Nation Revisited # 109, November 2013e-mail: email@example.com
Sterling and the Dollar – Robert RowUKIP and its rivals want to strengthen Britain’s trade links with the Commonwealth. This was tried back in 1932 at the Ottawa Conference. Robert Row described it in this extract from “Sterling and the Dollar” published in “Lodestar” in 1985:
“But in Britain the hour of crisis produced the man of mediocrity in pursuit of the impossible. Mr Neville Chamberlain, a former Lord Mayor of Birmingham, became Chancellor of the Exchequer. His goal was to restore the old pound sterling, confronting a new situation with old ways. Armed with his umbrella, Mr Chamberlain had recourse to three old policies. A true son of Birmingham, he had visions of recapturing world markets for British manufacturers; a depreciated pound would do that. His other policies were cheap money and protectionism.To these he added a fourth. The son of the great “Radical Joe”, Mr Chamberlain sought to realize his father’s dream of Empire Free Trade, and called the leaders of the Dominions together for a conference at Ottawa in 1932. But the dream perished at Ottawa. The Dominions were no longer the simple commodity producers of Joe Chamberlain’s time. They were becoming manufacturing countries and saw no reason to shut down their new factories to become markets for Britain’s old factories, which was Mr Chamberlain’s main aim. The very fact that their farming commodity prices were deep in a slump made them cling more fiercely to the new industries. If Mr Chamberlain was protectionist, so were they.
Thus Ottawa was mainly a fiasco. Something came out of it, it is true, a few minor trade agreements in Britain’s favour dressed up as high sounding “Imperial Preference”. But since these were confined to the British colonies, and Mr Chamberlain made no attempt to develop the full potential of colonial markets, Imperial Preference was more of a sop to Tory imperialists than a real solution to Britain’s export needs.But Ottawa had another effect, and an adverse one. Imperial Preference, meager as it was, aroused the ire of soon-to-be-elected President Roosevelt. He was reared in all the anti-imperialist prejudice of New England political families. In him the abolition of the British Empire assumed the force of a religion. And he was to succeed in this aim.”
Eighty years later a resurrected Commonwealth is even more unlikely; Canada is locked into the North American Free Trade Agreement, Australia and New Zealand are tied to Asian markets, and South Africa and Zimbabwe are black run states.Britain will always have ties of blood and history with the white dominions, just as we have with the United States, but it’s inevitable that we will belong to the European Union; the world’s biggest trading bloc. Those who yearn for expansion must overcome their unfounded fears and learn to love Europe.
The Alternative - Oswald Mosley
“The real idea, which must become the creed of the future, is surely to reject the old Internationalism on the one hand and on the other hand, to transcend an exclusive nationalism which divides natural friends and relatives. Man moved from the village to the nation in the natural process of uniting with his nearer kinsmen as his mind and spirit grew. Now the time is come to move from the nation to the continent, or even beyond it, under the same natural impulse and process of next uniting with those nearest to us in blood, tradition, mind and spirit”.He also dealt with the lies and slanders of the popular press; no mean feat in the fanatically anti-fascist atmosphere of the late forties.
“What then was the truth concerning the National Socialist of Fascist movements before the war? Our fault was exactly the opposite of that suggested against us. How often in politics is that a fact? How rarely are the people permitted to know anything except the reverse of the truth. It was suggested that we might set the interest of other countries before our own; that was an absurd lie. In reality we were all too National – too narrowly concentrated upon securing the interests of our own nations. That was the fault of all real National Socialist or Fascist Movements; whether in Britain, Germany, France, Spain, Italy. So far from being willing to serve each other as “Fifth Columns” in the event of a clash between States, our political ideology and propaganda were far too Nationalistic even to mould the minds of men in a new sense of European kinship and solidarity which might have avoided disaster by universal consent. So far from fighting for other countries in a war, we none of us argued with sufficient force in favour of that new sense of European Union which modern fact must now make an integral part of a new creed.”And he warned against the menace of petty nationalism.
