H&D Issue 99 published

The new issue (#99) of Heritage and Destiny magazine will be out very soon. The 26-page, November-December 2020 issue, has as its lead.:

Power Shift in Washington – Biden prepares to Make America Liberal Again

Issue 99

November – December 2020

Contents include:

  • Editorial – Trump defeated: the end of “populism”? by Peter Rushton
  • Bankster Banking? – by Chalmers W. Macleod
  • Obituary – Jean Raspail has left us (1925-2020) – by Tony Paulsen
  • The Jew Church Ladies – Part III: Women Amok – by Simon Sheppard
  • Book Review:  The Great Coronavirus Hoax – by Dr. Nicholas Kollerstrom – reviewed by Dr. James B. Thring
  • CoVid-19: A Nationalist Perspective – by Ian Freeman
  • Book Review:  Mother Europe’s Son: Ian Stuart – by Mirko Savage – reviewed by Stevie Cartwright
  • A Collusion: Franklin Roosevelt, British Intelligence, and the Secret Campaign to Push the US into War – Part II, by Mark Weber
  • Yockey and the European Liberation Front – by John Gannon.
  • Book Review: Failed Führers: A History of Britain’s Extreme Right – by Graham Macklin – reviewed by Steve Frost.
  • Movie Review: The Irishman – reviewed by Mark Cotterill.
  • Two pages of readers’ letters.
  • Movement News – Latest analysis of the nationalist movement – by Peter Rushton.

If you would like a sample copy please send £5.00 /$10.00 or for a year’s (6 issues) subscription, send £28.00 (UK) – $52.00 (USA) – £35.00/$52.00 (Rest of World).

“Nasty, Brutish and Short” – Should Racial Nationalists support ‘Freedom’?

While we prepared the May-June 2020 edition of Heritage and Destiny, every day seemed to bring further news of disorder on Anglo-American streets, usually involving either ethnic minorities or ‘antifa’ anarchists, or both. These events were not in themselves surprising: what came as a shock was the reaction of police officers and their political masters. The guardians of law and order seem to have abdicated.

During these weeks, with most forms of political activity impossible, experienced nationalist observers on both sides of the Atlantic have discussed possible reasons for this transformation, and for the passivity of White communities in the face of this existential threat.

Is there something in British character that predisposes us against civil disobedience? Have centuries of liberalism and individualism prepared us for racial suicide?

London police ‘take a knee’ in obeisance to ‘Black Lives Matter’ and Antifa

Even more uncomfortable questions have been raised by the Covid-19 crisis. Setting aside the obsession with conspiracy theory that has diverted many movement activists during lockdown, the essential questions of nationalist political principle – raised both by multiracial disorder and pandemic crisis – are ones that were classically addressed in 17th century England by two of the greatest political philosophers in history, Thomas Hobbes (1588-1679) and John Locke (1632-1704).

By far the most famous quotation from Hobbes’ Leviathan (1651) describes the anarchic “state of nature” which is the apparent objective of the ‘antifa’ mob, and from which the ancestors of today’s ‘oppressed’ blacks were rescued:
“In such condition there is no place for industry, because the fruit thereof is uncertain, and consequently no culture of the earth, no navigation nor the use of commodities that may be imported by sea, no commodious building, no instruments of moving and removing such things as require much force, no knowledge of the face of the earth, no account of time, no arts, no letters, no society, and which is worst of all, continual fear and danger of violent death, and the life of man, solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short.”

To escape from this unenviable “natural” condition of chaotic “war of all against all”, Hobbes recognised that civilised men – even though they “naturally love liberty, and dominion over others”, instead accept “restraint upon themselves, in which we see them live in Commonwealths”, i.e. under the control of a powerful central state.

They do this not in pursuit of some abstract greatest good, but rather to avoid a greatest evil (summum malum). Civilised men (in contrast to savages) have “foresight of their own preservation, and of a more contented life thereby; that is to say, of getting themselves out from that miserable condition of war which is necessarily consequent, as hath been shown, to the natural passions of men when there is no visible power to keep them in awe, and tie them by fear of punishment to the performance of their covenants.”

Writing in mid-17th century Paris and London, Hobbes had very limited experience of non-Whites, but experience has shown that self-restraint and foresight are not the best known attributes of Africans and their descendants. It has therefore been all the more necessary to exercise “visible power to keep them in awe”, whether in the days of the British Empire, the ‘Jim Crow’ Southern states of the USA, or many other ‘White oppressors’. Well-meaning liberal Whites (including police officers) have backed down from exercising this “visible power”: BLM mobs have rampaged without “fear of punishment”. The consequences have not been limited to statue desecrations and city centre riots. Even the lowest IQs in ethnic ghettos have got the message – they can now defy the law with impunity – and political establishments now struggle to redraw the lines of acceptable conduct.

