Now that the election results in the UK and European Union are declared it is possible to draw some conclusions. But first a warning! Americans should avoid trying to find parallels with their own political landscape. It’s a case of apples and oranges. The UKIP is not another Tea Party and UKIP’s substantial success has to be seen solely in the context of the UK’s election cycle and against the background of the EU’s ambitions.
In previous articles this website has unfavorably compared UKIP to the BNP, not because the writers have any illusions about the BNP but because we also have no illusions about UKIP. The BNP has a leader who has steadily become a disaster for British Nationalism. Nick Griffin’s behavior over the last few years has revealed a grossly immature character, not only lacking in personal charm, but determined to be ‘leader’ even if it means driving out of the Party every possible rival.
Not so many years ago the BNP was growing and on the cusp of winning enough local council seats to control two big cities and several smaller ones. Its members were mostly poor, working native Brits who risked jobs and personal safety to take the Party’s patriotism (and anti-EU policy) to the streets. It captured two EU seats, one of which Griffin allocated to himself. Success and recruitment must have thrown up a number of relatively able and ambitious local personalities and pretty quickly the BNP was immersed in a series of internal struggles which led to dramatic denunciations, mass defections, expulsions and (most likely) physical violence. Despite having an effective website under his control, Griffin was unable to lay bare any philosophical or policy differences between his own faction and those who were being denounced and expelled. We were supposed to believe that all his opponents were long-time planted agents of sinister powers or in the pay of Zionists.
We do not question Griffin’s courage or tenacity as leader of a Party that has long been outspoken and prescient about Muslim crimes and Islamic Imperialism. Only the bravest souls in Western Europe will risk self and family by going public about Islam and its fanatics. Besides risking Muslim violence and persecution, Griffin and his followers in the shrinking BNP have also endured the persecution of an increasingly lawless police State and the constant attacks of Red Mobs whose members enjoy the patronage of mainstream politicians, the encouragement of Academia and the approval of the Mainstream Media (MSM). Criticizing Griffin is like kicking the underdog but the facts are that under his leadership the Party now has one local council seat in the whole of Britain, no MEP’s, and has just attracted a pathetic number of votes. Since Griffin seemingly exercises a Stalinist control over his Party and its website, he must be held responsible for its catastrophic decline. If he had any shame, or compassion for the good patriots who take the Party’s name to the streets, he would immediately resign as leader, for who from among the shrinking ranks could do worse. A mature and wise leader, who cared more for the cause and the Nation than for personal status, would have healed divisions, sought compromises, set out policy differences and encouraged debate in the face of defeats. Griffin did none of this and even now is blaming defeat on ‘Zionists’ and UKIP and declaring that ultimate victory is just around the corner. Either he is living in cloud cuckoo land or he thinks his followers are.
On this website we know that Nationalist movements have elements that are motivated by irrational hatred, a personal lust for violence, intolerance, envy, frustrated ambition and unhinged idealism. We also recognize that such motivations account for (national) socialist economic policies, an attachment to powerful and intrusive government, a preoccupation with ancient racial myths and paganism and a distrust of individual freedom. The BNP under Griffin’s leadership has advocated socialist economic policies, including renationalization of the railway system, more State-controlled health care, severe limitations on the individual’s right to accumulate wealth, a wartime economy of rationing, and dancing around the Maypole to Folk music. It has made clear that it would ban supermarkets and impose the corner-shop and has made clear that it would stop all inter-racial relationships. The discerning voter may ask what a BNP government would do with the 6 or 7 million Black, Brown and Asian people now living in the UK.
Such dangerous underground streams flow in most of the European Nationalist Parties and clearly flow in the BNP, but are there less dangerous streams flowing in the Parties of the Left? In today’s Europe and the UK the choice is increasingly between a Left and Right. The so-called center parties are really Leftist and marching determinedly though craftily to totalitarianism. Where in the parties of the brazen Left or in the parties of the so-called center is there evidence of toleration of conflicting ideas, toleration of free speech, a commitment to laws that protect the individual from the State, a defense of the rights of native peoples and their language and culture, a defense of true property rights, a defense of marriage and traditional Christianity, the right of the unborn and the protection of the young from moral corruption? In the estimation of radical and right, the Nationalist ‘Right’ is the lesser of two evils.
The BNP, like the other Nationalist parties of Europe, and despite the dangerous beliefs outlined above, has been vocal about the very real Islamification of the UK, the moral and financial corruption of the members of the mainstream parties and the Media Class, it has rejected the Climate change nonsense, has steadfastly opposed immigration and has called for a speedy exit from the EU. These are potentially popular policies, especially an exit from Europe. The ruling Media Class and its allies are ever fearful of Nationalism, not primarily because of their threat to the EU but because some Nationalist parties, including the BNP, would halt the swamping immigration tide and purge the Nation’s leadership of perverts.
