As I write this evening, David Cameron has become the new Prime Minister of the United Kingdom and we await confirmation that the proposed coalition between the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats has been approved by the parliamentary membership of the latter party. This arrangement may hold, but then again, it could quite readily fail. We shall have to see. There thus exists the possibility that the country will have to return to the polls before the natural term of a parliament has elapsed, and the BNP needs to be prepared for this eventuality. The BNP needs to learn some lessons from its performance last Thursday so that it can up its game and make a substantial advance.
Yes, it is true that Nick Griffin managed to win an historic high in terms of the overall number of votes won in Barking last week, netting a total of 6,620, but alas, this was accompanied by the fact that overall turnout in the constituency increased and the BNP’s share of the vote fell. Granted, there may well have been some irregularities with postal votes which acted to the detriment of the BNP’s performance, but there were also deeper factors at play. Some of these it will be possible to address, others unfortunately, such as the changing demographic composition of areas like Barking arising from the outmigration of indigenous residents and large-scale immigration coupled with higher birth-rates amongst immigrant descendents, will remain beyond the party’s influence.
Some BNP members and supporters have highlighted that if the Liberal Democrats were to realise their long-cherished dream of introducing proportional representation for Westminster elections, this could work in the party’s favour. Had a ‘pure’ version of this system been in place last week, the BNP could have secured 12 or possibly 13 MPs with its national share of the vote. However, the Conservatives have been discussing the possibility of a referendum on the single transferable vote and have not mentioned proportional representation as a potential option. If the single transferable vote system were to be adopted, this would in all likelihood make it harder for the BNP to win seats than under the present first-past-the-post system. Irrespective of whether proportional representation is introduced or not, if the BNP is to realise its potential as a political force, it needs to finally get to grips with some internal issues that in the eyes of most electors have accorded it pariah status.
Yes, it is true that the BNP is opposed by a truly mind-boggling united opposition: all of the mainstream political parties, the entirety of the mainstream media, the trade union movement, fringe leftist parties such as the SWP and Respect, and third-party organisations and campaigns such as Searchlight, Hope Not Hate, Love Music Hate Racism, the UAF and Nothing British as well as the anti-British quango the EHRC (Equalities and Human Rights Commission). All of these are united in a visceral hatred of the BNP, and their combined might brings to bear immense propaganda resources that the party itself cannot hope to effectively counter. However, there is one quite straightforward thing that the BNP can do to draw the venom from this attack and render it largely impotent: rid itself of the shadow of the Tyndall years and accusations of neo-Nazism and ‘Holocaust denial’. The party could achieve so much if it honestly and openly distanced itself from the continuous stream of 'Nazi' allegations and concentrated on driving home the message that the BNP is a 'moderate nationalist party'. Without doing so, it'll never be able to achieve a breakthrough, even if our country were to be in such a dire position as to be on the brink of civil war.
Of course, the relentless barrage of negative propaganda about the party from the aforementioned organisations may not have had an impact upon the allegiances and views of staunch party members and supporters, but we would be foolish to think that the general public's perception of the BNP has not been very negatively affected by this attack. Besides the propaganda, a number of genuine internal issues in recent months haven’t helped either. The peculiar affair surrounding Mark Collett; the violent physical ejection of a Times journalist from a party meeting; the loss of a number of prominent figures such as Alby Walker who then went on to attack the BNP and Simon Bennett taking out the party website two days ahead of the election were all priceless gifts to the party’s opponents which fed genuine public mistrust and suspicion. If the BNP wishes to be taken seriously as a party fit for government, party members need to behave impeccably. Mark Collett and others of his ilk must thus never be readmitted.
There needs to be a debate about how to neutralise this opposition and alter public perceptions (i.e. alert them to what the BNP actually stands for, rather than what it is said to be) beginning now. There is no time to be lost owing to the rapid and increasing pace of demographic and cultural change and displacement within our country. Whenever the next election comes, the men and women who speak on behalf of the BNP must be able to confidently, politely and robustly rebut opposition smears relating to neo-Nazism and sundry related matters.
There are many ways of presenting the nationalist message, and how this is communicated requires serious re-examination if the party wishes to be viewed as credible by an educated middle-class audience. The general tone of rhetoric employed hitherto might well go down well in the convivial atmosphere of a pub, but it sounds out of place in the general public arena. I in no way advocate that the party should ditch any of its core policies and principles or seek to abandon any one class in favour of another, for as nationalists we by definition wish to afford the best opportunities for all to realise their potential, and we should not neglect the welfare of our less fortunate compatriots who languish in poverty, unemployment and squalor. Nonetheless, our message needs to be communicated in a way that resonates with a middle-class audience and readership, as well as with those whom our political elite have readily confined to the margins of society and who have to date been subject to the worst effects of mass immigration, Islamisation and multiculturalism.