H&D readers would probably have no difficulty coming down on the Hobbes side of this philosophical argument when it comes to antifa and multiracial disorder. Concerning the Covid-19 pandemic, matters become far more tricky, and White racial nationalists (perhaps more in the USA than in Europe) begin to consider the counter-arguments of Hobbes’ great rival John Locke.

As many generations of students have discovered, Hobbes and Locke often contradicted themselves in the course of long lives as philosophical writers and framers of practical political blueprints. However, for our purposes and at the risk of caricature, we may simplify their respective positions as on the one hand, the benefits of a strong central authority; and on the other, the benefits of individual liberty and the ‘rights’ of citizens.

Whereas Hobbes described the “state of nature” as a hypothetical nightmare and justified the exercise of absolutist power to protect against the evils of anarchy, Locke placed a more positive emphasis on the virtues of free industrious citizens whose consent was required before any government imposed those restrictions necessary to preserve property and guarantee lawful trade.

John Locke

Hobbes and Locke were not diametrically opposed, and indeed their similarities have been stressed by some 20th century commentators such as Leo Strauss, who described Locke as “Hobbes in sheep’s clothing”. However, since they began from different first principles, Hobbes and Locke ended up placing different emphases on order and freedom.

The parallel with today’s debates among liberals, conservatives and racial nationalists, regarding appropriate responses to the Covid-19 pandemic, is obvious. This crisis has also highlighted a fundamental difference of principle between racial nationalists and many leading Brexiteers.

To understand questions of political principle involved here, we must turn the clock back again – not all the way to the 17th century, but to the Thatcherite ascendency of the 1980s. During that decade, traditional Toryism was abandoned in favour of economic liberalism – a blind faith in the virtues of the ‘free’ market. Central government’s job (outside the sphere of national defence) was to get out of the way and allow industrious citizens to generate prosperity.

Among the many problems with this market fundamentalism is that (though our more conservative readers would hate to admit it) Karl Marx was partly right in his analysis of capitalism’s historical development. Today’s multinational businesses are part of a ruthless profit-seeking machine that knows no racial distinctions and no national boundaries. Work is ‘outsourced’ to the other side of the globe; cheap labour is imported – without any regard for the environment or for indigenous communities.

For the likes of Nigel Farage (and for many Conservative politicians whose outlook was formed by hegemonic Thatcherism) the ‘free market’ can do no wrong. From their perspective, the main purpose of Brexit was not to regain national sovereignty, but for ‘British’ businesses to escape from European Union regulations. (Hence the ongoing dispute over whether a ‘sovereign’ United Kingdom should drop any objection to importing chlorinated chicken from the USA.)

Home Secretary Priti Patel

Naturally this capitalist logic is colour blind. In 2012 five Brexiteer ‘right-wing’ Conservatives – then young backbenchers but now influential in the highest tier of government – wrote the treatise Britannia Unchained: Global Lessons for Growth and Prosperity. They included Priti Patel (now Home Secretary), daughter of Indian Hindu immigrants from Uganda; Kwasi Kwarteng (now Minister for Business, Energy and Clean Growth), son of Ghanaian immigrants; and Dominic Raab (now Foreign Secretary), son of a Czech Jewish immigrant.

This motley crew attacked the UK’s political structure (even post-Thatcher) for having a “bloated state, high taxes and excessive regulation”. They also took aim at British workers: “The British are among the worst idlers in the world. We work among the lowest hours, we retire early and our productivity is poor. Whereas Indian children aspire to be doctors or businessmen, the British are more interested in football and pop music.”

In rejecting the European Union these Brexiteer Tories (in common with Farage and his ilk) wanted to take the UK in the direction of deregulated societies such as the USA and India. Their ideal scenario was summed up by critics as “Singapore-on-Thames”. To some extent in the early 2010s non-Brexiteer Tories in David Cameron’s government shared some of these objectives. In other words they were socially and economically liberal. While not wishing to leave the EU, Cameron-era Tories constantly dragged their feet and sought exemptions from European regulations.

Under both Theresa May and Boris Johnson, there have been hints that some leading Conservatives had a different vision – both more statist, more illiberal and more nationalist – in a word, more conservative! (In the American sense, paleo-conservative.) It was this agenda that helped the Conservative Party win swathes of formerly safe Labour seats in White working-class areas of England at the December 2019 General Election.

Even before the pandemic struck, obvious faultlines had emerged on the conservative right. Old fashioned fiscal conservatives have been marginalised (as in Trump’s Washington), and perhaps the most important division is between those who want to establish high standards and boost British agriculture, versus the advocates of ‘free’ trade, deregulation and ever-cheaper food.

Radical racial nationalists would tend to support the former strategy – taking environmental policies seriously and favouring a quasi-autarchic revival of British farming, even if this means higher food prices. But with the onset of Covid-19, even our own ranks have been thrown into political confusion.

