Adam Walker stays on as BNP Chairman for four more years
Those with copies of the British National Party constitution will know that there is meant to be an election for Party Chairman every four years. The last “election” – which Adam Walker won by default (as nobody else stood) – was in July 2019.
So you might have thought there would have been another election this month, as their constitution states that nominations have to be open and be prominently published on the BNP website for one week from the last Monday in June. However, those who regularly check the BNP’s dormant website will note that this did not happen.
The constitution then goes on to say that nominations close on the first Monday of July. Well we are at the end of July now, and that did not happen either!
The BNP’s website is very rarely – once a month at best – updated now, since their former webmaster quit a few years ago to file a legal suit (which failed) against Adam Walker through the civil courts. The front page is still offering BNP members (are there any left now?) support during the Covid 19 pandemic of 2020-2021. It also wishes them a “Happy St George’s Day” – from back in April, and of course asks them to donate and leave money to them in their wills!
The BNP has long since given up on political campaigning and the only point in its continued existence is to wait for two more (that we know of) legacies from elderly supporters who made their wills back in the days when the BNP was still a credible party. One member has bequeathed them their house in Greater London, which will now be worth well over one million pounds, and another in the North East of England has left them half a million from their bank account.
UKIP has now reached the BNP stage where the party only continues to exist in the expectation of legacies. But at least UKIP (unlike the BNP) are honest enough to make some sort of political effort rather than sitting waiting for the cash to roll in. The last time the BNP fought a Parliamentary election was back in December 2019.
IRA scum off our streets!
Editor’s note: The following is a report from one of our Scottish subscribers who attended the Loyalist counter-demonstration in Glasgow city centre on Sunday 23rd July.
A number of H&D subscribers were amongst a crowd of several hundred Scottish Loyalists and British Patriots who were counter-demonstrating against a pro-IRA march through Glasgow city centre on Sunday.
Around 300 hundred Irish Republicans and their supporters – including a number of SNP and Labour party members – marched through the centre of Glasgow to commemorate the 42nd anniversary of the Maze Prison hunger strikes of 1981, where ten IRA/INLA criminals starved themselves to death.
Police arrested five people altogether, including three from our side, who have been charged in connection with public order offences during the march.
The march, which was organised by the extreme left-wing Cairde na hÉireann (Friends of Ireland) group started at 2pm on Wishart Street, near the Necropolis, and was met by staunch Loyalist opposition right from the start.
Cairde na hÉireann was formed as a split from the West of Scotland Band Alliance (WoSBA) in 2004. The WoSBA supported dissident Republican groups like the Real IRA/ 32 County Sovereignty Movement, while Cairde na hÉireann stayed ‘loyal‘ to IRA/Sinn Féin. Their aim is a “32 County Socialist and a Republican United Ireland”
A statement on the group’s website about the events on Sunday read: – “Today, Cairde na hÉireann members and supporters gathered to hold our annual commemoration march to mark the 42nd anniversary of the 1981 Hunger Strike. The heroic sacrifice of the 10 H-Block Martyrs remains an inspiration to the Irish diaspora across the world and is marked accordingly wherever Irish people and their multi-generational descendents gather. Despite Police Scotland deploying an extraordinary number of personnel, several loyalists, football hooligans and neo-Nazis were allowed to throw bottles and other missiles, spit at and abuse marchers, and attempt at various times to have the commemoration stopped. In this last endeavour, they failed.
Republicans will continue to commemorate our dead and generation-defining events such as the Hunger Strike and no amount of abuse, threats or violence will deter us.
Cairde na hÉireann thank everyone who attended today, particularly for their dignified restraint under severe provocation.”
The march met further Loyalist resistance as it headed along John Knox Street onto Duke Street and down High Street before turning into Ingram Street in the Merchant City.
As the Republican march went towards Queen Street and George Square Loyalist counter-demonstrators were kettled in outside a pub by Police Scotland. Then onto St Vincent Street where another group of Loyalists were waiting for them.
Chief Superintendent Mark Sutherland, Divisional Commander for Greater Glasgow, who allowed the pro-IRA march to take place said: “Five people have been arrested and charged in connection with public order offences following a planned procession, and counter-protest, in Glasgow City Centre on Sunday, 23 July 2023. “They are expected to appear at court at a later date and reports will be submitted to the Procurator Fiscal. “Officers acted swiftly to prevent escalation and disperse those intent on causing significant disruption to the public in the George Square and St Vincent Street areas.”
H&D salutes all those Loyalists who attended the counter-demonstrators in Glasgow on Sunday. The IRA and their left-wing supporters must be opposed every time they venture onto the King’s Highway. No Surrender!
