostess.  I immediately felt a certain responsibility to look after this powerful but unhappy looking  creature.

The Satyr at the Garden Party I was at looked like this man

He came in and plonked himself on the white sofa.  "Is that all right?", I asked the other guests pleadingly, for I am sure I would not have liked an outdoor satyr whose toilet habits I was uncertain of to sit on my sofa.

"Er, I think we had better wait for permission before sitting down, don't you think?" I said to it.   He obligingly got up, and I saw that he had in fact been sitting on a cushion.  I felt relieved, on behalf of the host.  Only the cushion to dry-clean then, I thought.

I asked the guests to please please ask the host if everything that was happening is how he would wish it, because I did not know the protocol about entertaining satyrs in someone else's home. The creature was still holding my hand.

Eventually, someone did come to me, sent by the host.  I then realised it was someone who disliked me called Troy Southgate, who had banned me after from attending any more New Right meetings after the 36th one.  My heart sank.  And then I woke up.

(Yes, I did know about the guy being a BNP candidate before I went to bed last night.)  I do hope I shall be given some credit for not talking about this until it was mentioned by others, but probably not.

I have a system of generating dream numbers, so send me your dream and I will see what I can do.

As for how I feel about the BNP, I do already know that many nationalists are dysfunctional, socially retarded, and do not come from the best backgrounds nor have they been to best schools.  

They are the party of Angry White Losers with a reputation for violence, and Nick Griffin will do nothing to shift this impression as he clings to his loyal core supporters, who unquestioningly support him.

That is why they are treated with contempt by their own race.  The Labour Party, who might  have looked after lumpenproletariat in a previous age, has gone all trendy and aren't in any case interested in non-unionised members of the white working classes.  To be a member of the privileged unionised members of the working class aristocracy, however, you would have to be very PC indeed, or you will find yourself kicked out of your union.

The BNP are mostly a party of lower class white men who cannot compete with foreign labour.   Most criminals come from a lower class background.  The leader of the BNP is not interested in making nationalism attractive to middle class graduates because he does not want anyone who could be leadership material stealing his limelight.

The fact is that these people have been ignored and marginalised because the Labour Party has kicked away the ladder of a good traditional education for them, and by this I mean the grammar schools.  Some of you may remember that Shirley Williams and Tony Crosland wanted to destroy every single fucking grammar school in the land and have more or less succeeded in doing so.  The white urban proletariat are not taught the virtues of hard work at their sink schools and have been deprived of their fathers by their slut single mothers who have not had the ability to teach them good manners or anything of much use in their fatherless undisciplined childhoods.

Now, they only have the BNP to go to, but Nick Griffin only wants them so he can exploit their grievance and their credulity.   He has no intention of even saying what needs to be said to fix the country, because that would be unpopular indeed, but I do.  I dare to criticise the Slut Single Mother.  

Very few people however dare criticise the worst of women and the worst of employees - the Slut Single Mum, probably because they know someone who is an SSM, are themselves an SSM or their mother is an SSM, so degenerate are the white working classes these days.

Indeed, so degenerate are the whites that David Starkey (one of the more honourable homosexuals who disdains gay marriage) said that the whites have become black.  Even he forbore to say that black people are mostly singly parented, fearing the wrath of feminists both white and black.

So it is not surprising then that no sane British employer would want to hire them, and instead prefer cheaper more willing foreign labour.

The Labour Party has completely closed its eyes to the degeneracy of the white working classes because it has its testicles in the vice-like grip of the feminists who also have the testicles of the teaching profession in its vice-like grip.   The Labour Party is so rotten with feminism that its current leader forgot to marry the mother of his two sons until compelled to do so when he became Labour Party leader in spite of all expectation.

The Labour Party is so rotten with feminism that the promoter of the only electorally viable idea of Blue Labour, Lord Glasman, was disgraced and marginalised by the feminists.

The Conservative Party too is also rotten with feminism, for its leader is now promoting gay marriage.

Feminism is a cancer.  Gay marriage is a tumour.

Cameron is so unmanned that he doesn't even pretend to hide the fact that he is afraid of the harridans at Mumsnet.

It is actually quite easy to defeat feminism if you know how, and I certainly do.  Strange, is it not, that I have more moral courage in my little finger than the leader of the BNP, who only feels comfortable with people who are his social inferiors because he finds them more easy to manipulate and impress?  It is he who has seen to it that the BNP remains the party of losers, social retards, of white working class men who cannot compete with foreign labour in the field of unskilled manual labour as well as the party of CHAVs, sluts, granny porn stars and bastards.  Anyone of any talent is sooner or later marginalised, suspended or expelled because he wants to be Top Dog at all costs because the party is his only source of income.

Nick Griffin won't be touching feminism with a barge-pole because it is more than his job's worth.   To tell the degenerate white working classes they have been fucked by feminism is not the message he cares or dares to give.   That is basically how DEGENERATE the nationalist movement is.  To be fair, no nationalist I know outside the BNP dares to discuss feminism either, and use his real name, apart from Simon Sheppard, the Political Prisoner.

So intellectually bankrupt are these nationalists that they can only go on about the JOOS,  MOOSIES and IMMIES so they can blame them for everything that is wrong with their lives and their government while Nick Griffin feeds and fattens himself on their grievance, which he has no intention of addressing.

So there you are.  I could instantly transform the BNP into a party worth voting for by the next election, but I know that the racial pride of white men will not allow them to be led by a foreigner and a female of another race.   They prefer the weeds of Nick Griffin and the NF to the fruits of Claire Khaw.

So there we are, sliding merrily along the slippery slope of decline, decadence, degeneracy and doom.  You cannot help a person who does not want to help himself, who has given up and is rotting even now as we speak - morally, spiritually and physically - as Britain continues to marinate in a stinking concoction of toxic feminism ....

Isn't it time YOU called the cops on feminism?

Dare you discuss this with a woman?

No, of course not.  That is how scared you are, you little man afflicted by moral and spiritual limp-dickery that is only the prerogative of woman.    That is why you, your nation and your civilisation deserve to DIE.

Who will protect the men when the men become women?  Not the women, you can be sure.   The men will be slaughtered, and the women and children sold as slaves.   

The Orwell Prize and the Bernard Crick Prize

Yes, I am still whingeing about the scurvy way in which I have been treated by the Orwell Prize.

It was set up by Bernard Crick, a well-known lefty with an obsession with racial discrimination.  Lefties do not tend to approve of me so I can imagine that Bernard Crick would not be awarding me any prizes for anything I have done.

However, I like to think that George Orwell and I would have got on swimmingly.  Orwell satirised the Communists and the Soviets and there is no suggestion at all in anything that he has written that he would have disapproved of me, I, who have turned political writing into an art, but whose talent will not be acknowledged because the Prize is run by a bunch of rabid old lefties who are so arrogant they did not even attempt to hide their bias this year when they appointed two judges for the blogging prize with known Labour connections viz Suzanne Moore and Hopi Sen, who are bound to hate and fear my anti-feminist views and nationalist stance.