Given the novelty of this virus and the developing state of knowledge, racial nationalists can’t be expected to reach definite conclusions on the topic, but our reactions have revealed some surprising political instincts. Many in our movement – who might be expected instinctively to favour ‘authoritarian’ solutions, have been found on the libertarian side of the argument.

This is only partly based on eugenics. Undoubtedly some racial nationalists have found the apparent racial bias of the virus interesting, though it’s very early days to draw any conclusions. Some instinctively favoured the ‘herd immunity’ argument that seemed to be finding favour in UK Government circles at the start of the pandemic in March, only to be abandoned in favour of a confused form of lockdown. Perhaps this is rooted in a particular English variant of racial nationalism, instinctively resistant to over-regulation, and reflected for example in G.K. Chesterton’s The Rolling English Road (see H&D 91). However if we are serious about racial renaissance, we must admit that a nationalist government would have to impose an extreme version of what is often derided as a ‘nanny state’ with unprecedented levels of state intervention to raise standards of public health, education and training.

In this context it’s arguable that a racial nationalist government would have imposed – rather than ‘herd immunity’ – an earlier and much stricter form of ‘lockdown’, backed up by far more widespread and rigorous testing. Moreover, though I’m not qualified to express an informed opinion on the subject of vaccination, it has often seemed strange to me that so many people in our movement are such passionate ‘anti-vaxxers’. What is the connection between racial nationalism and what so often looks like ‘fringe science’? Especially when the fundamental basis of our movement – racial reality – is so obviously and sensibly grounded in genuine scientific fact.
Racial nationalist governments in the past have often adopted interventionist policies on public health. The most often quoted example is National Socialist Germany’s anti-smoking policy, though this was more complicated and nuanced than is sometimes portrayed. Adolf Hitler himself was famously hostile to smoking, but he allowed different regions of the Third Reich to pursue divergent policies. The central German state of Thuringia had a very strong anti-smoking policy for example, with its famous university city of Jena becoming the first university in the world to introduce a complete ban on smoking. By contrast in most parts of Germany the policy went little further than anti-smoking posters and propaganda, often related to public health measures to boost the German birth rate and protect the health of expectant mothers.

A Third Reich anti-smoking ad published in 1941 entitled “The chain-smoker” and reading: “He does not devour it, it devours him”

Smoking bans were also introduced in party offices, in the Luftwaffe and the SS, although some German smoking laws were more lenient than their British and American equivalents (for example minors were allowed to purchase and – in private – smoke tobacco).

Whatever we might think of the pandemic in terms of science, personal instinct or ideological tendency, the political facts are obvious. A tiny group of online nationalist activists are radically hostile to all Covid regulations. Similarly a section of Conservative and Brexit Party opinion, typified by editorial writers and commentators on the Telegraph, are outspokenly critical of the entire lockdown approach, adopting a libertarian fundamentalist call to reopen everything as soon as possible.

However, among the general public this outlook is mainly confined to the feckless underclass. The vast majority of ordinary Britons – well beyond the ranks of the elderly and sick who are genuinely at risk from Covid-19 – seem to be both scared of the virus and respectful of authority. Racial nationalists would in my opinion be very foolish to focus their campaigning activity on anti-lockdown protests: there simply isn’t much political capital in it for us.

A combination of economic chaos, revulsion at ‘Black Lives Matter’ antics, and general disillusionment will create much political potential for racial nationalists once ‘normal electoral business’ resumes – which for the UK will be 2021. But we should steer well clear of Covid-related conspiracy theory and anti-lockdown rebellion.

Peter Rushton, Manchester, England

Note: This article was first published in the May-June 2020 issue # 97, of Heritage and Destiny magazine, copies are available for £5.00/$10.00 each, email – heritageanddestiny@yahoo.com – for full details.

H&D Issue 98 published

The new issue (#98) of Heritage and Destiny magazine is out now. The 26-page, September-October 2020 issue, has as its lead.:

The Churchill – Roosevelt Collusion – Mark Weber exposes the conspiracy that led to WWII.

Issue 98

September – October 2020.

Contents include:

  • Editorial – by Mark Cotterill
  • Can Trump still win? – by James Knight
  • Obituary – Jean Raspail has left us (1925-2020) – by Tony Paulsen
  • The Jew Church Ladies – Part II: From Blonking to Beatification – by Simon Sheppard
  • Book Review:  We Fight Fascists – The 43 Group and Their Forgotten Battle for Post War Britain, by Daniel Sonabend – reviewed by Peter Rushton
  • Friends and Family – From BUF/UM to BNP/BM – by Bill Baillie
  • Book Review:  The Myth of the Andalusian Paradise – Muslims, Christians and Jews under Islamic Rule in Medieval Spain – by Dario Fernandez-Morera – reviewed by Sidney Secular
  • A Collusion: Franklin Roosevelt, British Intelligence, and the Secret Campaign to Push the US into War – Part I, by Mark Weber
  • “Slavic Untermenschen” – A Right to Reply – Ian Freeman replies to Eddy Morrison,s article – “Slavs and the Untermensch Big Lie” (published in issue 96).
  • Movie Review: Once Upon a Time in London – reviewed by Mark Cotterill.
  • Two pages of readers’ letters.
  • Movement News – Latest analysis of the nationalist movement – by Peter Rushton.