Deadlock in Spanish election as ‘right-wing’ Vox stumbles
During the past fortnight British media coverage of the Spanish general election has verged on hysteria as journalists and politicians (including former Prime Minister Gordon Brown) recycled the tired ‘anti-fascist’ rhetoric of Spain’s Civil War era. Many on the British left are eager to revive memories of that era, since they are dimly aware that unlike today’s ‘socialists’, their fathers and grandfathers actually believed in something.
The conservative Daily Mail ran a scaremongering article that associated today’s Vox party with 1930s nationalism, and even mangled nationalist history by conflating the reactionary caudillo Francisco Franco with the radical Falange.
The reason for all this hysteria was that Vox – a party that the media likes to portray as ‘far right’ – seemed likely to be the power-broker putting the conservative Partido Popular (PP) into government.
In the September issue of H&D, our correspondent Isabel Peralta will explain the true nature of Vox and the true crisis of Spanish ‘democracy’, in the context of yesterday’s election results and the inevitable post-election horse-trading.
But in this initial report we simply look at the results.
Vox polled 12.4% (down from 15.1% at the previous election in 2019) and lost 19 of its previous 52 seats in the Congress of Deputies. The conservative PP with just over 33% of the vote (up from 20.8% at the 2019 election) won 47 extra seats and now has 136. Even if the PP struck a deal with Vox‘s 33 Congressional deputies, the combined ‘right’ would be seven short of a majority.
Spanish elections are decided on a regional party list system, similar to the one used in European parliamentary elections that led to Andrew Brons and Nick Griffin being elected as MEPs in 2009. Each of the fifty provinces elects a list of Congress seats (ranging in size from Madrid with 37, to the mountainous province of Soria with two), while the autonomous Spanish cities in North Africa – Ceuta and Melilla – have one seat each.
Whereas Vox is essentially a right-wing conservative party, there were also candidates from the tiny nationalist party FE-JONS which for electoral purposes is allied to another tiny party La Falange. They paid the price for many years of ideological confusion and poor leadership. FE-JONS contested just eleven of the 52 constituencies, and in each case their vote was below 0.1%.
Vox‘s leaders, who seem to care more about personal and factional advancement than ideological principles, will be disappointed that the election result deprives them of their longed-for role as kingmakers.
The reality is that this election was a victory for the conservative PP, but its leaders will struggle to exercise any meaningful political power. Partly because conservatism is a bankrupt ideology, but also because they would need support from both Vox and at least seven votes from regionalist parties. While in other circumstances the PP might possibly be able to buy support from the Catalan populist party Junts (who have exactly the seven seats necessary) it is inconceivable that Junts would support a government that included Vox.
The electoral arithmetic just about allows for a coalition of the left, far left, and separatists, but it’s difficult to imagine that this could last for long. Such a coalition would partly depend on Sinn Fein / IRA’s friends in the Basque party EH Bildu, whose roots are in the banned party Batasuna that acted as the political wing of the terrorist ETA.
In short: Spain is set for months of instability and possibly fresh elections in the autumn. In the September edition of H&D our correspondent Isabel Peralta will report on Madrid’s ‘democratic’ circus and the media fallacy of Vox as a ‘far right’ party.
Hindu tribal vote saves Tories in Uxbridge: civic nationalists fail again
On a generally disastrous night for Rishi Sunak’s Conservative Party, the Prime Minister was saved by his fellow Hindus from what would otherwise have been a historic hat-trick of defeats.
Two safe Tory seats were lost on massive swings – the rural West Country constituency Somerton & Frome falling to the Liberal Democrats, and the previously ultra-Tory North Yorkshire constituency of Selby & Ainsty electing a Labour MP.
But Uxbridge & South Ruislip in North West London – which should have been a much easier target for Labour – narrowly stayed Tory with a wafer-thin majority of 495 votes.
With good reason, most of the media will focus on the London Mayor’s unpopular ‘Ulez’ policy – the extension of the Ultra Low Emission Zone that imposes a fee on drivers of the most polluting vehicles. The Conservative campaign in Uxbridge focused almost entirely on this issue, even though in principle Ulez was first agreed by the Conservative London Mayor Boris Johnson in 2015. No doubt the Tories were also helped by their candidate being a local, middle-aged family man; whereas Labour brought in a young homosexual candidate from Camden (a very different part of London). However we should also note that another young homosexual candidate won a historic victory for Labour on the same day in Selby & Ainsty.