In terms of policy, I agree with a good 90% of the BNP manifesto, but some elements, I have to say, appear just plain outlandish and alienate voters. Honestly ask yourself: how much appeal do policies such as liberalising gun ownership laws and opening a penal colony in South Georgia possess? Why insert these into a manifesto brimming with good ideas? It just turns people off and leaves the party open to ridicule. Who wants to be thought of as a neo-Nazi gun-obsessed wacko who’s turned on by the idea of opening a sub-Antarctic labour camp? I’m not saying that that is what the typical BNP member is, but this is the sort of impression that most non-supporters possess. How many people out there want more liberal gun laws? How often have you heard someone say that this is a serious issue of concern? This is not a vote-winning issue and vote-winning issues are what the party needs to concentrate on if it wishes to grow and gain elected representatives. There are plenty of vote-winning policies in the BNP’s manifesto, but liberalising gun laws is definitely not one of them: it is a definite vote loser. If some members of the party have a particular penchant for firearms, this sort of measure can be discussed at a later date after the BNP has won MPs, but certainly not before such a time.
A number of presentational gaffes need to be avoided in future. I realise that having someone appear in costume on St George’s Day and inserting the Marmite image in the initial version of the party political broadcast were light-hearted affairs, but unfortunately the mainstream media picked up on these to portray the party as being just plain daft and amateurish. Moreover, the Marmite fiasco has resulted in an unnecessary court case which will drain the party of much-needed funds. As for the content of the final election broadcast, I realise that the BNP is a small party with very modest resources which relies upon the enthusiasm and dedication of its members to make these stretch a long way, but please re-shoot scenes which do not work. If the BNP wishes to screen broadcasts which ostensibly feature interviews with party members and supporters telling the voters about why they support the party, never have them reading in stilted robotic fashion from cue cards. If they are to be scripted, at least get them to rehearse ahead of shooting and ensure that they can deliver their lines naturalistically. Furthermore, make sure that they speak to camera, so it looks as if they are addressing the viewer instead of some random location in the street out of shot.
There is also time to avoid a PR disaster in the making which relates to a comment recently made by Nick Griffin in which he stated that after the election all BNP literature would feature a Christian cross to emphasise the party’s ties to our country’s Christian heritage. Why? This is not the USA. British (and I mean indigenous here) people are not overly bothered about religion (except Islam, which all true Britons rightly despise if they become acquainted with its reality), and to overtly associate the BNP with Christianity will only serve to make it seem totally out of touch and irrelevant. If it wants to succeed in Ulster or the US Bible Belt then fine, but if it purports to be a nationalist party in England and the other constituent nations of the British mainland, then it had better realise that we are no longer living in the seventeenth century. If anyone needs objective proof of this fact, just look at the abysmal performance of the Christian Party in this election.
This is a particularly odd tack for Nick Griffin to take given that he himself is not a Christian. As British nationalists we should be secular, but publicly celebrate our national festivals that arise from a combination of Christian and pagan traditions. Many of us are atheists and agnostics, so kindly leave religion out of the equation unless you are attacking Islam which is absolutely essential, for it sees no divide between the temporal and the ‘spiritual’, which is why it is completely incompatible with our culture and others. Otherwise, people’s religious beliefs and affiliations or lack of them are a matter for personal conscience.
Another recent policy tack which will possess only a limited degree of electoral traction, and runs the risk of backfiring badly, pertains to ‘global warming’ or ‘climate change’. Calling all of the science a ‘hoax’ or a ‘scam’ might well be music to the ears of oil company executives, but once again, it jars with most people and certainly with the overwhelming majority of scientists. Just because ‘climate change’ is being used by our mainstream parties to justify ramping up foreign aid, domestic deindustrialisation and introducing ‘green’ taxes doesn’t mean that the science is necessarily being invented to justify policy. All it means is that our government, as well as the governments of many other countries, sees this as a useful pretext for implementing other agendas that they already possess, such as creating transnational institutions of political and economic governance. The BNP should therefore not adopt a strong position either way on the scientific basis of ‘climate change’, but should constantly and unfailingly highlight the political abuse of the ‘climate change’ rationale for implementing undesirable policies that work directly against the national interest.
As our domestic oil reserves are declining and international supplies are growing less secure and more expensive, developing new technologies not dependent upon oil are good in and of themselves, for they reduce national vulnerability to external geopolitical factors and will be cleaner. If other countries are convinced of the necessity of introducing such technologies, why shouldn’t we profit from this by selling such new technological expertise and products? Furthermore, moving away from an oil dependent economy will help to undermine the source of vast wealth underpinning Islamic states such as Saudi Arabia which ultimately funds global jihad and Islamic proselytisation, including in the UK.
There is a genuine environmental crisis and the BNP should highlight this. It however, is not ‘climate change’, for if anthropogenic climate change is indeed a reality, it is simply a by-product of global overpopulation. This must be constantly reiterated along with the corresponding fact that the UK has no further ‘carrying capacity'. Thus to take further immigrants is both irresponsible and, in the long term, dangerous.
The BNP needs to concentrate on a few core positive messages which will enable it to broaden its base of support and appeal. These must be communicated using temperate language to emphasise its moderate nationalist agenda. Always refer to the BNP as a “moderate nationalist party”. The words ‘moderate’ and ‘nationalist’ must appear together as frequently as possible, so that listeners become accustomed to pairing the two, instead of ‘far-right’ which is currently the undesirable descriptor habitually associated with the noble terms ‘nationalist’ and ‘nationalism’. Who could possibly object to a moderate party with a moderate agenda?
The term ‘anti-globalist’ must be used as frequently as possible. The Conservatives, Labour Party, Liberal Democrats and Greens must all be referred to as ‘globalists’. ‘Globalists’ and ‘globalism’ must be transformed into pejorative terms by highlighting the very real and negative aspects of this ideology and its attendant processes. Nationalists and nationalism on the other hand, stand for freedom, self-determination and democracy. Our ideology is positive, which is why globalists and the globally owned media hate us and our values: we are the little people standing up against the lies and vested interests of corporate power. We, as nationalists, are the real anti-globalists, not the Greens. Only nationalism and national stewardship can guarantee respect for national natural resources and ecosystems. A respect for our natural environment, on land and at sea, should be an integral part of our nationalism. The landscapes, flora and fauna of our isles and surrounding seas are ours in trust to be tended and passed on to future generations in good condition.
We need to stress the following key messages: the BNP is a party of peace and wants an end to unnecessary wars; the BNP is a party of neutrality that seeks to maintain good relations with neighbouring countries; the BNP seeks to preserve the best of British heritage and culture, whilst developing a dynamic hi-tech science focused manufacturing economy; the BNP believes in upholding individual liberties and the right to free speech; the BNP believes that the British people, like all peoples, are sovereign and possess the right to self-determination; the BNP seeks to enhance the quality of life of the British people through focusing upon per capita rather than aggregate economic measures; the BNP recognises that sustainable development requires a sustainable demographic policy.
The above are just a few suggestions, but as you can see, you don’t need to lapse into the language of ‘race’ or even overtly mention ‘immigration’ to adequately defend our way of life, sovereignty and demographic integrity, for the solution to these issues is implicit in the arguments themselves and the language used to express them. Nonetheless, it will be important not to neglect directly referring to the unsustainable nature of immigration and its very real negative impacts upon our economy, housing, environment and culture. Also ensure that a clear differentiation is made between those immigrants who have been assimilable, and those who have not (i.e. Muslims in particular).
Multiculturalism, Islamisation and the colonisation of our country can all be effectively blocked and reversed adhering to the aforementioned principles and can be communicated as genuinely ‘progressive’ for our people and our voters. Islamisation can be countered by vigorously adhering to secularist arguments but, importantly, Islam must be singled out as different from all other religions because of its refusal to sever the temporal from the spiritual. Islam must never be referred to in a false (i.e. favourable) light. Furthermore, never miss the opportunity to stress the fact that Islam is incompatible with British and wider Western civilisational norms as well as being deeply misogynist.
The New Left has successfully undermined longstanding cultural norms and nullified rational thought through its perversion of language. We can defeat it through using language to gradually move public perceptions towards our position. However, we have an advantage, for our position does not rest upon a fabric of lies. Our language must rest upon truth and rational argument, and if our voice is allowed to be heard, eventually a large section of the public will come around to our way of thinking. When debating with opponents, either verbally or in writing, we should concentrate upon the facts and not make ad hominem attacks. When they use ad hominem attacks against us we must calmly highlight what they are doing, and ask them to address the ‘facts’ of the issue under discussion.
There is plenty of corroborating evidence from politically neutral organisations such as Migration Watch, the Optimum Population Trust and Civitas that we can use to back up our policies on immigration, the environment, economics and education. We must always seek to make good use of non-partisan sources of information.
Alas, the nationalist vote remained split last week. Although the BNP beat UKIP in the majority of cases where the two parties fielded a candidate apiece in the same constituency, UKIP still gathered a greater national vote share than the BNP owing to its larger number of candidates: 917,832 votes (3.1% +0.9% compared to 2005) versus 563,743 (1.9% + 1.2% compared to 2005). Furthermore, although a very small party, the English Democrats also tucked into a 0.2% share of the national vote winning 64,826.
