Translate

Showing posts with label ethno-nationalism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label ethno-nationalism. Show all posts

Tuesday, 18 December 2018

The success of ethno-nationalism depends on the slaying of its sacred cows



at No comments:
Labels: , , , , ,

Saturday, 9 December 2017

How civic nationalism would give ethno-nationalists substantially what they want



at No comments:
Labels: , , , ,

Thursday, 7 September 2017

Classical Liberal Objections to Ethno-Nationalism: my response to Millennial Woes



Millennial Woes is saying whites decline to compete against the non-whites because white people want to carry on being gay, MGTOW and not have the bother of having children. Also, the white working classes have shit jobs if they have jobs at all and are unlikely to attract decent women who will prove to be good wives and mothers, unlike Asian men who at least have a family business to give them employment and something to inherit.

This rather does show how important marriage and the family is for your group, which whites have lost in their mania to accept the bribe of sexual liberation offered to them by feminism and the fornicating sluts feminism has produced.

Having been emasculated and bribed by feminism, most white men are not up to the job of getting a decent job and finding a wife, let alone becoming fathers of legitimate children calling for the abolition of the welfare state.

Our politicians and political parties don't care though. Even UKIP are not saying anything about this, because they are afraid of upsetting female voters whose votes they need to be voted into office by offering them free stuff from taxpayers.

Do I hear Millennial Woes proposing to repeal anti-discrimination thoughtcrime legislation that is the Equality Act 2010 or abolishing no fault divorce to make marriage a better bargain for white men? Or a grammar school in every borough? NOPE. He is not even prepared to discuss it with me, or anyone else for that matter. Nobody in his cosy circle would be interested in these subjects because they are all bachelors like him, of course.

Is he prepared to discuss any of these issues with me? NOPE. They would rather take up the cudgels and GO STRAIGHT TO POGROM.

He is not passing go or collecting £200, he is heading STRAIGHT TO POGROM.

Why?

Because talking about social reform is boring and his followers and subscribers are not up to discussing the merits of:

- abolishing no fault divorce since they are mostly unmarriageable men no rational woman would marry,

- selective and single sex education (they probably have no idea what those are and have never heard of a single sex grammar school anyway)

- repealing feminist legislation (because they are all determined to continue accepting the bribe of feminism ie fornication)

- considering whether Christianity has failed (because they are atheists anyway) and certainly not its necessary replacement.

What is "our culture"? A Culture of Entitlement and Excuses? Drug Culture? Pub Culture? Football Culture? Slut Culture? Porn Culture? He surely doesn't mean High Culture! When was the last time Millennial Woes was in an art gallery or at the opera? Does what he and his followers know about European architecture exceed what the average Chinese tourist can pick up in a visit to Europe on a package holiday?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4861370/Woman-tries-explain-ended-trapped-window.html appears to be what passes for the shit of Western culture. What kind of job is this sociology student on his bad date going to get after finishing his dissertation? Will he marry the woman who blocked his toilet and then threw her turd out of his window and then damaged his window so badly it had to be repaired? Or will they have illegitimate offspring which they will parent badly? Will their badly parented offspring grow into criminals unable even to graduate in sociology as their father did or be a credit to their mother? What do you think, dear reader?




But back to High Culture. I can't imagine Millennial Woes at the opera somehow or at any music recital. He is more likely to be at one of those "music festivals" that the older generation now would call rock or pop concerts.

Western men have been too busy accepting the bribe of sexual liberation that feminism has offered and this has undermined the institutions of marriage and the family as well as the white man's inclination to speak the truth as he sees it or behave in a way that does not arouse hatred, contempt and ridicule.

At the 30th minute Millennial Woes pronounces pompously to his subscribers, followers and viewers:

We [the white people] are the custodians of precious things: a cultural, linguistic, artistic, architectural, philosophical and genetic inheritance that has survived hell and high water because our ancestors protected them.

Yeah, they MARRIED VIRGIN BRIDES OF THEIR OWN RACE, HAD LEGITIMATE CHILDREN AND WEREN'T GAY GAMERS OR MGTOWs or PUSSYWHIPPED JOBLESS NO-HOPERS NO RATIONAL OF ANY RACE WOMAN WOULD MARRY.

These losers don't even have a leader to plead their cause. The most rabid of these nationalists are hoping for an Irish atheist lesbian spinster Islamophobe who was from the Labour Party to lead them.

How are the mighty fallen.



If these men had any shame at all they would be ashamed at what they have been reduced to: of not having anyone at all that cares about them enough to even tell them what the fuck is wrong with them and what they must do to fix it.

None of their leaders have even touched on the subjects I mentioned above: not Nick Griffin, not Adam Walker and certainly not whoever will be the next UKIP leader and that is why they are aghast when I mention these unheard of things that they think are just my hobby horses.  

These subjects are not mentioned because these leaders would be quite right that talking exclusively about their victimhood, of being exploited by Jews and invaded by Muslims would get them more approval and agreement than talking about the social, political and moral reforms necessary for them to get their country back. Indeed, talking about these things would only demoralise, divide and distress them because they would then begin to have some idea the extent to which they have been abandoned by their political classes who don't care what happens to them and only wants to warehouse them and keep them stupid while they continue pursuing neo-liberal policies to replace the working classes with robots and reduce the total sum of human population in the West in order to protect the environment.

I don't call "pleading the cause" of the unskilled white proletariat just egging them to prepare for civil war after which they can conduct a pogrom and kick everyone else out.

It was a racially homogeneous white Britain that let all these non-whites in anyway, wasn't it?

And isn't it interesting that Millennial Woes is also abusing his position just as MSM are by refusing to discuss these topics with me or anyone else? He even threatened to block anyone on ask.fm if they asked him questions about me. 

https://ask.fm/MillennialWoes/answers/143655672203

Who is Claire Khaw? A muslim?
 
She is a woman, who doesn't mean any harm, but who was simply posting too many questions and drowning out other people's questions. That's all. Any further questions posted to me about Claire Khaw will result in blocking. 
Why is he refusing to discuss them? Because he knows his audience will be bored by these matters and prefer to talk about race war. If he bores them with the nitty-gritty of social policy, they will just leave him for someone who will give them the excitement, thrill of impending violence and entertainment they so shallowly crave from nationalist politics.

Really, Millennial Woes is just another politician. Instead of chasing votes, he is chasing subscribers, likes and retweets.

And this is what happens when your morals are so utterly corrupted there are literally no men left of any integrity, backbone or principles to lead the people out of the swamp of their degeneracy.
at No comments:
Labels: ,

Tuesday, 29 August 2017

My modest proposal for the alt-right and a suggestion for Steve Bannon

The alt-right should now divide itself into:

1) ethno-nationalists some of whom enjoy dressing up as Nazis who want to conduct a pogrom against Jews, Muslims and non-white citizens in the West

Greg Johnson:

The Jewish question is not distinct from ethnonationalism. It is ethnonationalism applied to Jews. Thus no ethnonationalist is entitled to abstain from it. Once one recognizes that Jews are a distinct people, the ethnonationalist solution to the Jewish question is Jewish nationalism, i.e., Zionism.

