EDL Solihull Demo

This afternoon an EDL demo has been taking place in Solihull, the first of 2013. According to various reports on Twitter, anywhere between 40 and 60 supporters took part. One estimate even placed their numbers as low as 25. Although billed as a ‘regional demo’, the numbers are small. There seems to be little other information circulating about the demo, although its detractors have asserted that its organiser – Matthew Pile – had been involved in a violent racist attack on a fellow bus passenger last October. Press coverage of the protest was limited to an article in the Birmingham Mail, which claimed that there were circa 60 demonstrators in total and whilst hostile in tone noted that the demonstration was peaceful. There was no counter-demonstration.

With Stephen Lennon/Tommy Robinson having recently been sentenced to a ten-month custodial sentence for having entered the US on someone else’s passport, and the EDL seemingly having passed its high watermark in terms of numbers attending demonstrations, some observers have been touting this as signalling the demise of the anti-Islamist campaign group, although in reality the picture is rather more complex. Lennon himself had assumed a high-profile role in the BFP alongside Kevin Carroll in April last year, but left in October, announcing that he was to transform the EDL itself into a political party. Carroll however stayed in the BFP whilst remaining a high-profile member of the EDL. To the surprise of many, Carroll became BFP Chairman earlier this month when Paul Weston stepped down from the role after a little over a year in the position. Adding to the confusion was the fact that the BFP became deregistered as a political party in November 2012 following its failure to pay its annual registration fee. The current status of the party is therefore unclear.

With Kevin Carroll having become BFP Chairman and his cousin now sitting in prison for the best part of this year, will Lennon’s intention to transform the EDL into a fully-fledged political party remain, or will he rejoin the BFP now that Weston has stepped down? It seemed that one of the primary reasons for Lennon’s departure was linked to a failure to see eye-to-eye with Weston’s political agenda despite the party's near monomaniac obsession with Islam, but with Carroll in control, this difference will now in all likelihood have been removed. If the BFP is to continue, it would appear that it will now be the electoral arm of the EDL, although this poses questions both for the BFP’s existing membership and for many EDL supporters who are averse to involvement in electoral politics. It is unlikely that there will be any clarity on this score for quite some time to come, and it seems probable that those EDL protests that do take place in the coming months will be organised by local divisions rather than by the national leadership. 

EDL Solihull Demonstration

EDL Luton March Coverage: Lennon and Carroll join BFP

Today the EDL is holding a demonstration in Luton to mark the third anniversary of its foundation. Unsurprisingly, UAF and the SWP are holding a counterdemonstration (badged as 'We are Luton'), as has become traditional upon such occasions. According to the Casuals United blog (hat tip for the picture below), some 2,000 supporters have taken to the streets of Luton. This also coincides with the long-anticipated official announcement regarding Stephen Lennon/Tommy Robinson joining the British Freedom Party (BFP) as Deputy Chairman. It has been announced that he will be sharing this role with Kevin Carroll. Quite how effective that arrangement proves to be remains to be seen.

Yesterday witnessed the first electoral test for the BFP, and as can be seen from the results at this link, it fared spectacularly badly. Although those who head both the BFP and the EDL hope that today's announcement will provide a boost for the former, it has already prompted the departure of a number of BFP members. However, what is beyond dispute is the fact that Stephen Lennon's decision to join the BFP will generate headlines and afford the party far more coverage than it has hitherto enjoyed. Although Matthew Goodwin correctly observed in The Guardian yesterday that the BNP was spent as an electoral force and should now be considered a political irrelevance, he perhaps places rather too much store upon the potential success of an EDL/BFP tie-up, owing to the numerous reasons outlined in previous articles highlighting the weaknesses both of this strategic approach and of the BFP's policies and presentation (a detailed criticism of its 20 Point Plan can be found here).

Luton of course has acquired a reputation for radical Islamism, with the most recent arrest for terrorist-related offences taking place towards the end of last month when five men in the town were detained in police swoops. It is therefore not surprising that Luton was the town that gave birth to the EDL, and this fact has in recent months drawn considerable media coverage, most notably in two documentaries looking at ethno-confessional polarisation in the town: Stacey Dooley's lightweight 'My Hometown Fanatics' and the rather more serious but partial episode of Despatches 'Proud and Prejudiced'. Both of these came after a special Radio 4 report on the town last September, featuring interviews conducted by John Humphrys with Stephen Lennon and Sayful Islam amongst others.

The following video gives a flavour of the EDL demo today.

 

EDL Luton Demo: Saturday 5th May 2012

British Freedom Party storms to success in Liverpool

The British Freedom Party made its first electoral outing this week, fielding a total of five candidates in Liverpool and one in Basildon. There can be no denying that the BFP's results were remarkable, and they will forever remain seared into my memory. Anyone who has heard of the BFP and set eyes upon the figures will never be able to forget them, proving as they do, just how much potential there is in the party's current strategy and approach.

Taking the results ward by ward in alphabetical order, we first come to Clubmoor, where Andrew Edward Philip Harvey secured a startling 26 votes, some 0.78% of the total. In County ward, Peter James Stafford won a truly memorable 17 votes, or 0.6% of the total. Everton however, was to provide a slightly more encouraging result with a whopping 50 votes (1.7%) won by its female candidate Jacqueline Stafford. This was enough, as was also the case in Clubmoor and County, to gain her an unchallenged last place. Did Fazakerley buck the trend? Well, to a certain extent yes! Peter Stafford managed not to come last by taking 50 votes and a 1.51% share. However, it was Norris Green that was to play host to the BFP's strongest showing in Liverpool, where its candidate Peter Squire achieved 2.77% with 78 votes and came third. As for the party's performance in Basildon, this was to be the BFP's most 'impressive', which was still very weak indeed: Tony Harris polled 87 Votes, securing a 4.2% share and fourth position out of five.

Given that the BFP currently claims 724 members, has its own website, is supported by a number of bloggers, possesses links with the EDL and has been covered in the national press (e.g. The Independent), should not the expectation be that it ought to fare better electorally than a party of circa 60 members that possesses a rudimentary website, no supporting network of bloggers and has zero visibility? Well, such a party does exist, and it is called the Democratic Nationalists. Despite the fact that to all intents and purposes it is invisible, its five candidates clocked up the following results on Thursday (the first three wards being in Bradford, the fourth in Doncaster and the fifth in Pendle): Royds - 453 votes, 15.1%; Tong - 276 votes, 11.5%; Wyke - 313 votes, 9.6%; Stainforth and Moorends - 410 votes, 16.6%; Waterside - 92, 7.8%. If the Democratic Nationalists could achieve this, why did the BFP poll even more abysmally? The DNs even managed to beat both the Respect and Liberal Democrat candidates in Wyke. Overall, the DNs averaged 309 votes per candidate with a 12.1% share, whereas the BFP equivalent figures were 51 and 1.93%.