But the media will ignore another vital factor. Uxbridge & South Ruislip is 8.6% Hindu (almost five times the national average of 1.8%). Evidence from local elections since Sunak became leader has shown that Hindus have swung heavily to the Tories (evidently for tribal reasons), and many Tories have close ties to the Hindu fundamentalist government of Indian prime minister Narendra Modi. The problem for Sunak and his party is that there are not that many constituencies in the UK where Hindus are a significant electoral force. England is 6.7% Muslim but only 1.8% Hindu.
This week’s by-elections were yet another predictable disaster for civic nationalism. UKIP (now a moribund shadow of the party that won 24 European parliamentary seats and forced David Cameron to promise a Brexit referendum) fought two of the three, and polled joke votes even by their standards. UKIP deputy leader Rebecca Jane took only 61 votes (0.2%) in Uxbridge, and might be wishing she was back in one of her old roles as ‘reality TV’ contestant and Marilyn Monroe impersonator. Peter Richardson in Somerton & Frome fared only slightly better with 0.7%.
By far the biggest name in civic nationalism, actor Laurence Fox, stood in Uxbridge for his Reclaim party which is little more than a one-man band, but well-financed. His 714 votes (2.3%) were an improvement on the 1% taken by his former deputy Martin Daubney in Reclaim’s previous by-election effort (North Shropshire in December 2021), but Fox’s donors must be starting to wonder whether this is the best use of their cash.
The anti-vaccination campaigner Piers Corbyn (brother of former Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn) also stood in Uxbridge but polled only 101 votes (0.3%): perhaps even his strongest supporters will now wake up to the fact that there is absolutely no electoral potential in peddling conspiracy theories about the pandemic.
In Somerton & Frome, Reform UK (which is clearly the largest successor party to UKIP on the civic nationalist scene, but equally clearly is failing to make any serious headway) lost yet another deposit, polling 1,303 votes (3.4%).
Similarly in Selby & Ainsty, Reform UK took only 1,332 votes (3.7%), beaten not only by the Greens but by the regionalist Yorkshire Party. Another ex-UKIP splinter party, the Heritage Party (founded by half-Jamaican anti-vaccination campaigner David Kurten) managed just 162 votes (0.5%).
These were the ninth and tenth successive Reform UK lost deposits in parliamentary by-elections: a stark contrast to some national opinion polls and the regular hyping of the party by Nigel Farage and his friends at GB News.
The truth is that the ‘free market’ capitalist ideology that underpins both Reform UK and the Tories offers no solution to the UK’s immigration crisis and related crises in housing and transport policy.
The challenge for any racial nationalist party that gets its act together to fill the UK’s political vacuum will be to link London’s chronic overcrowding to the transport issue. Crude populist gestures against the ‘Ulez’ policy won’t suffice. Nationalists have to reclaim the green agenda as our own, not reject it – but we need to explain that a green agenda means ending the mass immigration, multiculti madness.
THE ROAD TO POWER 2 – THE LADDER STRATEGY
In the first article in this series, I outlined the broad strategic direction in which the National Front is pointing – towards the “local information nexus”, towards direct contact with the people, and away from the “central nexus”, the mass media, as a means of putting across our message. Now I want to get down to brass tacks, and outline the first steps each Branch must take on the long road to victory.
The first step is to select a “target ward”, the ward in which the NF will build its first mass support base in each area. These wards should be selected for, obviously, good NF potential, where our policies on e.g. immigration, unemployment or whatever will be seen as directly relevant to the local people, but where the situation, especially the racial one, is not so hopeless in the foreseeable future that local Whites have despaired, fled, or stayed because they like the way things are now.
They should also be surrounded by other wards in the same Parliamentary constituency which are mostly, if not as good as the selected target ward, at least of reasonable potential. For ultimately the constituency will itself be targeted. Finally, obviously, the target ward should be reasonably accessible to local Branch activists.
The next step is to survey the target ward in depth. This is done in two sweeps. Sweep one consists of activists, over a period of weeks, knocking on every door in the ward selling NF literature. To make this easier, The Flag in particular has been carefully designed to appeal to ordinary people who may never have seen an NF publication before.
On a copy of the electoral roll for the ward, each house’s response is noted. Sympathisers will form the basis of a permanent monthly paper round, and will be invited to buy extra Flags etc. to pass on to their friends; eventually some will be politically educated and recruited. “Don’t knows” will be leafletted and intermittently visited again. Hostiles will also be noted and ignored/avoided in future..