Of course many White Nationalists have a whole lot more to say about Jews than merely observing that they are a different people. I have argued that the fate of White Nationalism does not depend one way or another on the outcome of historical debates about the holocaust. But I do believe that Jews are not just different from whites, but powerful and malevolent enemies who bear significant responsibility for causing white decline and opposing white renewal.

Some White Nationalists don’t want to hear it. But even so, as I have argued here, they still have to face up to the Jewish question. Because if Jews are nothing more than a distinct people, then ethnonationalists must conclude that Jews belong in their own homeland, not in ours. It is as simple as that.

https://www.counter-currents.com/2015/10/reframing-the-jewish-question/

2) libertarian anti-feminist civic nationalists who reject neoconservatism and neo-liberalism who only want to expel illegal immigrants eg Ann Coulter.

My elegant solution means respectable and reasonable people can join the civic nationalist faction of the alt-right, including Jews, Christians, Muslims and socially conservative non-whites who are already citizens in the West.

Option 2 is probably the only way of saving the Trump presidency peacefully.

The best way of achieving this is to get the alt-right to divide along these lines and then choose a leader to represent the respective factions. I wonder which faction Steve Bannon would like to lead.

at 4 comments:
Labels: , , , , , , , ,

Tuesday, 23 May 2017

Civic nationalism is enough to get ethno-nationalists what they want: a dominant culture



Judaism is ethno-nationalist because Jews regards themselves as a tribe. If your mother is a Jewess, then you are a racially Jew whether or not you practice Judaism. If you want to convert to Orthodox Judaism, you need to be sponsored by one of their number to be shown how to cook, live and worship as a member of that community which goes beyond just going to the synagogue on Saturdays.

Islam is civic nationalist because it has a much lower entry threshold, requiring only a declaration of belief ie "There is no God but God and Muhammad is His prophet" to become Muslim.

Millennial Woes is confusing white people with the nation. Supposing white people died of some mysterious and fatal disease that only affected white people. Britain as a nation would still exist, but it would be a nation of non-white people. You may well think that only white people represent the nation, but I have demonstrated by positing this hypothetical situation that this is not necessarily so since Britain would continue to be populated in the event that all white people disappeared for some reason. The non-white peoples would just move into the vacuum in the same way that the original Britons who got swamped by the other white peoples who invaded Britain moved to Cornwall and Wales - yes, those white people who have always been here for practical purposes but who really really hate the English.

It is absolutely imperative that there is a dominant culture, however, to give the nation its distinctive identity. This dominant culture must not be perceived to be degenerate by the newcomers, because that would make them reject and despise it.

You will find that all empires are civic nationalist proclaiming that all citizens have equal rights and are not to be discriminated on grounds of caste, race etc because it is a polite fiction that causes least resentment and obtains the most national unity. It is up to the dominant race and the dominant culture to perpetuate itself and maintain its dominance. I say this is a civic nationalist who is not white but does not wish to see the white race dominated by any other race. The dominant culture is not what it ought to be, and this is a matter for the dominant race to sort out, if it wishes to preserve its dominance.

As Andrew Breiitbart said, "Politics is downstream from culture."

If this is so, culture is downstream from law.

If this is so, law is downstream from morality.

If this is so, morality is downstream from religion.

Christianity has failed.
at No comments:
Labels: , , , , , ,

Thursday, 9 March 2017

Swedish woman is now Western woman, therefore Swedish man is now Western man

Sweden is dying because it is a matriarchy.
To discover that your society is a matriarchy is to discover it has a terminal illness.





























https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tower_of_Babel

The corruption of language is the corruption of thought.

The corruption of thought is the corruption of the law.

The corruption of the law is the corruption of morality.

The moral corruption of a society is the destruction of social cohesion.

Social cohesion is necessary for shared values, national identity and the continued existence of a nation.

Only through respecting the rules of marriage is it possible for a society to keep and maintain what it has so far acquired in the way of possessions and knowledge.

All societies need the protection of social conservatism to protect themselves from their internal and external enemies.

The eternal enemies of society are sluts and socialists. 

Everything about female promiscuity undermines marriage.

Everything about feminism destroys civilisation.

Not a single feminist is prepared to discuss any of this.

What all feminists will conspire to do is ignore, marginalise and smear anyone who asks any of the questions I have asked, proving that they are indeed the totalitarian enemies of free speech and civilisation. 

History first enacts itself as tragedy, then repeats itself as farce.

The ancient Chinese idea of Yin and Yang acknowledges this eternal battle of the sexes. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_marriage#Marriages_in_early_societies

In traditional Chinese thinking, people in "primitive" societies did not marry, but had sexual relationships with one another indiscriminately. Such people were thought to live like animals, and they did not have the precise concept of motherhood, fatherhood, sibling, husband and wife, and gender, not to mention match-making and marriage ceremony. Part of the Confucian "civilizing mission" was to define what it meant to be a Father or a Husband, and to teach people to respect the proper relationship between family members and regulate sexual behavior.

God was created by Man to make the laws that protect his civilisation from the Slut, because Man  knows he cannot trust himself to say no to the Slut. This is why a theocracy is both logical and necessary, even to me, an agnostic.

In a matriarchy where there is no alpha male, there is only the weaker sex and the even weaker sex, to be invaded, raped, pillaged, and conquered.

Why don't women care about men's civilisation?

Because they didn't create it and know they will be OK whatever happens, in just the way a lion's harem never come to his assistance when they know if he loses the fight against his potential usurper he has to leave the pride and his cubs will be killed by the usurper. If their cubs are killed, that's just fine with the lionesses, because they will be impregnated again by the victor, who won't have a loser's genes.

Helen was a slut, Paris was an MCSF and Troy fell because it protected them. The West is Troy.
Nothing much happened to Helen. Menelaus just took her back to Sparta as his wife.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rahab
Rahab was honoured for letting the invaders into Jericho.

In short, feminism is a shit test to test the fitness of men and their civilisation to survive.

Strangely and surprisingly, Western man prefers merely to complain weakly and weekly about being exploited by Jews and invaded by Muslims and assorted foreigners. He prefers merely to complain than actually having to marry a woman of his own race and bringing up her children, apparently. If he does not think women of his own race are worth marrying because they are all feminists, he does not seem able to get up the courage to denounce feminism and propose the repeal of its laws viz:

  • the law that says it is OK to have premarital sex
  • the Equal Pay Act 1970
  • the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973
  • the Sex Discrimination Act 1975
  • the Equality Act 2010
This means that the next generation will be even more slut and bastard and more full of morally compromised slut-fuckers than previous generations, entrenching the idiocracy.



