Friday, 24 August 2012

Issue 13, August 2006

Nation Revisited

An occasional email to friends
# 13. August 2006. 

Minding our business

The Israeli attack on Lebanon has killed hundreds of non-combatants and uprooted hundreds of thousands. Since America forced the Syrian peacekeeping force out of Lebanon the country has been ripe for invasion. The Lebanese Army cannot control Hezbollah or take on the US-equipped Israeli Defence Force. Hezbollah has Katyusha and Fajir rockets and anti-tank weapons but the Israelis have Phantom fighter-bombers, helicopter gun ships and illegal phosphorus bombs. The Israeli air force has destroyed much of the country but the IDF is bogged down in Bint Jbeil against an increasingly confident and stubborn enemy.

Some British nationalists have advocated a policy of “stay out of trouble” and refuse to criticize Israel’s disproportionate intervention, even against the thousands of British refugees pouring out of the war zone. The appeasers say that Britain is “far too small a nation” to influence world affairs and suggest that we mind our own business. But Britain is a member state of the world’s biggest and most successful trading bloc. We are not just a country that is “far too small” but part of an emerging superpower that is destined to play an increasing part in world affairs.

The trouble is that Britain does not have a foreign policy but simply follows America’s Manichean vision without regard to our own interests. Tony Blair has continued the “special relationship” that was forged by Winston Churchill and confirmed by Margaret Thatcher. We have given up all pretence of national independence and use our armed forces to support American objectives. By adopting a common European policy we would take an active part in decision-making instead of simply obeying orders.

The “stay out of trouble” policy is disingenuous. Oil supplies and the fate of our citizens are legitimate British and European interests. The eastern Mediterranean is vital to Europe and it is everybody’s interest to restore the region to normality. At present Israel is waging war on Lebanon and Palestine, occupying part of Syria and threatening Iran. The Americans and their allies are fighting resistance movements in Iraq and Afghanistan. The situation is grave and getting worse by the day. Only international agreement between the US, the EU and Russia can bring peace. President George Bush is controlled by an alliance of extreme Zionists and born-again Christian warmongers.

They are in no mood to talk but eventually they will be forced to negotiate, just as Israel was forced to withdraw from Lebanon in 2000 after losing 1200 men in a costly occupation that started in 1982. Israel enjoys total American support and every bombing mission is seen as a victory, but this mood will change as the body bags come home.

This will be no six-day war but a long and bloody struggle.

What They Believe In                                                                                           

To find where the British nationalists parties stand on Europe I have looked at their websites and conclude that although most of them are against the EU, there is nevertheless a definite drift towards European solidarity. I have not bothered with UKIP because it is just a Tory group with no conception of race and nation.

The British National Party is committed to withdrawal from the European Union although some of its leaders are known to be euro-friendly. They claim that we pay 43 million pounds per day to the EU, that’s 15.6 billion pounds per annum. In fact last year we paid 9.9 billion Euros but got back 6.2 billion Euros, a real annual cost of 3.7 billion Euros, or 2.5 billion pounds; a fraction of the sum claimed by the BNP and a small price to pay for access to the world’s most successful trading bloc. The party that has tried to be realistic about immigration remains in a state of denial about Europe. Recent articles by BNP leaders point to a softening of the party line, even an acknowledgement of the need for cooperation between national representatives in Brussels. Such an alliance for reform would make more sense than the nihilistic wrecking policy of UKIP.

The National Front is against the EU: “The NF supports the right of self-determination for all European nations and demands that right for Britain. It seeks a Europe where each nation is friendly to others but where no nation seeks to dominate or interfere in the affairs of another. Consequently the NF would withdraw from the EU. The NF would encourage the cultural diversity between the nations of Europe and resist attempts to eliminate this. It totally opposes the monetary and political merging of the separate nations into a super-state.”

The British People’s Party shares its website with Aryan Unity, a movement dedicated to promoting unity between euro-nationalist groups worldwide. Their first objective is: 

“To build an organization which is dedicated to the promotion of White Nationalism.”

Nevertheless point 14 of the BPP policy statement calls for: “The withdrawal of Great Britain from the EU, NATO, the UN and all other arms of the New World Order.”