Sweep two, at more or less the same time but with different personnel (especially older or more reticent activists) will also go through the ward, not identifying themselves as NF but conducting an “opinion poll”, aimed at identifying the main local issues in the ward, for later local propaganda targeting. Birmingham Branch, who have successfully done this, will be pleased to explain the details to other Branches.
POTENTIAL RECRUITS
In the succeeding months, some activists simply service the existing doorstep paper buyers every month (here again, the older or more reticent come into their own.) These potential recruits should gradually be introduced to more in-depth Party literature, so that by the time they are ready to join the Party, if they ever are, they will understand at least basic ideology. Again, in the NF Statement of Policy and 100 Questions and Answers, the Party national centre has provided the Branches with the resource they need.
Meanwhile, the Branch begins production of a regular ward leaflet, homing in on local issues identified by the “poll”. This is distributed to every door not known to be inhabited by hostiles (or Immigrants!). Those whose appearance or manner is less effective on the doorstep can do this.
Later another paper sale attempt will be made to those “don’t knows”. The effectiveness of these leaflets can be gauged both by follow-ups coming from them and by getting feedback from the regular paper-buyers.
Feedback from these people on national literature, especially The Flag, should also be asked for “What did you think of last month’s paper? What did you especially agree with/not like?”) This feedback on every paper/magazine and leaflet issue from every Branch is needed by national centre so we can “fine-tune” our output to make it even more effective for Branches to use.
After a while, potential recruits among the regular paper round can be invited to aspecial Branch meeting. This should to an extent be “stage-managed”, with a carefully designed decoration (flags, banners etc.), literature table (no fringe irrelevance!), audience and the best speakers briefed on local issues.
The aim is to push them into making the final step and signing up, or if they have already to reinforce their enthusiasm and commitment. Boring and divisive meetings should be confined to committed activists. Also special meetings aimed at youth should be held.
“WARD COMMITTEE”
After some months of this, perhaps a year, the Branch should have attained Rung Two on the local ‘ladder to power’. By this stage, there should be enough locally-recruited activists (only a few are required) to form a “Ward Committee”. This is responsible initially for servicing and slowly extending the door-to-door paper round, and putting out local leaflets. Later, it will produce these itself, after training from the Branch.
The Branch itself will thus be freed to commence Rung One in an adjacent ward. In the initial target ward, someone, ideally a local, should be adopted as a local candidate – NOT a few weeks before polling day, but well in advance. This candidate’s main role will be to get him or herself well known, liked and respected in the local ward community. Practical help with local peoples’ problems, e.g. with the Council, should be made available.
Here the aim isn’t to boost the NF directly but to actually help people, thus earning gratitude and respect. So in, for example, letters on behalf of people the NF name (hated and feared by many, especially Communist, “Labour” Councils) should not in general be used.
The measure of actual attainment will be provided by a local candidate’s poll in the target ward – and it is to obtain such a concrete measure, not at this stage to win, that such a seat should be contested. Bv the time Rung Two has been reached, the NF vote should have risen from under 1 to 5 per cent. As has been achieved in their target ward by the “pilot project” Branch, Birmingham, in about 12 months.
INTERNAL POWER
The aim now is for the Branch to bring ward after ward in the target constituency up to Rung Two, so that ward after ward begins to run under its own internal power, freeing Branch activists (who of course may come from another constituency entirely) to move on to the next one.
Rung Three has been reached when most wards in the target seat have their own ward committees and can poll 5-10% in local elections. At this stage the ward committees can set up between them a Constituency Committee, and indeed may as well now apply for admission to the NF Confederacy as a Branch in their own right, since the ultimate NF aim is one Branch per parliamentary seat.
During the Rung Two to Three transition, the best ward candidate should be being built up, years in advance of an election if possible, as a locally known Parliamentary candidate. With an average NF local poll of over 5% and indeed with many of these voters personally known to ward activists as regular paper buyers, a Parliamentary election, General or By, can now be contested with a reasonable prospect of reaching 5% and saving our deposit, boosting credibility locally and nationally. (In fact, it’s pointless to fight seats otherwise, usually five saved deposits are worth 50 1% polls).
The aim now is Rung Four, in which, with credibility enhanced by a saved deposit and good local candidates in place in most wards, the local vote reaches the 25 – 35% mark. At this stage, the NF is a serious local political force. The local media will take us seriously. On previous experience in Blackburn and S.E. London, where this strategy was applied in the mid-70s and worked, some local media, aware that NF voters buy papers, will moderate or even cease their hostility.
Others will not do so, but will resort to careful probing to find our weaknesses.
As pointed out in my last article, given intimate local contact between the Party and the people, the obviously untrue “Nazi” smear will fail. But we must be sure our candidates, in particular, are persons of good, or at least locally acceptable, character without skeletons in cupboards. A local NF HQ advice centre should now be attainable, as well as a local Flag-style paper (perhaps initially simply a 2-page local insert in the Flag).
NF COUNCILLORS
Rung Five sees NF Councillors elected on around 40% of the vote. These must behave themselves, as the eyes of the nation, and a hostile mass media, will be on them. Actual local power may be attainable here too. Again, the first NF Council must be very careful, a showpiece to the country at large. The media will now nationally take the NF seriously, though only as a local phenomenon – areas we do well in will be “Britain’s Alabamas”.
The Race Issue will begin to be moved, by the NF’s rise and Immigrant-Red counter-(and probably over-) reaction toward the centre of the political stage, to our advantage. There will be another Anti-Nazi League, but a party dug in locally and not dependent on the national media to communicate with the public should withstand the challenge this time. Votes in target Parliamentary seats are 25-35%.
At Rung Six, the first NF MPs are elected. The Party is now at the stage reached by the Front National in France, with maybe one million voters. Beyond this point, the NF itself so transforms the nature of British politics that further prediction now is pointless, due to insufficient data. But by the time we reach Rung Six, Rungs Seven, Eight and so on will have been mapped out. And so on to power.
This, as can hopefully be seen, is a concrete plan. Locally, Rung Five has been reached and can be again. What has changed since the 1970s isn’t the British public, which after the race riots is as racialist as ever. It’s the NF, and the way it is perceived by the public. These things are up to us to change.
The mass support of the Seventies is still there. We need to turn towards it, and tap into it in a coherent, planned way, which will avoid the “swamp-and-split” cycle of the 1970s. The NF, like a comet, has spent a long time in the cold and the dark after its first blazing passage near the real world. We have used that time to equip ourselves ideologically, to remove Hitlerites and bourgeois student poseurs, and to evolve a clear plan for power.
Now we have reached the far point of our orbit and we are headed back inward toward the sunlight and the people. Once more we shall blaze forth in the political firmament – but this time we will stay there. If we put the work in.
All this strategy needs for success is a lot of hard, sometimes boring, effort, week after week, month after month, year after year. There may well be no sudden breakthroughs, there may well be some setbacks. But if we stick through it in the coming years, in the end, by our own efforts, we will win:- “Victory or defeat lie in our hands alone” – Let us make sure that our hands forge Victory.
The Road to Power 1 – How we convey our Message
As Vanguard stated in issue 1, the National Front is Britain’s most popular party – it’s just that the public don’t realise that yet! Much of the public, as opinion polls show, agree with NF policies. To translate that into mass popular support what we have to do is to convey to the public a fairly simple message: “We, the NF, agree with you. We say what you think. We can turn what we say, and you believe, into a better reality we can all live in, if you, the public, will join us and help us do it.”
How do we get that message across? To answer that question, we have to look at how the public receive messages, how they find out what is going on in the world around them. In a classic piece of political analysis, the American racial nationalist intellectual Dr. William L. Pierce identified two “information nexuses” through which facts and opinions, not always clearly separated are conveyed to the people, the “central nexus” and the “local nexus”.
The “central nexus” is basically the national mass media. National newspapers, radio, the cinema, television. The central nexus is relatively new – national newspapers are at most 300 years old – and had little mass impact until general literacy became a reality at the end of the last century. Radio, cinema and the TV are all 20th century creations. The central nexus is, at most, no older than the oldest living Britons today.
Before that nexus existed, and alongside it today, is the “local nexus”. This consists of what people see for themselves, what they hear from people they know, what they find out from talking to people face-to-face, and, at the highest level what they read in immediately accessible local newspapers serving their own community.
OUR MESSAGE
Both nexuses, central and local, convey information to the people. Which one should we concentrate on in getting our information, our message, across?
In the past, the NF has concentrated overwhelmingly on using the central nexus, the mass media. Throughout the late Sixties and early Seventies the NF “crashed its way into the headlines.” Marches, demonstrations and stunts ensured that the name “National Front” was a household word.
By 1977 everyone knew our Party’s name and, in the most basic terms, what we stood for – if only “sending the Blacks back”. This was a vital, necessary political achievement, since without such use of the central nexus, the NF would have lacked the essential political credibility that comes from a well-established “brand name”.
However, in my view a strategy of getting our message across dependent, as the NF’s traditionally has been, mostly on the central nexus is now fatally flawed. It has, and had a decade ago, yielded the one certain return available – getting our name across.
But the next problem, brand image, what people having heard of us thought of us, lay outside our control as far as the central nexus is concerned. It depended on outside events – for example some African dictator deciding to rid his country of Asians and thus putting “race” in the news, and how those events were reported in the central nexus. For example the Ugandan Asians were portrayed by the media as a threat, as “ASIAN HORDE INVADES BRITAIN”, thus benefitting, in the short-term at least, the NF. The Vietnamese “Boat People” by contrast, were portrayed as helpless, hapless refugees deserving only of sympathy.
Finally, further gains from the central nexus depended also on how we were reported. In the early 1970’s the NF was generally reported in the media as “right-wing”, “anti-Immigrant” etc. As such, given a media “Immigration scare” the public stampeded toward us in great, and often somewhat indigestible, waves, so that even the quantity and quality of our membership became entirely dependent on outside influences beyond our control.
By the late Seventies, the media were portraying the NF less favourably as “neo-Nazi”, “fascist” etc. So the recruits dried up. This was partly our fault but it was also, very largely, the fault of the central nexus.
For the central nexus overlords, the media bosses, are no friends to racial nationalism, and were not prepared to be used by it. It has, after all, been the single great achievement of the central nexus, in its century of existence, to transform a basically healthy popular culture to the multiracialist Coca-Cola junk-culture of today.
It was, I would argue, ten years ago, that the NF should have ceased concentrating on the central nexus to put across our message to the public. For by doing so we were in the ludicrous position of someone who gives his worst enemy a vital message to deliver to his best friend. And then wonders why the message isn’t getting across!
ALTERNATIVE
What, then, is the alternative? Clearly, the local nexus. Put simply relying not on Press headlines and TV stories but direct communication on doorsteps, via local newsletters, and in letters to local newspapers (who unlike national ones often actually print them) to get across our message to the people.
This method of putting our message across is less exciting and glamorous than marches and fisticuffs with politically irrelevant Marxist cranks. It involves lots of hard, boring work, but the advantages are overwhelming.
At last WE determine the message the public gets. Instead of our message being at best garbled into some sort of reactionary ultra-Toryism and at worst totally falsified as neo-Nazi cultist lunacy it arrives in the hands of the people in the same state it left the editors of NF national publications or local newsletters and the lips of NF members on the doorsteps.
Moreover, the public are more likely to believe that message. When information from the central and local nexus conflicts, the public generally believe the latter. “You can’t”, they say “always believe what you read in the papers”, but most people do believe what they have seen, heard, and assessed for themselves. One presentable NF member putting across a credible case on a doorstep confers immunity to a hundred Press smear stories.
Yet another advantage of using the local nexus is that it controls recruitment, and sometimes reduces it. This may sound a strange advantage, but what I mean is that the number of recruits gained, being proportional to the number of doorsteps knocked on, rather than to the number of race scare stories in the Sun, is therefore proportional to the number of doorstep knockers. And thus to the ability of the local branch to assimilate, train and turn into doorstep knockers such recruits.
We get steady, sustained growth, with the flow of recruits increasing only in proportion to the ability of the Party to assimilate them. Eventually, of course, our sheer size will generate media publicity in itself – but it also gives the Party at least some real power to control it.
The final advantage of concentrating on the local nexus to put across our message is perhaps the most persuasive. It works! Whenever the NF has broken through to win real mass support – in West Bromwich in 1973, Newham in 1974, Leicester in 1977 and, increasingly, in the West Midlands today – the key factor standing out is that the Party locally has got stuck into the local nexus.
It has hammered on doors, pushed local issues, written to local papers, put out locally-produced, locally relevant newsletters and leaflets and generally dug into the local community.
Now we know what we’re doing, we can, not just break through, but stay through, and build our strongest citadel in the hearts and minds of our people.
Flying the flag for the Union: friends of Loyal Ulster celebrate the 12th
H&D editor Mark Cotterill and assistant editor Peter Rushton were among the many supporters of the Union who turned out to fly the flag for traditional celebrations on 12th July.
Bad weather failed to dampen patriotic spirits in Southport, while many mainland loyalists once again marched in Benidorm where there is a large pro-Unionist community.
The biggest celebrations were of course in Ulster itself, where Unionists are increasingly united against any potential betrayal of the province by Rishi Sunak’s Brexit deal.
With the Conservative (and sadly no longer Unionist) Party struggling in the polls and facing almost certain defeat at next year’s general election, it is more vital than ever for friends of Loyal Ulster to stand together.