Catch 22:

The only way Western civilisation can be saved is if it became Islamic. But if it became Islamic, then Western civilisation as we know it - sexually promiscuous, hedonist, feminist, consumerist, still fucking around with elections under a multi-party system of indiscriminate universal suffrage falling over themselves to pander to feminine preferences - would have to end.

http://thebattlefieldoflove.blogspot.co.uk/2010/10/case-for-disenfranchsing-women-or-why.html






https://www.thelocal.se/jobs/article/why-these-swedish-trade-union-bosses-wore-pink-pussyhats-for-gender-equality

http://www.returnofkings.com/70400/all-swedes-will-be-forced-to-fund-female-promiscuity

The Muslim Brotherhood is creating a 'parallel social structure' in Sweden, aided by 'political elites' making it impossible to criticise Islam, government report admits

“Mr. Trump did not exaggerate Sweden’s current problems. If anything, he understated them.” - Per Jimmie Akesson and Mattias Karlsson, in Wall Street Journal op-ed

Stereotype of Swedish women as promiscuous

“We have strange drinking habits and we copulate assiduously, before we commit suicide on a large scale, after we have paid a terrible amount of taxes,” is how the actor Erland Josephson ironically summarized the foreigner’s image of Sweden in 1987 (30).

Englishwoman Mary Wollstonecraft, who actually went to Sweden, complained about promiscuity at length. In her famous travel book of 1796, Letters written during a Short Residence in Sweden, Norway, and Denmark (already translated into German in 1800) she wrote of “the total want of chastity in the lower class of women” (Wollstonecraft 1989:258) in Sweden, for whom love is “merely an appetite, to fulfil the main design of nature, never enlivened by either affection or sentiments” (314).

The about-turn in the (West) German perception of Swedish sexuality first becomes apparent in the fifties, as the Swedish film industry achieved great success abroad with, for that period, very permissive films such as Arne Mattsson’s Hon dansade en sommar (1951; English One Summer of Happiness) and Ingmar Bergman’s Sommaren med Monika (1952; English Summer with Monika) and became “the initiator of cinematic aphrodisiacs” (Der Spiegel 1964:96) – to some extent involuntarily. For example a second version of Sommaren med Monika was also shown in the USA; cut from 97 to 65 minutes, dubbed and with new film music as Monika, the Story of a Bad Girl (Stevenson 1995:19–22). “Stockholm produces cultivated films with good photographic technique, with preaching pastors and naked women” is how the cinema researcher Georges Sadoul summarized the “Swedish film” in 1957 (394). Or even shorter: “naked swimming plus social criticism” (Der Spiegel 1964:96). But if one examines the reception of, for example, Hon dansade en sommar in German-speaking countries (see Beindorf 1995 and 1996), it is noticeable that the “immoral” is still not attributed to the country and its inhabitants. The stereotype only arose in the course of the following twenty years. Der Spiegel (1969:132) summarized as follows under the headline “Free from taboos”:

Drugs and pornography, prisons without doors and girls without morals, boredom and short skirts, hot love and cool people – that is the average German’s image of Sweden.

 there is no shortage of arguments to confirm that the heterostereotype really is referential. Historians and ethnologists argue that a specific Scandinavian or Swedish development with regard to sexual practice has existed for centuries. Two historical phenomena are held primarily responsible for the tradition of premarital relationships in Scandinavian countries; “night courtship”, ritualized visiting by young men in unmarried women’s bedrooms, and the specific function of engagement in old Nordic law, which counted as permission to commence a sexual relationship (Hertoft 1970:61–69; Löfgren 1972; Frykman 1977). Wollstonecraft wrote as an eyewitness about the sexual activities of young couples subject to the conflicting forces of secular engagement custom and religious marriage law:

Young people, who are attached to each other, with the consent of their friends, exchange rings, and are permitted to enjoy a degree of liberty together, which I have never noticed in any other country. The days of courtship are therefore prolonged, till it be perfectly convenient to marry: the intimacy often becomes very tender: and if the lover obtains the privilege of a husband, it can only be termed half by stealth, because the family is wilfully blind. (326)

In Stockholm around 1850 almost half of all children were born to single mothers; in general the proportion of extramarital children in Sweden in the nineteenth century was about 10% (Frykman 1977; Frykman 1993:189f.; cf. also Hertoft 1970:68). This is not to mention the marriages entered into after conception but before birth. The assertion was that the nexus between sexuality and religious sexual norms had actually always been undermined – a development which continued with the great morality debate in the Modern Breakthrough and in the cultural debate of the 1930s, which was in many respects a struggle for self-determination in sexuality (Bergström-Walan 1970:11–58; Linnér 1967; above all Lennerhed 1994 and 1991). In the thirties a new functionalist physical consciousness, modernism, and the construction of discursive-collective identities such as national identity were combined to great effect (Frykman 1993:161ff.). In 1938 information on contraception was legalized and the first abortion law was passed (although without permitting social grounds). Sex education was made obligatory in all schools in 1955, an event which attracted worldwide attention; “the Swedish sin” became a catch-phrase (Lennerhed 1991; Frykman 1993:189ff.). The sexual liberalism debate conducted with great enthusiasm between 1962 and 1965, and also the Swedish sense of being the international standard-bearers of modernism influenced foreign opinion. Western conservatives were convinced that the Swedes had sacrificed the secret of sexuality to profane functionalism, functionalizing sexuality as a hedonistic principle. On the other hand, liberals praised Sweden as the model for progressive sexual policy and asked “whether it would be worth creating ‘many Swedens’ of sexual policy” (Giese 1970:9).

a comparative analysis of illegitimate birth rates in Sweden and elsewhere3 shows that premarital sexual intercourse was common in Europe and North America, a consequence of the “European Marriage Pattern” (early sexual maturity, high marriage age) (Mitterauer 1983:23– 30). Scandinavia is one of the regions with traditionally high illegitimacy rates, but the figures for the Eastern Alps region are significantly higher. For example, in Vienna in the second half of the nineteenth century, the proportion of births out of wedlock was over 50% (Mitterauer 1983:25). In Bavaria in the nineteenth century the figure was around 20% (Nipperdey 1991:127). The particular function of engagement existed into modern times, not just in Scandinavia but also in England, North America, France, Portugal, etc. (Mitterauer 1983:14). And night courtship was widespread in Central Europe, the Baltic region, Wales, Western France, etc., under a variety of names (Kiltgang in Switzerland, Fensterln in Austria, Nachtfreien etc.) (Mitterauer 1983:57).

As a central discourse of modernization, sexuality was progressively socialized by it4 and thus inseparably interlinked with the entire social system:

Because important cultural systems (religion/ theology/church; state/law; family/marriage; science; art; economics), lay claim to and realize love, its control, shaping and functionalization, its domestication, classification, or simply representation, alterations in one or more of these systems lead to alterations in the attitude to sexuality. And vice versa; alterations in the attitude to sexuality lead to alterations in one or more cultural systems (Beutin 1993:92).