What do these results prove? It would seem safe to conclude that were Ken Dodd to choose to stand any of his Diddy Men at the next round of local elections, they would be sure to beat the BFP. Neither however, could beat this party here.

 Ken Dodd and his 'Diddy Men': the BFP's primary challengers

Tommy Robinson to appear on Jeremy Kyle?

An anti-British campaign blog has today claimed that Tommy Robinson/Stephen Lennon will shortly be appearing on the Jeremy Kyle show together with the Chairman of the British Freedom Party Paul Weston. Is this true? It may be a popular show (I must confess to never having watched it), but is this really the right forum for people who wish to elicit support from the general public? Does this not run the risk of seriously backfiring, with these two participants, given the type of people normally said to feature in the programme, coming to be perceived as just another addition to Kyle's dysfunctional circus sideshow?

Rhetorical Question: Is Jeremy Kyle patronising or smug?

Russia Today has hitherto been a rather more reliable news source with respect to its treatment of Islamism and Islamisation in Europe, but in the video below it would seem that it has been infected by the Breivik meme being vigorously peddled by none other than the anti-British 'Hope not Hate' campaign. As someone elsewhere has commented, blaming the EDL for Breivik as 'Hope not Hate' and this report do is akin to blaming The Beatles for Charles Manson (although of course it has to be said that The Beatles produced rather better music than the EDL).

The Sound of Confusion: another “Freedom Party”?

A little over a week ago a story appeared courtesy of Reuters in which journalist Michael Holden claimed that the EDL was going “to form [a] “Freedom Party””. This claim was made upon the basis of a couple of quotes from Stephen Lennon:

Stephen Lennon, head of the English Defence League (EDL), said the three-year-old grassroots group wanted to move on from holding street demonstrations to contesting elections.

"The British political anti-Islamist party will be launched in May at our Luton demonstration," Lennon told Reuters, saying the new body would be called the Freedom Party.

"At the Luton demonstration, the whole country will hear an anti-Islamist political party that gives everyone an option in a non-racist way - the opposite to the British National Party."

It would seem that either Holden misheard what Lennon said, or that Lennon accidentally omitted the first part of the party’s full name which, given his hitherto stated support, can only be assumed to be the British Freedom Party. There is, or more accurately was, a UK political party named The Freedom Party (its website can be viewed here), but it is now essentially defunct although still technically under the chairmanship of Adrian Davies. So, the question that naturally poses itself is this: is Lennon really proposing to launch another party named “The Freedom Party”, or is he choosing the occasion of this May’s EDL Luton demo for what will be the third attempted launch of the British Freedom Party (BFP)?

The second option would seem to be the most logical one, but then again, not as logical as it ought to be. After all, the local elections are on Thursday 3 May, but the EDL’s Luton demo is on Saturday 5 May. Why choose to launch a party two days after the elections, particularly if the launch in question is actually a relaunch of the BFP? The BFP has previously declared its intention to field candidates in May, but to date, no concrete announcements seem to have appeared in connection with such plans. Perhaps a decision, for whatever reason, has been taken to delay its electoral baptism? Whatever the fact of the matter, this launch or relaunch is being poorly managed and communicated owing to the lack of clarity surrounding the whole affair. 

Yesterday also witnessed Stephen Lennon/Tommy Robinson appear on the BBC Sunday morning television programme ‘The Big Questions’ following his trip to Aarhus in Denmark the preceding day for a European Counter-jihad gathering. Although this was the first time that he had appeared on ‘The Big Questions’, this was not the first occasion that Islam featured in the programme, for the fact is that it seems to play a disproportionate role in almost every episode that is aired. This perhaps should not come as a surprise given that Aaqil Ahmed was appointed as the BBC’s Commissioning Editor Religion and Head of Religion and Ethics in 2009. His appointment has served to embed a pre-existent pro-Islam bias at the BBC, which also seems to have spilled over into its ‘Thought for the Day’ slot on Radio 4’s Today Programme, where once again Islamic voices are given a disproportionately large amount of airtime, whereas neo-pagans, Wiccans, UFO worshippers and voodoo practitioners seem to be left out of the equation. Come on now BBC, when are you going to redress your innate monotheistic bias! So much for ‘diversity’, eh?

Returning to yesterday’s rather more mundane and predictable bear-baiting session on ‘The Big Questions’, the BBC did of course deploy its normal tactic of packing its panel and audience full of pro-Muslim voices, leaving Lennon to defend himself from a far from impartial Nicky Campbell. The latter sneeringly inferred that Lennon dwelt in an alternative reality, responding to his comment that many middle class academics, such as Matthew Goodwin (also on the panel insinuating that Lennon was a crypto-Nazi), were out of touch with ordinary people’s life experience and concerns with the question: “Are they out of touch with what he perceives to be his reality?”

Although the programme purports to present a debate, its real function is to draw the audience towards a predetermined conclusion agreed in advance by its producers, and brought about through their careful selection and weighting of the audience. The end result is to produce a narrow and dogmatic BBC narrative that dehumanises anyone who objects to the ill effects of multiculturalism through making nasty and baseless assertions about their characters, and insinuating that anything other than a thoroughgoing endorsement of its position inexorably paves the way for ethnic cleansing and gas chambers. Yesterday’s episode, as can be seen from the video excerpt below, conformed precisely to this tediously predictable and bogus narrative.

Videos and Commentary: EDL Leicester Demo, 4 February 2012

The phrase “no news is good news” possesses much merit, and the absence of “news” about arrests in Leicester yesterday must surely be adjudged to be “good news”. Congratulations are therefore in order for the organisers of the EDL demo and their supporters, as well as for the police in ensuring that this protest passed off peacefully, contrary to the shrill propaganda that emanated from UAF, the SWP and kindred groups in the run-up to the event. 

This EDL demo marked something of a shift in tack for the protest movement, insofar as that its focus was not on Islamisation but upon “anti-White racism” and the neglect of this phenomenon by the judiciary and the mass media, sparked of course by the recent furore surrounding the Rhea Page case and the failure of the Judge to classify the attack upon Page and her boyfriend as a case of anti-White racism. As almost all mainstream media coverage of the EDL tends to be highly negative and Leicester yesterday proved to be bitterly cold, the EDL turnout can be adjudged to be a modest success. Estimates as to the numbers as ever vary, with their opponents in the SWP providing the lowest at 450, whereas Suzy at the pro-EDL Casuals United blog gave the highest at 1,200. The BBC and Capital FM cited figures of 800 and 700 which, being in the middle, are probably closer to the mark. What is clear however is that claims by the SWP that UAF protesters outnumbered those on the EDL side are false. UAF did not draw 700 “activists” as claimed, but somewhere in the region of 200.