British Movement is pro-European but does not go into detail: “ National Socialism liberates the freethinking folk of the world to stimulate the development of civilization. The peoples of Europe stem from a common racial root; we must enjoin in spiritual union for the defence of our freedoms against common enemies. Our strong race-founded bloc will scale new heights in all fields for the advancement of our vibrant culture.”

The other openly national socialist party, the November IX Society is opposed to the EU but takes a positive attitude to European solidarity: “ We will strive to positively cooperate with our European neighbours… We believe that the nations of Europe should be free to trade and cooperate whenever it is mutually beneficial, though without being forced into a political and economic straitjacket – such as the disastrous current push for a Federal Europe.”
The England First Party wants to break up the United Kingdom and form a new union including Ireland. It is not clear if this federation would belong to the EU. Despite this extraordinary policy the EFP have two councillors in the Northwest.

The Nationalist Alliance works with like-minded groups including the EFP, NF, League of St George and N9S. Their policy statement includes complete withdrawal from the EU, but this is way down the list at number 17 in their 22-point manifesto.

The League of St George supports “Europe a Nation,” as befits their Union Movement origins. The LSG magazine “League Sentinel” promotes BUF and UM literature but also carries advertisements for the eurosceptic NF and BPP – but not for the BNP.

England First – not to be confused with the EFP – belongs to the International Third Position, a Catholic-social movement, and to the European National Front that stands for a Europe of the nations:
“Although we advocate a policy of England First, this does not mean that we are anti-Scottish, anti-Welsh, anti-Irish or anti-European. For us “No More Brothers Wars” is more than just a slogan – it is a statement of belief that calls for practical action… We are opposed to all ventures such as the EU, NATO and the UN, which seek to make England an impoverished province of the New World Order. We also oppose Big Business, Freemasonry and other NWO vested interests.”

The Freedom Party is critical of the EU but has given some thought to its position:
“On the other hand it is wrong to suggest (as the single issue UKIP does) that all our problems can be laid at Brussels’ door. Our abjectly pro-American, pro-war foreign policy is none of the EU’s doing, and the waves of asylum seekers heading for England come here because of our domestic politicians’ dereliction of duty over more than half a century. We therefore favour a more flexible, reformist approach to our relations with the EU, not a simplistic policy of wanting out regardless of the consequences, and with no clear plan for the future.”

The Euro 2006 opinion poll shows that 42% consider our membership to be a good thing, 25% think it’s a bad thing, 28% think that it’s neither good nor bad and 5% don’t know. The traditional anti-EU position is increasingly out-of-touch not only with the general public but also with informed nationalist opinion. Hostility to the EU is justified by invoking the bogeyman of the New World Order, but if one nation can fight back then several nations acting together must have an even better chance.

As well as being anti-EU most of the parties of the far right are also anti-American. The BNP has developed a split personality on this issue with articles in “Freedom” attacking American imperialism while the party manifesto calls for American troops to defend us from a European super-state. A great deal of confusion surrounds the issue of European Union due to the apocalyptic visions of AK Chesterton that have distorted the picture for generations of nationalists. But neither America nor the EU are inherently evil, just some of the politicians who work for them. The white people of America, the EU, the UK, the Commonwealth and Russia are the same people with different flags and passports.

Action and Reaction                                                                                                  

Pope Gregory XIII issued a papal bull in 1582 to replace the literally out-of-date Julian calendar. This reform was adopted by the Catholic nations of Europe and within a few years the Austrian Empire, France and the Catholic German states had changed over.

Eventually the Protestant states fell into line, but Britain held out until 1752 and the change was bitterly opposed by those who saw it as a foreign or popish plot.

“The English calendar as it appeared in the mid 18th century was a great reef of religious, economic, social, ritual, customary and natural elements, the by-product of centuries of cultural accretion: it could not simply be reformed by a stroke of the legislator’s pen, like the pottle (half gallon) or the prayer book.” Early Modern Notes.

So it took 170 years for Britain to catch up with Western Europe, and it took even longer for the Russians who only adopted the Gregorian calendar in 1919.

In 1849 Britain minted a new coin called a florin, this was worth two shillings, or one tenth of a pound. This was the first step towards a decimal currency that was supposed to take ten years, but it was not completed until 1971, 122 years later.