At the latest since Foucault’s research it has become a platitude that discourses on sexuality always develop where the power in society is located, and are an instrument of power (Foucault 1978). There is an inseparable relationship between supposedly “merely” interpersonal sexual behaviour and the overall organization of society (Giddens 1992:3).

Sexuality is capable of representing the modernization project not only in synecdochic, but also in metaphoric terms. Modernization research, long committed to linear models, has in recent years emphasized that modernization is a paradoxical process which unites apparently contradictory developments (e.g. individualization and pluralization) (van der Loo & van Reijen 1992). At least in Western cultures sexuality has a similar paradoxical character. It is viewed ambivalently, on the one hand with fascination, on the other with fear and caution. My main point is that the promiscuity stereotypically attributed to the Swedes is primarily an expression of the ambivalent stance taken on the best-known project of Swedish modernity, namely, the welfare state.

As late as 1963, in the context of a long Spiegel interview with the Swedish prime minister Tage Erlander, Sweden was presented as the “perfect” welfare state under the headline “Everyone is entitled to a pension”. The journalist’s critical questions were directed solely at the affordability of the welfare state, and its relationship to the private economy, and no reference was made to sexuality either in the journalist’s questions or in the illustrations for the interview (Der Spiegel 1963:60–67). It was not until the end of the sixties, when critical voices were increasingly heard, that the stereotype received prominence in West Germany. Examples are the Spiegel quote already mentioned or Huntford’s book on the Swedish welfare state, published in 1971 and translated into German in 1973. Huntford “crowned” his polemical criticism of the Swedish new totalitarians with a chapter on the promiscuous behaviour of the Swedes, stating that the freedom of copulation has led to an obsession which permeates all of Swedish life (Huntford 1971). Lennerhed, who has investigated “the Swedish sin” above all in Anglo-American regions, summarizes:

In the context, however, it appears important that the negative post-war image of Sweden is so extremely focused on Swedish sexual policy. The rational, pragmatic and reform-oriented sexual policy was seen as typical of the Swedish state and possibly of the welfare state in general (Lennerhed 1994:97).

The German heterostereotype of Swedish promiscuity implies the same connection between sexuality and welfare state, but it interprets it differently. It is more differentiated, because it does not only express criticism of the Swedish welfare state “model”, but articulates ambivalence towards it. This is because Swedish sexual behaviour came into use as a stereotype in the Federal Republic of Germany at precisely the moment when the image of Sweden became ambiguous,5 as criticism and fascination became paradoxically fused in public consciousness. The following question was asked in a representative West German opinion poll in August 1970: “Which country is the best example to us in terms of social matters, or is no country a model to us in terms of social matters?” For 44% of those questioned there was no country which was superior in social matters, but Sweden was in second place with 36%, with Switzerland at 7% and Denmark at 3% far behind. Even amongst CDU/CSU supporters, whose party leaderships presented Sweden as a socialist horror state, one in three thought that Sweden was a good example (Der Spiegel 1970:79f.). The attraction of the “model” was by no means gone (see also Der Spiegel 1972:122–145).

Finally, it is noticeable that the stereotype normally refers to female sexual behaviour. But this is only surprising if the stereotype is understood as referential in relation to the Swedish sex debate, where other subjects such as sex education, the abortion question, equal rights for homosexuals, and censorship played an important role (Lennerhed 1994) – a series of things which are ignored by the stereotype. Because, unlike tempting-threatening female sexuality, they do not offer the (male) groups which dominate public debate the opportunity to articulate ambivalence towards the welfare state project.6 An additional factor is certainly rhetorical identification of the Swedish welfare state as woman, emphasizing “female” characteristics (care, unagressiveness, warmth) (cf. Ehn 1993:279).

In the film The Producers mentioned at the start, the Swedish secretary Ulla, characterized as a “Swedish sexpot” in the secondary literature (Yacowar 1981:76), has long lost all specific “Swedish” qualities. She has become an icon for (heterosexual)7 sexuality itself.

The blonde woman became the sensual dream woman, her hair no longer an indication of shyness and chastity, but an erotic allure.

The Swedish Woman is now the Western Woman.  

The Bhagavad Gita:

"Out of the corruption of women proceeds the corruption of races; out of the corruption of races, the loss of memory; out of the loss of memory, the loss of understanding, and out of this all evil."  

 
at No comments:
Labels: , , , , , , , , ,

Wednesday, 16 October 2013

What an ethno-nationalist should say when he adopts civic nationalism as a strategy

The standard reply for ethno-nationalists who have chosen to adopt the strategy of civic nationalism should be as follows:

"Within the rules of civic nationalism which is that of not proposing and supporting, either in public or private,
(a) apartheid
(b) the repatriation of non-white British citizens
(c) making non-white British citizens second class citizens
I shall promote the interests of my own race whenever it is moral and rational."

What is the point of this exercise, you ask?

Observe this exchange between a questioner and the conflicted answers an ethno-nationalist who has decided to adopt a civic nationalist strategy gives:

Q:  Are you a civic nationalist or an ethno nationalist?

A:  These days civic nationalism is a sine qua non for any nationalist party with serious aspirations.

Q:  Does that mean you support it as a strategy but are basically a racist?

A:  That is a loaded question. I support it as a strategy, but I do not welcome being outnumbered by other races in this country.

I suppose 19th Tories decided to give working men the vote because they knew that otherwise they would disappear - they needed people to share their ideals who were not born and bred members of the landed aristocracy.

Nationalists now need to find allies among non-whites - not because there are too few white people but because the nationalist movement can be too easily discredited if they do not.
Marine Le Pen is showing how successful this strategy can be in France.

Q:  Which races would you say you are most racist against on average?

A:  You seem to be ignoring my points in order to go on insisting I am 'racist'.
Not much future for this conversation, I feel.

Q:  I am not sure how black people will be any use to nationalists?

A:   1. Black people might not want to be forced into a postion where they always have to back more and more immigration just because they were once immigrants themselves.
2. If people are going to come here, they should integrate. If they cannot be integrated, they should not come to the UK.
3. The debate about nationalism is treated abusively by our enemies who will insist we are 'racist'. While racism is a normal enough instinct, the effect of being called racist is similar to being called a paedophile.
A serious nationalist party can therefore not be 'racist'. If members of the French Front National say anything racist they are simply expelled.
This type of party discipline accounts for FN's success. This is something that the ramshackle UKIP can only dream about.

Q:  You have sometimes been known to make racist comments yourself

A:   I am sure I have. Nevertheless the civic nationalist strategy is more likely to be successful, I think.

Q:   If black people know that somebody is a racist because of their past comments, will it not make them uneasy about that person? if they think they are only refraining from saying racist things as a short term strategy and have long term sinister ambitions for them

A:   The black people will have had racist thoughts of their own, I expect. You seem to think only white people can be racist while blacks are merely the victims of racism. This makes them far too passive.