Trotskyist agitator and leading ‘light’ of the SWP and UAF – Martin Smith – made a risible speech in which he made the following comment: 

“The EDL are David Cameron’s monkeys. The Tories are cutting our wages and pensions, and to do that they need someone else to blame.”

Poor Martin Smith appears to live in an alternative reality in which when it comes to Islamism, Islamisation and anti-White racism his motto appears to be that of the three wise monkeys: “See no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil.” What had the EDL’s protest to do with cuts to wages and pensions? Nothing. Perhaps as a riposte to Smith’s inapt characterisation the EDL might wish to start singing “Hey, Hey We’re the Monkees!” on their marches? If they did so however, UAF could well start demanding a ban on Monkees show reruns and their ‘racist’ psychedelic pop. 

Martin Smith's Three 'Wise' (Brass) Monkeys

 

The EDL is coming up to the third anniversary of its foundation, and in the time it has existed it has certainly succeeded in generating media attention, which has unfortunately been almost exclusively hostile in tone. To have sustained itself for this time is thus something of a feat in itself, but it does seem that in terms of the numbers of protesters that it can get out onto the streets, the peak appears to have come and gone. A shift in focus and re-evaluation of tactics is thus required to propel it forward and to ensure that momentum is not lost. The recent protest against the sale of halal meat at a Rochdale Asda involving supporters of the EDL and other concerned members of the public seemed to be on the right tracks, although an Asda spokesman seemed perplexed by the protest and missed the point altogether. Whilst the Tommy Robinson endorsed tie-up with the British Freedom Party was backed by some EDL members, it did not win universal assent, and although it appears that there has been some crossover in personnel in recent months with a number of EDL joining the BFP and contributing towards its organisational structure, the two organisations remain very much separate entities, which is probably right for both of them.

Returning to yesterday’s demonstration in Leicester, the main speaker was leading EDL member Kevin Carroll. However, from what can be seen in the video of his speech below, for some reason he chose not to focus upon anti-White racism, but instead upon sending a message of support to British forces in Afghanistan and directing criticism at the Government for cuts to military expenditure that have left us without an aircraft carrier. David Cameron was singled out for personal criticism for  “dismantling our armed forces whilst we’re at war.” Although valid points in themselves, it seems odd that this occasion was chosen to make them. As indicated earlier, the EDL needs to be more focused with respect to its campaigning. Tomorrow’s EDL demonstration in Liverpool appears to be an example of this more specific approach, one which could help in winning the movement a more sympathetic hearing from the public. The EDL states:

On Monday 6th February eleven men will appear at Liverpool Crown Court charged with operating a child sex ring.The men, from Rochdale, Greater Manchester, targeted exclusively local white girls in what is becoming an all-too-familiar pattern.

Shockingly, an anti-English hate group calling itself ‘Liverpool anti-fascists’ is planning to counter-protest against the EDL tomorrow. It shares the anti-democratic inclinations of the trades union funded UAF, Searchlight and Hope Not Hate, that together function as the semi-official enforcers of Britain's contemporary controlled 'democracy', in which certain topics that threaten to reveal the truth about the diversity dogma are deemed taboo. The EDL is breaking such taboos, which is why its supporters and activists have been targeted by these groups. I wish its supporters in Liverpool a peaceful and successful demonstration tomorrow. 

Andrew Brons – a Man of Integrity

Quite justifiably, Andrew Brons yesterday responded to his critics in the form of a short piece sarcastically entitled ‘Sorry for Working so Hard; I’ll Try to Do Less Well’. Apparently, fulfilling his duties as an exemplary MEP has been adjudged by some rather less successful and carping figures who term themselves nationalists, to be a dereliction of his duty, and to contravene the cause of advancing British nationalism. This criticism is of course without merit. 

What is also notable, following the recent recommendation by Roger Bennett of the Brent Group that supporters of the BNP Ideas camp should move to the British Freedom Party, is that Brons is now being courted by both the BFP and, as of this evening, Paul Golding of Britain First. Both the BFP and Britain First are in my opinion being precipitate, but their eagerness to court Brons indicates the respect and influence that he rightly commands amongst British nationalist activists. Brons should hold firm to the course that he has set, and allow his plans to be revealed in the coming week. There exists, clearly, an apprehension within the leaderships of both the BFP and Britain First, that Brons may not endorse them, and will instead favour their primary rival, or something else altogether.

The scramble for BNP Ideas activists appears rather undignified. Golding’s piece is particularly ill humoured, and betrays the peculiar obsession of Britain First with what it terms “militant homosexuality” and “Zionism”. “Yes”, I hear you say by way of assent, “the British public has been crying out for these issues to be addressed! Oh, if only there were a party that made dealing with “militant homosexuality” and “Zionism” a central plank of its policy platform we’d go out and vote for it tomorrow!” There’d be a landslide victory, wouldn’t there?! Well, quantum physics does posit the existence of multiple universes, so I daresay that this tack might work in one of them, but it’s certainly not this one. Anyway, I shall serve up a few nuggets (more akin to the chicken than the golden variety) taken from Golding’s ‘message’ this evening:

“We now see the final machinations by the euro gravy-train blood-suckers that surround the well-meaning Andrew Brons, as they prepare him for their departure into the internet-only, miniature British Freedom Party (BFP).

Most have already stabbed Andrew in the back and departed, and some are getting ready to go.”

“Andrew is a good man who bravely took on the Griffin/Harrington gang but has now, sadly, lost the momentum that so many good people were relying on.

With the departure of the Brent Group into what can only be described as a homosexual-ridden, multicultural, Zionist micro-party, this tells us, and many other nationalists, including you, Mr Brons, what a lucky escape we all just had.

Imagine if your calls for unity had come to fruition when the recently departed political whores were still in with you Andrew?

We would all have been duped and open to contracting the disease of multicultural, “inclusive nationalism”, compounded with aserious dose of Zionism and militant homosexuality.”

Strangely, perhaps tellingly, when I last looked at Golding's article on the British Resistance site it had attracted 22 comments. Precisely what these comments were I couldn't say, for unlike those attached to all other articles, they could not be accessed. Something tells me that the feedback contained in these comments is thus in all likelihood not complimentary and was neither to his liking nor to that of the site's host 'Green Arrow' (Paul Morris). If you left a comment there that can no longer be accessed, please feel free to post it here, as I will not delete it [since this was written the comments section has once again become accessible and those that have been published are not altogether supportive of Golding, which is notable given that only selected comments are published. How many, if any, were rejected?] .

