The British Nationalist

First of all I hate the phrase “Anti-Fascist”. This is a contradiction as what they practice, through limiting our freedom of speech, is directly the equivalent to the modern day definition of “fascist”. I could discuss the origins of the word “fascism” but that’s for another day! I prefer to refer to them as “under informed sheep”.

I’m sure many of you will have come across “the great unwashed” as, in jest, we refer to them. They were probably trying to prevent you entering a meeting of some sort held by a perfectly legal, democratic party. Or maybe they were bravely giving you a phone call, off a withheld number, and hanging up before you even have a chance to reply to the insult. They could have been “trolling” a forum or article on the internet, to give the false impression that they have a lot more support than they actually have.

Either way I hope you will agree with me that most of this is based on cowardice. In fact, I remember a certain head of BNP security telling me that the only time they get charged upon, is when the police were there, and even then they charge straight towards the police, as they know the police are limited to the amount of force they can use. Mind you, would you really fancy the job of taking on Martin Reynolds? I know I wouldn’t!

When we actually dissect (not literally) the likes of the UAF, searchlight and other “anti-fascist” movements, I find that they are set into three very distinctive groups. “Midgets, transvestites and the rest are weirdos?” I hear you cry. Well joking aside, I believe it runs deeper.

At the top are the people in charge, the likes of David Cameron, Gordon Brown, other politicians and top trade unionists. These people do not really care about the message of perceived unity and harmony the UAF pretends it follows. All they care about are consolidating their public positions. As the British National Party is the only British party that believes in aiming for TRUE meritocracy, and the abolition of the ruling elite, they support any movement that will stop this, as they frantically try to claw on to the elevated positions they hold. Unfortunately this is at the expense of democracy (and of course all the hard working union members, who mostly are unaware where the money they pay in goes).

Next down the line are the true degenerates. These are people that are so insecure with themselves that they choose to believe in communist ideology, as this brings everybody else down to their level. Rather than choose self improvement, it is easy enough to pass the blame on the world around you, and take it out on those you see as superior to yourself. Because of the promotion of meritocracy within nationalism, they see this as a threat that they will have to foot the blame for their own status in society.

The third group, mainly students I believe, are the majority. These are people who just misunderstand nationalism and I believe they cannot be blamed for it. After all, if all the lies told about the BNP were true, I myself would be alongside them. But we know they are not. Up until the last five years, the British National Party have been something of a myth to most people, with no general media coverage, and no means, apart from the odd leaflet, to really get our message across. This has lead to a lifetime of indoctrination against us. On top of that the horrible stories they make up about us, laughable to anyone in the know, could be convincing to younger minds. They genuinely believe that we are a holocaust denying, Hitler-worshiping group of thugs.

The challenge here is convincing them that we are not. This has become easier since the growth of the internet as they can now view our side of the argument, and even liaise and debate with supporters through social networking. Sites such as YouTube also help us get our message through with multimedia videos dispelling the myths about us.

The bottom line is that we should not hold this against the majority; instead we should seek to disprove and discredit the first two categories of people. Once accomplished the majority should cease to protest, realising the flaws in their arguments, and in the best case even join our growing ranks.

I know we are still a long way from this but already we are starting to gain some ground. More and more, younger people are approaching us, and instead of blatantly shouting abuse, they are asking genuine questions.

I really believe people are starting to wake up and smell the coffee, and this will prove to be the undoing of the far left.

By Joey Smith

Against New and Blue Labour

After the recent Conservative Party Conference whereby Shadow Chancellor George Osborne vowed to freeze pay, increase the retirement age to 66, refused to abolish Labour’s 50% tax-rate for the wealthy as well as axing tax credits for families earning above £50,000; one has to ask, which party is this?

Cameron’s CONservatives are a far cry from the Tory party of yesteryear.

Which honest to God right winger would dream of backing such high tax rates in support of the welfare state, or what is effectively a redistribution of wealth when it comes to tax credit, not to mention a pro-immigration stance (irrespective of whether it is points based) at a time when Britain is on its knees with almost 3 million unemployed?

It would appear David Cameron and his ilk would feel more at home with the Labour Party.

One also has wonder over the likelihood of the Conservatives winning the next General Election. Unpopular as the Labour Party may seem at the moment, the Tories would have to win over the North East and overturn 117 seats nationwide in order to take power; all this with un-conservative and highly unappealing proposals means it is likely Britain could be facing a further four years of Labour tyranny, Blue or otherwise…

In this case, the Tories are barely the lesser of two evils. The UK’s democratic first-past-the-post system works in favour of either of the two parties and, whilst a vote for a minority party may seem like a vote for hope, the current circumstances are such that this kind of vote will hold little to no influence.

Action at the voting booth should be replaced by direct action on all levels. The Irish people were given the right to vote on the Lisbon treaty and upon an “unsatisfactory” two-fingered salute at the charter were yet again made to vote until they adhered to the wants of the powers that be.

The British were given no such “privilege”. We the people have had no real say in the matter despite a recent YouGov poll showing the majority of the population oppose the treaty.

It is clear the ballot is no good. The only alternative is to show our disapproval is via protest and civil disobedience.

It worked with the Poll Tax riots. The legislation was repealed. It can work again. The state can and will be pressured by the people to amend unsatisfactory proposals. We have no choice at the ballot box, but we do have a say in how we live. It is our RIGHT.

We are under no obligation to follow unjust law.