Q:    Well if we invent a hypothetical race of green people (in the majority) and they have nationalists who made disparaging comments about the purple race (in the minority), then the green nationalists stop saying racist things and try and induce the purple people to cooperate, the purple people may be skeptical

A:   Whites are not always in the majority now in cities like Birmingham, London, Bradford and so on. So whites will have felt the effect of prejudice too.

The way I have stated that principle - the principle of not proposing or promoting as an ethno-nationalist either in public or private (a) apartheid (b) repatriation and (c) making non-white British citizens second class citizens allows the ethno-nationalist (which is just a polite term for racist really) to say that he is indeed an ethno-nationalist but MOST IMPORTANTLY makes clear that the non-white British citizen has nothing to fear from him.

It allows him to remain an ethno-nationalist while adopting a civic nationalist strategy without giving up his principles.

Observe how the interview would go if my strategy above were adopted:

Q:  Are you a civic nationalist or an ethno-nationalist?

A.  I am an ethno-nationalist who has adopted civic nationalism as a strategy.  

Q:  What on earth does this mean?

A:   This means that as an ethno-nationalist I will never propose or promote apartheid, the repatriation of non-white British citizens or making them into second class citizens.  However, within these rules, I shall promote the interests of my race whenever it is rational and moral to do so.  

Would you deny me my right to promote the interests of my race when it is rational and moral to do so?  

Q:   Er, no, I can't see any moral or rational reason to deny you this right.  

A:  Thank you so very much for allowing me the right to promote the interests of my own race when it is rational and moral to do so.  That is mighty generous of you.  

at No comments:
Labels: ,

Sunday, 24 February 2013

The national interest is too important to be left in the hands of British nationalists

Such is the moral degeneracy of the British nation that no political party will support the institution of marriage unless it is "gay marriage".

Taking a stand on gay marriage is the only thing the fourth and fifth parties of British politics have done, but  it is far too little and far too late.

The BNP now have no intention of repealing the Equality Act 2010 in its entirety, which consolidates all the major Acts of totalitarian anti-discrimination legislation in one Act.

The primary purpose of the Act is to codify the complicated and numerous array of Acts and Regulations, which formed the basis of anti-discrimination law in Great Britain. This was, primarily, the Equal Pay Act 1970, the Sex Discrimination Act 1975, the Race Relations Act 1976, the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 and three major statutory instruments protecting discrimination in employment on grounds of religion or belief, sexual orientation and age. 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equality_Act_2010

The most they are prepared to do is

... repeal the Race Relations Act and all other far leftist social engineering projects, such as the Equalities and Human Rights Commission aimed at enforcing multiculturalism.

as stated in their 2010 manifesto at http://www.bnp.org.uk/manifesto

It is the manifesto at http://www.reportingthebnp.org/wp-content/uploads/Mini-Manifesto.pdf which represents my favourite BNP manifesto.  This one proposes the repeal all anti-discrimination laws.

Social conservatism now only survives fitfully in the Eurosceptic nationalist parties, and is constantly being eroded, as we have seen, even in the BNP.

This, together with the pariahs status of nationalist parties, will further marginalise social conservatism.

It was not that long ago that the Jews were told that their religion is sexist and racist.

Clearly, the fact that the BNP are associated with racism discredits the entire package of social conservatism.  They are associated with racism because ethno-nationalism is by definition racially exclusive.

While they are attached to this ideology, it has done them no good at all.   Nothing is to be gained by keeping it and everything to be gained by dumping it.

They don't have to listen to me, only look across the Channel to see the success of Front Nationale.

Why won't they do it then?

Is it because Nick Griffin actually wants to party to stay small so he can retain control over it, or is it perhaps because he is too lazy or fearful to grasp the nettle of ethno-nationalism and uproot it from the BNP once and for all?

In a way I understand why he would not wish to.  The idiocy of those who insist that they must be ethno-nationalist so they can propose

(a) the forcible repatriation of non-white British citizens
(b) apartheid
(c) laws that would turn non-white British citizens into second class citizens

is both bemusing as well as tragic, and tragic not only for nationalism, but for social conservatism too.

It is therefore time non-racist, non-antisemitic and non-Islamophobic social conservatives who want a smaller state and fewer laws snatched nationalism out of the hands of these antediluvian dinosaurs before they discredit the cause of social conservatism even more with their imbecilic mulishness.

They do not see reason because Nick Griffin either has not the energy or the will to make them see it.

The long-term national interest is clearly too important a matter to be left in the hands of British nationalists.   
at No comments:
Labels: , , , ,

Friday, 14 September 2012

The end of crude ethno-nationalism?


The result of the Trinity Ward by-election for Burnley Borough Council on 13 September 2012

Labour - Tony Martin - 493 (49.25)
Liberal Democrat - Stephanie Forrest - 256 (25.57)
Conservative - Tom Watson - 96 (9.6)
BNP - Derek Dawson - 95 (9.6)
UKIP - Craig James Ramplee - 35 (3.5)
NF - Steven Smith - 26 (2.6)

Majority 237
Turnout 1,001

The BNP claim to be both a civic and an ethno-nationalist party.  Actually, if they were really clever, they should drop race from their entire discourse.  But we know they are not really that clever and are being led by a man who has too much to lose.  Nick Griffin will not be sticking his neck out for you, BNP member or BNP supporter.   It is much more important to him to stay well within this comfort zone.  He knows which side of his bread is buttered - the EU side, for it is the EU who pays his and Nigel Farage's wages.

That is why these parties never get anywhere.  They are too busy wasting their time and energy in Brussels when they should be going up and down this country talking to the British voter, winning hearts and minds about leaving the EU.

But Brussels has created just the kind of culture and environment that these easily-impressed MEPs like, rubbing shoulders with bureaucrats and people whom they think are bigwigs.  That is why the Eurosceptic movement is precisely nowhere and neither Nigel nor Nick want Claire and Dave in their parties, however brilliant and bold they are, indeed, especially if they are brilliant and bold.

David Jones will not be mentioning race at all in his campaign (Polling Day 25 October 2012).   He will be talking only about issues that affect and will be of interest to all British citizens who live in this country.

David Jones - campaigning for family values and smaller government


at No comments:
Labels: , , , , ,

Monday, 14 May 2012

The Ancient Greeks and the 21st Century Briton


The Greek Pantheon


The Greeks worshipped ideas in themselves, such as Love, War, Wisdom etc which they would invoke in given situations. It is how they named and organised their pantheon that was appealing and conducive to the exercise of Reason. The Greek gods' attitude towards humanity - treating us humans as mere playthings of gods - exactly mirrors the cruelty and capriciousness of life in our dog eat dog world.


Did the Greeks really believe in the literal existence of the deities?  Who knows - it was enough to talk about them as if they existed to each other, because to do so would mean you were expressing your Greekness, and being Greek was better than being a barbarian.  


The Greeks were known for being resourceful, rational and SWIFT IN ACTION.


