Letters to the Editor
Several readers objected to my reference to Social Credit in China. Of course, the authoritarian experiment in China is far removed from the system devised by major CH Douglas, but both systems are intended to redistribute wealth. Unfortunately, the balance of supply and demand has been upset by global capitalism and uncontrolled immigration. It's difficult to make any system work when unlimited cheap labour is available. The 'Market' always sorts itself out, whatever the social consequences, but state control of the economy can result in the inefficiency of the old Soviet Union. Reform is required but the complexities of demographics, climate change, automation, artificial intelligence, and human nature must be considered.
Dr Kerry Bolton writes from New Zealand:
"Please excuse the whine, but your comment about a question of Fascism in Nation Revisited # 177, that 'China is turning to Social Credit' is something that needs revisiting. What is called Social Credit in China is as far removed as it is possible to get from the doctrine and policy of Social Credit as formulated by major CH Douglas in 1917, as avidly promoted by Ezra Pound. Under this method credit is issues by a state credit authority in accordance with the needs of production, and a National Dividend is issued to every citizen to compensate for what Douglas saw as an intrinsic discrepancy between the cost of production and the amount of credit and money in circulation (A+B Theorem) to consume the entirety of that production. This discrepancy in costs and spending power results in 'poverty amidst plenty' where people starve while produce is dumped, which is what happened during the Great Depression. My book Opposing The Money Lenders (Black House Publishing) reproduces many texts from money reformers such as Gottfried Feder, Charles Coughlin, Ezra Pound, John Hargrave (British Green Shirts) and New Zealand's John A Lee and Arthur N Fields who helped to push the First Labour Government (1935) into implementing its election promises on banking and credit which - like a few other states - brought NZ out of the Great Depression."
Another controversial issue was the Second World War. John Mortl from Canada wrote:
"It's ridiculous to deny the obvious, there is no evidence whatsoever that millions of Jews died during the war. Glossing over this fact, by saying that the numbers are in dispute is disingenuous. Evidence and facts do matter. Unless there is forensic or contemporaneous documentary evidence for millions of deaths, such claims must be dismissed as fantasy. The amount of people, some of whom were Jews, who died from typhus and other diseases, many after the Allies took over the camps, couldn't possibly have reached even a million when non-Jews are included. It's ridiculous to deny that unless it can be proven that millions of Jews were killed, claiming such is a falsification of history, not to mention it's deceitful misuse."
And Stephen Swinfen wrote:
"The six million is a myth that we are not allowed to question and Arnold Leese was an absolute legend.
We should not be pillaging East Europe because apparently we are so pathetic we can not wipe our own backsides, absolutely selfish taking workers from other countries and then expecting their countries to survive without them.
The Poles were far from innocent when Germany was forced to invade, even then 58,000 Volksdeutsche were murdered before the Germans stopped the slaughter. A well documented fact at the time that has been wiped from history.
WW2 was fought to re-establish Jewish control over Germany and brainwashed Gentiles were the ones that did it. Absolutely disgusting Brothers War same as WW1, none of our business when the Germans nipped into Belgium to get behind the Maginot Line.
Nationalists justify this pointless slaughter constantly Jayda Fransen being one. Germany never wanted war with England, it was England's choice. Churchill's order to bomb Berlin was why the blitz happened, in retaliation, but generally Germany only bombed military targets including armament production, whereas the Anglo-Saxon Alliance engaged in terror bombing purely to murder large numbers of civilians.
Camps liberated by Allies were full of starving inmates or dead through starvation and typhus, the German population was also starving due to Allied bombing."
I generally subscribe to the Hugh Trevor-Roper school but 'Historical Revisionists' are perfectly entitled to their views. Adolf Hitler's intentions were clearly stated in his book Mein Kampf that was first published in 1933:
"Anyone who wants to free the German blood from the manifestations and vices of today, which were originally alien to its nature, will have to redeem it from the foreign virus of these manifestations. Without the clearest knowledge of the racial problem and hence of the Jewish problem there will never be a resurrection of the German nation."