By Jersey Royal

Famous Labourite: Frost

Tory Leader David Cameron has accepted an invitation by Sky News to take part in the first live leader’s debate. Liberal Democrat boss Nick Clegg is also thought to be keen, whilst De-Facto Prime Minister Lord Mandelson revealed that Labour Leader Gordon Brown is ‘willing to discuss’ the possibility of making an appearance.

Sky News have approached life-long Labourite Sir David Frost to chair the debate, a decision which has angered politics junkies: “That man is as red as they come, not the man for the job at all,” said Rob, from Derby.

Questions have been posed about maintaining the impartiality of the debate. There are known marital ties between Sky executives and senior Labour apparatchiks, Sky News political editor Adam Boulton is married to Labour spin doctor Angie Hunter.

The main issue potential viewers have is why are all the other party leaders excluded from this debate? The BNP’s Nick Griffin MEP and UKIP’s Nigel Farage MEP being the most popular choices. The BNP chief is a proven ratings winner, but the suggestion of Nick Griffin appearing alongside PM Gordon Brown is out of the question to Labour bosses.

Panelists on the BBC’s Question Time were recently asked if they would appear on the panel if Nick Griffin was included, their answers were unanimous; they would have no problem with the BNP leader making an appearance. In their folly some politicians believe they could handle the issues raised by Mr. Griffin, their advisors know better.

Picture the scene;

Nick Griffin: So Prime Minister, why did you commit treason by signing the Lisbon treaty behind closed doors?

Brown: uh uhh ummm, I will not take lectures from extremists!

Nick Griffin: Can you explain why your party allows and encourages mass immigration against the will of the British public?

Brown:  I will not answer racist questions!

Sir David Forst (Chair): Quite right prime minister, Mr Griffin no more diffic….I mean racist questions.

It wasn’t all that long ago that Lembit Opik refused an invitation from the BNP MEP to a public debate.

Interest in a live debate between three leaders – who are happy to occupy the same patch of central ground – is limited. Conservative supporter, Keith Haddle, said: “They’re all pro-EU an pro-immigration, what kind of debate is that? I want the BNP and UKIP leaders there to add some spice to the discussion, otherwise I probably won’t tune in.”

If Gordon Brown doesn’t come down with some mystery illness the night before, I will eat my hat.

The Difference Between Left and Right Wing and Where British Parties Stand – An Introduction

For too long there has been confusion between Left and Right wing in British politics.

In economic terms, those on the Right hand of the political spectrum tend to favour low taxation, privitisation and a free market to encourage competition in business so to become more efficient and provide a better service.

Conversely, those on the Left tend to prefer a strong hold over the economy and suggest nationlisation and a tightly controlled market is the way forward.
Those on the far Left favour income redistribution, high taxation and a welfare state to eliminate the social economic class system and promote “equality”.

The British National Party (much like the Green Party), by some of these definition, are economically Left wing.
Their policies regarding health, transport, housing, protectionism and globalisation fall strongly on the Left side of the political spectrum and may explain why they receive so much support in traditional Labour strongholds.

Parties such as UKIP on the other hand profess their support for a freer market and the scrapping of Inheritance Tax, though both UKIP and the BNP stress the importance of reforming the current welfare system so that it acts as a safety net as opposed to the hammock it has become.

The Labour Party after Blair and Brown’s reform (although still economically Socialist in the vaguest of terms) do not hold the same views towards privitisation as Old Labour did.
Tony Blair, though forced to re-nationalise Railtrack, was intent on privitising the London Underground and Royal Mail. This is a far cry from Old Labour policy and has undoubtedly lost the Party a crucial following.

Socially, those on the Right hold conservative values such as an authoritarian attitude to crime, often supporting corporal and capital punishment, are against immigration, asylum seeking and multiculturalism and emphasise the value of National identity and tradition, insisting that social change should be organic rather than manufactured.

Contrarily, the Left argue for tolerance towards (read ‘preferance towards’) minorities, hold liberal attitudes on law and order emphasising the importance of reform as opposed to punishment and imply the state is justified in intervening to create social change.

By this definition the BNP is certainly on the Right hand of the political spectrum when it comes down to their policies on immigration, asylum, law and order, the military and school discipline.
In this sense it is easy to see the parallels between todays British National Party and yesterdays Conservative Party with the likes of Enoch Powell possibly springing to mind.

Today’s Tories under David Cameron could be said to be more ‘Blue Labour’ than Conservative.
Cameron has made massive reforms within the Conservative Party, defeating the New Right and traditional Conservatives in order to implement policies worthy of battling the Labour Party for the Centre ground.

Cameronites supported the idea that significant minorities within Britain were excluded from mainstream society due to economic deprivation and social discrimination.
The advocacy of grammar schools was abandoned, instead taking on board the Labour policy of creating different types of secondary schools that would be available to all irrespective of background.
The traditional Conservative hardline stance on law and order was softened, for example by proposing measures to combat youth crime by lessening the amount of custodial sentences given.

It can safely be said that Labour and Conservatives to lean firmly more towards the centre in comparison to their original standpoints.

It is difficult to accutely differentiate between Left and Right especially when it comes down to Party alignment where it is almost impossible to find one that lands squarely on one side with all its policies.
As earlier exemplified, the British National Party harbours policies that fall both on the Left and Right side of the political spectrum and is thus wrongly described as “far-Right” by the media.

It is therefore better to avoid using these terms to describe a party altogether, rather only to label significant policies as either Left or Right.

David Cameron, Leader of the (Un)Conservative party, carbon copy of Tony Blair and supporter of communist Labour party front group Unite Against Fascism. Guilty by association of the hammer attack on British National Party activist Tony Ward.

Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.