Who will lead the British branch of Generation Identity?

It does look like it could be Jack Buckby because he is young, politically active, has met Markus Willinger, and is reproducing large chunks of Generation Identity at

http://libertygb.org.uk/v1/index.php/home/root/news-libertygb/5975-generation-identity-chapter-1

But what ideas has he apart from the ideas of Liberty GB, an Islamophobic party even more Islamophobic than the BNP contained in the following links

http://libertygb.org.uk/v1/index.php/home/about-libertygb/ideology

http://libertygb.org.uk/v1/index.php/home/root/about-libertygb/manifesto

http://libertygb.org.uk/v1/index.php/home/about-libertygb/ten-point-plan

and his failed Culturalism?

http://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.co.uk/2013/02/national-culturalism-wont-work-as.html

Why Jack Buckby's idea of National Culturalism cannot work

As you can see at http://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.co.uk/2013/11/more-speculation-on-reasons-why-i-am.html Jack Buckby does not like me and cannot provide coherent ideological reasons for doing so.

Quite often my rivals simply hate me for saying the things that they dare not say.  They call it "grandstanding" because, not surprisingly, I do get a lot of attention when I say the things I say.  It is quite understandable, in a way, that many nationalist men would hate to see me succeed where they have failed, since I am but a female and a foreigner, or something infinitely more sinister ....

I am the mind of a man happily inhabiting the body of a female, and am nothing like what they have come across before.  Apparently, they want to be led by someone just like themselves - timorous failures - thereby allowing the matriarchy to control the terms of debate.  

If you were a sane lunatic would you let someone like you - that is, another lunatic - represent your interests, or someone who is actually sane, knows what the problem is and has the solutions?  

In my opinion, there can only be one correct answer.

The kindest thing to do is to assume that they do not know what they want, and proceed to tell them what it is that they do want.  

Compared to Jack I am an intellectual giant.  

Why I, a non-white, do not feel threatened by the ideas in Markus Willinger's Generation Identity

Yes, I know Willinger talks about a time when Africans and Muslims have returned to their homelands, but in a way I think anyone, even the indigenous, will want to flee the country when things get bad, and they will.

The rage felt by the youth of today is the rage felt by any adolescent that is unsure of its identity and cannot find anything appealing in its own land.  There are surely many now who find British culture shallow and degenerate.

What is British culture but pop culture, pub culture, TV culture, football culture, gay culture and drug culture?

What is the British character most recognised by foreigners but the culture summed up as "Dipso, Fatso, Bingo, Tesco, ASBO and Paedo"?

If you agree that British culture is the result of its laws and social practices, so is it also the result of its political culture, and its political culture is called Representative Democracy. This means that its political system consists of amoral political tribes incapable of thinking beyond the next general election whose divisions are easily exploited by the Israel lobby. The rights of these tribe members are abused regularly by their leaders and their cronies, and but they (especially the ones in Parliament and who are Cabinet Members) are too stupid to notice or too scared to protest against this. The consequence of this political culture is that all politicians who want to remain politicians must toe the line and play the system, and this means not saying anything that might resemble the truth or engage the public.

Only when the political culture changes will the British character change for the better.

When British culture changes for the better, Muslims will no longer wish to distant themselves from the culture of Paedo Bastard Britain Slutland, nor will Muslim women feel the compulsion to wear the niqab, hijab or burkha to proclaim that they are not sluts like the non-Muslim indigenous females.  They may not be so rude as to tell Western women what they really think of their morals, but that is what their obsession with wearing the Muslim uniform is really all about: an assertion of a feminine identity that is not part of Western slut culture.

The solution is therefore very simple: Western women should simply collectively resolve to cease to be sluts, for the good of everyone else, including themselves and future generations.

What is a slut?  She is a fornicatress.  Who is a fornicatress?  Any woman who has pre-marital sex.

It remains to be seen how resolute are these Identitarians in challenging the matriarchy that squats above their heads.

Generation Identity by Markus Willinger: an indictment against the liberal establishment and the 68ers

You can order it at http://www.amazon.co.uk/product-reviews/1907166416/ref=dp_top_cm_cr_acr_txt?ie=UTF8&showViewpoints=1 where I have reviewed it.  It is reproduced below:

It is short, sweet and strong as well as a compelling read. I must say I relish the thought of liberals reading this book and quaking in their boots, for they cannot refute any of the accusations Willinger makes with facts or logic.