“The wounds of Europe must be healed before the work of construction can begin. They are wounds of the spirit, and they are kept open by these animosities and memories of atavistic savagery. These old things have no interest to the creative mind, but they impede our work. That is why we ask Europe not to look back, but to stride forward. In these pages I have attempted to describe some possibilities which beckon us onward in the march of the European spirit. They are worth that effort of the living mind and will, which forgets the past and, thus achieves the future. Division is death, but Union is life”.The Alternative published by Black House Publishing Co is available from Amazon.com at £9.00 for paperback or £2.75 for Kindle.
BNP EconomicsThe September 2013 annual conference of the BNP passed the following motion.
“This conference proposes that a British National Party government will eradicate Poverty, Unemployment and the National Debt; by creating an Alternative Monetary System, which is controlled by the British People.A British National Party government will end the deceitful cycle of debt-slavery and will issue new debt-free money (which would never have to be repaid and would NOT increase the National Debt).
Outrageous schemes, such as the ‘Bedroom Tax’ would be eliminated, and we could also reduce taxes very significantly.To avoid ‘boom and bust’, this new currency will be linked to Britain’s Measure of Economic Welfare and will be guaranteed by the nation’s common wealth.”
A new currency could be established linked to GDP but we would still have to repay our National Debt which currently stands at £1.16 trillion. If we defaulted we would be blacklisted by the rating agencies, the international banks, the IMF and the World Bank. The new currency would therefore be unsustainable. We would not be able to buy food or oil and we would not be able to sell anything abroad because we wouldn’t be able to pay for shipping or insurance. Our supermarkets would run out of food within days and our power stations would have to cut production almost immediately. Our gold and dollar reserves currently stand at $129.2 billion but they would not last long with foreign creditors demanding payment of outstanding accounts. This new economic system would not be under the control of the British people it would be a financial disaster leading to chaos and starvation.The BNP are right to want a new economic system but we cannot achieve it by declaring national bankruptcy. Argentina defaulted on her international obligations in 2002 and she is still struggling. The value of a currency is decided by the marketplace. The pound trades against the euro and the dollar by international agreement not according to a fatuous declaration from the BNP.
We import nearly half our food and oil and we pay for them in dollars; not in worthless assignats issued by the “Peoples’ Bank”.The UK is not self-sufficient but united Europe could be; especially in alliance with Russia. A European superstate stretching from the Atlantic to the Pacific could have a genuinely independent economic system. But the BNP’s vision of a fiercely independent but half starved Britain cut off from Europe and growing vegetables in roadside allotments will achieve nothing. Brave words about “debt-free systems” will not keep our generators running or put food on our tables
Capitalism and ImmigrationThe British tax authorities recently struck a deal with the Internet giant Google to settle their outstanding tax bill. Of course Google should pay their taxes but they are a major employer in the UK with plans for expansion. The government obviously thinks they have more to gain by keeping Google on board. They have done similar deals with Amazon, Starbucks and other international corporations.
There is nothing new about global capitalism. When the grave of a Roman princess was found in Spitalfields in London in 1999 she was wearing the remains of a gold-embroidered dress from Iraq and carved jet jewelry from Germany. World trade has been with us since the days of the Roman Empire and mass production was pioneered by the British and Dutch East India Companies of the 17th century. The British Empire used Indians to build railways in East Africa, Chinese to work in the goldfields of British Columbia and West Indians to drive buses for London Transport. The great international corporations are behaving in exactly the same way by moving labour around the world to suit their requirements. Until we achieve a self-sufficient European economy based on fair wages and conditions we are stuck with a system that relies on cheap labour. All we can do in the meantime is fight for decent wages and try to keep out unskilled immigrants.The European social model guarantees health care, education and social security. It should also guarantee work and housing. These are achievable objectives if we stop trying to feed and defend half the world and close the doors to Third World immigration. The far right parties have conflated the EU with immigration but if we quit the EU tomorrow we would still be inundated with economic refugees from Africa, Asia and the Caribbean. Two thirds of our immigrants come from outside Europe. The EU does not force us to take these people; they come to the UK to avail themselves of work and benefits unavailable in their home countries.