Bernard Crick also has a prize named after him viz the The Bernard Crick Prize

While I am happy not to enter for his prize and happy not to receive one from the crafty old lefty, I would like to point out yet again that the Orwell Prize has been hijacked by the liberal left.  Any government of any hue should not allow the award of such a prestigious prize to be controlled by a bunch of people who are corrupt, smug, arrogant and quite simply unable to comprehend politics except through the narrow focus of their tunnel vision.

I would argue that the Orwell Prize should not be awarded according to the narrow leftist principles of Bernard Crick (even though he was the one who set it up), but the grander vision of George Orwell himself, who understood only too well the arrogance that lies behind the liberal left's attempt to deny me the blogging prize that I deserve. It is only the corruption, bias, indifference and negligence of those administering the Prize that has prevented me from winning it. is where to read my blog posts that have been dismissed by the corrupt and cowardly leftists who plan to ignore and marginalise me.

It would not be so bad if the Orwell Prize called itself the Bernard Crick Prize of Commie Pinko Feminist PC Liberal Political Writing, but they do not.  If they had I would not have wasted my time.   They are quite simply a FRAUD and a DISGRACE.

Below are the people ultimately responsible for this state of affairs.

The Council was formed in 2009 to simplify the governance of the Prize, which had previously been split between the Prize’s main partners: Media Standards Trust, Orwell Trust and Political Quarterly. The Council is currently made up of:

Bill Hamilton (chair) Literary agent and literary executor of the Orwell Estate at A. M. Heath, Orwell Trustee

Richard Blair Son of George Orwell, Orwell Trustee

Meg Russell Reader in British and Comparative Politics and Deputy Director of the Constitution Unit at UCL, Political Quarterly board member

Albert Scardino Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist, Media Standards Trust board member

Jean Seaton Professor of Media History at the University of Westminster, Director of the Orwell Prize, Political Quarterly board member and Orwell Trustee,-jean

D. J. Taylor Author, Chair of the Orwell Trust

Tony Wright Former MP for Cannock Chase, Professor of Government and Public Policy at UCL, co-editor of Political Quarterly

However, the person probably most responsible for this state of affairs is

Katriona Lewis | Administrator, Orwell Prize
Email |
Phone | 0207 229 5722
Address | The Orwell Prize, 5/7 Vernon Yard, Portobello Road, London W11 2DX

Sunday, 29 April 2012

Essay on the problem of Feminism by an Enlightened Nationalist who wishes to be known as "Eric Blair"

Everything that is wrong about Western society stems from feminism and the fact that men are now afraid of women.   Discuss.

Feminism is the ultimate expression of the liberal conspiracy, the cultural-Marxist conspiracy, designed to emasculate white men and distort forever the natural working relationship between the sexes. Feminism does not attempt to inflict itself on Chinese or Japanese men, or Black men or Muslims. They’re culturally exempt from the oppression of this insidious social disease. Its victim is the white male, the inarticulate white male biomass and the white men who’ve been intellectually paralysed by its androcidal toxicity. 

But when did the planned diminishing of western white men in the name of ‘equal rights’ begin? Feminism began in the late 1960s, portraying women as the perpetual victims of male tyranny and it purported to address the supposed inferior social condition of women. But feminism had little to do with social justice. Rather, it was rooted in a militant lesbianism, a deep detestation of men in general, and that gave it its powerful single-minded dynamic. So now, aided throughout by the male inadequates of the political left, militant feminists have succeeded in creating a new social construct and a white man never seen before in history, a man who is no longer comfortable in his natural masculinity. And in this emasculating process, masculine integrity, the very foundation of nationalism and nation states has been severely compromised to the point of extinction.

Worse still, under the relentless onslaught of female-orientated mass advertising, modern white men are required to feminise themselves and conform as metrosexual men. They’re obliged to show female patterns of behaviour, wear ‘manly’ perfume  and use skin conditioners. They must show respect for the feelings of others and feel free to show their own feelings without reservation or embarrassment. The ethos of the ‘stiff upper lip’ and ‘big boys don’t cry’ has died and nowhere is this more evident than in the case of the emoting, feminised white American male. And so successful has the feminist movement been in the blurring and diminishing of sexual roles that even the natural distinction between male and female has been rendered ambiguous. The gay movement is the bastard child of feminism.

To compound all these manufactured problems for white men, to add insult to injury, feminism has told women they don’t need men at all except for the purpose of fertilisation. Women don’t need the socioeconomic unit of marriage, they can live alone with their random offspring on welfare and the state will be Big Sister. Their daughters follow their example and their sons are signalled they have no more a role to play than that of their absent and often anonymous fathers. The masculine identity of young white males is obliterated and no more obvious is this than within inner-city communities where an ersatz machismo has taken the place of the instinctive values traditionally handed on from father to son; courage, fortitude, strength, self-discipline, a male work ethic and personal honour. Within just four decades, feminism has driven these values to the edge of the abyss. 

None are more blind to these processes than white nationalists as they consider the uncomfortable and bleak situation they find themselves in. But in their introverted world, there’s no sense of masculine solidarity, no brotherhood, they’re held together by a collective inferiority complex. Their forums are whining, negative and full of rancour and discord and there is no awareness of the covert, imperial matriarchy that feminism has inflicted on them. Feminism has won even in the last refuges of white nationalism and diverted its attention.  Instead of identifying feminism as the real problem that faces them, its proponents blame other races for their misfortunes in their ever-diminishing world. They define themselves, unwittingly, by what they hate rather than by what they are. This is partly due to their almost universal incapacity for intellectual analysis and the fact that the forces of feminism are now so deeply embedded in society - they’re indistinguishable from an invisible force of nature, such as gravity.

So, how will the self-confidence and natural role of the white male ever be recovered? Is it too late to change things? Maybe the answer lies in a new debate between men and women to establish a new equality where the respective roles and attributes of the sexes realign with the natural order. For this to happen, white men must shed the artificial and unnatural inhibitions inflicted on them by feminism. They must take courage and not be inhibited by the false intellectual and moral credentials of feminism. It has to be said, this could be an enormous challenge, but feminism itself only began with a handful of activists. Or, maybe the answer lies in the political formulation of a new moral rearmament based on the principles of equality not inequality, not of "who's right" but of "what's right". A new non-religious variant of Buchmanism. 

Whatever the road ahead may be, the time for nationalism to overthrow feminism and the existing world order is long overdue. We’re certainly living in interesting times , so perhaps an old remedy from history, a global economic collapse, will be the spur required to force the restoration of the natural order to its default setting." 

May I tentatively suggest that nationalists appoint me as their spokeswoman? contains the bare bones of my publicity campaign.  

If it is any comfort the Japanese seem to be suffering from a similar malaise. 

War, I suspect, is the cure, and what a terrible cure it will bel.   