As for British identity (which is currently Dipso, Fatso, Bingo, Tesco, ASBO and Paedo), it will change for the better when the right laws are in place.

The right laws, as far as I am concerned anyway, will be in place after the following take place:

1. after the repeal of the Equality Act 2010
2. after the repeal of the European Communities Act 1972
3. after the repeal of Murder (Abolition of Death Penalty) Act 1975
4. after fault is taken into account in any divorce settlement
5. after a flat rate income tax of 20% is in place
6. after the welfare-dependent and low-waged are disenfranchised
7. after the civil partnership and inheritance tax is abolished
8. after the welfare state is dismantled
9. after the NHS is broken up and sold off
10. after it is again shameful to have a child out of wedlock

The right laws would be the laws that undermine the foundations of the West's entrenched matriarchy that have made its government and people so venal, irrational and immoral. It would not be difficult at all to entirely discredit feminism as a viable, moral or intellectually respectable ideology when our voices are loud enough.

Generation Identity significantly increases the volume.

For an explanation of 68ers, http://www.counter-currents.com/2013/07/markus-willingers-generation-identity/ does this quite well:

In May 1968, wildcat strikes across France initially sparked by student rebellions brought the entire nation of France to a standstill, with President de Gaulle going so far as to flee the country. The slogans of the ’68ers were a classic example of postmodern Marxism, a cry for a life more meaningful than what was possible under capitalist alienation. “A cop sleeps inside each one of us. We must kill him. Drive the cop out of your head.” “It is forbidden to forbid.” “Be realistic, ask the impossible.”

Though de Gaulle was able to defeat the would-be revolution, and his Center-Right party even gained seats in the elections that followed, May ’68 had a huge impact on European society, government, and culture. It heralded the establishment of Cultural Marxism [feminism, in other words] as the default culture of educated Western opinion. The rebellious young figures of the uprising, like the charismatic Daniel Marc Cohn-Bendit (aka “Danny the Red”), have gone on to become the boring old bureaucrats of the European Parliament, lecturing the people of Europe on what products they are allowed to use, what they are allowed to say, and what they are allowed to think. Instead of the beginning of a new era of freedom, May ’68 was the beginning of what Keith Preston has called “Totalitarian Humanism.”

What I think of Gregory Lauder Frost's speech about immigration being a threat to the British nation

It is not that I dispute that GLF has a right to say whatever he wants to say about uncontrolled immigration and what he would like to do about it ie implement repatriation.

There was a time when he was talking about forced repatriation, which led me to ask someone there if he was NF (who do explicitly propose forced repatriation), but I was assured that he was too posh to be NF who are overwhelmingly plebs.

What exasperates me is that these so-called patriots do not seem to know the difference between making a complaint and proposing a course of action.

In his entire speech he does not in any way address the question of what is to be done about it.  Did he say vote BNP?  Or UKIP?  Or even NF?  No, he glorifies the achievements of the white race, says how unfair it is that liberalism seems to have gotten the better of them, and, er, that's it.

The speech was well-received though, particularly from a woman who laughed obediently and raucously at every predictable joke he made.

So this is the shambles of the so-called Far Right, these old men who don't like what is happening and can only complain like the querulous ineffectual old men that they are.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EjxXUj52m24  is where you can find GLF speaking for nearly an hour without proposing a solution.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-23627520 is where you can see how he is blinking like a frightened rabbit when being interrogated by Kirsty Wark about his views on immigration.

My purpose in blogging about this is not to mock the afflicted, but to make known that to TBG I am persona non grata.

While there are many who would point out that I should not be surprised that such an overtly racist group would wish to exclude me, I should point out that I have attended their meetings before and have therefore heard it all before when the TBG dining club (which is what it is really) was once called the Conservative Democrats and then the Baldwin Society when it was run by the late Mike Smith whom I am proud to have called a friend.  GLF and I were not on unfriendly terms and we, together with Andrew Moffat and Sam Swerling, attended Mike's funeral after he tragically committed suicide by throwing himself off Porchester Castle.  http://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.co.uk/2010/07/late-michael-keith-smith.html

It would have been all too easy to dismiss the fact that I was disabled from commenting on the TBG Facebook page or that the TBG Secretary Louis Wellcome was ignoring me for racial reasons.  It may surprise people to hear that out of all the parties I have joined it is people from the BNP who are the people I still see socially and who have become friends and that in my opinion UKIP people are nastier and more full of hate than BNP people.