Whilst gratifying to see that Brons is honoured by Golding, it does strike me as rather rich that he describes the BFP as a “micro-party”. If that is the case, should Britain First and its offshoot the National People’s Party not be termed a “nano-party”, for just as three weeks ago, Britain First’s website remains ranked behind that of the BFP, with their positions in the UK today being 13,240^th and 10,914^th  respectively? Both have slipped in the rankings since 9^th January and, more importantly, still lag behind the popularity of BNP Ideas, which irrespective of a recent hiatus in posting comes in as the 9,084^th most popular site in the UK. Andrew Brons, despite not currently leading a party of his own, should thus rightly be adjudged to be more influential than either the BFP or Britain First. Brons is effectively in a position akin to that of kingmaker, which accounts for the attention that he is being paid by the two would-be successors to the BNP.

Turning to the BFP, Peter Stafford has of late been attempting to curry favour in the comments section of the BNP Ideas website, whereas George Whale has here donned a somewhat ‘regal’ (denoting royalty or a brand of cigarettes?) demeanour in his rubbishing of ‘Jurassic swamp’ nationalism as he believes is exemplified by the person of John Bean. Well, the Whale may well have swum out of the swamp, but the being that taps away at this keyboard lives firmly in the age of mammals, and has a singular aversion to both fully and semi-aquatic environments. I prefer to keep my feet upon terra firma. Who then, would the Jonah be upon the good ship of the BFP?  

 Jonah and the Whale (Gustave Dore) 

Whale’s decision to comment upon my piece on John Bean and the Brent Group and the forthcoming development to which it alludes, reveals a sense of unease and a desperate wish to get those at BNP Ideas to jump ship before the news is revealed. I will not pretend that I am privy to what this development will be, but I recommend that people be circumspect, and reserve judgement upon their most appropriate option for affiliation until at least next week. If something should not be forthcoming, then there are some of us who are already giving consideration to what will need to come next, for I can see - which means that any member of the public will be able to see – a number of significant flaws with the course being set by the BFP.

Now, given that nationalism is in a state of flux, we have an ideal opportunity to ensure that whatever objectives, strategy and tactics are forged, are best adapted to our current situation and what is to come in the next few years. This provides us with a chance to make a breakthrough. If we set off down the wrong track now, diverted from our central course by certain overlapping issues and interests, our cause is more or less finished. Contrary to the beliefs of a certain Dr Whale, this Dr knows that the solution lies not only outside of the Jurassic, but outside of the Cretaceous too.

Cycling enthusiasts ought to take rather more care when trying to keep their appointments.

John Bean and the Brent Group’s Endorsement of the British Freedom Party

The Brent Group, led by Roger Bennett, was the skeleton around which the concept of a ‘BNP Parallel Party Structure’ was taking shape, as Andrew Brons and the BNP Ideas group deliberated over how to find a way out of the impasse created by Nick Griffin’s corrupt stranglehold on the BNP. Ultimately, most supporters of the BNP Ideas faction and the Brent Group were of the opinion that a new nationalist party would be formed, but when Andrew Brons instead announced the formation of the Centre for Democratic Nationalism, this caused mixed reactions and exasperation on the part of many members who had wanted in effect a new ethnonationalist party. This week however, Roger Bennett decided to throw in his lot with one of the small nationalist parties seeking to mop up the activists and support base of the ailing BNP: the British Freedom Party. The following excerpt taken from the Brent Group’s site explains the reasoning underpinning his decision:

"We need a party for the 21st. century and not one rooted in the early 20th. century. A party promoting the principles in we believe, but in a moderate and intelligent manner. With leaders of integrity and no previous bad past history so easily used against a party by our enemies and hostile press. Leaders that can give intelligent and educated interviews, and will win media support.

The only option now is to combine with an existing party that has the policies, organisation and principles we can support. A party that is truly democratic, with officers elected and not appointed, a party run for the members in an open manner.  After closely reviewing all options, only one party fits our criterion, The British Freedom Party.

My proposal to you is to join and support the British Freedom Party."

This statement has caused some surprise, with a mixture of reactions being present in the comment thread to the article on the BNP Ideas site reporting this move. BNP Ideas itself has adopted a neutral tone, in line with the principles of the Centre for Democratic Nationalism which seeks to act as a unifying hub for nationalists in Britain:

“Speaking to BNP Ideas after his announcement yesterday, Mr Bennett said that his decision, announced in an email circular sent to thosewho had specifically joined the Brent Group (and not to those who registered with BNP Ideas through this site’s contact form) was a recommendation based on his personal decision and should not be ipso facto taken as official endorsement from BNP Ideas.”

How many supporters of the Brent Group will take Roger Bennett’s advice? It is clear that some certainly will follow him into the British Freedom Party, but a comment left by veteran British Nationalist John Bean struck me as very interesting, and potentially portending a significant announcement:

“It is a pity that the Brent Group could not have waited another two weeks before deciding to wind down the organisation. As I see it the problem with the miniature parties trawling for new members, including former BNP members, is that their policies are ultra-nationalist. Despite a few passing expressions of support to fellow nationalists on the Continent (certainly from British Freedom) they want no connections with the European mainland whether through trade agreements or military pacts to increase the effectiveness of our common defence.

My views have previously been aired on this site for replacing the EU with a European Confederation of sovereign states in order to guarantee our present major export markets, AND to tackle the biological threat of the eventual elimination of the heart of the white world. Any so-called nationalist party will not get my support on the latter unless it can say that it aims to halt all further Afro-Asian immigration. To talk of “strict controls” or “welcoming a few non-European members” is only playing for time and not solving the disaster that faces our grandchildren. Having read some of his blogs I suspect that Paul Weston is aware of the significance of this.”

It is the opening line of Bean’s comment that struck me: “It is a pity that the Brent Group could not have waited another two weeks before deciding to wind down the organisation.” Why, unless a significant announcement is to be made with respect to the organisation – or proposed organisation - of nationalist politics in Britain today, would he have written this? It suggests that whatever is to be revealed within the next fortnight will prove to be a good political fit with the principles and ideology underpinning the Brent Group; a better fit indeed, than the British Freedom Party.  

Bean’s views with respect to our European neighbours are, in my opinion, worthy of serious consideration, and represent a saner response to contemporary geopolitical realities than Atlanticism. To an extent, they overlap with Guillaume Faye’s Archeofuturist vision of a Euro-Siberian Confederation comprised of ethno-cultural units which in many instances – such as in the cases of Brittany and Padania – would be smaller than our existing nation-states. This model of ethno-cultural devolution within a wider confederation of sovereign states, collaborating in key areas of trade, defence and hi-tech manufacturing and research on behalf of the interests of the native peoples of Europe, possesses a certain appeal, particularly when considering the nature of our external threats, actual and potential. I support Bean’s reservations with respect to the British Freedom Party on this matter. 