In 1849 Lord Kelvin and the British Association for the Advancement of Science recommended that Britain adopt the metric system of weights and measures. This was endorsed a year later by a House of Commons select committee. The process did not get under way until 1965 and we are now being told that the changeover will be complete by 2009. That will be 148 years between recommendation and adoption.

Unsurprisingly metric weights and measures are opposed by UKIP. A spokesman has described their introduction as “metric fascism” and vowed to fight for the old avoirdupois system that we imported from France in the 14th century. His father probably fought against decimal coinage and his distant ancestor may have been one of those who demanded, “Give us back our eleven days” as the popish plot was enacted.

Britain pioneered the industrial revolution and the development of railways, shipping, mining and heavy industry. Later we led with television, computers and the silicon chip.

All of these technologies were international in concept and benefited from the exchange of ideas throughout the world. But if the Ukippers had their way we would become isolated and frozen in time, like the Polynesians of Easter Island who were isolated by geography and so enslaved by ritual that they destroyed themselves.

The British nation, like its army and navy, is best going forward. A people who are always in the vanguard of scientific achievement cannot be buried by tradition. We are not an agricultural backwater but a world leader in science and technology. We cannot afford to mess about with rods, poles and perches while our industry turns out high-tech precision instruments. The cranks and neo-luddites of UKIP will not succeed in turning Britain into a peasant theme park for the amusement of tourists. The great ecological and logistical challenges of the modern world will force us to choose between the future and the past - between action and reaction. We have the intelligence to overcome all obstacles but we must not be held back by the dead hand of conservatism.

Views on the News                                                                                                   

Energy prices have increased by 20% and have more than doubled since 2003. The energy suppliers, Centrica and EDF are efficient companies but they are struggling with fuel price increases and lack of generating and distribution capacity. British Energy, the owner of our eight nuclear power plants, collapsed in 2002 and was virtually nationalized by the Department of Trade and Industry injection of 3 billion pounds in 2004. This state intervention has upset the free market fanatics but it will prove to be a vital part of our future energy industry. Power cuts in London have shown the need for greater capacity. Centrica have announced the construction of a new coal-fired power plant at Langage in Devon, in association with Drax, owners of the massive power plant in North Yorkshire. Infrastructure companies like energy and transport should have an element of state control and a coordinated development policy.

The sight of Tony Blair groveling to George Bush has become a regular feature of news broadcasts. George stumbles through a prepared speech full of inappropriate inflexions while Tony stares admiringly at his master like a devoted mongrel. Even Labour Party loyalists are now getting embarrassed by this performance. Margaret Thatcher was clearly besotted with Ronald Regan. The chemistry between them was palpable and their relationship was one of genuine mutual admiration. There is none of this about the master-servant relationship between Bush and Blair. When Bush called “Yo Blair” to his cringing acolyte the whole world witnessed the spectacle of the British Prime Minister being publicly humiliated.

Veteran nationalist Colin Jordan has recently had a letter published in his local paper the “Nidderdale Herald.” He is calling for support for local traders and for a boycott of the big supermarket chains including Tescos. Older readers will remember that CJ was fitted-up by the Special Branch in a Tescos shoplifting scam, many years ago.

The letter has been posted on the Nationalist Alliance website –

Two news items suggest that it is impossible to protect national cultures against foreign influences. In Albania the police do not know what to do about Scandinavian tourists bathing naked on their beaches. Conservative locals have complained to the police but Albania needs tourists and is reluctant to interfere with their freedom. And in Iran the President has issued a decree banning foreign words like “pizza” and “helicopter.” The Iranians will ignore this attempt to defend their language just as the French continue to ignore the Academie Francaise by using words like “weekend” and “e-mail.”

Cultural purists are fighting a losing battle all over the world. Trying to ban foreign words or foreign morals and manners will not succeed. People are now fully exposed to the Western way of life. Even strictly regulated tribal societies will break down when confronted by the free and easy lifestyle of liberal democracy. The so-called “honour killing” are a desperate attempt by Asians to maintain their traditions, but ultimately they will not succeed. For good or bad people will eventually opt for personal freedom over tribal and religious customs.

No comments: