We Must Secure The Existence Of Our People And A Future For White Children - Robert Baggs. Part two
The second strand we need to look at is the “white children” element of the 14 words. The simple truth is that there are not enough of them. Even ignoring all other elements, we are just not breeding in sufficient quantities to maintain our present numbers, we are essentially destroying ourselves. White men and white women need to ensure they have children, it really is as simple as that.
So not only are we not actively trying to increase the white population we are being outbred by the non-white population and the figures illustrating this are alarming to say the least.
According to the statistical bulletin, “Population Estimates for UK, England and Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland: mid-2016”, published by the Office of National Statistics (ONS) on the 22nd June 2017, the population of the United Kingdom, as at 30th June 2016, was estimated as 65,648,000 people. This was an increase of 0.8%, or 538,000 people in the year up to that date. This increase is a combination of those born here and net migration, the latter being 336,000 or 62.4% of the increase! There has been a steady annual increase since 1992 when the total population change stood at approximately 150,000.
Once this growth rate is broken down into ethnic groups more alarm bells start to ring. A separate ONS bulletin “Population Estimates by Ethnic Group 2002 – 2009” published on the 18th May 2011 shows that the white British population actually decreased over this period, albeit marginally. However, that in itself is frightening particularly when the total population grew by over 2 million over the same period! The average annual percentage growth rate of non-white and mixed race groups ranged from 0.9%, in the case of the black Caribbean group, to 8.6% in the case of the Chinese group. The latter fact may be surprising but the increase was from 233,000 to 451,500, indeed a large enough increase of over 200,000 but the total increase for black African and Asian: Indian, Pakistani and Bangladeshi groups was over 1 million. Look at some of these figures again – the white British population remained static but some non-white groups increased by 1 million in less than 10 years. In fact the total increase of non-white British over this period was approximately 2,500,000, that’s 2½ MILLION! Of course much of this increase is due to migration and a Nationalist government would put a stop to this. But fertility rates by ethnic groups have yet to be considered yet already there is evidence indeed that by the middle of this century the white population will be in the minority and this certainly won’t be news to anyone. Even back in 2001, BBC News reported “Ethnic birth rate climbs” saying that “Britain’s ethnic minorities are growing at 15 times the rate of the white population … data collected by the ONS (and published in its Population Trends report) between 1992-1994 and 1997-1999 showed… compared to 1% for white people”.
Further and perhaps the most worrying evidence projecting our demise can be found in yet another ONS statistical bulletin – Births in England and Wales: 2016, which provides data on live births, stillbirths and the intensity of childbearing measured by the total fertility rate. Main points from this bulletin include:
There were 696,271 live births in England and Wales in 2016.
The total fertility rate decreased to 1.81 children per woman.
Over a quarter (28.2%) of live births were to mothers born outside the UK, the highest level on record.
Drilling down into these figures it can be determined that women born in certain countries such as India, Bangladesh, Pakistan and African countries tend to have above-average fertility, this meaning that white British women have average or below average fertility thereby having less children. Obviously over time this disparity will be more and more marked, resulting in the white population being outnumbered by non-whites. The urgency of this problem cannot be emphasized enough as those living in predominantly white areas still do not, or will not see, the extent of this change.
To emphasis further the changes that are taking place with the birth rates in this country, readers are reminded of recent press coverage showing the most popular names given to males in 2016. This coverage, which, although showed Oliver as being the most popular with 6,623 boys so named, was actually the second most popular if the eighth most popular, Muhammad, with 3,908 births, was added to Mohammed (at no. 31, with 2,228), Mohammad (at no. 68, with 948), Muhammed, (no. 118 with 534), and Mohamed, (no. 177, with 321), which together total 7,939!
This situation will only get worse and even if all white Nationalists increase their family size massively, still we will not achieve our 14 words. So where are we going wrong here?
The main problem seems to be with general attitude, do our young men and women actually care, or are they blind to the fact that they are looking at their children and grand-children becoming a minority population in the very near future? As mentioned earlier, part of this attitude is a denial that such changes are taking place and that these changes will not affect them so it doesn’t actually matter.
Sadly much needs to be done to reverse this attitude, an attitude which has its roots in the permissiveness of the 1960’s, exacerbated by the selfishness created during the Thatcher years and further developed in the 2000’s. This results in young people putting themselves, their careers and their fun before all else including the natural process of raising a family, which happens later in life, if at all. This allied to the increasing acceptability of homosexuality and the feminisation of men must result in the reduction in the size of pool of males capable of fathering children.
No mainstream political party has any formula for this problem as they don’t see it as a problem, in fact, on the latter point above, they actively encourage it! As Nationalists, we do see it as a problem, hence the 14 words. Consequently we must urgently look at how we are managing our response and combining our resources and our political activity to ensure we manage this need to increase our population. Recently the right-wing German AfD (Alternative for Deutschland) had great success in the German elections, with posters being displayed advertising the need to increase their population. It may be that, rather than using the less accessible 14 words, whilst not abandoning it, we actually utilise a more direct message similar to the AfD. On top of that, even if total unity does not occur amongst Nationalists, there is a real need to create a unified approach to managing how we bring this to the forefront of the British political agenda and start turning around how the real British population see themselves and their future before it’s too late.
Labour's Dilemma
The Tories have been just as bad as Labour at turning the UK into a mixed race country, but it was the post-war Labour government that started the influx of blacks and Asians with prime minister Clement Atlee's British Nationalities Act of 1948.
Before the BNA the non-European population of the UK was tiny. There were Chinatowns in London and Liverpool and well established black communities in Cardiff and Bristol, but there was nothing like the complete takeover that has occurred in placed like Leicester.
Those of a conspiratorial nature see mass migration as a deliberate plot to destroy the white race in the UK. I prefer to see it as blatant capitalist exploitation. The industrialists and financiers see the Third World as an unending source of cheap labour. They don't consider the social and economic damage it does to the native population, and they care even less about the racial factor.
Since WW2 our economy has grown and so has our immigrant-swollen population. We need manpower and the Third World needs jobs, but now a new and largely unexpected development has come into play in the form of artificial intelligence. In future AI will take over millions of jobs now done by immigrants and native Britons alike, and we will face the unfamiliar problem of having too much labour.
If our immigrants had been treated as guest workers with no right of citizenship, it would be easy enough to put them on planes and ships and send them back where they came from. But the BNA of 1948 bestowed on them the right of settlement.
It could be argued that the politicians of 1948 never realised the consequences of their actions, but some, including Winston Churchill, spoke out about the danger. Churchill was a Zionist and a warmonger but he was right about immigration.
He knew that there was simmering tension between whites and blacks in the United States and South Africa, and he didn't want to repeat it in the UK. Only the most optimistic socialists expected racial harmony to prosper in the UK when it had failed elsewhere. Nevertheless, they went ahead with mass migration to provide medical staff for the National Health Service and bus crews for London Transport.
Who can tell what the future holds? Will vastly different races disappear in the mix? Will religious fanatics become token Muslims just as we Brits have become token Christians? Or will the whole thing come crashing down in a multiracial bloodbath?
These are the thoughts that should occupy Keir Starmer as he prepares to move into No 10 Downing St.
Nick Griffin
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nBXE39MkZx4
In his 2020 speech "A Message to Nationalists", Nick Griffin, the former leader of the National Front and the British National Party concludes that there is no electoral road to success for nationalists.
He refers to the infamous Coudenhove-Kalergi Plan which has joined the Protocols of Zion and the Zinoviev Letter as yet another conspiracy theory. Coudenhove-Kalergi's oft-quoted words about Europe becoming mixed race were a warning not an aspiration.
His unselfconscious evaluation of nationalist leaders as narcissistic, greedy and corrupt is chillingly accurate, and so is his description of their fragmentation of the movement.
He says that most (presumably European) countries are majority white, except South Africa and Kosovo. We all know that South Africa has been taken over by the Blacks, but that's not the case in Kosovo. The people of the Balkans adopted the religion of their conquerors. The Croats became Catholics under the Austro-Hungarian Empire, the Kosovars became Muslims under the Ottoman Empire, and the Serbs became Orthodox Christians under the Russian Empire. But they are all Europeans.
If he thinks that Kosovo's association with the Turks is demeaning he should consider that genetically the Turks are only 15% of Central Asian origin. They speak an Asian language but so do the Finns and Hungarians.
This kind of racism comes strangely from the man who coined the phrase "a little salt in the soup" to justify the acceptance of non-whites into the BNP.
At the end of his speech he claims that his message is not all doom and gloom. He says that victory is still possible but he doesn't go into details.
Two Senile Old Men - Robert Lyons writes from Baltimore
Hello Bill, I agree with you that "two senile old men" is all the US can produce, it's our stupid two party system, as Commander Rockwell used to say the choice was between "tweedle-dee and tweedle-dum" meaning no choice at all. Most of us who feel disenfranchised either don't vote or throw our vote away to some miniscule third party who managed to petition themselves on the ballot in our state. Yes it's a sad, sad situation and can't be changed. All my best Bob.
NR: Robert Lyons represented the National States' Rights Party at the 1961 British National Party Camp in Norfolk, where delegates from all over the world gathered at Andrew Fountain's estate to celebrate their European heritage. I kept in touch with many of them over the years but with the passing of time there are not many of us left. We are often accused of being too nationalistic but the comradeship forged in the Sixties shows that blood and culture are more important than flags and passports.
European Outlook - https://europeanoutlook.blogspot.com
Nation Revisited
1 comment:
I think Griffins description of Nationalist leaders as narcissistic, greedy and corrupt, is a good description of himself. I don’t know why you give this charlatan any publicity.
Post a Comment