If the next General Election were to happen in the next year or two, it is unlikely that the BNP would have sufficient resources to field candidates in every seat with the requisite funding and feet on the ground to make this a worthwhile effort. If such an eventuality were to occur, it would make good sense to come to a temporary nationalist pact with UKIP, whereby the BNP could concentrate its resources on those constituencies (typically urban) likely to provide the largest return for effort invested, and for UKIP likewise to devote its resources to large rural seats where the BNP’s appeal is comparatively weak. Such a pact has been mooted previously, but unfortunately was rejected by UKIP. However, such an agreement should be explored afresh if resources are limited.
If the BNP can rid itself of the media ‘Nazi’ tag this will be an achievement which should help to destigmatise the party and open up the opportunity for more members to join. Unfortunately, as one anonymous visitor to this site has commented, the mass media and all politically correct organisations will never be able to accept the respectability of an ethno-nationalist party, so the inappropriate term ‘far-right’ is just something we’ll have to put up with. After all, this is also a label that our hostile ignorant media (the BBC, Guardian, etc) also apply to Geert Wilders and the PVV as a smear intended to place him and his party beyond the pale of respectability. UKIP itself is stigmatised as ‘extreme’ even though in reality it is a moderate, conservative civic nationalist party.
The above are just some observations on how the BNP might attempt to extend its appeal through communicating key nationalist messages in a palatable fashion to the British public. These are offered in a spirit of friendly criticism, and are not meant to detract from the very real progress that has been made by the party in recent years and the central role that Nick Griffin has played in this process. Nonetheless, the BNP now needs to shift up a gear and to avoid the pitfalls of the past.
Wednesday, 12 May 2010
How can the BNP improve its electoral Prospects?
Comments that call for or threaten violence will not be published. Anyone is entitled to criticise the arguments presented here, or to highlight what they believe to be factual error(s); ad hominem attacks do not constitute comment or debate. Although at times others' points of view may be exasperating, please attempt to be civil in your responses. If you wish to communicate with me confidentially, please preface your comment with "Not for publication". This is why all comments are moderated.
Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)
Excellent review of what the party needs to do to move forward. From speaking to people with nationalist inclinations i've found that many thought the general election just too important to risk voting for a 'minor' party, so i think people tended to vote tactically for one of the big 3. Also, i think the bnp's standpoint on firearms does tend to leave many voters cold and is something thats often seized upon by interviewers. Personally i'm also uncomfortable with the new 'christian' stance, i cant see it doing the party any favours in the short or long term. The bnp have come a great distance in the last few years and need to assure the public they're not the crackpot party the mainstream media make them out to be. It would be a shame to make a wrong move now after so much hard work.ReplyDelete
Thank you for your supportive comment Anonymous as well as your observations regarding the risk averse voting behaviour of people with nationalist inclinations in last week's election. The desire to defeat Labour probably caused a considerable number of people who voted BNP in the EU elections not to do so this time around owing to the first-past-the-post system. Hopefully my suggestions for improving the BNP's appeal will filter out to the wider nationalist blogosphere and will be read by some of those who have an input into the BNP's long-term strategy.ReplyDelete
You're welcome. I'm still trying to work out how to put a signature to my responses, apologies. I'm fairly new to the whole blogsphere thing (I came across this site as a result of a google search) and would be interested to know if you're aware of whether anybody in a position to suggest or make changes reads your posts?ReplyDelete
Superb piece. It is like you have read my mind actually, and therefore quite spooky!ReplyDelete
I am absolutely with you on all aspects of your article, and it has been refreshing to finally hear some plain honesty and some rational thoughts which do not veer off the road of sanity onto that of fantasy land.
Thanks for articulating so much of what I already wanted to write myself. I wrote a draft article a few days ago which steered into some of this stuff, and also how we need to just take stock and reform what we are doing along these lines - but because it was also a bit pithy about a particular site and its descent into fantasy land commentary lately, I decided not to publish it in case it ruffled more feathers than it would help.
Yours is much better than what I wrote. Well done. Lets hope we can all take heed and formulate ways to make it happen.
Many thanks for your warm words British Activism. I am glad that we are as one on these issues. I really do think that the BNP has the prospect of making a real and permanent breakthrough if it follows the general tack that I have outlined. If you have any input into party policy formulation, you are always welcome to submit any element of my modest piece that you find useful. Unfortunately, I am barred from joining by my job, so will have to remain an anonymous amateur 'hack' for the time being. I do hope though, that some day in the none-too-distant future, I will be able to join.ReplyDelete
Your observations are completely what I have long believed re; the BNP - so much so, it is almost uncanny to learn that my own thoughts are mirrored so closely. Before I continue I will state that despite actively supporting the BNP for around 5 years now through regular and, for by my own modest means, fairly substantial donations, as well as activism during elelction campaigns I have not yet taken up membership due to an uneasiness with the policy on capital punishment ( which I think should be put to a free vote) and global warming scepticism, uncertainty over abolition of income tax policies, the firearms issue and particularly crass comments from Mark Collett ie' 'AIDS Monkeys'. I work in education and whilst I wholeheartedly and passionately support the BNP's fundamental nationalism I have reasoned that it would be personally an act of folly to stick my neck out whilst the party clings to a number of extraneous issues which I would be unable to convincingly defend.ReplyDelete
However, I have decided that I will very likely join the party in the next month or so as an act of solidarity with the party, regardless. I have absolutely no truck for irresponsible behaviour, wreckers, quitters and stirrers. I never voiced criticism about Collett until he 'left' the BNP for this very reason. Nationalist unity is everything and I will do nothing, unwittingingly or otherwise, to do the work of our nation's enemies by sowing fractious discord.
I have long stated on Simon Darby's blog, Green Arrow, as well as on the main BNP website that the party needs to robustly refute the 'fascist' and 'Nazi' slur, which I am convinced is far more injurous to our electoral prospects within our natural constituency than the accusations of 'racism'. Clear statements on election literature and the party website to this effect are what is urgently needed.
I too shuddered. and was further deterred from taking out membership, by the recent talk about using the Christian Cross on all party literature; Britain is a secular country, many nationalists are atheists ( like myself) or even pagans, and Britain's nationalist party must reflect this.
There is a substantial natural inclination towards nationlism amongst the British people ( this is what keeps our enemies so uptight) and this is what has become almost tangible now when you go out leafleting,and you get to talk to people who you might presume would always remain on the fashionable end of politics. However, The BNP has yet to win the confidence of the British people - and sometimes alienates potential supporters by daft or simply bigoted remarks here and there - and it is this which urgently needs to be addressed in a more thoughtful way than hitherto.
During the recent election campaign I too have informally put it to other activists that the BNP needs to reach beyond its core constituency ( ie, appeal to the more "educated" middle classes for they make for more articulate spokespersons) if it is to succeed.
If you really want to be heard, try submitting your comments directly to the blogs of Simon Darby, Lee John Barnes and Martin Wingfield. They are much further up the food chain.ReplyDelete
Thank you for your comments Salford City. I understand your difficulty with working in the education sector. It's not easy. It is heartening to learn that you and others who have responded to this piece are with me on these proposals. Mark Collett and his extensive media exposure were disastrous for the party. He could easily personally account for the loss of several hundreds of thousands of prospective votes, if not more. I was so revolted by him that I couldn't bring myself to write in support of the BNP for a long time.ReplyDelete
I think that last week's result demonstrated that the BNP has gone as far as it can with its current approach, but it is far from finished. It can and it will gain much more support if it reforms its strategy.
You're right in thinking that the 'Nazi' and 'fascist' slurs are far more damaging than accusations of 'racism'. A good section of the indigenous public is fully aware of how elastic and how abused this latter term is.
Thank you for your suggestion Abu. I have posted on Martin Wingfield's blog, so hopefully he'll read what I've written and not automatically delete it as spam. His blog hasn't been updated since February though, so I'm not sure when or if he'll get around to reading it. The length of the article is awkward, as I have to post multiple comments. Nonetheless, I'll have a go on Simon Darby's and Lee Barnes's blogs as suggested. I may not post over the next few days as I need some time to see to all of the chores and social aspects of life which were largely put on hold in the run-up to the General Election. I should be back posting by next week at the latest though.
As someone who has actually lost a good job due to my nationalist views i'd advise caution to those who are considering switching from silent running. I also agree that the bnp needs to purge itself of the career racists who thrive in the spotlight. Hopefully if this post is put in the right place, the right people will take notice. Personally i'm so pleased that its not just myself who feels this way, and that my views are replicated by people who appear to be moderate, articulate and intelligent people.ReplyDelete
Just had to bow in appreciation.ReplyDelete
Really hit the nail on the head and excellent from start to finish.
Totally agree that the BNP need to finally shake off the news-polluters' taglines. Also agree that the Establishment need to be shown as oppressive and profiteering Globalists.
Best example we can use for that is Al Gore. Finally found a use for the sod - he can keep his Nobel prize for providing that alone.
Excellent posting that deserved a digg http://digg.com/d31R2mZ.
