This should come as no surprise: the Orwellian “Commission for Equality & Human Rights” is attempting to crush the BNP, and the party now has to “adapt or die” by surrendering to non-White membership. I wonder if British nationalists will continue to bash Hitler, lionize Winston Churchill, and sing the praises of “democracy.” It was their so-called “finest hour” that led to all of this.
According to Ian Kershaw, if Britain hadn’t declared war on Hitler’s Germany in 1939, “there is little doubt that German race policies would have been introduced in Britain, or that willing hands would have been found to enforce them.” (Kershaw, Making Friends With Hitler, 345) In other words, the small non-White minority would have been removed or sterilized, non-Whites would never have settled in Britain en masse, and Jews would have been removed or excluded from all positions of influence. Vichy France, which was outright defeated by the Third Reich, was allowed to retain its overseas empire. A neutral or allied Britain would similarly have been allowed to retain the Empire.
In hindsight, Britain’s best hope (now expired) was a Quisling government under Mosley or some such figure. Even a puppet of the Third Reich could not have racially mismanged Britain as horribly as Winston Churchill and his successors.
British Nationalists whould form an underground movement, with a paramilitary arm.
should
Real British Nationalists don’t care very much about Hitler or WWII, but they will do whatever it takes to win, including subterfuge. They are actually engaging in the political process instead or just talking anonymously on the internet. Would you have them come out as pro-Hitler?
The BNP has been prepared for this for many years. They have a few Indian supporters already available who will join if the BNP is forced to have non-white members. It’s not that big of a deal.
Seems like they’re fighting a losing battle.
Like in the northern US, as in Britain, liberals seem to outnumber the racialists.
If the people are corrupt, a party doesn’t have much chance to succeed to any significant extent.
I support the BNP anyway.
“The BNP has been prepared for this for many years. They have a few Indian supporters already available who will join if the BNP is forced to have non-white members. It’s not that big of a deal.”
Considering that they had and probably still have some informants, having a non-white might not make much of a difference.
I suppose some of the higher caste Brahmins and other Asian sympathizers would be best.
I am not so sure I understand the problem. If a handful of non-white BNP supporters want to join, so what? They already accept Jews.
Is there a serious chance that enough non-whites would join for the purpose of subverting the direction of the BNP?
The BNP has stated on record that “settled minorities” are OK.
I struggled with this issue for years. It’s hard for us Americans and westerners in general to break out of our socialization vis-a-vis ‘The Good War’ (and the phony “Holocaust”) which are unquestionably the defining myth(s) of the modern world order.
The fact is, 1939-1945 was one of the worst civilizational disasters to ever befall European mankind. It is pretty clearly so, in retrospect.
But it is easy to lament the past, isn’t it. As to solutions today- I don’t know, but, I do think that if more and more people see the truth about the Holocaust (that it is a myth/hoax…it’s more complicated than that but that’s the meat of it), the better chance for down-the-road recovery there is. Unfortunately, very few people take revisionism seriously, or at least would admit to doing so in public.
Google “Holocaustdenialvideos”.
Why does anyone have any illusions about the BNP anymore?
First they expelled their founding member John Tyndall. Then they softened their image to achieve some gains during elections. Wow, a whopping half a percent! Now they’re going to admit non-whites into their membership while “holding true” to their “core principles.” But don’t worry, says Griffin, when the time is right we’ll fight back!
How about actually forming a revolutionary White Nationalist party instead of a conformist parliamentary one?
I look upon the self-destruction of the philosemitic, Islamophobic BNP with eagerness. Then something nobler can replace it.
Ymir – You do not have an understanding of the political and legal context within which the BNP is operating. If it makes a misstep, it’s enormous fines and jail. What Griffin is doing is demonstrating to the British masses–quite well–that the ruling elites are hypocrits and will not allow a democratic threat to their rule and the slow genocide of the British people. Until that point has been made, aside from cadres, there is no hope for a mass revolutionary party.