If you would like a sample copy please send £5.00 /$10.00 or for a year’s (6 issues) subscription, send £28.00 (UK) – $52.00 (USA) – £35.00/$52.00 (Rest of World).

Immigration surges after Brexit referendum

Many of those who voted in 2016’s referendum for the UK to leave the European Union believed that this would lead to a rapid reduction in immigration. A continuing debate ensued for example in the pages of H&D between keen Brexit campaigners (who broadly believed that leaving the EU would be a major blow against the multiracialist establishment) and more sceptical racial nationalists, some of whom feared that Brexit would actually worsen our country’s racial problems.

This week official statistics confirmed the sceptics’ worst fears. It is now apparent that almost from the moment of the 2016 referendum, net immigration from EU countries began to fall. In fact there is net emigration from the UK to the Central and Eastern European nations known as the EU8: i.e. Poland, Lithuania, Slovakia, Estonia, Latvia, Slovenia, Hungary and the Czech Republic.

However there has been a sharp rise in net immigration from outside the EU, not only increasing numbers of university students (especially from China) but other immigrants from Africa and Asia. Prime Minister Theresa May’s office actually boasted that this increase in immigration was a positive sign!

Conservative-dominated governments for the past nine years have consistently stated their aim to reduce annual net immigration to below 100,000. If achieved, that would take us back to the start of the Blair / ‘New Labour’ era in 1997, when net immigration was 50,000.

Don’t forget that even then, there would be tens of thousands more people arriving in the UK than leaving, and these immigrants would be constantly adding to our existing non-British population.

Shockingly, none of those Conservative-led governments since 2010 has got anywhere near even their modest 100,000 immigrant target. The most recent figures for the year ending June 2018 show net immigration of 273,000.

And of these an increasing proportion are non-Europeans. In that same 12 month period, the number of non-EU citizens who are in the UK on a long term basis rose by 248,000, whereas the same figure for EU citizens was 74,000.

A very large number of the new arrivals are from India.

The UK faces an ever more dangerous demographic time bomb, and this crisis has been worsened by the Brexit process (so far).

Social conservative split rocks Irish republicanism

Peadar Toibin, formerly of Sinn Fein, now leader of a new socially conservative party

The Republic of Ireland has no electorally credible racial nationalist, or even eurosceptic nationalist party. In 2014 the big story here was Sinn Féin’s success in gaining three MEPs with 19.5% of the vote. This year Ireland’s European parliamentary representation will increase from 11 to 13 MEPs, so Sinn Féin (political arm of the terrorist IRA) will almost certainly retain these three seats.

However Sinn Féin is now being challenged by social conservatives, who take a leftwing stance on economics and remain committed to taking Ulster into the Irish Republic, but are disgusted by their leaders’ new liberal policies on issues such as abortion.

Co Tyrone councillor Rosemarie Shields is among the new party’s recruits from SDLP

At the start of 2019 a Sinn Féin member of the Irish Parliament, Peadar Toibin defected to set up a new conservative nationalist party called Aontú (which means ‘Unity’ or ‘Consent’). Some see this party as a desperate last stand by a dying Catholic establishment, but it has already attracted a few defections from either side of the Irish border.

Mr Toibin is a business consultant and graduate of University College Dublin, and had been a Sinn Fein activist since his student days. He says that about one-third of the new party’s supporters come from Fianna Fail, Ireland’s second-largest party and successor to the tradition of the country’s first independent leader Eamon de Valera. North of the border recruits have also come from Sinn Fein’s declining rival the Social Democratic and Labour Party (SDLP), including a councillor in County Tyrone.

The latest defector to Aontú is Sinn Fein councillor for Central Craigavon, Fergal Lennon, who told the media: “My former party has lost contact with the grassroots and no longer represents the best interest of the electorate, choosing instead to put media sound bites in place of real action.”

Craigavon councillor Fergal Lennon is the latest defector from Sinn Fein to the new party

Arguably the roots of this split date back to the late 1960s when the Provisional IRA was formed. This rejected the old-fashioned Marxism of the ‘Official IRA’: instead of waiting and building towards a proletarian revolution, the Provisionals were determined to escalate a brutal terrorist war against the hated Brits.

Yet on the other hand these same Provisionals increasingly identified themselves with Third World ‘liberation movements’, and eventually with the entire gamut of trendy delusions ranging from feminism, through abortion rights, gay marriage, multiracialism and no doubt now ‘transgender’ rights.