Anonymous, I'm so sorry to hear about you losing your job. That's absolutely awful. I just hope that you've managed to find something else since this happened, and that you've managed to put it behind you. It's crazy that people should face such persecution in their own country. Thank you for your cautionary advice. Like you and other posters in this thread, I am glad that there seems to be a general mood in favour of reforming the party and its approach, and that we are not alone in thinking the thoughts outlined above.ReplyDelete
Cheers for the Digg 'Jack'. I've not sussed out how to use that function yet, hence me not getting around to reciprocating on any of your postings yet. It’s very slack of me, but I really need to get around to creating a properly anonymised email address before doing so.
I must also offer my apologies to another poster, but your comment seems to have vanished into the electronic ether after I pressed accept. Please feel free to leave another message.
I intended to add in my post above that I have also long held the view that the globalists should be consistently referred to collectively as the 'anti-British parties', 'anti-British alliance', 'anti-Brits' or something to this effect; the emphasis and central message being 'anti-British'. Thus, the anti-Brits - from the Tory party, Greens, SWP to the anarchists - would be perceived by the British people for what they actually are, and if we look at the numerous examples of alliances against the BNP and the ways in which these allegedly unlikely bedfellows cohere, then this is born out by fact. Not only would this be a potent and simple way of marking out where we stand and, more to the point, where our vociferous opponents stand, but it would be an easy to understand, explain and defend political term which would resonate with the less politically astute public - who make up the vast majority of voters.ReplyDelete
Continuing with the political potency of language, which the marxist left and adherents of cultural theory have employed to great effect; instead of falling into the trap of denying 'racism' and thus lending this marxist /liberal position credence and credibility we should be questioning and deconstructing its meaning and usage. Thus, in answer to the charge of 'racism', we should always demand clarification of what is meant by what is, to the average man and woman on the street, a nebulous term. We could, with ease, counter this charge against us stating that we uphold ethnic and racial identity as a right for all but that we reject and condemn ethnic/racial hatred and derogation. If indeed the former is, in the eyes of the globalists, 'racist' - particularly in relation to the ethnic British! - then it will be a charge which most people of all ethnic backgrounds will be happy to have levelled against them.
Quite simply and in truth, the globalist parties can be said to be anti-British because their policies and political positioning effects the destruction of British national sovereignty, cutural and ethnic integrity. The globalists have no prime allegiance to a particular kindred group - the nationalist identifier of nationhood - or to a fixed or integral national indentity, but rather, they regard Britain as a mere geo-political/economic entity to be, populated, colonised and exploited by any economic, political entity or ethnic group from anywhere within the globe.
fantastic well written article !!!! I will be posting the link to your blog to other pro BNP websites as it deserves a wider viewing and i also hope that the valid points you have mentioned are brought to the attention of Nick Griffin and co.ReplyDelete
Salford City, thanks for your excellent additional suggestions regarding linguistic usage. Successfully branding the outlook, policies and actions of the aforementioned parties as 'anti-British' would be an outstanding achievement and would represent a genuine paradigm shift in the consciousness of our people. However, care needs to be taken to ensure that this does not mean that a lot of their supporters (with notable exceptions such as those of the SWP) end up being tarred with the same brush, for this would simply cause them to take umbrage. Many grassroots activists in the Conservative and Labour parties certainly are not globalists in outlook, yet they remain with their current parties out of a misplaced sense of political tribalism.ReplyDelete
Your suggestion re the deconstruction of that much abused term ‘racism’ is spot on. I am in complete agreement with you, and have often used the tactic you recommend myself and demanded that people clarify what they mean when they use this loaded word. There are some people though, as I’m sure you are all too aware, who cannot be asked such a simple question because they explode with fury (trade union activists, the majority of academics in the social sciences and vast swathes of the managerial caste in the public sector are particularly prone to such Pavlovian displays of irrational hate). It should therefore be a key task of the party to defuse this term by methodically stripping away its politicised accretions and using the definition that you have provided. I have seen allegations of ‘racism’ used to try and cover up incompetence in the workplace and destroy the reputations and careers of honest colleagues, and thus realise what a vicious concept this is and how vulnerable our people are to such malicious attacks thanks to race legislation.
dazg35, I’m glad that you found some merit in my suggestions and will be posting links to this article on other British nationalist sites. Let’s hope that the party leadership are alerted to its content and act upon it.
It is interesting that the issue of the usage of language has cropped up a few times now.ReplyDelete
I was going to write a piece about an aspect of this on my site last month, but I never got around to it at the time I had a bee in my bonnet about it (and sometimes I need to strike whilst the iron is hot lol).
However, my piece was going to be more about looking at our our own language in some of the Nationalist Blog circuit rather than about fighting aspects of what others throw at us.
It is a concern I have had for a while now, especially with some prolific writers on a very well known blogsite (and the comment sections of the (old) British National Party website, on newspaper replies and such).