There are not many in nationalism who are all or any of the above. When you meet a man who has these qualities* it is indeed something to be celebrated.


Sadly for the Greeks, they eventually lost their reason. Fortunately for us, we can always pick up the pieces of reason when we look back knowledgeably upon human history.


I desire the British to be a people who are resourceful, rational and swift in action - a bit like David Jones and me, I like to think.  I like to think of David being as cunning as Odysseus.  Nick Griffin can be our Cyclops ...


Cyclops and Odysseus


All we have to do then is interest enough British citizens in this aspiration, and the British peoples will have their Nationalism.


What form will this Nationalism take? It will be more peaceable, rational and libertarian than our so-called liberalism and feminism, which are the antithesis of being Greek.






*  I believe David Jones is such a man.  He has certainly understood that civic nationalism is only a tactic and that using civic nationalism to get what you want is better than "sticking to your ethno-nationalist principles" of being loudly racist and crudely xenophobic so that the entire ugly package of your ideas gets thrown out by the voter, unopened.  Of course he would favour his own people if push came to shove, but, like a true politician, he does not see any reason not to do deals with people who can help his cause.

If only there were more like him in British nationalism!
at No comments:
Labels: , , , , ,

Monday, 14 November 2011

Why Ethno Nationalism is a Busted Flush


  1. Ethno natonalism is promoted by the BNP who are the most hated party amongst white people in Britain.
  2. The BNP are more hated by white people than by non-whites.
  3. White people hate the BNP because they think the BNP brings their race into disgrace.
  4. The BNP brings the white race into disgrace because the BNP are mostly members of the lower classes, and no one with ambition, a  job and a family wants to be associated with lower class white people who cannot compete with foreigners who are always fighting each other and who hate their leader.
  5. The incumbent leader is hated by nationalist activists because he has not brought success to the movement.
  6. The incumbent leader is hated by nationalist activists because he is widely known to be unprincipled as well as ruthless in suppressing his critics and potential challengers.
  7. The incumbent leader is suspected of keeping the party small and talentless so he can easily dominate and control the party as if it were his own personal fiefdom and treat the activists like vassals and serfs.
  8. There is a perception that anyone who joins the BNP and who then gets expelled should consider himself or herself a failure of failures, because UKIP will not accept ex-BNP members and there is really no point joining a Eurosceptic party even more useless than the BNP.  
  9. Because the BNP now have 2 MEPs, and the 2 MEPs owe their votes to members in the EU region of the North West (represented by Liverpool known for its decline and degeneracy) and the EU region of Yorkshire & Humber (represented by Scunthorpe also known for its decline and degeneracy) who collectively threw a tantrum over my remarks about the disabled, illegitimate and degenerate, I have been suspended, expelled and now proscribed to appease them.  This is of course a complete PR disaster, for it will be said by the party's critics that the unwillingness of the leadership to defend Free Speech and its willingness to appease the wrong-headed, illegitimate, disabled and degenerate members precisely demonstrates that the leadership is devoid of courage, honour and principle and replete with cowardice, hypocrisy and cant as well as illegitimacy, disability and degeneracy.
  10. A party dominated by the illegitimate, disabled and degenerate is not likely to gain the affection, trust and confidence of any electorate however illegitimate, disabled and degenerate it itself already is.  This is because even the illegitimate, disabled and degenerate who wish to improve their lot would instinctively know that they need someone better than themselves to improve their lot, in the same way that a "sane lunatic" would not trust another lunatic to be in charge of his affairs or promote his interests.   
  11. By always expelling any activist who shows signs of independent thought and talent, the party remains poor in talent, low in status as well as despised and feared by the voting public.   
  12. By ditching their previously stated policy of promoting family values supported by marriage and by pandering to and appeasing women who make bad reproductive choices ie their female members with illegitimate and disabled offspring, the BNP has in effect sold its racial soul to the devil.   Even if there were no other races in the country for white people to avoid miscegenation with, the first requirement of racial health and hygiene is to prevent or at least discourage the most promiscuous and unproductive females of your race from having illegitimate and disabled offspring with the most depraved and unproductive men of your race, while the taxpayer picks up the tab.   By refusing to condemn Slut Single Mums, the BNP have shown that white men lack the courage and the intellectual honesty to address the problem of civilisational and racial decline at its root - sexual selection.  The BNP are clearly too afraid of proposing that that Sacred Cow of the Liberals - which goes by the name of Free Love, Sexual Liberation, Feminism  - be slain.  It is well known that females of animal kingdom choose males with attractive qualities to father their offspring as they understandably wish to pass on to their offspring the desirable qualities of size and strength their father had.   Pointing out to white women that it is not a good idea to have a baby with a man you would  never consider marrying only arouses blank incomprehension followed by anger.  (If he does not want to marry you, you are not worthy.  If you do not want to marry him, he is not worthy.)
  13. Because the BNP have now virtually declared that they are afraid of  Slut Single Mums for they fear to alienate the female vote, just like the LibLabCon, it can be seen that they are no longer fit for the purpose of promoting the interests of the White Race.  This means that Civic Nationalism would be the only way of drawing a line under the failures of Ethno-nationalism.   To most convincingly show that you have dumped Ethno-nationalism ie racism, a non-white white nationalist could be given the job - on a one year probation - of leading the nationalist movement under the old BNP constitution mutatis mutandis that would bring back the noble nationalist tradition of annual leadership elections.   Whatever you think of John Tyndall's views on race, he was at least an honourable man.   
at No comments:
Labels: ,

Thursday, 13 October 2011

If this is what Ethno Nationalism means, wouldn't you be better off without it?


What do people mean when they say they are Ethno-Nationalists?
I believe it means these Ethno-Nationalists want to say the following in public and in their party manifesto:
1. We want to introduce apartheid.
2. We want to forcibly repatriate non-whites citizens to their ancestral homelands.
3. We want to make non-white citizens second class citizens.
If saying any or all of the above is all it means when people say they are Ethno-Nationalists, then may I just point out that saying these things is not going to help them get elected.
at 5 comments:
Labels:

Wednesday, 21 September 2011

Why I claim to speak for British Nationalists better than the indigenous white male


A number of nationalists keep asking me - in tones of surprise and some suspicion - why I have nailed my colours to the BNP mast.   One of them even asked if my anti-feminist stance is part of my job as an agent provocateur, designed to get them into trouble with the Feminazis, rather like in the Mao's Hundred Flowers Campaign which invited criticism and then cut down the Hundred Flowers when they criticised ...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Let_a_thousand_flowers_bloom

So I will say this to you:

1. I do this because I am a CIVIC nationalist. I live here and care enough about this country to want to fix it, instead of just fucking off home like so many people keep telling me to.

2. I believe Civic Nationalism is enough to give Ethno Nationalists the most of what they want, ie withdrawal from the EU, the repeal all anti-discrimination legislation, family values supported by marriage, respect for family tradition that prevents your children taking up with wasters and losers of their own race or wasters and losers of another and who then give you illegitimate grandchildren whose behaviour will bring shame, disgrace and humiliation on your family, your nation and your race.