A far greater Tory Prime Minister than Sunak – Andrew Bonar Law – famously promised to resist the betrayal of the Union: “there will be no shrinking from any action which we think necessary to defeat one of the most ignoble conspiracies which has ever been formed against the liberties of free-born men”.
No doubt H&D readers would be denounced as ‘extremists’ or even ‘terrorists’ if we repeated Bonar Law’s words in 2023, but we similarly should not shrink from any action we think necessary to prevent the betrayal of Ulster by a 21st century government, whether Tory or Labour.
July by-elections confirm civic nationalist chaos
Three parliamentary by-elections being held on 20th July confirm the chaotic state of civic nationalism in the post-Brexit era, but also reflect the absence of racial nationalism from the electoral arena.
Selby & Ainsty has thirteen candidates, including two parties that emerged from the wreck of UKIP (Reform UK and Heritage) and the SDP (who nowadays are a pro-Brexit, socially conservative, but economically left-wing party). There are also two independents and two ‘no description’.
Unusually the environmentalist vote is also split, with a Green Party candidate but also someone from the Climate Party, which was founded last year as a conservative green party. They are ‘right-wing’ in the sense of being pro-business and focused on the single issue of fighting climate change, rather than all the other trendy leftist policies that the Green Party now stand for.
But of course neither the Climate Party nor the Green Party recognises that mass immigration and unchecked population growth in the Third World is part of the threat to our planet’s future. Neither of these parties recognises that ecological politics, the organic food movement etc. were pioneered by German national socialists such as the Third Reich’s Minister of Food and Agriculture, Walther Darré, and British fascists such as Henry Williamson and Rolf Gardiner.
(The latter’s son – eminent Bach scholar and conductor Sir John Eliot Gardiner, who as a personal friend of King Charles III conducted some of the music at the recent Coronation – inherited his father’s interest in organic farming but not other aspects of his fascism.)
The Climate Party are also fighting the Uxbridge by-election, where their candidate is the party leader Ed Gemmell who is also a councillor in Buckinghamshire.
In Uxbridge & South Ruislip there are seventeen candidates. The interesting thing is that Reform UK are not contesting this one, and have presumably done a deal with Reclaim’s Laurence Fox – his party’s second parliamentary candidate after a disastrous debut by Fox’s then deputy Martin Daubney, who polled less than 1% at North Shropshire in 2021.
As well as Fox, the Uxbridge ballot paper includes the anti-vaxxer Piers Corbyn (brother of the former Labour leader), and UKIP’s deputy leader Rebecca Jane (aka Rebecca Jane Sutton) who has an eccentric background even by her party’s standards. She was born in Barrowford (near Pendle, Lancashire) and used to live in Burnley, where her jobs included working as a Marilyn Monroe lookalike and running a private detective agency. She has also ‘starred’ in a couple of reality TV series including Big Brother.
There are four independents, two of whom are single-issue campaigners who have changed their names to include the words ‘Anti-Ulez’ and ‘No-Ulez’ (referring to the controversial ‘Ultra Low Emission Zone’ that imposes charges on the most polluting vehicles. This was originally a Boris Johnson policy, approved in theory when he was Mayor, but Sadiq Khan was Mayor by the time it was implemented.
Others on the Uxbridge ballot paper include the SDP, Christian Peoples Alliance (whose candidate is, as usual, an African) and Rejoin EU, as well as the Climate Party mentioned above.
By comparison to the other two 20th July by-elections, Somerton & Frome has a conventional ballot paper with just eight candidates, including Reform UK and UKIP. This is the only one of the three by-elections where Nigel Farage’s new party and his old party are fighting each other.
The Mid Bedfordshire by-election date hasn’t yet been set, but I’d guess will be September or October.
And it seems possible there will be a by-election in Tamworth, because there’s a report due to be published on the homosexual Tory Chris Pincher who had to resign as deputy chief whip after a scandal that helped bring down Boris. Pincher lost the Tory whip in July last year but has remained as an independent MP for the last 12 months while the investigation continued.
The bad news for failing Prime Minister Rishi Sunk is that both Mid Bedfordshire and Tamworth are very safe Tory seats. If his party loses either or both of these, in addition to the pretty certain defeat at Uxbridge, and the fairly likely defeats at Selby & Ainsty and Somerton & Frome, then it’s not impossible the Tories might seek another very late change of leader before next year’s General Election.