When I get chance, I might elaborate.
By the way, I have linked to your above piece on my site at the end of an article. I do not receive an awful lot of traffic, but it's the thought that counts ;).
The comments here have been an interesting read too, and of course, I wholly agree to the things being put forward.
A strong, thoughtful piece of analysis. I hope that the party leadership opens itself to the discussion that must inevitably now take place.ReplyDelete
Thanks for linking to the article British Activism. It's much appreciated. I agree with you that the wider question of language usage in the nationalist blogosphere itself is a pertinent one. There is often a lack of civility, and manners cost nothing. Furthermore, some of the terminology employed should, in my opinion, be ditched for rather more sophisticated and nuanced terms/arguments. I look forward to you writing an article on this theme, as I'd be very interested in discovering your opinions.ReplyDelete
Thanks for your comment Dowlish. I enjoyed your article entitled 'Needs must when the devil drives', so much so in fact, that it has prompted me to write a piece building upon some of your themes which relate to the wider question about what the BNP needs to do to win public confidence and support.
At last someone who understands the problems that nationalism in this country faces. Many sane normal middle class professionals last Thursday voted BNP. They wouldnt admit it to their family, friends or work colleagues though, I am sure. Yes stigmatisation is the main aim of the BNPs enemies but own goals on the BNP s side do not help. The BNP councillor in Stoke with the nazi morons beside him photo I am sure had been waiting in the searchlight office for the right moment and was probably supplied by MI5 which ran organisations like Column 88 for years.ReplyDelete
Modern neo Nazis tend to be dim, fat and vile and are not and never should be in any mainstream nationalist movement.The BNP must move into the 21st century, the second world war ended over 65 years ago. We face different enemies and foes these days.
Hello Anonymous. Thanks for your comment. I agree that many middle class people will have voted BNP recently but will not have divulged this fact to family, friends or colleagues. Given the understandable climate of fear generated by the hate campaign against the party and its members, this is fully understandable. However, as you rightly note, it is currently very easy for the BNP's opponents to stigmatise it when it fails to decisively distance itself from the Nazi elements of its past.ReplyDelete
The Steve Batkin photograph taken in 2002 in which he stands next to a war memorial alongside three men, two of whom are giving Nazi salutes, is nauseating. This is an affront to our war dead. I wonder whether perhaps that it was figures such as Batkin that Alby Walker was referring to when he walked out and voiced his disquiet about those with Nazi sympathies remaining in the party, despite assurances from the very top that the BNP was seeking to reform and purge itself of such elements. I am not in a position to know, but if this were to be the case, it is a very sad state of affairs. Mind you, as you note, Searchlight have probably had this photograph on file for quite some time and have chosen to release it now as part of their effort to split and demoralise the party.
It is my opinion that the party should not split, but genuinely reform itself. The BNP will have no future whatsoever if it does not decisively break with this genuine Nazi element of its past. Having dealt largely with issues of communication and presentation in this piece and the need for a temporary alliance with other nationalistically inclined parties and movements in its follow up, I shall shortly be writing on policy. This article will outline which policies I consider central to building a popular nationalist party capable of winning under the first-past-the-post system. As you will have picked up from what I have already written, this will require a significant enlargement of the party’s base and its transformation into a genuinely credible and moderate nationalist party. It needs to become more like Geert Wilders’s PVV, but should retain its radical distributist economic focus.
What the BNP leadership must realise is that any association with neo Nazism or holocaust denial or the KKK is electoral suicide. The modern neo Nazism attracts low iQ, dim witted individuals who are loosers ; the irony is that the pre WW2 version attracted the opposite but that time is gone. Whether the Holocaust happened as per the Nuremberg indictments can be left to historians to debate when the holocaust denial laws are lifted. This may happen one day but anyone can read and make up their own minds as it is all on the internet.ReplyDelete
The BNP needs to be more professional and decisevely reject any association with the above ideas. It should concentrate on its core objective be more disciplined and professsional. Nick Griffin needs to think before he opens his mouth. We saw that slimy Gordon could say one thing and think the other during the election but that is how he became a successful politician. The prime example was Question time where he could have stated his repugnance for the KKK but he didnt. He then goes on to declare two men kissing as " creepy" presumably as it frightend the horses.
Own goals . i do really think like column 88 the BNP is a searchlight/MI5 honeytrap the way they behave.