For many years Sinn Fein / IRA disguised these leftist/liberal affiliations from their American donors, since most of the latter were old-fashioned nationalists with a romantic attachment to traditional Irish culture, and in most cases devout Roman Catholics.

Now the chickens have come home to roost. Emboldened by a decade of scandals that have undermined church authority, militant left/liberal secularists have openly taken control of Sinn Fein’s agenda.

The new Aontú party is an effort to reconnect Irish republicanism with its traditional roots: it will be interesting to see whether Sinn Fein’s hegemony (that has been consolidated over the past half century) will now be challenged.

There is also a new party called Irexit campaigning for Ireland to leave the European Union, but it’s not yet clear whether this will be officially registered in time to contest this year’s elections. In Ireland (unlike the UK) at least 300 registered members are required before a party is officially recognised to appear on ballot papers.

FIRST NATIONALIST UNITY MEETING 26TH JANUARY

A brief report on Saturday’s meeting of British nationalists in Leeds from one of the organisers.

The City of Leeds

What started out as a simple idea, less than two months ago, between two nationalist colleagues and a solitary Facebook group that is barely two weeks old, resulted in the coming together of SIXTY attendees at Saturday’s first ever Nationalist Unity meeting.

I emphasise the word sixty simply because the number of patriots who were in attendance exceeded my initial expectation and I would very much like to take the opportunity to thank all those who made the effort to get there, including of course all the fine speakers – some having had 2-3 hour journeys to get to the venue.

The overarching theme of the day’s proceedings, was the question of whether some of the separate parties and organisations within the wider nationalist community could somehow begin working more closely together. It’s true to say that the movement has been badly divided since the British National Party’s heyday of a decade or so ago, indeed it is fair to echo the comment made recently by Max Musson over at www.westernspring.co.uk by saying that the movement has very definitely become moribund of late.

So, Saturday’s event was an attempt to breathe new life into a political ideology that at one time, not so long ago, could boast of having almost one million people voting for it.

Here’s the thing. Although we are not yet all ‘singing from the same hymn sheet’ in terms of agreeing on a definite singular path for the way forward, there was no animosity on display, no heated arguments and no falling out amongst ourselves whatsoever. Every individual in attendance was willing to hear the other out in a spirit of friendship and comradeship and that has to bode well for future cooperation between all of us. Many good and practical ideas were put forward and we shall be working on those in the coming weeks and months.

Without some form of unity and understanding, and, a little bit of give and take from all sides, we shall surely remain a splintered diaspora, and the end result will simply be the loss of all that we hold dear in terms of race and nation. IT IS VITAL THAT WE BEGIN ONCE AGAIN TO START WORKING TOGETHER AS A TEAM.

There will be no watering down of our core values of racial nationalism or adherence to the sentiment contained within the Fourteen Words.

It was encouraging to see representation from a number of well-established nationalist organisations at the meeting. We had people there from all of the following; National Front, Western Spring, British Movement, Heritage and Destinyand the British Democrats.

Further clarification

At the meeting we stressed the point that the reason for setting up this Nationalist Unity project was not simply to create another electioneering party, indeed that may not happen, though it is one of the options on the table. It is possible that we may at some point in the future offer ourselves up as a membership block to another party already in existence. Alternatively, and at the very least we continue on as an organisation fighting for the rights of the native population of Great Britain, and by extension, for that of our brothers and sisters right across the western world.

WE ARE LOSING THE WAR AGAINST OUR PEOPLE BUT IT IS NOT YET LOST. LET YESTERDAY’S MEETING BE THE START OF OUR FIGHT BACK TO WINNING WAYS.

Readers wishing to contact the Nationalist Unity Facebook page should go to

https://www.facebook.com/groups/281875142500361/

FOR SALE – NATIONALIST PUBLICATIONS & BOOKS

For Sale; 1,000’s of back issues of Nationalist publications from both the UK and USA, including Spearhead; Nationalism Today; Right NOW; Vanguard, The Loyalist, League Sentinel; NS Bulletin; NF North West Observer; NF News; Britain First; National Vanguard, Western Destiny and many more.

One of our elderly subscribers recently moved house and having to down size donated his vast collection of publications and books to Heritage and Destiny.

For a full price list please send either; a large S.A.E. to Heritage and Destiny, Sales. 40 Birkett Drive, Preston, PR2 6HE and we will post you a copy of the most up to date price list; or an email us at – heritageanddestiny@yahoo.com – and we will email you a copy of the price list back.

PC INQUISITION PERSECUTES DNA PIONEER

The sheer vindictive nastiness of the Thought Police of Political Correctness has recently been shown yet again by their treatment of a very old, sick man who is also one of the World’s greatest living scientists, Professor James Watson.

Noble Prize-winning James Watson is stripped of honorary titles at lab

In 1953, Watson and his colleagues Maurice Wilkins and Francis Crick discovered the spiral helix structure of DNA, establishing it as the repository of genetic information in almost all living things on Earth. Their epochal work earned them a Nobel Prize in 1962.