Immigrants can’t be blamed for trying to improve their conditions. The fault lies with the corrupt and lazy politicians of all parties who let them in. They either turned a blind eye to the invasion or actively encouraged it. But it’s never too late to stop immigration and start repatriation. There is no question of rounding up immigrants at gunpoint and herding them onto boats and planes. But a humane programme of resettlement funded in part by the foreign aid budget would benefit everybody. We should start with criminals and illegal immigrants and then look for volunteers. Britain is a country with limited resources. We are full up and we have to shut the door to further immigration. This is not racial hatred; it’s plain old-fashioned commonsense.The Plot against Harold Wilson
The article on Captain Henry Kerby MP in NR # 108 prompted a reader to comment as follows:
“An old friend stated that Kerby had promised to join the National Front shortly after its formation in 1968 if that party could guarantee his Parliamentary salary for the next five years.”Our correspondent goes on to describe the moves against Harold Wilson.
“There were two moves against Wilson. The first during 64-70 but which gathered momentum towards the end of the sixties. This was to assassinate him. That was believed to be sufficient.When Wright (Peter Wright of Spycatcher) referred to the dissident clique in MI5, he did not state – probably because he didn’t know – that there were others outside the service involved. Some of them had previous service in the security services and, more generally, were decorated ex officers from the armed services.
The second move was to hold a coup to remove the government, during the period 74-76. By then we had three day working weeks, trade union militancy, power cuts, inflation at 28% (albeit largely the result of the Barbour boom of 1973) economic collapse (the stock market had fallen 75% from previous highs), nationalization (the building sector was next), communists running the unions – and these were merely some of the difficulties.In the 60s and 70s, we must recall that there was still a patriotic presence in the old Establishment, who were decorated veterans of one and even two World Wars and cared not one jot what subversive Labour Party and BBC pipsqueaks thought of them. In their ranks were elements from the aristocracy. As we know, those people gradually died out.
In 74-76, rumours were rife and Wilson was aware of them – I suspect via Mountbatten, who was involved with the plotters and was reporting back to the Government. It is surprising the plotters included Mountbatten, not least given his background.When the plot was in its final stages – and it was that close – the Duke of Edinburgh was approached to ascertain the position of the Queen in the event of a coup. The response was that under ‘no circumstances’ would she consent to it. That was the end of the affair. It was not the end of MI5’s activities, however, and in the early hours of the day of his resignation, Wilson was approached with damning evidence, which the Soviets also possessed and could have used to blackmail him. Wilson resigned at once, that day.”
This anecdotal evidence is partly supported by the memoirs of newspaper editors Hugh Cudlipp and Harold Evans, and in best sellers written by historian Ben Pimlot, journalist Chapman Pincher and former MI5 officer Peter Wright. Harold Wilson’s chief accusers were Soviet defector Anatoly Golitsyn and James Jesus Angleton the Counter Intelligence Chief of the CIA 1954-1975. Angleton also accused Canadian PMs Lester Pearson and Pierre Trudeau, West German Chancellor Willy Brandt, Swedish PM Olaf Palme, Secretary of State Henry Kissinger and US President Gerald Ford.The 2006 BBC documentary “The Plot against Harold Wilson” was based on tapes secretly recorded by journalists Barrie Penrose and Roger Courtiour. Harold Wilson was convinced that there was a plot against him. Penrose said:
“You may ask, at the end of the programme, how much of it can be believed. My view now, as it was then, is that Wilson was right in his fears… in answer to the question ‘how close did we come to a military government’ I can only say – closer than we’d ever be content to think.”Five Questions Answered by Vic Sarson
So far we have had twelve replies to our Five Questions. Here is Vic Sarson, an occasional contributor to this newsletter. We would like to hear from more of our readers. Please reply to firstname.lastname@example.orgWho are you?
Vic Sarson; I have retired from business but I am a full time community action volunteer.
What do you believe in?I believe in representative government and public participation at all levels.