Along came Nigel Farage and his UKIP which is ready to exit the EU, but accepts mass immigration, and welcomes homosexuality and the libertine agenda. The Media Class was quick to see that this party, if given some favorable publicity, and if EU membership was made a central election issue, would suck votes from the BNP and other genuine Nationalist parties. However, as so often with clever but unprincipled strategies, things can get out of hand. The UKIP, tapping into the anti-EU sentiment that is sweeping Western Europe, arriving on the political scene at a time in the British election cycle when a minority government of opportunists is failing and its respective leaders have alienated each party’s members, finds itself catapulted into a political vacuum. Farage, an amiable man with a personality that is as likeable as Griffin’s is dislikeable, has taken his party to heights the MSM, led by the BBC, did not intend. The UKIP has taken votes primarily from Conservative voters who know that Cameron has sold out (to the Media Class) on moral issues and is detestable. Floating LibDem voters have gravitated from a party that made an unprincipled pact in order to taste power. The Labour Party is more attractive to these voters who like the EU, and Labour looks like the next government.
The UKIP, despite not getting the 40% predicted by opinion polls, has captured around 25% or more, a major upset that has severely damaged Cameron’s leadership and government. The mass defection of LibDem voters to Labour may well have irreversibly sunk the Lib Dem party. In the past, the Lib Dem Party has captured the protest vote in between general elections whenever a government has become unpopular. Now the UKIP has taken a big slice of both the floating protest vote and the Conservative rank-and-file vote.
If this success for UKIP had come on its own, it may not have had a serious long-term effect, but the electoral success of genuine Nationalist parties in Europe and in the European Parliament, offers UKIP possibilities and a dilemma. Farage has until now rejected an alliance with EU Nationalists. If the BNP had made the modest advance which was denied it by UKIP success, it would have joined the EU Nationalists, including Marie Le Pen’s National Front. The French NF now sits just across the English Channel and not much further away sit the Flemish Nationalists in Belgium and the Dutch Nationalists in Holland. All have made substantial progress despite harassment and persecution from their respective Governments and the Media Class. The EU faces political turmoil and in Greece and Italy the Nationalist movements have survived proscription. The immigration wave into Europe will continue, exacerbating severe racial tensions. Farage and his band of inexperienced political followers are ill-equipped to deal with difficult and complex issues and being a one-issue party will not suffice.
The first challenge to UKIP will come in the EU Parliament, but next year the British general election will pose a greater challenge to UKIP if it finds itself holding a balance of power in the House of Commons. The Media Class will seek to split the Party in order to ensure that the modern Marxist Labour Party’s Miliband will become Premier. We predict that UKIP’s MP’s will be easily seduced or intimidated. More than a few will have cupboard skeletons.
On this website we celebrate the blows to Cameron’s Conservative Party and to the LibDems and we hope that the UKIP will evolve into a Nationalist party that not only takes the UK out of the EU but halts immigration into the UK and reverses the libertine social agenda Cameron has imposed. Farage will find himself and his followers becoming the target of the Media Class. The slightest move toward immigration control or opposition to Islamification will draw a sustained charge of racism and any attempts to bring back free speech will be deemed homophobia and bigotry. We doubt that UKIP has a membership capable of resistance to the great revolution, but only time will tell. In the meantime, American conservatives, Christians and Nationalists should resist finding too many similarities with their own counter-revolutionary struggles.
Here in California a grisly mass killing has hit the headlines of the MSM. 22 year old Elliot Rodger stabbed to death three young Asian students in the apartment he owned and shared with them. It is presumed that they were asleep when brutally slain. He then took two revolvers and shot to death three more young people. Finally he used his car to run down more victims, one of whom has died. He then shot himself before the police could stop his rampage.
It appears from his writings on the Internet that he has been nursing hatred and resentment towards his peers for some time. He resented his lack of success with girls and felt it was time to get revenge and make his mark on the world. His parents claim that he has been mentally ill for some time and both they and a parent of one of the victims have blamed gun ownership. This despite that he stabbed three and killed another with his vehicle.
Rodger was born in England of mixed race parentage and his parents divorced. The Media reports about the Rodgers family are sketchy but it appears his father has remarried. All the adults are members of the affluent ruling Media Class. The pictures of Elliot Rodger show a young man who is still a college student yet has an expensive car and is said to own the accommodation in which the three young Orientals were murdered. Clearly he has not lacked for money. His father is reported to be an assistant director of “The Hunger Games”, a Hollywood futuristic drama in which teenagers fight each other to the death. The MSM has so far been coy about any connection between father’s work and the alleged crime and we can expect Media attention to be directed at gun ownership.
Media reports have also concentrated on parental claims that their son was suffering from a mental illness. We have read nothing that suggests mental illness but rather a materially spoiled young man boiling with rage and resentment. We will venture a guess that Elliot was either poorly parented in the way that Christians would prescribe, lacking a moral education, hands-on parenting and good role models or he was psychopathic and amongst the Hollywood crowd this would not seem unusual. His father is reported to have a website covered with pictures of female backsides. Is it possible that his family were Democrats, morally progressive, socially liberated and not old-fashioned when it came to parenting? The MSM has decided that gun ownership is to blame. SURPRISE! SURPRISE!