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.