Presumably, the cadre building of that vanguard is continuing apace alongside the parliamentary route.
Once it is made clear that playing by the rules and winning means only that the leftoids will simply change the rules, the barrier to entry for revolutionary activity among the average masses drops considerably.
If you’re looking for purity and a perfect situation, you can find many parties of one on the Internet. In the real world, there is only one Anglo party standing up for its race and that is the BNP.
“In a sane society, kike-a-like vermin like Griffin would be tried and shot for treason.”
Does this guy ever stop???
Proz, reign him in if he can’t do it himself.
Swine would be a more Nobel replacement.
The sad thing is that in Britain, both liberals and old-style reactionaries opposed the Nazism.
Even Rudyard Kipling — one of the most anti-liberal poets of the 20th century — gave a speech (titled “An Undefended Island”) warning of the “dangers” Nazi Germany.
In Nazi Germany itself, old-style reactionaries were opposed to Hitler.
My point? Contrary to Prozium’s assertions, opposition to Hitler’s regime was pronounced not only among liberals, but also among reactionaries and monarchists.
Churchill was an example of this trend. He was a conservative in the antique sense – he cannot be regarded as a liberal by any stretch of the imagination. And even he regarded Nazi Germany as a grave danger to Britain.
Both the Right and the Left are the enemy. Fascism and Third Way politics are the answer.
How about actually forming a revolutionary White Nationalist party instead of a conformist parliamentary one?
I’ve said this same thing other places. BNP, like most of the nationalist groups of today, is a safe diversion for both our side and theirs. We need a truly revolutionary group, not a cadre of fairweather nationalists who wear their philosemitism on their sleeves.
Both the Right and the Left are the enemy. Fascism and Third Way politics are the answer.
Wholeheartedly agree.
Why is an international pan-European Fascist philosophy so unfeasible? Anyway, it’s my own vision. I’d like to see true Aryan revolutionaries develop an international revolutionary state of mind aimed at achieving Fascist/Third Way regimes throughout the Eurosphere. The Bolshevik-Trotsky faction did the same thing with Communism in a time of far less sophisticated technology. Substitute the “universal proletariat” with the universal call of untainted European genetics and imagery of shared destiny, etc.
You make it sound so simple!
You make it sound so simple!
If I project the attitude that it will never happen, then the probability that it will happen drops to .00.
/\ Should read: “if I and others like me project…”
Whatever dude.
“Like in the northern US, as in Britain, liberals seem to outnumber the racialists.”
It’s 2009. Liberals outnumber racialists in the South too.
I disagree about the South. I’m talking about the population, not the politicians.
Who voted for Obama is a good indicator.
Most of the comments in this thread display the usual confused commentary concerning the BNP and the race relations legislation in the UK, so I hope the following will help to dispel some of the confusion.
First, concerning the present litigation initiated by the EHRC, the BNP’s defence rests upon a claim that it is a ‘membership association’ and as such is exempt from the requirements of the Race Relations Act 1976 (a so-called ‘Section 26’ exemption). The EHRC’s case rests upon the claim that, as a registered political party, the BNP cannot claim such an exemption, and as a political party it is breaking the law by restricting membership to ‘ethnic Caucasians’.
The Act itself does not make any mention of political parties so what the dispute amounts to is a retrospective interpretation of a law which was written over thirty years ago. As to whose view would prevail in open court is anybody’s guess, although in such cases it is customary that the side that can wheel up the heaviest legal artillery (in terms of ‘name’ QCs and research assistance) and has the deepest pockets will eventually prevail.
That is the calculus that Griffin has to deploy. There is actually a solid chance that the BNP might prevail, depending who got to try the case, but it would probably bankrupt itself in the process. That in fact may be the entire rationale behind the EHRC’s case, since in little more that a few months from now, in Spring 2010, the RRA76 will be superseded by the new Equalities Bill will removes definitively the previous S.26 loophole that the BNP depends upon. The Equalities Bill specifically prohibits political parties from discriminationg on racial or ethnic grounds. At that time the BNP really will have no alternative but to ‘adapt or die’, so there seems little benefit for the party in continuing to contest the action with the EHRC given it will have no choice but to comply anyway early next year.