Martin Webster's speech at the 38th New Right meeting, interrupted

Was this really so bad and antisemitic it had to be stopped by the landlord, who had been paid for the hire of his function room?

Below are my notes:

Doublethink, Ruthlessness and Cynicism in the Zionist Movement and Jewry

"What they think is doublethink gentiles think is duplicity and cheating."

Webster points out that Nuremberg laws declared that only members of the race can be citizens of a nation of that race. "Or else we will find ourselves calling a cat born at sea a kipper."  

[It is tedious how so many nationalists cannot get it that race is a smaller concept than nation, since a nation consists of groups of people who have agreed to form a nation in pursuit of their own self interest.  If we want to send everyone back to where they come from then the Old World would have to suffer the return of all the white people who colonised the New World, if the Native Americans got it together to forcibly repariate them all.  Therefore, gentlemen, therefore, we have to take the world as we find it, and ruefully admit the practical truth of the legal adage that possession is nine-tenths of the law.

It would be nice if nationalists would now just  GROW UP and stop doing the political equivalent of a child saying "I want".  Whenever they talk about repatriating non-white British citizens either forcibly or voluntarily they are doing the political equivalent of saying "I want", which well brought up children of sensible parents are told not to do so when they are old enough to understand.   Perhaps after that,  we can move on to talk about more important things, such as the

(1) challenging of feminism
(2) the uncompromising promotion of family values supported by marriage
(3) the return of male authority
(4) the return of parental authority, and, most importantly of all 
(4) the stigmatisation of the Slut Single Mum who breeds her illegitimate feral offspring at taxpayers' expense.]

"Jews are defined as persons who are born to a Jewish mother."

A Rabbi in Nazi Germany approved of the Nuremberg laws because it helped Jews define themselves, apparently. 

There were active transactions between Zionist movement and SS. Lorries were provided to the Nazis by Zionists so Jews could escape cattle truck transportation to somewhere else. But it has to be noted that these Zionists did not want to sick Jews, old Jews or Jews with sciatica [Webster suffers from sciatica] but wanted young and fit Jews who would go forth and multiply to deprive the Palestinians of their homeland. 

"Any panel discussion on Radio 4 has a Jew on it or Editor or Producer is." 

"Everything that reaches gentile ears has already been filtered through Jewish minds."

"In just the same way that Jews don't want gentiles to know the secret of their success, Hitler said National Socialism was not for export. Ruthless and immoral application of the laws of natural selection - survival of the fittest - is what the Jews do." 

[I have already said elsewhere that if Hitler were really serious about Darwinian selection, he would have converted to the Germans to Judaism en masse and just shot the ones who wouldn't.]

"The Jews exude an attitude which is secretive, selective, racist, exclusivist and predatory of other people."

"We the British are a small number of folk, heavily invaded at the moment by aliens who wish us no good at all. We've got to find ourselves not only to shake off the parasites infesting our fur at the moment, but after that we have to find a way of maintaining and defending our national independence and our identity as a people in a world full of different other kinds of people."

"It is in our interests always to be strong - speak quietly and carry a big stick, as they say - and it is also in our national interest to make as many friends as possible, whatever colour they are, as long as they are not inter-breeding with us, as long as we are not allowing ourselves to be interbred with, as long as they are not poncing off us, as long as they pay our bills for the stuff we send them, as long as we pay our bills for the stuff they send us, there is no reason why, with a sensible financial system, we should have a snarling, aggressive, predatory view of everyone else."

"The Indians are either at your feet or at your throat."

Webster talks about the banking system set up by the Jews, Dickens' description of the Jews, especially the Rothschild Octopus.

"They back every horse in the race using other people's money."

"Jewry have promoted multiracialism to us, and to the Communists too." 

"Clement Attlee was the best Prime Minister, Bevan the bravest Foreign Secretary." 

The government promoted immigration: "to slap down the uppity working classes, bring in the blacks. They will soon come back to you cap in hand begging for a job."

"The Jews have a global vision."

Webster tried to curry favour with the Jews when he was young and naive after the setting up of the NF. There was a plan afoot by the Neo Nazis to throw bits of bacon at the Chief Rabbi at the cenotaph parade.

In those days he was fighting off attacks in the street by the 62 Group and he thought he would earn some brownie points by tipping them off. 

Gerald Smith of the Jewish Chronicle said to Webster after he had tried to curry favour with the Jews, in the hope of getting the 62 group off his back.

"Even if we thought that you weren't anti-Jewish, even if we thought that were anti-anti-Jewish, even we thought you were positively pro-Jewish, we would fight you to the bitter end, to the death. Why? Because if you were successful in alerting the ordinary British people to the threat of coloured immigration, to the racial, social and cultural threat and the rest of it - if you made the British people what they are not at the moment - racially sensitive, racially aware - then certainly you might be successful in sweeping away all the blacks, all the Pakis and all the rest of the stuff that is coming to this country, but a racially alert, triumphant and sensitive British people would look around after that, and who would their gaze alight upon?  

The Jews. 

And in your country, if your people see so many exotic creatures from all over the world from all parts of Africa, Asia, the West Indies, South America, God knows where else, you will be so distracted by that that we pass under the radar." 

So we need the lands of the diaspora to be cosmopolitan, multiracial because we are unified in your country and in Israel, but you are not. 

[This is understandable since Christians were horrid to Jews and Muslims when they were in charge, and also horrid to each other, because their doctrine of the Trinity (that you must believe that Christ is also God or go to hell) is so weak and ridiculous that they needed all manner of thoughtcrime legislation to prevent Christians from throwing out the baby of morality with the bath-water of the Trinity.  Western man should have embraced Islam after discovering the design flaw of Christianity, but he was too proud and too hedonistic and hypocritical to do so.]

He thanked Gerald Smith, Chief Reporter of the Jewish Chronicle whom he met in 1970 for alerting him to the fundamental attitude and the fundamental nature of the Jewish threat.

They judge everything on this question "Is it good for the Jews?"

In the US the National Association for the Advancement of Coloured People were not negroes, they were Jews.

They use Marixist ideas to promote race-mixing amongst gentiles in the West. Then they used Holocaustianity to make it seem that opposing black people will inexorably lead to the ovens of Auschwitiz.

"The Jews have promoted amongst us race mixing.  But amongst themselves they are ruthlessly promoting a campaign to stop themselves from marrying out. The most insulting and revealing argument to Jews who are thinking of marrying out is "Marrying out is a continuation of Hitler's work.  This means that marrying out is genocide. Why is it bad for them but a moral duty for us?

Jews founded to the ANC. Jews were working with the South African government to make a nuclear bomb. 

White South Africans should have set a generous portion of the land to the black people and subsidised those native peoples to make a success of themselves. They should have been content with white nannies, white dustmen, white sewer workers, white farm labourers standing on their own feet. Then apartheid would have an honesty, frankness and decency about it.
Webster was saying that the Jews at the time were interested in preserving white civilisation in South Africa, at least until they got their bomb. 