And the bad news for H&D readers is that despite the Tory collapse, Reform UK’s continuing failure, and widespread distrust of Labour – there is no sign whatsoever of even a vaguely credible movement party. In 1972 the Uxbridge by-election proved that the National Front was a serious party, and ignited that party’s most successful period during the mid-1970s. More than half a century later, this year’s Uxbridge contest is likely to prove both that civic nationalism and single issue obsessions are electorally bankrupt, and that there is a political vacuum waiting to be filled by any racial nationalist party that can get its act together on a national scale.
H&D Issue 115 out now
The new issue (#115) of Heritage and Destiny magazine is out now. The 32-page, July-August 2023 issue has as its lead:
H&D interview leading French revisionist and political prisoner Vincent Reynouard
Issue 115
July – August 2023
Contents include:
- Editorial – by Mark Cotterill
- Why the political class cannot be trusted to resolve the migration crisis – by Alec Suchi
- Nationalists – both civic and racial – were crushed in the recent English local elections: Has this cleared the field for a new nationalist party? – by Peter Rushton
- Who likes – and dislikes – Whom? – by Gil Caldwell
- Book Review – Colonialism: A Moral Reckoning – by Nigel Biggar – reviewed by Peter Rushton
- Obituary – Professor Roger Pearson M.Sc. (Econ), Ph.D., (London) 1927 – 2023 – by Mark Cotterill
- Time for nationalists to decide: are we serious? – by Peter Rushton
- Football – The Roots of the Game – “Footer” – by James Collyer
- H&D interviews leading French Revisionist Vincent Reynouard – Part I – by Peter Rushton
- The Ladder Strategy and Community Politics are not the answer – by Alek Yerbury
- From the Other Side of the Pond – by Kenneth Schmidt
- Right to Reply – Reflections on the Climate Change narrative – by Ian Freeman
- Movie Review – The Three Musketeers: D’Artagnan – reviewed by Mark Cotterill
- Book Review – Charlottesville Untold – Inside Unite the Right – by Anne Wilson Smith – reviewed by James Knight
- Two full pages of readers’ letters.
- Movement News – Latest analysis of the nationalist movement – by Peter Rushton.
If you would like a sample copy of this issue please send £5.00 or $10.00 to Heritage & Destiny, 40 Birkett Drive, Preston, PR2 6HE, England, UK – or if you would like to subscribe please go to http://www.heritageanddestiny.com/publications/journal/ for full details or email heritageanddestiny@yahoo.com
Historic win for anti-immigration party AfD
The anti-immigration German civic nationalist party ‘Alternative for Germany’ (Alternative für Deutschland – AfD) took control of a town council for the first time on Sunday when AfD candidate Robert Sesselmann was elected ‘district administrator’ of Sonneberg, a town of just over 20,000 inhabitants in Thuringia.
Sonneberg is in the east of today’s Federal Republic, though in the centre of traditional Germany.
AfD was founded as a right-wing Conservative party espousing what British voters would call ‘Thatcherite’ economic policies, but has steadily moved to the right and is now mainly identified with a strong anti-immigration stance. The Thuringian region of AfD is seen as especially right-wing and controlled by the party’s so-called Flügel or ‘wing’ led by Björn Höcke, who has made controversial remarks on racial and historical topics.
The party was greatly boosted by Angela Merkel’s decision to admit more than a million extra immigrants and ‘asylum seekers’ in 2016 – a policy which alienated many traditional conservative voters who had once backed Merkel’s CDU and its Bavarian sister party CSU.
After losing its focus and slipping in the polls during the pandemic, AfD has greatly revived during the past 18 months due to economic problems that are felt especially keenly in regions such as Thuringia that were part of the old East Germany.
Voters in such areas are often nostalgic for aspects of communist rule, without being ‘left-wing’ in the usual sense of that term.
And partly for reasons discussed in a broader context by Ian Freeman in the forthcoming issue 115 of H&D, hard-pressed voters in such areas believe that environmentalist policies pushed by the German Green Party (who are coalition partners with liberals and socialists in the present federal government) are an ill-considered luxury that the country can ill-afford right now.
Foreign and defence policy has little relevance to a local election in a small town, so the controversial pro-Moscow stance taken by some AfD leaders is unlikely to have had a decisive influence on Sonneberg’s voters.
This latter AfD policy is utterly rejected both by the right-wing of CDU and CSU (who sympathised with AfD on immigration) and by the racial nationalist party III Weg (which regards Putinism as a betrayal of Germany’s and Europe’s fundamental interests, and strongly supports Ukraine’s defiance of the Kremlin).
Nevertheless, AfD’s latest electoral success has alarmed the liberal-left establishment and might be a sign that increasing numbers of German voters are no longer afraid to assert their national identity and turn back the immigration tide.