If you could influence government policy what would you do?I would reinstate many of our traditional laws and customs with the emphasis on the protection of society rather than the rights of the criminals. Capital punishment should be available for premeditated murderers, terrorists, paedophiles, and financial criminals who threaten the national interest. Sentences for all crimes should be reviewed and where appropriate, foreign criminals should be deported on completion of their sentences.
The commercial banks should not be allowed to grant mortgages; that should be done by mutual building societies at realistic rates of interest and income multiples.
Austerity isn’t working. The government should boost the economy by investing in job creation and industrial and scientific training, and they should protect domestic industry by banning the dumping of cheaply produced goods from overseas.
The educational system has failed to produce a literate and numerate workforce. We must bring back selective education, teach British history, and scrap meaningless university degrees in sociology and media studies.
Iwould dismantle the party system. Membership of the political parties is so low that they no longer represent the people. MPs and councilors should be elected as individuals and their loyalty should be to the country – not to the party.
We obviously need to control immigration but we must acknowledge that many immigrants from Africa, Asia and the Caribbean come here to escape poverty. It would be better to improve their conditions at home with equitable trade deals rather than trying to keep them out at the point of a bayonet.
What are you proud of and what do you regret?
I am proud of successfully taking on the Labour Party, which has betrayed its original constituency, and of refusing to compromise on matters of principle. I regret not getting involved in local politics earlier. In order to influence events it’s necessary to participate in government. This is hard work. It involves organizing, canvassing, lobbying, sitting on committees, writing countless letters and e-mails, talking to people and persuading them by reasoned argument. There are no short cuts.
How would you like to be remembered?
I would like to be remembered as an honest campaigner for social justice.
The Meaning of an Enemy
Andrew Fountaine (1918-1997) fought for General Franco during the Spanish Civil War and served in the Pacific as a Royal Navy Lieutenant Commander during WW2. His masterly denunciation of the warmonger Winston Churchill is now available from Ostara Publications at £7.45 plus postage. www.ostarapublication.com
Peter Huxley-Blythe was born in Mansfield, Nottinghamshire on November 16 1925 and died August 18 2013 aged 87.As a child he was a chorister at the Chapel Royal Hampton Court and at St Mary of the Angels school.
He joined the Royal Navy as an officer cadet and served in the Battle of the Atlantic, the North African Campaign and the Far East.
After the war he supported Oswald Mosley’s Union Movement but broke away with Guy Chesham and Baroness Pfugl to join the European Liberation Front led by Francis Parker Yockey; the author of “Imperium”. They fought for a united Europe when most of the continent was in ruins. Peter Huxley-Blythe edited the ELF paper “Frontfighter”. He published the newsletter of the British-German group Natinform, with AFX Baron. Later he founded the Northern League with Roger Pearson and Jan Kruls. He helped John Bean to distribute his newsletter “Outrider” in 1954. And he published his own newspaper “The World Survey” from 1954 to 1959.Between 1959 and 1961 he wrote a series of articles for “The American Mercury”. The following extract is from “Modern Christian Martyrs”:
“That the Communists are determined to destroy the United States at the earliest possible opportunity is a fact. Before that can be accomplished they must first remove the solid foundation upon which the Constitution was built, namely the belief in Jesus Christ and his teachings. Unfortunately there are patriots who believe that too much stress is placed upon the religious aspect of our fight against the Red virus. These people together with many clerics of all denominations are unwittingly giving material aid to the enemy. Their protests, a manifestation of materialism, show how well antireligious propaganda has been operated inside America.”In 1964 he wrote “The East Comes West”, the story of the Cossack volunteers for the Third Reich. This was followed by “Under St Andrew’s Cross, on the same subject, and “The Man Who was Uncle”, the story of Nicholas Dulger-Sheikin who was a double agent for Germany and Greece.
In the late sixties he took a PhD in psychosomatic medicine in America and founded the National College of Hypnosis and Psychotherapy. In the seventies he wrote a number of books on psychology and made a successful career as a consultant specializing in the needs of children with learning difficulties. He is survived by his wife Sally, a stepdaughter and two stepsons, and by a son and daughter by an earlier marriage. Peter Huxley-Blyth led a full and interesting life. May he rest in peace.