Then the publican of The Lamb interrupted.  Not a believer in free speech then.
After being thrown out.  Pretty blond WPC.  

Saturday, 28 April 2012

A proposed Darwinian Party of Nationalism - POLITICS DRAMA DOCUMENTARY IDEA

  1. Its purpose - to give anyone who has revolutionary ambitions a chance to play the game of politics and eventually overthrow the government.
  2. Anyone can join as long as they can convince its founder members that they are sincere in wishing to develop policies that promote the National Interest and are decent, right-thinking members of society.
  3. A Code of Conduct will require that its members behave in a comradely way towards each other.  (An example of uncomradely behaviour would be if members do unto other members what they hate to have done unto themselves.)
  4. Such a party would function as a debating society with motions proposed, seconded, opposed or carried as the case may be as well as run for elections.
  5. There would be a disciplinary tribunal whose quality of rigour and mercy will be higher than that of any other party in the country.
  6. The member's right to criticise party policy or the leader without endangering his position in the party will be jealously upheld.  
  7. There will be no Party Whip and it will be as if Peter Bone MP's House of Commons Disqualification Bill were in force.
  8. Its purpose is to eventually create a one-party state in which current MPs and aspiring politicians find that the workings of such a party gives them better working conditions than what is currently available, as well as making their jobs easier and their position more prestigious while delivering to voters better government.  

It is hoped that the workings of such a party will be of some interest to psychologists, politicians, journalists, revolutionaries, aspiring dictators, TV documentary makers, novelists etc.   

Any TV production company who steals this idea without acknowledging the source of this idea or inviting my participation will not be making a programme that could be as entertaining as it would otherwise be with me and my associates in it.   

Schools to be prohibited from challenging gay marriage by PC police

The Catholic Education Service has written to every state-funded Catholic school in England and Wales and asked them to draw the attention of pupils to the Coalition for Marriage's anti-equality petition. Austen Ivereigh, former press secretary to the Archbishop of Westminster Cormac Murphy-O'Connor, and Andrew Copson, Chief Executive of the British Humanist Association, debate the decision.

Listen to this very SINISTER interview.

Apparently, objecting to gay marriage means you are homophobic and against equality, according to the gay British Humanist, Andrew Copson.

Apparently, the BHA are saying that encouraging school children to keep marriage just for heterosexual couples in British schools should no longer allowed, because it is political, and engaging in politics (which entails debate and thinking through the issues) is therefore no longer encouraged in our schools.

These people - ie the LibLabCon - are just steam-rolling their legislation, with no more than a token squeak of protest, while the nationalist parties and social conservatives are in complete disarray.

Below are my arguments against "Gay Marriage":

"Gay marriage" is an oxymoron.

Marriage was never meant for gay people, only for men and women who want to procreate and need rules to regulate their relations between each other and also as to the disposition of property in the event of the death of the one or both of the marriage partners.  

Why is marriage not for gay people?  Because they do not have children and have no moral obligation to stay with each other when one of them tires of the other.

"Gay marriage" is like a man wearing a maternity bra or a woman wearing boxer shorts.  It is purely and simply, FETISHISTIC.

Now, I hear that Carlos Cortiglia the BNP London Mayoral Candidate, has promised to defend feminism and gay rights against Islam in page 8 of this week's Time Out.  I was also told that the Time Out reporter was "astounded".

These benighted British Nationalists appear to have no idea that it was decades of chasing the female vote that has brought them to the abyss of national decline and racial degeneracy.

Feminism is a cancer.  Gay marriage is a tumour.

Fevered speculation about "Nazi Dave", Jeffrey Marshall and me in VNN

"This Jeffrey Marshall character. Is he a Talmudist Jew, or a Torah Jew? Furthermore, is he a Zionist or an anti-Zionist?"

Well, I personally do not think he is a Jew at all.  We were just visiting synagogues on Open London Day 2011.

"Civic nationalism is TREASON and is INTERNATIONALISM."

What silly people these VNN men are.  Embracing Civic Nationalism does not mean you care less about your own people, it is just a change of TACTICS.

May I point out that the Roman Empire was Civic Nationalist?

"I doubt Claire Khaw is with Searchlight. More likely some shady government connection. Her background isn't known. Hong Kong Chinese were heavily involved in such matters. Royal Hong Kong Police, Royal Navy listening posts, and also Chinese anti-communist elements. Khaw could have such connections."

"Such matters"?  WHAT matters?

I don't mind them making out that I am some sort of an Oriental Mata Hari.  Trust me, if I were a spy I would be a little more discreet.

(I have tried to join VNN to clear up a few misconceptions about me but they wouldn't even let me join.  This was rather worse than Stormfront, who at least let me join, post one post, before disabling my account.)

Friday, 27 April 2012

Proposed London Debating Society

 I would like to organise a debate to discuss this question under old fashioned debating society rules.

Who would like to be part of this Great Project?   

There is probably money in it.   

Other possible topics:

  1. "Should Britain have a one-party state now that all the parties have policies that are indistinguishable from each other?"
  2. "George Washington: 'Let us indulge with caution the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion.'  If morality cannot be maintained without religion, then surely our government has a duty to establish a theocracy?"
  3. "Should we examine more fully the destructive effects of feminism on Western civilisation?"
  4. "A patriarchy is a society that condones male promiscuity while a matriarchy is a society that condones female promiscuity.  Why is female promiscuity considered worse than male promiscuity in most societies?"
  5. "When we extol democracy above all other forms of government, it may be that we confuse the means with the ends.  Democracy is thought to deliver Good Government. Should democracy be abandoned since it has not delivered Good Government?"
  6. "Is widespread illegitimacy and female promiscuity a sign that your civilisation is at an end?"
  7. "Does feminism disarm a society against foreign and internal enemies until it either destroys itself or is invaded and conquered?"
  8. "Should voters be required to pay a minimum of tax?  This would swiftly disenfranchise Slut Single Mums who are a burden on the state."
  9. "Are the British now degenerate?  Has feminism caused this degeneracy?"
  10. "Repealing the Equality Act 2010 would at a stroke destroy feminism and its running dogs.  Do you agree?"
  11. "If we reintroduced the concept of fault into divorce, silly selfish wives would be less likely to divorce their husbands, resulting in less family breakdown so destructive of the quality of the next generation and the future of the nation.  Fault would be easier to apportion if there were a requirement to have a marriage contract before we can marry.  The Muslims show great perspicacity and practicality in having this requirement.  This should be done for the greater good of the non-Muslim population of Britain."
  12. "Should the British entertain the idea of being ruled by the Caliphate now that liberalism, feminism and secularism have failed them so miserably?" 

I think the above may complete the list of Liberal Sacred Cows.   

The Cassandra Prize of Political Writing

Since the Orwell Prize is now just a cabal of the Left Liberal establishment that falsely claims to represent the nation's political writing, I propose that the Patriarchal Right set up an alternative prize against the Demented Matriarchal Left.