As one of the world’s most eminent geneticists, Watson was showered with promotions and honours.  In 1968 Watson began serving as Director of the world-leading Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, subsequently assuming the roles of President and Chancellor thereof.

For nearly forty years Professor Watson pursued a distinguished career at that Laboratory, which for a long time was understandably proud to be associated with him. However, the noose of Politically Correct totalitarianism was tightening imperceptibly.

In the eyes of the PC Thought Police Watson’s crime was to uphold the view, shared – though ever less openly! – by most geneticists that human intelligence is primarily determined by genetic inheritance and that such innate genetic differences are at the root of much of the differences in average intelligence repeatedly revealed between genetically distinct human populations or races.

This was once uncontroversial. A very large number of independent studies over many years confirmed the reality of average differences in intelligence between races, with Australian aborigines lowest, Negroes in both Africa and America somewhat higher and Whites higher still, with Mongolid East Asians, Chinese and Japanese having the highest average intelligence. These measured IQ and other intelligence metric differences correlate well, indeed very obviously, with the historical, cultural and current performances of the ethnic groups concerned. Books such as Oxford Professor John Baker’s 1974 study Race, and Herrnstein and Murray’s 1994 The Bell Curve, give chapter and verse of the evidence in this area.

But as the jackboot of Political Correctness ground ever harder on the world of science, one by one experts in this field fell silent, or even, in fear for their careers, began parroting the desired liberal orthodoxy. The evidence of innate racial differences in mind as well as body was not disproved, the old studies which had supported such conclusions were not supplanted by later ones proving them wrong. Instead research in this area simply stopped. Or was stopped.

It is now impossible to get any sort of research grant for a scientist to investigate this field, and career-ending to try. It would be very difficult for a book like Race or The Bell Curve to find a major publisher today. What few research papers still venture into publication in obscure journals such asPersonality and Individual Differences and Intelligence, both from scientific publisher Elsevier, continue to support these innate differences, but are simply not mentioned beyond nervous whispers in college common rooms.

Professor Watson, however, had the courage to carry on speaking the truth about an area on which he was, after all, one of the world’s greatest experts.  In October 2007, Watson said to the Sunday Times that he was “gloomy about the prospect of Africa” because “all our social policies are based on the fact that their intelligence is the same as ours, whereas all the testing says not really.”

He later waded into even more dangerous territory, suggesting that anecdotal reports said that black employees were less intelligent, and that there were no talented black scientists who could be recruited to work in his laboratory.

Clearly this could not be tolerated, and Professor Watson was summarily sacked from all his academic posts and seats on the boards of biotech companies. To damp down the ensuing outcry, he was fobbed off with meaningless honorary titles from Cold Spring:  Chancellor Emeritus, Oliver R. Grace Professor Emeritus and Honorary Trustee.

But his income dried up and he was reduced to penury in his old age. In 2014 he told the Financial Times “Because I was an ‘unperson’ I was fired from the boards of companies, so I have no income, apart from my academic income. No one really wants to admit I exist.” To make ends meet he was reduced to selling his Nobel Prize Medal.

Never the less this brave, honest old scientist was unbowed. Filmed last summer in the PBS documentary American Masters: Decoding Watson, he stuck to his guns and upheld the truth.

Asked whether his views about race and intelligence had changed, he forthrightly replied: “Not at all. I would like for them to have changed, that there be new knowledge that says that your nurture is much more important than nature.” But there isn’t, so he went on “There’s a difference on the average between blacks and whites on IQ tests. I would say the difference is, it’s genetic.”

This temerity could not be tolerated. Even though Professor Watson was subsequently injured in a car accident in October and is sadly now in an almost vegetative state, Cold Harbour responded by vindictively stripping him of all the honorary posts and titles earned in sixty years of world-leading research, describing the views of probably the greatest living expert in this field as “unsubstantiated and reckless”. Their institution“condemns the misuse of science to justify prejudice.”  Although the considered opinion of a world authority based on decades of research, whether or not they agree with it, or dare admit they do, is hardly by any standard “prejudice”.

Sundry Politically Correct jackals then ran up to yap at the fallen lion, who was conveniently now no longer able to reply to them. One Dr Francis S. Collins, who no doubt is keen to remain Director of the US Government National Institutes of Health, said he was “unaware of any credible research” behind Watson’s “scientifically unsupported and hurtful beliefs”, revealing himself as either incredibly ignorant for one in his position or a coward and a liar.

This contemptible treatment of a sick but brave and honest old scientist standing up for the truth against a tyrannous official ideology will hopefully be judged by history with that meted out to Galileo for saying that the Earth goes around the Sun. When Politically Correct dogma on race is one with the Ptolemaic epicycles Copernicus and Galileo refuted, the name of DNA pioneer Dr. James Watson will still be remembered in honour. A great scientist and a brave and honest man.