A decade later, in a speech to the Reichstag in September 1942 he said:
"In my speech before the Reichstag on the first of September 1939, I spoke of two matters: first, since we are forced into war, neither the threat of weapons nor a period of transition shall conquer us; second, if world Jewry launches another war in order to destroy the Aryan nations of Europe, it will not be the Aryan nations that will be destroyed, but the Jews...Once the Germans Jews laughed at my prophecy. I do not know whether they are still laughing, or whether they are laughing on the other side of their faces. I can simply repeat — they will stop laughing altogether, and I will fulfil my prophecy in this field too."
I believe that he carried out his threat but others are not so sure. According to the 'Jewish News', "a recent poll shows that one in six people don't know about the Holocaust or don't think that it happened as the history books say." Instead of digging over the past we should look to the future. I believe that Britain and Germany should unite with the rest of Europe to form a self-sufficient bloc that's able to feed and defend itself. Patriotism is a fine thing when applied to sporting events but narrow and aggressive nationalism is dangerous and destructive.
Oppressed Minorities
Boris Johnson sent the Royal Navy Destroyer HMS Defender into the Black Sea in what can only be described as a deliberate provocation of Russia. His excuse is that Russia has repossessed the Crimean peninsular that was given to the Ukraine by Nikita Kruschev in a fit of drunken generosity. This region is of no importance to Britain. Boris has raised concern about the Crimean Tartars but they were just as oppressed under the Ukrainians. We should be seeking trade deals with Russia instead of threatening them with gunboats.
He is playing similar games with the Chinese by sending our giant aircraft Carrier Queen Elizabeth, affectionately known as 'Big Lizzie', into the South China Sea. The Chinese are having problems with their Turkish-speaking minority, the Uyghurs, as well as with Hong Kong. The Peoples' Liberation Army stands at 2,185,000 men with 510,000 reservists. The British Army stands at 82,230 with 30,040 reservists. We like to boast of 'punching above our weight' but such odds are impossible.
It's unfortunate that minorities are oppressed but there's very little that we can do about it. People are being abused all over the world; Amazonian Indians in Brazil, African Blacks in Libya, Palestinians in Israel, Whites in South Africa, Rohingyas in Myanmar, Aboriginals in Australia, and Gypsies almost everywhere. We cant take them all as refugees and we can't send expeditionary forces to liberate them. All that we can do is to protest at the United Nations and hope that things get better.
We have got laws in this country to protect minorities but still we've got homeless people sleeping in doorways and mental health patients confined to the prison system. We should put our own house in order before we send warships to foreign countries to force them to change their ways.
Boris Johnson and his gang should realise that the Empire has long gone. We don't have the ships or the sailors to rule the waves and our peacetime army and air force are designed for service with NATO, which is the military arm of American foreign policy in Europe. We should use our position as an advanced technological economy to eradicate poverty, improve education, set up a National Care Service to look after the elderly, build enough houses for everyone, and learn to mind our own business.
Indestructible Ideas
The Referendum of 2016 and the subsequent general election confirmed Britain's place outside the European Union. We were told to accept the Will of the People and embrace petty nationalism. Apart from the alleged economic advantages of Brexit we could look forward to 'Getting Our Country Back'. It was thought that the idea of United Europe was buried forever under a mountain of nostalgic jingoism. But just five years later the idea is alive in the pages of 'Heritage and Destiny'. Chalmers Macleod of Vancouver wrote:
The present multiculturalism of the EU government is typical of the empire model, since empires are about elites and wealth, and care nothing about nationhood. This will change if Europe can become a genuine federation of free democratic nations. Whatever the final union it will depend on Europeans, but I see no reason why a true federal model cannot be achieved, one that will require a united military to confront future China. A movement must therefore be formed to achieve these goals, one that would include Britain. If achieved, there would be no reason why Britain could not rejoin the EU.