When I am rich and famous I will set up The Cassandra Prize for Political Writing.  It will have express purpose of going against the current political orthodoxy, whatever it is, and will be known for the honourable impartiality of its judges rather than the dishonourable and blatant bias of the current judges for blogging, especially Suzanne Moore the Feminist and Socialist who has Labour Party connections together with the other blog judge Hopi Sen.

Can you believe it??

Only in apathetic and dumbed down Britain does nobody care about that  bunch of smug arrogant shits censoring political discourse like they have a God-given right to do so.

I actually told a whole bunch of journalists about it, but they didn't give a shit either, probably because they were hoping to win the Orwell Prize themselves one day, the cowardly shits.

Anyone who wants to complain about it should write to

Katriona Lewis | Administrator, Orwell Prize
Email |
Phone | 0207 229 5722
Address | The Orwell Prize, 5/7 Vernon Yard, Portobello Road, London W11 2DX

Thursday, 26 April 2012

Judicial Review of The Orwell Prize being considered

It appears that the Orwell Prize is the only prize for political writing in the UK.

It is certainly the case that the way they have awarded their prizes in the past has a proven track record of Left Liberal bias which they do not even bother to deny.

This year, they have two judges for blogging, both of whom have Labour Party connections viz Suzanne Moore and Hopi Sen.

I duly protested but my objections were brushed aside contemptuously.  Suzanne Moore's attitude was "People like us can do this to people like you.  It is a given."  The arrogance and presumption is breathtaking, but there you are - this is how an established member of the liberal feminist matriarchy behaves and thinks.

I would like to explore therefore the possibility of applying for judicial review.

Is the Orwell Prize a public body?

Not obviously because it was established privately but has the sponsorship of a registered charity - the Media Standards Trust. 

But it is the only organisation in the land awarding prizes for political writing.  There ain't no other.

It is a charity that serves a public purpose viz:

"The Media Standards Trust is an independent registered charity which aims to foster high standards in news media on behalf of the public. We’re a ‘think-and-do-tank’, conducting research on important media issues but also running projects to promote quality, transparency and accountability in news.

We believe high standards of news and information are critical to the health of our democratic society."

There is no denying however that it serves a public purpose in the expression of political thought through political writing, but it has taken upon itself the role of a public censor by a biased tribunal. Labour Party supporters do not pride themselves on dealing fairly and justly with people in the nationalist movement.  Indeed, they make a policy of treating us like a sub-human scum and are proud of this fact.

I am not saying that no obviously "right-wing" journalists are ever been awarded a prize, but the blogging prize is the only one that allows new talent to come forward.  People who regularly read "right-wing" writers such as Simon Heffer and Peter Hitchens would rightly demand why their favourite "right-wing" journalist is never awarded a prize when only the Guardianistas and the Observeritas are, and the Orwell Prize would have to shuffle their feet uneasily.

However, being relatively unknown, I do not have enough readers and supporters in a position to vociferously question the award of the Prize to a series of obviously rather dull Left Liberal bloggers rather than to radical right revolutionary me.

It is new talent that needs to be showcased here and I would argue that it is even more important that the blog prize judges be seen to be impartial.

Suzanne Moore is the opposite of impartial since she has run several online campaigns to get people to block me from following me on Twitter.   There may have been other online campaigns that she has run that I am not aware of.

Since it is clearly a problem that political thought has deteriorated in quality and narrowed in range, it is now even all the more important that the invalid that is Free Speech is nursed back into robust health again in this country.

Below are most of the grounds that I think may apply in this case:

Ignoring relevant considerations or taking irrelevant considerations into account

Suzanne Moore clearly thought she had the right to exclude me on the grounds that I was once the Election Agent for the BNP.

I wrote informing the Council Members of the Orwell Trust but they all ignored me.


It was clearly irrational of her to think she had the right to exclude me on the grounds that I was once Election Agent for the BNP.

Breach of natural justice

The fact that both blog prize judges had Labour Party connections meant that The rule against bias has been clearly breached.  There was clearly actual and imputed bias in this case since both judges had Labour Party connections and it is well-known that the Reds in the Labour Party feel a venomous hatred towards anyone with a different view to them.  While Hopi Sen took care not to show overt hostility, Suzanne Moore did no such thing.

Suzanne Moore is an unmarried mother and it would have offended her to be classified as an SSM at and to read my anti-feminist views.

She may not have liked my idea of fielding a BNP candidate in North Hackney & Stoke Newington either in the last General Election, when she was standing.

It is my view that the BNP would easily have got more votes than she received (a derisory 258 votes), even in her own constituency, and that is why she now LOATHES me with a seething, burning, boiling passion.   Too bad then that the BNP did not have the guts to do it and opted for where they knew they would get more votes but less publicity, because they wanted to play safe.

the Prize’s ambition [is] to encourage political argument and enthuse the public about politics and political writing"

"‘to encourage writing in good English – while giving equal value to style and content, politics or public policy, whether political, economic, social or cultural – of a kind aimed at or accessible to the reading public, not to specialist or academic audiences."

In short, to turn political writing into an art.

I wonder, though, whether there are any lawyers in this land of many lawyers if just one good one would be prepared to act on this matter of great public interest.

If the BNP were properly organised it would of course support me and even instruct a decent firm of solicitors to pursue this case, but it too is as cowed by the matriarchy as the LibLabCon because its supporters and members are the ones most affected by the widespread illegitimacy that Suzanne Moore and her feminist ilk has caused to spread like a cancer  in this country.

Nationalist Tittle Tattle

Yesterday a nationalist got in touch.  I think he was trying to say I should turn up at the Friday meeting in West London tomorrow.  Oh, but they would only turn me away, I said.  Perhaps they will forget to do so and welcome you with open arms, he said, and then I could really put a curse on the party if I were photographed in the group, he seemed to be saying - me with my rather striking poses with gun and flag, he said sarcastically.

I said it was my intention to start a campaign to detoxify Nazi imagery and to use it as a symbol of defiance against the PC liberal extremist political establishment we now have.

"A hard card to play," he remarked, and explained he could not be my Facebook friend either because it might be bad for business, after I complained that Eddy "Playing It Safe" Butler would not now be my Facebook friend.

Inevitably we got to the subject of other controversial photographs of other nationalists the most recent of which was the London Secretary Donna Treanor.

I said there were comments that the bits and pieces shown were of a younger woman when they know that Donna is a middle aged woman, suggesting the use of Photoshop.

No, he seemed to think that the skin tone and bits and pieces fitted.  The hands and fingers were certainly hers.

Hoho, I said, you sound like you know rather too much about the bits and pieces of Donna Treanor, I joshed.

What about those photos of Alan Harvey, I asked.  Were they really him, I asked. He was of the opinion that they were.

And then there began another spell of teeth-gnashing, hair-pulling and garment rending.  Why oh why oh why are we run by sluts, perverts, porn stars, prostitutes and porn addicts, he bewailed.