Ian Freeman

Harry Mullin – A Great British Patriot

It is with deep sadness that I have to inform comrades that the great British patriot Harry Mullin has died. Harry passed away peacefully in his sleep on 22nd of December 2018 at a care home in northern Glasgow.

Henry Cunningham Mullin, (Harry), was born on the 8th of March 1935, into a large family of Irish immigrant Scots. Harry was the youngest of seven children I believe. His father Ned and five of his sons served in the British Army, Three dying whilst serving the Crown. A sister went on to become one of the most prominent Salvation Army officers in America.

Harry grew up in the St. Georges Cross and “Roun’ Toll” areas of Glasgow. I recall Harry telling me of working as a boy delivering heavy bags of sugar around Glasgow and of the rats and “silverfish” that polluted his tenement home that terrified him so much as a youngster, so when he at last got the opportunity to join the Army, like his brothers and father before him, he grasped it with open arms.

Harry became a Sapper in the Royal Engineers, serving in Germany and Hong Kong and elsewhere. Harry eventually married, fathering four children if I am correct.

Harry had an insatiable thirst for knowledge and he read book after book. Nothing was out of bounds and no political theory was unworthy of analysis.

At this point Harry was a long distance lorry driver but he was also studying at every truck stop he could and eventually he was admitted to Glasgow University as a mature student. He gained a masters honours degree in politics and history I believe, but don’t quote me on the subjects.

It was at Harry’s time at University that his life took quite a turn.
One evening at a party Harry was given a photocopied pamphlet by University lefties advertising a meeting. Intrigued Harry went along.

The meeting was dull but a few in the audience seemed serious and they invited Harry to another party nearby.  Harry toddled along out of interest.
Before long the drink was flowing and the “revolutionaries” were talking about violence, guns and robberies.

Harry, as a British patriot was appalled, and decided to inform on the leftie students. Next morning he approached a nearby Police desk sergeant with the news and details of the plot and in a short space of time Harry was approached and eventually recruited by Special Branch.

To the detriment of his family life and his own personal security Harry then spent many years infiltrating various leftist groups.  He infiltrated Tartan Army groups, preventing the kidnap and murder of Lord Campbell of Croy. He travelled extensively informing on Irish Republican, Italian Red Brigade groups and even Eritrean rebels in Africa. Harry hated Communism and it is to Harry’s credit that the vile former Labour party MP and former Lord Mayor of London, Ken Livingstone, was duped enough to describe Harry as “A respected Labour movement member”.

Without going off too much into a tangent Harry’s relationship with Special Branch and MI5 soured. Harry had been asked to take part in a bank robbery organised by leftists that Harry had been informing on. Harry smelled a rat and refused, believing he was being set up because he knew too much. Harry then cut his ties with Special Branch.

There was a hiatus of a few years of Harry’s story but Harry eventually attended what was also to be my first ever BNP St. Andrew’s Day rally meeting in the 1980’s. John Tyndall and Dave Bruce were the guest speakers.

Whilst I headed to the pub afterwards, Harry headed home, spending his rent money on the pile of revisionist and nationalist books he had never clapped eyes on before.

In private, Harry came clean, informing us early of his former Special Branch and Mi5 roles. He also showed us some documents he had kept from his time as an informer on the left.
His anti-communist credentials let us know we had a good man in our ranks.

Those of us who were young BNP activists back in the day will recall that we would turn up team handed and tooled up, only to discover a solitary Harry Mullin standing there before us, brave as hell, facing the communists himself.

I have many, many, fond memories of my auld friend  Harry Mullin.
Be it Harry speaking at BNP meetings across Britain. His booming voice declaring “I may have been in the Communist Party but my name is Harry Mullin. It is not Gerry Gable”.

In the early 90’s Harry moved to Northern Ireland, living just off the Shankill, where one of his brothers was a Protestant Minister. Harry worked as a scrap metal man and his profession took him to all parts of Belfast and beyond. Even in Republican IRA areas. Secretly, although he was no longer an official informer and he was sick of that life, Harry would alert the RUC to any whispers he picked up in IRA areas on his scrap metal trips.

Back in Scotland after his brother died in Ulster Harry had a time living homeless, exposed to the elements, living on scaffolding in a sleeping bag night after night before he ended up in the Peter McCann hostel near Dobbies Loan. This was a time long before mobile phones, emails and social media so Harry could only contact us through a BNP P.O. box we visited irregularly I guess. Eventually when Harry made contact he was housed in a BNP friendly house in Govan. Back amongst friends and comrades.

Few people know that Harry was a deeply religious man. He regularly read his Bible and had articles published in various Christian magazines. Using his military experience he also had an article published in Soldier Of Fortune magazine too.