John Bean: European Confederation of Sovereign States

Looking further out into cyberspace, peering into the reactions within the nationalist blogosphere that used to be united behind the BNP, responses to Bennett’s BFP endorsement have been mixed, ranging from the equivocal (Northants Patriot) to outright opposition (New Leadership). Other notable nationalist sites have so far failed to pass comment. These include: Sarah Maid of Albion; Wigan Patriot; Southwest Nationalists (however, the Southwest Nationalists blog does display banners promoting Britain First, the BNP and BNP Ideas) and Eddy Butler. Butler has of course thrown his weight fully behind the English Democrats, but his opinions on nationalist politics are often worth reading, and it strikes me as highly likely that he will write a piece on this move. As for the piece covering this issue on the Northants Patriot blog, the author made some salient points with respect to the BFP’s tie-up with the EDL:

“I am sure the BFP have the right intentions, my only doubt is with the links this party is said to have with the English Defence League. If these links are true, any trouble associated with the EDL, whether they are blameless or not, will be used to hit the fledgling BFP with. Personally, I will continue to reserve judgement on joining, but will continue to work with any party furthering the cause of both English and British Nationalism.”

Well, there are such links, and Tommy Robinson/Stephen Lennon does of course endorse the BFP, but the EDL rank and file are far from united behind Weston’s party, often voicing support for UKIP instead. This is despite the latter party’s unwillingness to recognise Islamisation as a problem, which is why Weston left UKIP in the first place. Although it may provide the BFP with a boost in the short term, it is true that the link between the two could backfire on the BFP in the long run should it begin to attract a couple of percentage points in the polls. UAF, Searchlight and Hope Not Hate are of course already honing their arguments against what they have termed the “fluffy fascists” of the BFP, and busy peddling the line that the EDL are the new 'blackshirts'. So, if you are a supporter of the Brent Group, what are your thoughts? Will you wait for a fortnight, or have you decided to join the British Freedom Party? Strangely, at the time of writing the British Freedom Party had not commented on this development.

Rally for Free Expression: One Law for All

The One Law for All (OLFA) campaign will be holding a rally for free expression in London on 11 February between 14:00 and 16:00. OLFA campaigns against the encroachment of religious laws, in particular the rapidly growing reach of Sharia within the UK, and for the observance of the principle of one secular law for all. This principle provides the necessary preconditions for freedom of thought and expression, but alas of course does not necessarily guarantee them (e.g. witness the many pieces of legislation regarding thoughtcrimes against ‘diversity’, etc).

The reason for calling this protest at this point in time is explained by its organisers Maryam Namazie and Anne Marie Walters as follows:

The call follows an increased number of attacks on free expression in the UK, including a 17 year old being forced to remove a Jesus and Mo cartoon or face expulsion from his Sixth Form College and demands by the UCL Union that the Atheist society remove a Jesus and Mo cartoon from its Facebook page. It also follows threats of violence, police being called, and the cancellation of a meeting at Queen Mary College where One Law for All spokesperson Anne Marie Waters was to deliver a speech on Sharia. Saying ‘Who gave these kuffar the right to speak?’, an Islamist website called for the disruption of the meeting. Two days later at the same college, though, the Islamic Society held a meeting on traditional Islam with a speaker who has called for the death of apostates, those who mock Islam, and secularist Muslims.

Indeed, the threats made against Waters and those who attended the debate were truly chilling, and unlike much of the bluster associated with militant Islamists such as Anjem Choudary, the menace on this occasion was very specific as the following excerpt from a National Secular Society report shows:

Ms Waters was due to give a talk on behalf of the One Law for All campaign on 16 January but before it started, a man entered the lecture theatre, stood at the front with a camera and filmed the audience. He then said that he knew who everyone was, where they lived and if he heard anything negative about the Prophet, he would track them down.

The man also filmed students in the foyer and threatened to murder them and their families. On leaving the building, he joined a large group of men, apparently there to support him. Students were told by security to stay in the lecture theatre for their own safety.

The President of Queen Mary's Atheism, Secularism and Humanism Society, who organised the event said: "This event was supposed to be an opportunity for people of different religions and perspectives to debate, at a university that is supposed to be a beacon of free speech and debate.

What I would like to know is this: what have the police done since this incident to track down the man who made the threats and ascertain the identities of his supporters? Furthermore, is it not rather telling that there has not been a word of condemnation of this act from the so-called ‘anti-fascists’ of UAF, Searchlight and Hope Not Hate? All of them are in essence anti-English campaign organisations which push for restrictions upon freedom of thought, expression and political association, thus they are quite happy for Islamists to close down debate, threaten liberties and life and limb. Islamists and the authoritarian Left have much in common.

We must be eternally vigilant against those who would take it upon themselves to act as censor, and thereby to assume the role of arbiter over what may be expressed, and what may not. It was therefore of some surprise when the British Freedom Party recently declared its “20 Point Plan” which started well enough by stating that it wished to “Introduce a US style First Amendment guaranteeing Free Speech” but then went on to state in point number 15 that it would “Tighten regulations on the sexual/violent content of TV, films and games”. This does seem to be somewhat inconsistent. As Cygnus (a regular reader of this blog) noted, we already have a significant amount of legislation dealing with these matters, and it is the failure to observe the letter of the law when say selling violent computer games to children younger than the stipulated age, that causes problems. As for adults, they should be able to view, read and play what they wish.

There was an earlier Rally for Free Expression organised by Peter Risdon which was held in Trafalgar Square on 25 March 2006. This was poorly attended but attracted a large number of police with surveillance equipment. Everyone who participated on the day was filmed and photographed. Its detractors dubbed it ‘Islamophobic’, ‘far-right’ and ‘racist’: the standard stigmatising verbal repertoire of those unable to justify and defend their position through reason. How well attended will the OLFA equivalent be, and what will its opponents and the so-called anti-fascists say of it? Will it be opposed by militant Islamists as has happened in the past when a group of "Allahu-Akbar!" chanting protestors turned up marching with UAF placards in hand (video here)? Will the media give it any support? Unfortunately, I suspect that the NUJ will attempt to overlook this rather uncomfortable protest, for it highlights the ugly reality of one of the problems spawned by cultural relativist multiculturalism in the UK today. As such, it breaches one of the great official taboos of our current age.

MPACUK: Not keen on the EDL

Hardly a surprise, given that the stated mission of the Muslim Public Affairs Committee is to increase the power, influence and voice of the Ummah in the UK. Why however, they should not understand that a people in their own homeland – the English in England – should wish to resist Islamisation, is a question that should perhaps be answered by a psychiatrist, for it is not a logical position. Islam is not part of English identity and is incompatible with it, unlike for example Druidry, Wicca, agnosticism, atheism and Christianity. It is so incompatible, that any native who converts effectively renounces their ethnicity and declares themselves in opposition to the interests of their kith and kin. Thankfully, some who convert are bound to later realise the error of their ways and see their digression as either an aspect of youthful folly or as behaviour characteristic of a vulnerable interlude in their lives when they lost their sense of self-respect. 

Anyway, returning to MPACUK: what has been discomfiting its supporters of late? On their site I stumbled upon the following extracts taken from a piece entitled ‘Silence Isn’t Golden’ (I wonder if they think that ‘The Tremeloes’ are haram?):

In the latest news, the so-called English Defence League has set its eyes on areas which it has previously not marched at, such as Walsall and Bristol. To add insult to injury, they now have a formal political voice, via an agreement with the British Freedom Party. The BFP is also Islamophobic and the resources on their site point to the usual Islamophobic propaganda, as used and encouraged by terrorist Anders Breivik and their ilk.

It is pathetic that the most of our mosques ever seem to do is to tell people to stay in their homes and to not go out onto the streets. Furthermore, they tell the Muslims that to engage with the EDL thugs is mindless and pathetic. However, what many of them fail to realise is that when we go inside our homes, they will come knocking on our homes and destroy them. They have absolutely no dignity for any buildings in which Muslims are occupants as demonstrated by their recent march outside East London Mosque. 

I too find it an ‘insult’ that marches by the EDL are nowadays required to highlight Islamisation in Walsall and Bristol, for it is depressing that Islam has put down roots in these corners of England. Bristol apparently now has a sizable Somali colony. What benefits could possibly accrue from poor old Bristol acquiring a population of some 15,000 Somalis? Narcotics abusers who are keen on khat might find their presence a welcome addition, but who else I ask, other than anti-White Anglophobes? 

The BFP, particularly of late, may have adopted a somewhat Neocon tone, but it is rather hysterical or cynical (perhaps both) for MPACUK to seek to associate it with the name of Breivik. If the party was of the same ilk as Breivik after all, I would be extremely worried, for Breivik chose to massacre not Muslims, but native Norwegians.

It is telling that the author of this particular MPACUK article thinks that some mosque leaderships are “pathetic” for telling “people to stay in their homes and to not go out onto the streets.” This suggests that this individual has been picking up bad political habits from anti-English campaign group UAF and their SWP controllers, such as making slanderous allegations about the violent intent of EDL protestors. The writer has evidently been spooked by SWP propaganda, which serves to illustrate the highly destabilising and dangerous role that the Trotskyist Left plays in Britain today. It seems eminently sensible to me that the mosque elders he has chosen to chastise recommend that demonstrations should not be met with counterdemonstrations, for such occasions are bound to become overheated, particularly when the agents provocateurs of the SWP are present. The latter lust for violence, and clearly and willingly incite it.

Laughably, multiculturalist convert Boris Johnson is described as “Islamophobic”, but the author concludes their fearful piece in calling for Muslims to vote for Ken Livingstone in the next London mayoral elections. Well, at least on this count the author is correct: Ken will be a compliant dhimmi.

Ultimately, this MPACUK piece, as well as the existence of MPACUK itself, reminds us that we do have a problem with imperialist Islam in our country today. However, tempting as it may be, it would be myopic and not overly productive for a political party to become overly fixated upon attacking this manifestation of our multiculturalist malaise. The growth of Islamic militancy and of the population that gives it succour is a symptom of the globalist outlook of our political class and the associated policies that have been imposed upon us. The issue of Islamisation could be dealt with readily and peacefully enough should the political will be present. Thus it falls to us to discredit and remove the ideology of globalism, replacing it with a democratic nationalism in which the economy is made to serve our people, and not our people an unaccountable global market ruled over by transnational financiers. 

Not an organisation that I would care to endorse

Left redirects Flak towards British Freedom Party and English Democrats

There is a perceptive line in Oscar Wilde’s novel 'The Picture of Dorian Gray' that has rightly entered public consciousness, the validity of which pertains particularly to politicians and political parties: “there is only one thing in the world worse than being talked about, and that is not being talked about.” For Nick Griffin’s BNP, its longstanding opponents are falling silent about the party, not because they have given up their ‘struggle’ against nationalism, but because they think that the party is no longer worthy of their attention owing to its growing insignificance. In this evaluation they are correct. Unfortunately however, many who are new to nationalist politics will undoubtedly have been gulled into joining the wreck that is the contemporary BNP and parting with their money in the mistaken belief that it is something that it is not: a credible nationalist party. For those still unaware of the fact, be warned that the BNP is now a moneymaking enterprise for Nick Griffin staffed in its upper echelons by incompetent and morally dubious cronies.

The devil finds work for idle hands to do, and as a means of continuing to justify their existence the self-styled ‘anti-fascists’ have, as foreseen, broadened their definitions of ‘fascism’ and ‘racism’ ever further so as to create fresh foes that must in their eyes be combated and slain. The first of these that they chose to latch onto once it was clear that the BNP had entered its death spiral was the EDL. However, so large has the network of ‘anti-fascist’ organisations and campaigns grown, that the professional ‘anti-fascists’ in their employ have found that the EDL hasn’t been providing them with enough work, so they’ve invented some new ‘fascist’ and ‘racist’ threats that must be dealt with. Thus of late they have cast around and begun to lash out at the British Freedom Party and the English Democrats, thereby demonstrating that merely possessing and standing up for the idea that there may be a British or an English people is to the ‘anti-fascists’ synonymous with ‘fascism’ and ‘racism’, which is of course, nonsense on stilts.

As can be seen from the excerpts below taken from an SWP report on their annual conference earlier this month, the Trotyskists never relent in their shrill campaign of anti-democratic hysteria directed not only at nationalist organisations and supporters, but also at ordinary British people wanting to protect their jobs.

"The far right is growing across Europe. Britain has bucked the trend as both the BNP and the EDL have seen serious setbacks.

Weyman [Bennett] added, “Imagine the situation now if we hadn’t challenged them.”

The threat has not gone away. The new British Freedom Party unites elements from the EDL, the BNP and Ukip. The coming Unite Against Fascism conference is a chance to revitalise the movement in 2012."

The SWP’s hatred of ordinary British people and its desire to subvert their living standards and deprive them of jobs was clearly and unapologetically articulated by a delegate named Rhetta:

"Rhetta said that on N30 protests in Manchester some demonstrators supported calls for British jobs for British workers “We need to be deeply embedded in the class to challenge these attitudes,” she said."

For the British Freedom Party, the SWP focus upon them as their new target for anathematisation and annihilation should be seen as both worrying and encouraging, for it would seem to suggest that the Trotskyists view it as the party most likely to grow and exert popular appeal in the wake of the implosion of the Griffinite BNP.

In a separate article penned by Anthony Painter on the Labour List site, attention was turned to the (potential) growth of English nationalism, with the flak on this occasion being directed not at the BFP, but at the English Democrats who have been bracketed alongside the BNP and the EDL.