What is wrong with us?

No, dear reader, I did not say it was 3 to 4 generations of bastardy and sluttery that has reduced the white man to this sorry state.   I will let him read it here.

Only when enough people can bring themselves to say, after me, that FEMINISM IS A NATIONALIST ISSUE, will there be any hope of a cure.   You cannot have a prescription without a diagnosis.  You cannot have a solution until you admit that you have a problem.  Too many are still in denial about the perniciousness of feminism.

Another nationalist also called and mentioned those gun and flag photos, which he had heard about but hadn't seen.  He declared that I was an unusual individual and suggested that my family must have had problems with me.  I admitted that it was probably the case that back home I was considered such a trouble-maker than I can no longer return to settle there permanently.

I am therefore like a cornered rat.  It was UKIP who drove me further Right by refusing to let me join.  However, I do not regret doing so at all and have met very many interesting people which I otherwise would not have met, chief of whom was Simon Sheppard, Political Prisoner.

His analysis of the feminine psyche is spot on.  Because of the accuracy of his analysis  that is unflattering to women, it makes women hate him and then accuse of him of misogyny.  

Getting to know people of the Far Right has simply given me more range and depth amongst nationalist circles.

I think most people understand the need for me to attract attention and generate publicity.   It is perhaps a babyish way of doing it by posing Nazily with gun and flag, but it is really to demonstrate my commitment to the cause and my preparedness to offend liberal sensibilities and to put them on notice that their reign is coming to an end because the patience of the people is coming to an end.

I have started so I will finish, as Magnus Magnussen said.  I like to think I am like Christopher Columbus at the half way point of his journey round the world.  He might as well carry on rather than just turn back even if the way ahead be dark and stormy.

So, all I need to do now is persuade the ethno-nationalists that civic nationalism will serve them better as an ideology than their tried and failed ethno-nationalism.  We have very little time left.

It is only when a modern ideology of pragmatism based on sound moral foundations for the greater good (ie the National Interest) has been agreed upon will Nationalism no longer be associated primarily with the lumpenproletariat as represented by its core supporters who give Nationalism such a bad name.

That day should come sooner rather than later, and certainly before the next General Election, if Nationalists know what is good for them, which they probably don't, judging by the way they carry on.  

On being often compared to Adolf Hitler

Someone said to me today: "Some people have compared you to Adolf Hitler. I bet you did Nazi that one coming."

"But how am I like Adolf Hitler?" I asked in dismay.

"Probably because of your views on euthanasia of the disabled."

It should be noted that I at no time advocated a policy of systematic extermination of all who are disabled though many of enemies like to pretend that I did. My brand of Libertarian Eugenics consists only of legalising the practice of infanticide by the parents of the victim.  This means that up to the age of 12 months, parents of unwanted babies may dispose of them without getting into trouble with the law in rather the same way that the Ancient Greeks exposed their unwanted young.

This would considerably speed up the adoption process too, and obviate the need for social workers, adoption agencies and the like saving the taxpayer billions of pounds.

I really don't mind discussing the subject of EUGENICS.

Infanticide was not exactly unknown way, way, way before Hitler was even a twinkle in his father's eye.

"After the delivery, the midwife made the initial call on whether or not an infant was healthy and fit to rear. She inspected the newborn for congenital deformities and testing its cry to hear whether or not it was robust and hearty. Ultimately, midwives made a determination about the chances for an infant’s survival and likely recommended that a newborn with any severe deformities be exposed."

"Eugenics is the "applied science or the bio-social movement which advocates the use of practices aimed at improving the genetic composition of a population", usually referring to the manipulation of human populations."

"Eugenics was widely popular in the early decades of the 20th century. The First International Congress of Eugenics in 1912 was supported by many prominent persons, including: its president Leonard Darwin, the son of Charles Darwin; honorary vice-president Winston Churchill, then First Lord of the Admiralty and future Prime Minister of the United Kingdom; Auguste Forel, famous Swiss pathologist; Alexander Graham Bell, the inventor of the telephone; among other prominent people." is where you will find Allen Roper's essay on ANCIENT EUGENICS argues the MORAL case for Eugenics.

"The laws of the Twelve Tables required the pater familias to ensure that "obviously deformed" infants were put to death. The survival of congenitally disabled adults—conspicuously evidenced among the elite by the partially lame Emperor Claudius—demonstrates that personal choice was exercised in the matter."

I don't mind undertaking the task of explaining again and again these agreed facts of Western history to ignorant Westerners who have not been taught their own history in their morbidly feminised curriculum after they abandoned the Classics.

I don't mind explaining again and again that the institution of Marriage is Eugenic in intention, just like laws prohibiting incest.

Feminism is of course anti-eugenic because it promotes gender equality which encourages female promiscuity.

A matriarchy is a society which condones female promiscuity while a patriarchy is a society which condones male promiscuity.

What is wrong with female promiscuity?  Because it tolerates widespread illegitimacy.

Why is widespread illegitimacy a Bad Thing?  Because it tolerates and makes excuses for ever-lowering standards of behaviour, morality and educational standards, leading to the decline and fall of your society, race, nation and civilisation.

In a degenerate society, women find good men dull and bad men attractive, and are not punished for this preference.

Women, because of their weak, conformist and masochistic nature, will tolerate most evils while their strong maternal instincts seek outlet through the care of the helpless and the pathetic.  In those whose instincts are mainly masochistic, the more pathetic their offspring, the greater their status.

It has been noted that the most notorious cases of Munchausen by Proxy cases are women.

If only people would concentrate on what I am saying rather than wondering whether I am like Hitler in their infantile way.

I have no intention of having a union with Austria, or of invading Czechoslovakia or Poland.  In fact, if truth be told, I am really a bit of a peace-nik who believes in good old fashioned family values and the virtues of good government by a wise, courageous and rational political class capable of directing their minds to the principles of good husbandry in the long-term national interest and never again towards bribing the voters with their own money to their own long-term detriment for the sake of  a miserable term in office in which they will do very little good.

I am really not at all like Hitler.

How Ken can mop up a few more votes and give Boris a haircut on May 3

We could have a recorded debate on immigration, Islam, the war, the economy, law and order, the Americanisation AKA dumbing down of British politics, how he sees the future etc.  Or he could just allow me to interview him and blog about it.

If he wants me only at arm's length we can do this by Twitter or Facebook.

Over to you, Ken, to mop up votes from "Far Right" Londoners if you position yourself with just the right choice of words.

The only thing Ken has done that the BNP would approve of is his anti-war stance, which is in agreement with their own.

Boris hasn't even got that because that twerp voted for the war.  

Now is the time to see if all London voters care about is their own pleasures and their own comfort and that they don't give a damn about messing up other people's countries and ruining their lives.  

For all London voters who hate the war and what is being done in their name voting for Ken ought to be a no-brainer.