Finding this article in the pages of a traditionalist publication such as H&D shows that the idea of Europe is very much alive. The 'Wogs begin at Calais' philosophy of John Tyndall never represented the entire nationalist movement. Oswald Mosley believed in United Europe, and John Bean tried to steer a middle course with his 'European Confederation'. The pro-Europeans in the wider nationalist movement were overwhelmed by the loud-mouthed 'Little Englanders', but as Brexit begins to bite we will hear their sober voices once again.
Chalmers Macleod was commenting on a book review by Ian Freeman who was one of the first nationalists to re-evaluate the European situation. The half a dozen nationalist groups that survived the collapse of the BNP are led by dogmatists who have learned nothing. They are still trying to win votes by appealing to the skinhead mentality, but most voters are not 'Paki Bashers'. The pathetic votes won by the so-called patriotic parties are hardly worth recording. People vote for the established parties because they don't trust the self-promoting cranks and misfits of the far-right; and who can blame them?
Since the death of Oswald Mosley and the demise of Union Movement the patriotic tendency has lurched to the right. The old-fashioned imperialism of AK Chesterton formed the basis of the National Front and European kinship was dumped in favour of xenophobia.
But when this dreadful virus has run its course, and the full effects of Brexit are felt, our endemic problems will still be with us. We will need a movement dedicated to social improvement but respectful of tradition. A movement that values leadership and follows a guiding philosophy of fair play. The indestructible ideas that can still save us.
Support Your Local Police
On Wednesday 28th July the new UK Police Memorial was dedicated at the National Memorial Arboretum by the Prince of Wales. It commemorates almost 5,000 men and women killed on active service since the first police force, the Bow Street Runners, were founded in 1749.
Our police are undermanned and underpaid but they are amongst the best in the world. They infiltrated the IRA to such an extent that the terrorists were forced to negotiate. They were planting bombs in Northern Ireland and the UK but they were losing 'volunteers' at an unacceptable rate. Military Intelligence was finding its way to 'Loyalist' paramilitaries with devastating effect.
The IRA were forced to sign the Good Friday Agreement which has kept the peace for over twenty years. But as the threat from the IRA diminished a new terrorist movement appeared in the form of the so-called 'Islamic State'. Many of us thought that they would be much harder to penetrate. Our agents in Ireland spoke the same language and shared the same drinking culture as the IRA. But the 'Islamic State' terrorists were a different proposition, they spoke languages that we didn't speak, and their teetotal culture was entirely alien to us. Nevertheless, our security forces managed to penetrate their ranks and our prisons are now full of fanatical young men with bushy beards and baggy trousers.
Lately, they have been joined by foolish young Britons who visited websites controlled by the security forces. They plotted revolution from their bedrooms and attempted to build a terrorist army capable of taking on the British State. Some of them were genuine psychopaths but most of them were fantasists with heads full of conspiracy theory.
According to legend, a meeting of the American Communist Party was being held in the 1950s when an undercover cop who was masquerading as a delegate interrupted the meeting when he realised that everybody there was a government agent. This may or may not be true but there is no doubt that the security forces successfully infiltrated every patriotic organisation from the original British Fascists in 1923 to the various groups that emerged from the collapse of the BNP.
There is no tradition of bearing arms in the UK. The only people with a right to carry guns are the police and the army. The police support the State but they are not particularly committed to any form of government. When the East German regime was in power they had some policemen who had served under the Weimar Republic and the Nazis. It's a policeman's duty to enforce the Law, not to make it.
Attempts have been made in recent tears to politicize the police but those officers who are proudly defending democracy would be just as vigilant in defence of authoritarianism.
Nation Revisited
Nation Revisited seeks reform by legal means. All articles are by Bill Baillie unless otherwise stated. The opinions of guest writers are entirely their own. We uphold the United Nations' Declaration of Human Rights, Article 19:
"We all have the right to make up our own minds, to think what we like, to say what we think, and to share our ideas with
I
O