“One of the tragedies of recent years has been the way in which vile extremists including the BNP, the EDL, and the English Democrats have been able to latch onto anger and alienation and expressed them through a corrupted notion of Englishness. Nothing is more un-English than hate and extremism.”

Note the casual use of the term “vile extremists”. Painter does not elucidate what it is that is “vile” about them, or what is “extreme”. These words have been employed not to describe or to analyse what these groups represent, but merely to elicit a reflexive sense of revulsion in his readers based upon emotion rather than logic. In this way, Painter seeks to reinforce the in-group sentiment of his Labour readership and reaffirm emotional commitment to the redundant political approach of the party he supports. Labour-supporting readers of Labour List, already primed for their Two Minutes Hate when presented with the necessary verbal or visual cues, thus give vent to their repressed anger, directing it towards the EDL and English Democrats. Paradoxically, such officially sanctioned objects of Labour hate represent the true democratic and grassroots expression of the values that the early Labour Party largely embodied but abandoned many decades ago.

What have the EDL, English Democrats and British Freedom Party done to merit such opprobrium? Did they create the predatory Islamic colonies that have sprung up across England? Are they responsible for the democratic deficit exemplified by a cosy consensus amongst the Westminster parties that offers electors no real choice? Are they responsible for our country’s deindustrialisation, mass unemployment, runaway population growth and attendant housing shortage? Do they advocate globalisation and its concomitant loss of sovereignty and economic crisis? Do they call for an end to free speech and the anathematisation of their political opponents? No, they do not. The Labour Party however, cannot be absolved of any of the aforementioned, for it has been eagerly complicit in all of them. Who then are the real ‘extremists’? Who are the genuine enemies of democracy? If you are an English Labour supporter, can you not see that you are being duped and manipulated by people who care nothing for you, and who do not have your interests at heart?

The fact that the SWP, UAF and the Labour Party are now turning upon the British Freedom Party and the English Democrats illustrates that both are seen as possessing the potential for real political growth. That the anti-nationalists (for that is what the so-called 'anti-fascists' really are) at least purport to be alarmed at the emergence of these two parties is encouraging, but ultimately we require a single nationalist party to ensure success. Meanwhile, supporters of UAF are today going about their usual business of being a vociferous and potentially violent nuisance on our streets, targeting an EDL demonstration in Barking.

Dorian Gray or Father Jack Hackett?

British Nationalism on the Web: Who's up and Who's down

As mainstream media outlets are intrinsically inimical towards nationalism it is not surprising that the Internet has become the medium through which nationalists have in recent years sought to propagate their message and to establish channels of communication with others of a similar outlook. To members of the public at large who do not take it upon themselves to investigate this area of politics beyond reading what is printed in the press or broadcast on the airwaves, ‘nationalism’ in the contemporary United Kingdom is associated with two parties only: the BNP and UKIP, although the latter would not primarily define itself as a nationalist party. At the level of local media, the English Democrats have received minimal and fleeting coverage, but the other micro-parties that would seek to assume the mantle of nationalism are practically invisible. The British Freedom Party evinced momentary media interest when Tommy Robinson announced the EDL’s tie-up with the former, but since then, it has slipped from public purview back into the nationalist mists.

Nick Griffin’s catastrophic mismanagement of the BNP has reduced the party from a position in which it was on the verge of achieving an electoral breakthrough, to one in which it is caught in a terminal tailspin. This is well-known both in nationalist and anti-nationalist circles, but not to the general public, which is why opinion polls keep citing a residual 2% of respondents as intending to vote BNP at the next election. This of course does not in reality represent support for Griffin’s corrupt machine, but for the idea of a democratic British ethno-nationalist party. Nonetheless, it is to the world of British and English nationalism that I turn my attention in this piece, and to the relative visibility and strengths of the different contenders for the nationalist crown. The BNP is dead, long live . . . which party exactly?

Before looking at the statistics associated with the smaller contenders for the nationalist crown (taken from Alexa Rankings on 9th January 2012), it is worth bearing in mind that despite its many troubles the BNP website commands a very respectable amount of traffic allowing it to clock in as the 2023rd most popular in the UK. Likewise, it has a considerable Facebook following, with some 78,437 followers. Although far more successful electorally and possessing much greater media coverage and financial muscle than the BNP, UKIP’s presence on the internet is by contrast rather modest, with its party site clocking in as the 17,345th most popular in the UK and its Facebook page commanding a paltry 2,111 followers. Given the high average age of UKIP supporters though, this shouldn’t perhaps be such a great surprise.

Although not a political party, the EDL has been rightly trumpeted as the most successful nationalistically-inclined grassroots movement to have emerged in recent decades. It therefore seems fitting to include statistics relating to its web presence given this popularity and its wider influence on the nationalist scene. Its website attracts a significant amount of traffic, more than UKIP’s in fact, clocking in at number 12,064 in the UK and 234,946 globally, whilst its Facebook page has 27,111 followers. However, when considering the EDL’s presence on Facebook, it should be borne in mind that previous pages have been hacked and rendered defunct on more than one occasion, so it is possible that had this not happened the total would now be considerably higher. Clearly though, as with all nationalist sites, it will also be attracting visits from its opponents as well as from its supporters. Its high hit rate could thus also be an indication of the EDL’s unpopularity. There are also a number of Facebook pages associated with the EDL’s divisional structure which are in themselves popular, such as Leicester that boasted 3,123 followers when I last checked the statistics.

Another significant factor to consider when looking at the popularity of the EDL is Tommy Robinson’s recent endorsement of the British Freedom Party. Although both he and the BFP leadership anticipated that this would lead to a sizeable segment of the EDL’s membership lending its support to the party, debate on the EDL Forum indicates that opinion on this alliance is far from united, with a majority of those expressing their views on this subject backing UKIP rather than the BFP. It would take something significant on the part of the BFP to change this preference. Nonetheless, since the party’s relaunch last November its web traffic has received a noteworthy fillip, edging slightly ahead of the EDL clocking in at 9,666th in the UK and 223,423rd globally.

In contrast, traffic to the BNP Ideas site – attracting contributions and support from the thoughtful and democratic members (or recent ex-members) of the party outside of the Griffin clique – is higher in the UK at 7,645 but lower globally coming in at 239,166th position. Nonetheless, it strikes me as preferable for a British nationalist site to seek to attract most of its traffic from within the UK rather than from without. Quite what will happen to BNP Ideas now that Andrew Brons has announced the formation of the Centre for Democratic Nationalism and the abandonment of the idea of setting up another ethnonationalist party remains to be seen. According to Brons “The primary aimof the Centre for Democratic Nationalism will be to facilitate the emergence of a united British Nationalist Movement.” The only party to have affiliated to it thus far is The Democratic Nationalists, and it is clear that this recent announcement has driven traffic to the party’s rather basic website taking it to 74,025th position in the UK. 