As Griffin states, the primary imperative now is to recast the party constitution to make it even more difficult for infiltrators and provocateurs to gain control. The existing two-tier membership structure already provides some safeguards in that respect, but will need to be strengthened. The other area requiring urgent attention is to fine tune the party’s core principles and to make them practically impervious to change. At the same time, party management should provide itself with the powers to summarily expel any member who violates those core principles. Much of this already exists within the present constitution and merely needs to updated and strengthened.
Thanks for that insight, Dan.
I’m really curious to see a non-white fighting for a white Britain. Only whites fight for their own displacement, right? 🙂
I wouldn’t listen to Dan, if I were you. He is a conservative British patriotard and admirer of the Zionist kike-a-like Winston Churchill.
” He is a conservative British patriotard and admirer of the Zionist kike-a-like Winston Churchill.”
To make a comparison: that is like an American Racialist admiring Franklin Delano Rosenfeld!
This is sheer madness! Conservatism (especially the Jew-friendly type) must be jettisoned for a Revolutionary Stance!
“I’m really curious to see a non-white fighting for a white Britain. Only whites fight for their own displacement, right? :)”
Maybe they could “run a wog” in an MP election, a Sikh, maybe, from the area with the most Sikhs (after fully vetting him, of course). Whatever disadvantages that tactical move would have, it would certainly take the wind out of the sails of the people calling the BNP fascist, Nazi, racist, etc.
Front National in France (Le Pen’s party) has allowed non-whites in its party for a long time. There is even a North African guy who runs for election in FN – his name is Stéphane Durbec.
Winston Churchill was neither a conservative nor a liberal. He was a professional palimentrian politician. That is how he earned his crust of bread. Democracy breeds such carpet-baggers.
Isn’t it additionally nice that fat-troll alcoholic Winny even had to face the shame and embarrassment of losing an election BEFORE the conclusion of the war, whereas his four-term contemporary across the ocean had to die in office in order to be removed.
Clement Atlee sat in for Winny at the final conferences with Truman and Stalin. 😀
F*ck Churchill and f*ck democracy. Fascism and Third Way politics are the answer.
Hopefully the BNP will fight this unjust, and in the words of Nick Griffin, illegal ruling. This once again proves that whites have virtually no political rights in our own homelands and are expected to shut up and support our own racial demise…….or else. If whites in America ever get their act together and successfully organize you can be sure the Fed gov and media will come at us with every means at their disposal, notwithstanding the legality of the means.
I think Kerhsaw is correct about Britain adopting pro-white racial policies given the U.S. was already proceeding along this path even before knatsy Germany began implementing eugenics as state policy. Race based policies and eugenic measures were beginning to gain traction in much of the Western world in the early decades of the 20th century. It could be argued that Nationalist Socialist Germany was actually a latecomer to the implementation of racial and eugenics policies.
The propaganda following in the aftermath of WWII discredited racial policies as leftists used exaggerated and/or false atrocity tales and photos of concentration camps to equate racialist policies with genocide of innocent people. If the political right had a coherent strategy they would have counterattacked by associating leftist politics with mass murder, slave labor and gulags a la Stalinism and the Soviet Union, but I don’t want to get too far afield.
+ Japan to Pay Couples to Have Babies = http://www.dailyfinance.com/2009/09/06/japans-newest-job-opportunity-parenthood/
Why, how “nationalistically socialist” of Japan…in other words, Whites in North America, Europe, Australia/NZ, etc who buy Japanese goods (cars, electronics, etc) are basically subsidizing a hoped-for Japanese baby-boom.
“White Americans are subsidizing Japanese births.”
In large part, due to our elites betraying us with outsourcing!
I also noticed how only non-White countries can remain as they are and pay their homogeneous couples to have children! Whites having the same rights? Never!