Now is the time to see if Londoners are mere sheeple dazzled by the public school charm of their Etonian mayor (with Prime Ministerial ambitions) who always makes a point of shying away from discussing controversial subjects and who VOTED FOR THE WAR, unlike Our Wise, Courageous and Independent-minded Ken.

The Late Jonathan Bowden

The late Jonathan Bowden   

The first time I heard him speak was at a London BNP meeting at St John's Church in 2008. That meeting was targeted by Reds who came with weapons.  Fortunately, the police were on hand to protect us from their violence.

The speech mentioned both A K and G K Chesterton, which I am sure went above the heads of the assembled BNP members and supporters.  I am sure I missed some of the jokes too, being rather vague about the Chestertons.  My mother had a Father Brown Mystery.  I never read it, but perhaps I'll pick it up now.

The last time I saw him was in January this year when Jez Turner organised a cinema outing one Sunday. We saw CORIOLANUS at the Curzon Mayfair and then we had tea at a fashionable Piccadilly French pattiserie.

I remember him drinking the milk that came with my tea after I had finished drinking my tea, and that I gladly asked for more milk, for him, twice, as my back was just next to the counter.

He hardly spoke at all when we were having tea, and had to be invited to give his opinion on what he thought of the film.

We agreed that it was probably after Coriolanus's antics that started the Roman tradition of having a slave whisper to Roman triumphators "Remember, you are only a man," to stop the triumph going too much to their heads and becoming another Coriolanus.

I thought him a rather shy man who only came into own when he was performing.  His oratory was quite clearly a performance, in the grandest possible way and therefore unusual for this reason. No one I have ever heard speak declaims and entrances his audience in quite the same way he does when he is at his best.

To enjoy his speeches your really had to put your notebook down and let his words wash all over you and be swept away by it all.

I am sorry that he must have died a disappointed man and that more people did not hear his speeches.  Fortunately, for him and them, too, there is always YouTube.

I am sure aspiring imitators will find his style very hard to master indeed. was the last speech I heard of his. was the last but one speech I heard of his.  

A most enlightening twitter exchange I had with a Red this morning

#BNP supporter with #swastika-embossed dagger jailed for life after slashing Indian man's throat on...
8:40 AM - 26 Apr 12

Claire Khaw
‏ @1party4all
@ant1fane People who feel threatened lash out. Good government would reassure people rather than call them evil for feeling afraid.
8:45 AM - 26 Apr 12

@1party4all how can you justify murder? Oh I forgot you are Clair Khaw!!
8:48 AM - 26 Apr 12

Claire Khaw
‏ @1party4all
@ant1fane You are one of those silly people who confuse "explain" with "justify", obviously.
8:49 AM - 26 Apr 12

Claire Khaw
‏ @1party4all
@ant1fane I ask you why X murdered Y. You explain the reason. I accuse you of justifying murder! You r positively medieval in ur thinking.
8:50 AM - 26 Apr 12

Claire Khaw
‏ @1party4all
@ant1fane Do you really consider yourself educated, or are you just deliberately perverting everything I say?
8:51 AM - 26 Apr 12

far too early in the morning to read @1party4all (C Khaw) sh*te! Block the evil woman!
8:52 AM - 26 Apr 12

Claire Khaw
‏ @1party4all
If you treat every EXPLANATION as JUSTIFICATION then you will not have things explained to u very often and will grow IGNORANT. @ant1fane
8:54 AM - 26 Apr 12

Claire Khaw
‏ @1party4all
@ant1fane And HOW am I #evil? Because I have won the argument?? u r just a totalitarian egotist incapable of civilised rational argument.
8:56 AM - 26 Apr 12

Review of the London Mayoral PEBs and for whom I shall be voting
The abysmal BNP PEB in which Carlos Cortiglia is nowhere to be seen and the voiceover is by Nick Griffin in which all the people who say they will vote BNP have strangely incongruous Northern accents for London voters in the mayoral election.  A significant length of it is devoted to explaining how and where to put the cross to its presumably learning disabled supporters.   Embarrassing, infuriating and insulting to anyone who has ever had anything to do with the party.   Some of the more paranoid nationalists have been saying for a while now that Nick Griffin is really a Jew or at any rate a state agent in the pay of Searchlight.  This level of incompetence and mismanagement can only be deliberate, surely, they say.

That he is "a condom on the cock of British nationalism" is another colourful phrase that comes to mind.

Why is Carlos not even in the PEB?  Are they ashamed of him now after making such a fuss about appointing him in the teeth of so many objections within the party?

I was told by Steve Squire the London Organiser that it was not allowed.  But why then is Lawrence Webb in the UKIP PEB then?
The Green Party PEB has no sign of its rather elderly candidate Jenny Jones and is instead peopled by the young whose future we are invited to consider as we dutifully vote to pay more taxes in the name of the environment.  Cut open a Green and you will find a Red!
Boris being Boris in this rather predictable PEB.
LibDem PEB with a gay ex-copper trying to sound strong on law and order.
Siobhan Benita looking beautiful and beguiling with just a hint of the air-head about her.
UKIP London Mayoral Candidate Lawrence Webb appears in this rather competent PEB with the dishy GLA candidate Stephen Woolfe.  PHWOAR!
I have never seen our Ken looking so slick and smooth and good.  Very competently put together, with a very affecting soundtrack.  If I were Ken watching this on the big screen, I would have been moved to tears too, because I am an old softy at heart when all is said and done.

Ken is prepared to discuss controversial matters while Boris the Buffoon tries so very hard not to discuss politics at all.

Boris the Buffoonish Schoolboy v Ken the Man.

Ken may not be public school but he is a Futurist and is prepared to put his money where his mouth is, unlike Boris.  Ken reads the writing on the wall and acts on his accurate reading of it sooner and better than any other British politician I know.

So, looking good, Ken!   Give Boris a haircut for us all on 3 May!   I will be giving Ken my FIRST vote because he was against the war while Boris voted FOR the war, which is just despicable.

All Londoners who hate the idea of British soldiers dying for Neoconning US and UK politicians (Bush, Blair, Brown, Cameron, Clegg and Obama) should vote for Ken if they really care that much (though I suspect most are too unprincipled and apathetic to care about what is being done in their name and wouldn't dream of making any sacrifices for foreigners their government has wronged, especially if they are Muslims).  Probably they don't, but I do, because I hate stupid wars by stupid warmongering politicians who don't know what they are doing.

I am SO disgusted with the embarrassing BNP PEB that I will be voting UKIP even though they won't let me join their party because they want to continue pretending I am racist, when in fact I would not accept racial superiority even if you begged and begged and begged me to take it.

I think it is probably those of the ones who are wary of me are rather elderly and set in their ways, and the younger ones are just wishy-washy effeminate libertarians who don't really believe in free speech and actually rather like the Equality Act 2010 who fear I may use their party as a stepping stone in my plans for world domination ....