I have of course tried to discover the official reason why I am now persona non grata, but GLF steadfastly refuses to tell me and pretends it is nothing to do with him by saying that it is not his department, even after persistent questioning with a gap of many months.

http://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.co.uk/2013/10/the-fact-that-no-political-party-in_28.html gives the reasons why I think I am now persona non grata.

It is of course disgraceful that these men are too frightened to even tell me why I am persona non grata. Where is the English sense of fair play?  Why are they behaving like cowardly and frightened old women? You would have thought that these men would have the wherewithal to tell me why they want me to sling my hook as they tell me to sling my hook instead of pretending it is nothing to do with them.

Why do I care so much?  I care because I would have relished the opportunity of being one of the speakers at their conference on 19 October, to tell me what I think is the cause of British malaise.  http://www.traditionalbritain.org/content/traditional-britain-group-conference-2013

Only one of the speakers got anywhere near it, and it was the very handsome and Aryan Markus Willinger who has written this rather interesting book at http://www.amazon.co.uk/product-reviews/1907166416/ref=olp_pr_see_all_top?ie=UTF8&showViewpoints=1 called Generation Identity.

On sexual matters:

"We reject unrestrained sexuality more than any other generation. This is because for no previous generation in history has true love played such a great role as it does for us. Of all the things that you're devalued and destroyed, you've left us love. Truly, you've never really cared about love. You've despised it and sold it short. But precisely for that reason. you've never launched a frontal assault against it. It remained alive. And it became to our last place of refuge. So here we are this world of loneliness and fleeting happiness; we long for the person who can bring us to safety. It is our highest goal and our greatest happiness to find true love. Yet we are sexually promiscuous, drink hard, and settle for the second best. No one suffers more from this than we ourselves. /.../ The consequences of your 'sexual liberation' have us in a stranglehold. It is impossible to go out even even a day into the world without being greeted by half-naked men and women. All films, advertising, and magazines consciously manipulate sexual desire. So it is that desire grows, often in opposition to our love. When it's over and the wild, alcohol-soaked night is behind us, we regret what we've done. Often we feel sad because of it. This inner struggle, which each of us must win for himself, is also part of our identity. Yet we declare resolutely: we want to win it! A long road may lie for us, but in the end, the love within us will triumph over animalistic desire. For we are generation identity." Generation Identity - Marcus Willinger

A few years ago I was actually shocked at the number of disabled nationalists and nationalists with disabled and illegitimate offspring who wanted my head on a platter for saying what I had said on the Victoria Derbyshire Show. http://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.co.uk/2011/07/transcript-of-what-i-said-on-victoria.html  I had expected some sympathy for about how I would deal with my hypothetical severely disabled baby, but not a bit of it: they were as equally horrified as the typical liberal.

I would have thought that if you cared about your race you would care about the quality of your race and be rather keen on maintaining and improving the quality of your race. I would expect that you would be prepared to support marriage as a means of improving or at least maintaining the quality of your race and to be at least concerned about the increasing numbers of your race that now have some disability or other, but not a bit of it.

There is nothing noble about British nationalism at all, but then what did I expect anyway, when it is clear that those most attracted to nationalism are the indigenous who cannot compete with immigrants in the field of unskilled manual labour and who are either too thick to see the role of marriage in maintaining the quality of your race or too cowardly to say so because saying so would offend most of their friends and family who are mostly SSMs https://www.facebook.com/pages/Should-Spinster-Single-Mothers-be-lashed-100-times/417696111659379, SSM-parented, MCSFs or SPOSSMs http://thebattlefieldoflove.blogspot.co.uk/2013/06/all-spossms-are-mcsfs-but-not-all-mcsfs.html?

Most of these men are obviously unmarriageable and must necessarily rely on the charity of sluts because they know they cannot afford the services of a prostitute, let alone take a wife.

While the more plebeian British nationalist with not much education cannot be expected to display aristocratic virtues, I had rather expected GLF and his ilk to do so.  How wrong I was.

Is GLF an MCSF?  I think we should be told.

Why are the men at TBG terrified of discussing feminism?  Are they MCSFs and SPOSSMs to a man?   If so, then that explains everything about why British nationalism as it is currently being represented and run will never get anywhere since they are donkeys being led by donkeys.

Must they rely on foreigners to do everything for them?