Another party to have emerged from a BNP breakaway is the Freedom Democrats formed from expelled members of the BFP. Despite claims by the Freedom Democrats to be the true British equivalent of the European freedom parties and to enjoy positive relations with its continental counterparts, the figures do not seem to lend this assertion credibility. The Freedom Democrats website doesn’t possess a UK Alexa traffic ranking, but clocks in at 24,336,810th globally, and its Facebook page features 16 ‘friends’. Evidently, the party is a non-starter and has less political clout than my blog, which isn’t saying much. Its members, if they wish to be involved in politics, would be advised to stand as independents or to join another party. Despite what some disaffected BNP members may mutter, the National Front is effectively dead, commanding no UK traffic ranking and a global position of 3,006,831. Its Facebook page boasts 457 friends.

Although having some electoral representation – including the Mayor of Doncaster – the English Democrats possess a modest web presence, despite their recent website revamp which has left it looking far more appealing and professional. At the time of writing, the EDs’ website ranked at 1,540,656th globally, a little behind my blog which enjoyed a ranking of 1,508,640th globally and 85,579th in the UK. The EDs are certainly ahead of Durotrigan on Facebook though, for Durotrigan has no Facebook presence; in fact, they score relatively well with 6,149 ‘friends’, coming in ahead both of UKIP and the BFP.

Lastly, turning to Britain First (I couldn’t find a site for its spinoff National People’s Party) championed by the Green Arrow, I was surprised to see that despite the trumpeting their internet presence appears to be weaker than the BFP, BNP Ideas and the EDL. UKIP manages to outstrip them on Facebook, but not in terms of its British traffic. The figures for the Britain First website are 13,524th in the UK and 352,736th globally; Facebook – 1,170 followers.


Conclusions
What does all of this say about the different nationalist parties, factions and movements operating in Britain today? Evidently, it serves to underscore the seriously fragmented nature of the nationalist scene, and the possibility that any one of a number of what could be termed “post-BNP parties”could emerge to eclipse the BNP. Will it be whatever might emerge from the Brons plan with his Centre for Democratic Nationalism? Will it be Paul Weston’s BFP, or the English Democrats or Britain First/National People’s Party? What implications could Scottish independence have for the whole of the nationalist spectrum?

Evidently, UKIP will for the foreseeable future continue to be the most publicly visible and least pilloried of the parties and movements mentioned above, but it remains an Atlanticist Tory party rather than a nationalist party, and thus whilst a UKIP administration would be less damaging than any put in place by the current big three in British politics, it is not what we need in the long run to turn our country around. We need a single credible and viable party to emerge in the very near future and for nationalists to agree to unite around whichever vehicle it may be. Time is growing short. Websites, blogs and general internet activism will have their role to play, but this is only part of the story if a viable nationalist politics is to be born in our country. Some bloggers/website contributors have already taken their views to the comment threads on major national newspapers such as the Daily Telegraph so as to attempt to sneak nationalist views past the moderators, and in some instances, this appears to be enjoying some success. Will it work? If we don’t try, we won’t know.

A later post will look at the internet presence of the major campaigning foes of nationalist parties and politics, and I am sure that you’ll be pleasantly surprised to learn that in terms of traffic, the nationalists appear to be winning. However, given that the web is the only place where a nationalist position is freely articulated this should not be a surprise, for those of a multiculturalist pro-mass immigration bent have plenty of mainstream media organs, as well as political parties, advocating and pushing their message in every sphere of life. 

An interesting Year

It cannot be denied that it’s been an interesting year politically and economically. Indeed, it’s also been rather revelatory astronomically, given that the Kepler Space Telescope has discovered distant alien worlds of a similar size to Earth, with it only being a matter of time before somewhere is found of the right dimensions and composition orbiting its parent star at the correct distance for life to potentially thrive. Who knows, they may find somewhere even more pleasant than Peckham. I hope so.

Unfortunately, interesting times in politics and economics are rarely comfortable ones, and it could well prove to be the case that 2012 will be as interesting if not more so than 2011. As the year is drawing to a close, the time has come to take my annual festive break and enjoy good company, food and drink: the true meaning of Christmas. The time away from the keyboard will also hopefully remove the threat of developing carpal tunnel syndrome, at least for the time being. Thursday’s Solstice will soon be upon us, swiftly followed by Christmas and the New Year (all good excuses for celebration), so before leaving you with a contemporary (well, when I say “contemporary” I mean 1970s) pagan Christmas carol, perhaps you might appreciate some of the following amongst this year’s articles that you may have missed.

Mediaeval Mummers

 

What do you think may have been the topic that attracted the most interest from this blog’s readers in 2011? The August riots? The EDL leadership announcing its support of the British Freedom Party? The Emma West affair? Well, popular as these topics proved to be, it was actually a piece that dwelt upon what is the most perennial pressing concern about which the British obsess (no, it’s neither the economy nor sex). Can you guess what it is? Why, the weather of course! As of today the piece UK Winter Forecast 2011-2012: Blowing Hot and Cold had attracted an astonishing 4,147 page views. Now, regular readers will know that I wouldn’t simply write something about weather forecasting without looking at some of the wider political issues that it raises, so if you should be one of the few who has not cast your eye over it, you may wish to do so (unless you’re not British of course, in which case you may be baffled as to why this may be of any interest whatsoever).

On a more humorous note, some strange creatures have been spotted in northern England over the past year, one of which was captured on camera in Blackburn. The other, sighted in Shepley near Huddersfield, proved to be even more mysterious, and may represent a contemporary manifestation of something that has roots stretching back many hundreds of years.

The ethno-demographic changes in our society are well documented and proceeding at a startling speed, prompting some unexpected well-known voices to comment upon their sense of alienation from what contemporary England, particularly London, has become. Bradford witnessed a particularly unpleasant incident relating to this very phenomenon in September. Events further afield have had and will have consequences for our country, and yet despite the evidence of social and economic tensions caused by the mass immigration of culturally incompatible peoples, our Government and the EU are intent upon more of the same. In the long run therefore, the Arab Spring could well presage a European Winter, insofar as the continent’s peoples could be demographically overwhelmed by those from the predominantly Islamic Euromed countries. Islamisation of course, is not something unique to the member nations of the EU, but alas is also affecting other countries such as Russia, where in September this year parts of central Moscow were brought to a standstill by tens of thousands of Muslims praying in the streets.

Well, I do not wish to end on a negative note, and therefore wish all readers a very Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, and for those who prefer their midwinter celebrations to possess some rather older pre-Christian roots, I include the following song by Jethro Tull: Ring out Solstice Bells. Blogging will resume in early January 2012.