Wednesday, 25 April 2012

Thinking aloud about setting up a Nationalist Unity Party

  1. Would Peter Rushton consider joining David Jones and Claire Khaw in a Nationalist Unity Party intended to unite Civic and Ethno-Nationalists?
  2. If so, he should bear in mind that David are both are libertarian and anti-statist and our over-riding aims would be to lower taxes and repeal laws, and certainly the totalitarian Equality Act 2010.,_2010  
  3. David and I are also anti-feminist and pro-family values and therefore in favour of the restoration of parental and male authority the lack of which has resulted in the sorry state the West now finds itself.
  4. This Party is meant to be a Counter-Revolutionary Party to the Sex Revolution, which was what let in Feminism.  Feminism unapologetically promotes female promiscuity, and consequently degeneracy, widespread illegitimacy, which corrupts the characters of men by making them think and behave like women in a Culture of Excuses and Entitlement, and has provably accelerated the decline and fall of the West.   
  5. Such a party would be run on the basis of a triumvirate.   Nationalism after all needs to be give the impression that it is a broad church.
  6. The idea is to have a workable combination of male and female, the young and the mature, town and country, white and non-white, that is pro-enterprise but that also cares about the condition of the poor and the establishment of a strong and flourishing meritocracy that is racially neutral.  
It is my considered view that Western malaise can be attributed to feminism and its toxic effects of destroying  the family through no-fault divorce and consequently male and parental authority.  All any foreign settlers in the West have to do in the West is to continue practising family values themselves while the West destroys itself and fritters away its inheritance on wine, women, gambling and song.   In short, it is her considered view that it is feminism rather than the presence of Jews and Muslims that is responsible for the West's moral, economic and intellectual decline.  

As G K Chesterton said, "When we cease to believe in God we will start believing in anything."   Liberalism, Feminism and the Glorification of Female Promiscuity are now the deities the White Man worships.   It is no surprise therefore that he is now sunk so low that they need a female and a foreigner to be the one to point out these brutal home truths that they are now too much in denial to acknowledge.

Denial is a particularly feminine trait, is it not?      

I really think that with me in the mix, such a nationalist unity party would get the publicity it needs to thrive and flourish.   I do not mean to be egotistical, but a female and a foreigner in a white nationalist party would have a certain novelty value that would make the liberal media ask questions, in spite of the NUJ commandment to NEVER report favourably on nationalists.

There is no one in the country better placed than I to promote the nationalist cause,  Now, all I need is your support and your co-operation without which nothing much can happen.  Even if you HATE the idea, I urge you to discuss it with as many nationalists as you can.   

Peter Rushton now appears on RT. 

'Mossad agrees Iran has no nuke bomb plot'

Are any of these bloggers really better than me?

I only ask others because I already know do not have the necessary objectivity to make this judgement.  Of course I think my blogs are the best around, for they make points that are revolutionary that leave the Liberal Feminist Left spluttering with indignation yet devoid of a counter-argument.

I therefore ask YOU, dear reader, what you think of the quality of the submissions for the blog prize shortlist, compared to mine which you will find at

Tuesday, 24 April 2012

Orwell Prize Shortlist Announcement

This year I was not invited to the Orwell Prize Longlist or Shortlist annoucements.  This year the Administrator of the Prize is a woman, rather than Gavin Freeguard, a man.

This year there was no attempt even to appear impartial, for both the blogging judges had known Labour Party connections.

How very sad then that the only prize for political writing that you may have heard of has been contaminated and corrupted by extremist PC liberal feminism and its insufferable smugness, self-righteousness and inability to accept any other view than its own distorted view of the world.   

Feminism is a Nationalist Issue

Thank you all for looking in, but I rather suspect you are only popping your head round the door more now because of those Nazi photos I had of myself taken with David Jones of Todmorden, formerly of the BPP at

I do have another blog which concerns gender politics and it is at  Do please subscribe to it if you find it of interest.

Feminism is a nationalist issue (though it is not treated as such by nationalists because they of all  people suffer most from the degeneracy caused by feminism). Let us hope it is not too late to now time to discuss the subject of feminism earnestly and rationally.

I, a female and foreigner, presume to speak for white men in the West because they are no longer capable of speaking for themselves.

For nationalism to succeed, nationalists need to treat each other honourably, but, being victims of a degenerate matriarchy, they no longer have any pride or feel any shame.  Brought up mostly fatherlessly by their single mothers, they do not have the first idea of how to behave like gentlemen or even the concept of  honour amongst thieves.

Sadly, in all of Britain it would appear, I, a female and a foreigner, retain most completely the theory and practice of behaving honourably, dealing justly, being magnanimous in victory and gracious in defeat.

Yes, it is awful to think that one such as I should be run more swiftly and go much further than white nationalist men in questioning feminism and being a thorn in the side of the liberal political establishment by discussing subjects that make them gasp and stretch their eyes.

That I have to do it because white men are cowering in a corner at the PC Liberal Feminist whip goes to show that the rottenness has gone right to the bone.

Anyway, I just wanted to tell you to subscribe to both my blogs and to not be afraid.  For nationalism to be a force for the good of your country, I need you all not to be afraid to say what you think, to the people in your lives.

All of you can be political activists by simply sticking your neck out and discussing any of the issues I discuss, using some or all the arguments I use,  with your friends and family, and especially your female partner, if you dare, if you are not afraid of her divorcing you, taking half your stuff, the house and then depriving you of your children.  

Everything that is wrong about Western society stems from feminism and the fact that men are now afraid of women.   Discuss.
Everything that is wrong about Western society stems from feminism and the fact that men are now afraid of women.   Discuss.
Everything that is wrong about Western society stems from feminism and the fact that men are now afraid of women.   Discuss.
Everything that is wrong about Western society stems from feminism and the fact that men are now afraid of women.   Discuss.

Now go and write an essay about it.  If it is good enough I will post it here so others can discuss it, and I will grade it too.

To rid your civilisation of feminism, you destroy the intellectual and moral credibility of feminism, and only I have the ability, credibility and courage to do so.

If it were a white man, even if he were not afraid of his wife doing the things she probably would, the typical response would be "He would say that, wouldn't he, because he is a man."

Men should therefore think rationally and put aside their pride and anger (both deadly sins) and think about supporting me if they agree with me that the desecration of Marriage after decades of chasing the female vote and submitting to feminism has brought them to this pretty pass of civilisational decline.

If they want something done about feminism as well as the overweening and oppressive nanny state they now live under, they can do no better than to support me with all their heart and strength, because I am the best person for the job.

I am so hated and feared by the liberal feminist establishment that the only tactic they are now employing is to ignore me, because they cannot respond adequately to any of my arguments, but do not want to give me publicity by mentioning me at all, even in unflattering terms.  
Therefore, if enough of us who have the talent, courage and energy join together we can form a Counter-Revolutionary Party against the matriarchal over-lady who has been squatting over us and peeing on us since the Sex Revolution, we can get on with overthrowing the existing order.  

David Jones has invitation to speak at British Movement meeting in Heckmondwike withdrawn

There is a silver lining in every cloud.