I am very happy to include this response from Gregory:

I see on your page that you describe yourself as a satirist.

Could I point out, as you very clearly failed to pick it up from my speech, that I reiterated in it (and also on Newsnight and Radio 5 Live) that I was in favour of the Conservative Party's 1970 General Election Manifesto pledge which promised to halt immigration and encourage voluntary [State]-assisted repatriation, and I said it was needed more today than it ever was in 1970. So you see I did call for action and it was not the NF, the BNP etc I was citing, but the non-Conservative Party.

When I was on Newsnight the delightful BBC thrust the studio lights in my face (not visible to viewers because of the camera filters) and so yes it upset my eyesight. Is your comment meant to be serious political observation when you don't know the half of it?

I have not the faintest idea why you are not allowed on the TBG Wall. Ask Louis Welcomme, the TBG Chairman (not Secretary, as you said), who is the Fat Controller there. Not me. I have not the time to be involved there.

Lastly, I resent being called "old". What will I be in 20 years time? How "old" might you be?

It always interests me that people who claim to be on The Right delight in attacking those on the Right.

To which my response was:

I would be the first to acknowledge that I am no spring chicken.  We are none of us getting any younger, which is why we should get our skates on and do something more than carry on as if we have all the time in the world. 

This exchange continues in the comments which follow. 

The Khavian Theory of Sex for a Gender-Balanced Nation

Why oh why oh why do these nationalists hate and fear me so?

This is so unfair when all I have been trying to do is investigate and discover the case of Western malaise and help white men find their lost mojo.  

As Mao said, "To investigate a problem is to solve it."  I did investigate and made a diagnosis.  It was a diagnosis that is unpalatable, requiring as it does to slay the sacred cows that Westerners worship. Not only is it unpalatable, it is also irrefutable, and so even my detractors have given up saying "No, you're wrong, Claire, it just ain't so."

They cannot deny the correctness of my diagnosis because the things they sometimes say, especially when they complain about Cultural Marxism (when they really mean feminism) suggests that they too understand the problem a little.

But they only mention it en passant when they talk about fatherlessenss, bad parenting, single mothers and the secret family courts.

Fathers4Justice are absolutely terrified of complaining about feminism and it is also actually run by a woman.

The men at the BDP,  TBG and the London IONA Forum surely know what I mean, but they are making a point of not telling me why I am excluded from their meetings.

Is it my race? Could it even be that they find some of my ideas objectionable?  But which ones, I have so many?

I cannot be sure, but I suspect it is my uncompromising view that slut-shaming would cure the West of its malaise and blow its cobwebs away.

They cannot deny that lashing SSMs 100 times per illegitimate offspring would probably be the only thing that would stop these immoral and irresponsible women from bringing into existence the next generation of illegitimate disabled, retarded, obese and behaviourally-challenged NEETs.

Even abolishing the welfare state would not do the job quickly enough, because there are bound to be more than a few who will still get knocked up however much you warn them not to.

Therefore inflicting corporal punishment in a  public place is the only way of serving as a regular and effective reminder for women not to be sluts, especially sluts who go on to become SSMs.

I suppose these men don't want to acknowledge this brutal fact, and want to carry on complaining about the corrupt oligarchy that comprises our government as well as Jews, Muslims, Zionists, Islamists rather than do something that might actually work NOW.

The British are after all addicted to welfare, cheap labour, cheap sex courtesy of feminsim and it is undeniable that all my proposals threaten the sacred cows of the liberals and breach their taboos.

You would have thought that these men who fear for their nation, their race and their descendants would be interested in discussing things in a bit more detail, or invite me to give a talk so they can challenge me about my views, if only to reassure themselves that things are not as bad as I say they are, but not a bit of it.

I cannot prove it immediately, but I suspect that all these nationalist men have

1. girlfriends who are fornicatresses
2. wives who have friends who are fornicatresses
3. daughters who are fornicatresses
4. grand-daughters who are fornicatresses
5. daughters whose  friends are fornicatresses
6. male friends whose girlfriends are fornicatresses
7. sons whose girlfriends are fornicatresses
8. girlfriends who are SSMs
9. daughters who are SSMs
10. grand-daughters who are SSMs

In short, these men who claim to be so concerned about the quality of the white race are either SPOSSMs http://thebattlefieldoflove.blogspot.co.uk/2012/08/sex-partner-of-ssm-spossm.html and/or MCSFs http://thebattlefieldoflove.blogspot.co.uk/2013/06/all-spossms-are-mcsfs-but-not-all-mcsfs.html.  