3. I acknowledge that most of the wealth created in the world was created by the labour, inventiveness and enterprise of MEN and therefore all the wealth I have been able to enjoy in my lifetime came as a result of men, living and dead, who are dear to me.  I do this for them.

4. Women have the tendency of being generous with other people's money, and that is why Marx encouraged feminism. Feminism is the thin end of the wedge to full-blown Communism, as we shall see.  (Basically, they mess things up and destabilise their own society  by their sex and shopping (ie rampant consumerism and promiscuity) as well as their criminal looting rioting variously-fathered feral bastards so much that it will be vulnerable to any kind of pernicious ideology when order completely breaks down, as we shall soon see.)

5. Women have a tendency to deny the truth as well as being mostly conformist and mediocre, and wish to impose this on everyone else to the detriment of everyone else, for no particular reason that they can explain properly, and they are much less tolerant of difference and far more totalitarian than men.

6. An elderly white working class English widow once remarked to me that "One man is much the same as another." This is precisely why the lionesses in a harem don't run away when they see the father of their cubs usurped by another lion, whom they know will kill their cubs. If they ran away they would be without offspring. If they stayed, suffered their cubs to be killed and to be impregnated by the usurper, who is clearly stronger than the lion he usurped, they at least would have stronger offspring and the status of being in a pride of lions. That is why these lionesses do not help the father of their cubs see off the attempted usurper when he is fighting another lion.  (The moral of this story is that nationalist men should not compromise their principles because they want the approval of their women, who are mostly made up of slut single mums, who are in any case mostly irrational, hypocritical and cowardly.)

7. Not being of the white race, one group of white men and women are as much "my people" as another group. I would however prefer to identify myself with white people who share my political views than white people who do not.

8. The pernicious effects of feminism and liberalism have already spread to the country of my birth and there is now greater tolerance of divorce and single motherhood, which is bad for all races and all nations. If I want to make a stand against it, it is better that I do it in the nation and for the races most and worst affected by it, ie whites in the Liberal West in Paedo Bastard Britain Slutland.

9. I do this because there appears to be no one else prepared to do it or capable of doing it.

10. UKIP will not have me.

My unique position and qualities will help the nationalist white male, and they know it. The fact that I am foreign-born and female confuses the enemy, but I talk their talk and walk their walk, run faster and seek out the enemy more relentlessly than any of them.

As Confucius said:

"The average man is superior to the average woman, but the superior woman is superior to the superior man."   

(I believe this is because the superior woman is not as susceptible to the carnal enticements of sirens and sluts as men are.  I shall be able to resist men throwing themselves at me, and possibly women too.)

It is my hope to establish the most radical, libertarian, liberty-loving, low-taxing, red-tape cutting,  rational, anti-feminist and therefore family values promoting, but non-racist civic nationalist party in the UK that will give Ethno Nationalists most of the important things they want.

I believe I can achieve my Grand Ambition in the following  possible scenarios:

1.  Eddy Butler starting a party with me called the British National Independence Party which will be created for the express purpose of  working towards a merger of the 4th and 5th parties in order to more effectively challenge the LibLabCon.  This can be easily done by giving members and activists better working conditions and an incentive scheme.  (To be honest, I cannot decide between BNIP and SNMSSMP ("Sin No More Slut  Single Mum Party", but I will let Eddy suggest a suitable name if he wants.)

2.  If Eddy Butler joins the English Democrats then I too could join the English Democrats, but only if they agree in writing to (i)  put me in  prominent position. (I have in mind the position of Press Officer AKA Directrix of Communications.) and (ii) radicalise their sleep- and despair-inducing manifesto of contemptible and deliberate blandness.  (I actually hope the weak and stupid English Democrats will reject him as being more trouble than he is worth, so I can have him all to myself.)

at No comments:
Labels: , , , ,

Wednesday, 6 July 2011

Debunking ethno-nationalism once and for all

Taken to its logical conclusion, ethno-nationalism would mean repatriating Americans, Australians and New Zealanders back to where they came from.

Those who nevertheless insist that ethno-nationalism is moral and practicable would be reduced to saying possession is nine points of the law and that might is right. 

So give it up now, OK?

Civic nationalism is therefore logically and morally the only way forward because that would enable us all to rub along better with each other.

Nationalism is the ideology of pragmatic national interest that will cherry pick available ideologies for the long term good of the nation. 

I would define the national interest as a judicious balance of the conflicting interests of the various groups of people in that nation. 

Age, gender, class, wealth, race, religion, marital status would be the main reasons why our interests might conflict with each other.

Nationhood comes into being when a group of people under agreed criteria include each other as that part of the group in a way that transcends tribe, race and geography.

The Islamic concept of "ummah" (the Muslim version of Christendom) expresses this abstract concept perfectly.  You are one of the gang if you subscribe to certain core principles of the group.

I am a nationalist in the sense that I feel that the nation is the largest viable grouping that is big enough to matter and small enough to care about us as individuals.  I however reject all racial considerations as a reason for excluding anyone. 

I am even a white nationalist in the sense that I want good things for the white people of Britain, who are tragically most infected and affected by the dementia of liberalism and feminism.

The only antidote to the poison of feminism and liberalism is that of free speech and the promotion of family values supported by marriage.  Unfortunately, such is the sickness that has entered into the hearts and minds of white people that they reject the very things that would save them, preferring to return to their addiction to cheap sex, easy women, drugs, drink, welfare dependency and denial.

Cheap sex and easy women cause widespread illegitimacy, family breakdown and single parenthood, reducing the quality of the national gene pool, progressively increasing the burden on the taxpayer and the productive.   Not only that, it lowers the morals and educational standards of the entire nation, which will soon turn the white race into an inferior race.

There are many in the nationalist movement who would rather have the weeds of ethno-nationalism than the fruits of civic nationalism. It is therefore now time for the civic nationalist movement to have this debate and win it.  The Eurosceptic parties would be ideally placed to organise and hold such a debate, to settle this question once and for all, so we can all move on. 

Many BNP policies are popular, even amongst the ethnic minorities who are understandably inhibited from voting for the BNP because they don't want to be seen as turkeys voting for Xmas. 