As Harry aged and ill health encroached, Harry would limit his activism to writing articles for various Nationalist magazines and he was also a prolific letter writer to the ZOG press. He was also very kind in sending financial donations to White Nationalist groups at home and abroad.

I was wondering how to end this obituary but I have just received a text from a comrade of mine “G”. His abridged text says “Spent a few minute reflecting on the sad news. Harry was a one-off and he could never be accused of living a boring life. Lots of good memories. From bumping into him regularly in the town to meetings in London and Leeds etc. There’s a special hall on Valhalla for the old revered warriors.
Harry is there now. RIP!”.

Enough said really. If I live to be half the white man Harry was I will be doing well.

Steve Cartwright, Glasgow, Scotland

RIP Harry Mullin

The Mullin Family Remembered – By Harry Mullin – H&D Sept/Oct 2012 issue

In memory of my family, formerly of 14 Grove Park Street, off Garscube Road, and 20 Westbury Street, off Cedar Street: now departed this life.

Ned: my father.  Black Watch, Royal Engineers, Western Front 1914-1918.  Buried in Lambhill, Glasgow, 1944.

Jenny: my sorrowful Christian mother, who wept and prayed for her family. Jimmy and Jenny: died in childhood from diseases contracted in a vermin-infested Glasgow slum, my father’s reward along with unemployment and consequent poverty, from a grateful nation for the hardship he endured in Flanders fields. Sandy:  Scots Guards, buried in War Commission grave, February 1945, Streatham Cemetery, London.

John:  W.O. Pilot, RAF Coastal Command.  Shot down, Bay of Biscay, Christmas 1943 – lost with all his Kiwi crew.  Merry Christmas, Ned and Jenny.  I remember my mother’s tears and my father’s trembling lips.

Eddie:  RNVR, “signed up for the duration”, June 1939.  Buried in War Commission grave, 31st December 1946.  Happy New Year, Jenny.  (Ned was dead by that time.)

Robert: Royal Navy, was up on deck duty, battleship HMS Anson in Hong Kong harbour, when the Japanese military came aboard to sign the surrender terms, 1945.  Buried in Ulster, “the ould country”, 11th July.

Tommy: REME, served in Palestine, Egypt, Canal Zone – combatting terrorists.  Interred in Garden of Remembrance, Lambhill. May: my sorrowful sister, interred in Garden of Remembrance, Lambhill. Betty: Salvation Army officer, twice appointed ‘Woman of the Year’ for her work among the poor in New York.  Buried “under a tree” in New Jersey, USA.

Harry – the last of the clan.  Ex-Regular Army.  Served my country in the Royal Engineers: Britain, South East Asia, Europe, East Africa, Ulster – and got no thanks for it.  Put onto a blacklist by left-wing bigots in the trade unions, who with their cop comrades hounded me into a police cell for five days.  Reviled in the left-wing anti-British media for three pages. 

Unemployed for twenty years, just for being British, and refusing to grovel over our nation’s history. What left-winger, journalist, cop, or trade union bureaucrat has a record of sacrifice comparable to us Mullins?  Yet the public sector left has called me “Scum!”, showing they are no friends of us working-class Brits; but rather are our oppressors and hate-filled enemies.

Harry Mullin, Lambhill, Glasgow, Scotland

UPDATE: Alison Chabloz given suspended sentence for “grossly offensive” YouTube videos

Alison Chabloz

Folk singer and satirist Alison Chabloz was convicted this morning at Westminster Magistrates’ Court on three charges relating to “grossly offensive” material on YouTube.

Judge John Zani found Ms Chabloz guilty of what he termed “serious” offences under the Communications Act 2003: he will pass sentence on June 14th after receiving probation reports. The maximum potential sentence is six months imprisonment on each charge.

Click here to read a more detailed report, analysing Judge Zani’s ruling and his dangerous failure to respond to the important issues raised in defence evidence from H&D‘s assistant editor Peter Rushton.

14th June update: Ms Chabloz has been given a 20-week suspended prison sentence, combined with 180 hours community service and a 20-day “rehabilitation programme”. She has also been banned from posting to social media. The Campaign Against Antisemitism which brought the original private prosecution said in their statement following the sentencing hearing this morning:

“The case effectively delivers a landmark precedent verdict on incitement on social media and on whether the law considers Holocaust denial to be “grossly offensive” and therefore illegal when used as a means by which to hound Jews.”

In his personal statement, Gideon Falter of CAA repeated his earlier assertion that the verdict amounts to the outlawing of revisionism:
“This sentence sends a strong message that in Britain, Holocaust denial and antisemitic conspiracy theories will not be tolerated.”

As explained in our detailed report, it is by no means clear whether Judge Zani’s verdict does criminalise ‘Holocaust denial’ per se, or only particular forms of such denial which are deemed to be ‘grossly offensive’.

Next Page »

  • Find By Category

  • Latest News

  • Follow us on Twitter