This means that what I am trying to do is the equivalent of trying to take the bottle out of the hands of a drunk, when he is bent on getting drunk.  

The problem is also identified by Markus Willinger of Generation Identity:

"We reject unrestrained sexuality more than any other generation. This is because for no previous generation in history has true love played such a great role as it does for us. Of all the things that you're devalued and destroyed, you've left us love. Truly, you've never really cared about love. You've despised it and sold it short. But precisely for that reason. you've never launched a frontal assault against it. It remained alive. And it became to our last place of refuge. So here we are this world of loneliness and fleeting happiness; we long for the person who can bring us to safety. It is our highest goal and our greatest happiness to find true love. Yet we are sexually promiscuous, drink hard, and settle for the second best. No one suffers more from this than we ourselves. /.../ The consequences of your 'sexual liberation' have us in a stranglehold. It is impossible to go out even even a day into the world without being greeted by half-naked men and women. All films, advertising, and magazines consciously manipulate sexual desire. So it is that desire grows, often in opposition to our love. When it's over and the wild, alcohol-soaked night is behind us, we regret what we've done. Often we feel sad because of it. This inner struggle, which each of us must win for himself, is also part of our identity. Yet we declare resolutely: we want to win it! A long road may lie for us, but in the end, the love within us will triumph over animalistic desire. For we are generation identity." 

http://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/1907166416/ref=cm_sw_r_fa_asp_aLvOG.036Y83X

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=23-JNgPGdTc

Sex with sluts is the opium of the white man.


Once the current state of affairs (ie the fact that most British mothers are SSMs, most British women are sluts and most British men are MCSFs) is reversed, you can be sure that a new culture and a new tradition will come out of this, like a phoenix from the ashes.

But first we must systematically and absolutely challenge the supremacy of feminism. The future of this or any society depends on whether the men of the West, who are mostly manginas, can control their women.  To control their women they must first take control of themselves.

To get better, you must first acknowledge that you are sick, see the doctor and take your bitter medicine.  If SSMs are making you sick then you must ask yourself where they come from.  SSMs come from sluts, just as butterflies come from caterpillars.

The trouble is that men - especially men who do not have much money and status - want sex to be cheap, and cheap sex can only come from sluts.

Once the government has created a moral environment in which most women are sluts from whom most men get most of their sex, then you will have an entire nation that is addicted to cheap sex.

To expect such men to voluntarily make sex more expensive for themselves is like asking hungry men if they want to pay more for food.

I do not expect the hoi polloi or the great unwashed to support me in this, but I was expecting just a bit of leadership from the great and the good, but the trouble with living in a matriarchy is that the great and the good soon become extinct.

This is because a society that is run by slut values turns all its men into beta males, if not omega males.

You would expect every animal group to be led by an alpha male. In our society the alpha male (in this case the British Prime Minister and all the men who are leaders of political parties in Britain) is afraid of the omega female ie the SSM https://www.facebook.com/pages/Should-Spinster-Single-Mothers-be-lashed-100-times/417696111659379.  The omega female is the least desirable female.  If you were looking for a wife the SSM would be the least desirable kind of woman for you.  By allowing indiscriminate universal suffrage to operate and allowing SSMs to vote turns all men into omega males - the least desirable kind of male. There is no other class of male that is lower than that of males who are afraid of the worst of his women, is there?   Men who are afraid of women are considered the lowest of the low in courage and principle, because such men would be afraid of human beings who are in fact stupider and weaker than him, and therefore beyond contempt.  

I suppose it is possible that men detest being told that most of the women of their race and nation are immoral and that they are afraid of these immoral women.

But if a patient must have his leg amputated or he will die, then surely the only ethical thing to do is for the doctor to tell him so rather than sell him another bottle of snake oil?

It is clear that the cancer of the matriarchy has spread to all the major organs of state in the West.

“If you want to destroy any nation without war, create adultery or nudity common in the young generation.”
- Salah ad-Din Yusuf ibn Ayyub

If these men want anything to be done they must not fear to denounce feminism.  If they are too afraid to do it themselves, then they must get someone to do it for them.

I am a bullet in search of a gun, but I doubt UKIP, BNP or the BDP are brave enough to discuss sexual morality precisely because they fear alienating their female activists and voters.