The pity of it is that most BNP policies are sensible policies which are invariably discredited by the behaviour and attitudes of its dinosaur members who are on the one hand supporting female promiscuity (at the expense of family values supported by marriage) and on the other insisting on racial exclusion - a recipe for failure, defeat and extinction. 

http://thebattlefieldoflove.blogspot.com/2011/07/bnp-not-prepared-to-promote-family.html

http://thebattlefieldoflove.blogspot.com/2011/07/nationalism-should-promote-family.html

http://thebattlefieldoflove.blogspot.com/2011/07/hand-that-rocks-cradle-belongs-to-slut.html

http://thebattlefieldoflove.blogspot.com/2011/07/i-cannot-attend-meeting-of-prospective.html

http://thebattlefieldoflove.blogspot.com/2011/06/two-schools-of-thought-in-bnp.html

http://thebattlefieldoflove.blogspot.com/2011/06/official-britain-now-inferior-nation.html

http://thebattlefieldoflove.blogspot.com/2011/06/more-ostentatious-displays-of.html
at No comments:
Labels: , ,

Monday, 4 July 2011

Post Mortem on the death of my hopes to become the 2012 BNP London mayoral candidate

The reason given for the suspension of my membership of the BNP was give as my "cyberactivities". The issue to which it pertained concerned what I said I would do if I had a severely disabled baby which my husband and I did not wish to bring up and the matter was not "taken care of" by the midwife in the old fashioned way. 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Midwifery#Early_Historical_Perspective

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.

I said that, regrettably, I would feel morally obliged to commit infanticide rather than to pass on the burden to the taxpayer. 

However, in Britain, the consensus appears to be that I should be forced to bring up my severely disabled baby, destroy my marriage, not try to have any more children.  This happened to a school friend of mine, whose firstborn was a severely disabled daughter.  She is now single, alone and effectively childless, with her disabled daughter confined to an institution, which may or may not be like Winterbourne View featured in Panorama recently.

If I am to be disciplined, suspended or even expelled for saying this, then it appears that the BNP are saying that what I propose to do is wrong, and what my schoolfriend did was right.  The mind boggles as to how encouraging every mother with a severely disabled baby who did as my school friended did would benefit the white race, but there you have it: that is the BNP's policy for mothers with severely disabled babies: they should be forced to bring them up or the taxpayer forced to pay for their institutionalisation, whether they want to or is in the public interest to, or not. 

Unbelievable, imbecilic, coercive (on both the taxpayer and the mother) and irrational, but there it is. 











http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2011/jun/20/winterbourne-view-hospital-panorama-abuse
I have re-read the comments I made on Saturday 25 June on Charlotte Lewis's wall - the ones that were reported by Chez Dunn (a female BNP member who is a single mother with disabled offspring) who got me into trouble - and they really were quite innocuous.  Even my BNP buddies who have berated me for being recklessly provocative cannot actually point to any comment that was obviously objectionable in that thread.

http://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=10150228596296430&id=694016429#!/permalink.php?story_fbid=2176919068524&id=1413277405

If nobody can find anything particularly objectionable, this means that to avoid being suspended, I should not have said what I said on the Victoria Derbyshire Show.  However, there is no way I would have declined her invitation to express my views about Riven Vincent on air, even with the benefit of hindsight.

To not say what I think on the off chance of my becoming the BNP 2012 London mayoral candidate would have been overly optimistic.  The whole point of doing what I did was in the hope that I would at least be tested by hostile questioning on the selection panel to see if I could defend myself effectively.

In the event, my suspension meant I could not even attend the meeting for the GLA elections that took place on 3 July.  Even if I had attended, they still would not have been obliged to choose me. 

What does all this say about the party?

I had no illusions about the hardliners who would resent the fact that I was a member.  Their comments at

http://www.democracyforum.co.uk/bnp/96053-khaw-lewis-suspended-7.html

http://www.democracyforum.co.uk/bnp/95865-scatty-chav-chez-dunn-wants-charlotte-lewis-claire-khaw-booted-out.html

is evidence that they find my race very problematic indeed, which comes as no surprise.

Whatever has happened to my mayoral candidacy I can at least bask in the warmth of the messages of support I have received from BNP members who don't have an issue with my race, who recognised that I was really the best candidate they could have had.  Their exasperation with me for getting knocked out when I was so close to being selected was clearly genuine. Some of them even contacted the Chairman to speak up for me.

I do not think however that they any of this could have been avoided.  If it were not about what I would do to my own severely disabled baby it would have been about never married single mums.  They would have found something because I do undeniably have controversial views and do seek to provoke. 

Such was the opposition to the idea of having a non-white BNP London mayoral candidate that they were using me to discredit Nick Griffin in the coming leadership election with the slogan "Vote Griffin Get Khaw".

I know that the Chairman has said some complimentary things about me in the past to others and perhaps felt overwhelmed by the more vocal opposition against me as mayoral candidate (or even my membership of the party) and felt he had to do something.

The issue of what I said about what I would do to my own severely disabled baby seemed a good enough way of showing that I was unsuitable, on more than grounds of race alone. 

I asked Eddy Butler the expelled ex-National Organiser if he would have done the same thing in Chairman's position and his response was a definite no, though he would have suspended me, he said.  He pointed out that my biggest mistake was in thinking that the Chairman cared anything for election results.  The fact that I would have got more votes in London than any of the other mayoral candidates counted for nothing with the Chairman, apparently.

The Chairman submits to the view of the members who would rather have the weeds of ethno-nationalism than the fruits of civic nationalism. 


Perhaps the Chairman feels he has to tread a thin line and to be all things to all nationalists.  I know that he was being nagged by Jean Marie Le Penn during his visit to Britain to let the ethnics in as long ago as 2004.

The point is that if the Chairman had wanted to support me, he could have.

For fringe political parties, the only way forward is to fight elections and be seen to be doing better than before.  The 2012 London mayoral elections would have been a superb opportunity for the party to show to the British public that it was less racist than it has been portrayed, but there is now the possibility that they will not even have a mayoral candidate at all. 

What would I have done if I were Chairman of the BNP and was the same race as Nick Griffin?

I would have made a point of supporting free speech, supported the ethnic mayoral candidate's right to free speech, and made the leadership election absolutely ideological, between the Modernisers and the Dinosaurs. It could then be presented as a contest between the incumbent modernising Chairman who backed me against the hidebound dinosaur challenger Andrew Brons who cannot stomach the idea of an ethnic representing the party in the London mayoral elections.  Then there would have been clear blue water and the BNP would have turned a corner.  The Chairman would have easily won too, if I were involved in the leadership campaign and accompanied him on the hustings.

Medium to high risk but worth doing, I would have thought, in the spectrum of calculated risks. 

But it appears that it suits the Chairman not to take any risks and for the party not to do spectacularly well but just be chugging along, as long as the vote could be said to increase. 

Well, there we are.  I am just so glad I did not deactivate my blogs or stop myself from saying anything I believed in on the off chance that I might be made the mayoral candidate if I did shut up.  It would be too awful if I had shut up and was still sacrificed to the T-Rexes of the BNP for some trumped-up reason. 

http://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.com/2011/07/transcript-of-what-i-said-on-victoria.html
at No comments:
Labels: , , , , , , , , ,
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)

Christians irrationally choose a Higher Power when they could have the support of the Supreme Power

  8:44 @OfficialSecularKoranism ​​You can beat alcoholism with AA *and* a Higher Power 15:46 @OfficialSecularKoranism ​​If we have the Highe...