Hi Anonymous. Well, although I disagree with Nick Griffin on some of the things he says, I'd rather that he says what he thinks rather than not. Still, the BNP shouldn't take a stance that condemns people for being homosexual. It's not my cup of tea, but homosexuality isn't something to be feared. Some people are just born that way. At the same time, I don't think that we should have to go in for all of this 'pride' nonsense and 'celebrate' sexual diversity. It's a private matter. So long as all that takes place is private and between consenting adults, who cares?ReplyDelete
Excellent posting Durotrigan which reflects many of my views.ReplyDelete
We need a different and more professional approach to counter the inevitable bad press we at present get.
We also need people we can trust in the higher echelons of the Party who are untainted by their pasts.These people are there and we must use them. The ones of dubious loyalty must be removed from influence and I believe any competent organiser should be able to spot those who work against us.
I read this blog at an opportune time as we are having a meeting of local NW organisers starting at 6 pm and I will being as many of your points up as I can remember.
I'll read your article again tomorrow.
I believe as you do that party policy should be dictated by what is electorally feasable without compromising our principles, and we should make sure that none of our policies should appear outlandish as some of those quoted have done. Many people agree with our stance but are put off voting for us by these media slip ups whether accidental or designed.
We in our area are finding a more receptive public by having satellite meetings in local pubs etc (they are asking us now) rather than having members meetings preaching to the converted, and always manage to convert some attendees, which become the seed corn of our hoped for future success.
Lastly for now some tactics and policies seem to be made on the hoof and I believe a wider sample of members should have some input before they are broadcast.
Thanks for your observations Lanky Patriot. It's interesting to learn that you're now receiving a more positive reception in local pubs. I am sure that the party must be considering what it can do to strengthen strategy now that the membership has had some time to consider the implications of the election results. I'm glad that you'll be bringing up some of these points at tonight's meeting. Hopefully, this should be an opportune time during which to make the necessary changes to ensure greater success next time around. Good luck, and let me know how it goes.ReplyDelete
I've thought for a long time that the name of the party needs changing. First I thought 'English National Party'. Then I thought NO because the BNP stands up for the whole of the United Kingdom so, then I thought why not the 'UK National Party' what do you chaps think?ReplyDelete
BlackcountryAL, if the UK were to break up into its constituent nations, then renaming the BNP the 'English National Party' might be something worth considering. Currently, the BNP polls most strongly in England, but it also does reasonably well in Wales. In Scotland however, its appeal is much more limited.ReplyDelete
As matters stand, there would be a certain logic to it being called the 'UK National Party' owing to the fact that it is a unionist party and is pledged to retaining Northern Ireland within the state structure. However, despite the fact that the BNP name is to a degree tarnished owing to the relentless onslaught from the party's opponents, it remains well known to voters and is recognisable. In my opinion therefore, it would be better to make changes to the party's presentation and core focus in order to broaden its appeal rather than change its name, as this might detract from its overall visibility and confuse voters. Does anyone else have any thoughts on this? This invitation for feedback is not of course open to Muslims and other hate-filled opponents of the British people.
Please if you rename it dont call it the UK national party. It would be too much like the UKIP which most people see as a bunch of 80 year old codgers in blazers living in Frinton. Do you know anyone under 40 who is a member of UKIP???ReplyDelete
As for the question of Scotland it might be time for our two nations to seperate. There is indeeed a tide of nationalism running through Scotland and it is best if we had a velvet divorce as the Czechs and Slovaks did rather than see blood on the carpet as when the Irish decided to seperate.
That's a fair comment Anonymous :-). Not that I have anything against old codgers or Frinton people of course! The UK National Party doesn't possess as much resonance for me as British National Party. I think it is possibly because the first plays to a sense of civic nationhood, whereas the word 'British' also invokes bonds of family and ancestry.ReplyDelete
As you suggest, it could well be the case that Scotland might choose to go its own way in the years to come. Given its people's preference for voting in Labour MPs, this might not be such a bad thing. Whatever state structure(s) our home nations choose in future, there must never be any ill-will between us, let alone violence. The latter would be ridiculous. The amicable case of the Czechs and Slovaks is a positive model to cite when it comes to national separation.
Oh well, it was just a thought, my friends still call us the 'National Front' now, I don't know if you think that this is a stigma we need to put to sleep? I've never had anything to do with the NF but it does have a bad name amongst working class communities.ReplyDelete
All constructive suggestions are welcome BlackcountryAL, so thanks for opening up this topic of discussion. Well, the NF is a separate and much smaller party, and there certainly wouldn't be any mileage in getting confused with that outfit. Avoiding such confusion is all the more necessary when considering that the NF also stood a number of candidates at the recent election. I am glad to say however, that they did very poorly.ReplyDelete
Whilst Scotland and Wales remain part of the United Kingdom, I think that the BNP should stick with its current name, but as outlined in the above article, it needs to concentrate its efforts on making a clean break with some aspects of its past and getting across a positive and palatable nationalist message.