Disloyalty, greed and cowardice: rootless tycoons betray English football, then back down within 24 hours!
A tiny clique of globalist billionaires attempted to destroy the traditions of England’s national sport yesterday. Their attempted coup collapsed within hours, demonstrating that despite the apparent great power of the global greed machine, its controllers’ greed and disloyalty is equalled by their cowardice.
The so-called “big six” clubs of English football shocked the nation this week by announcing plans for a new “European Super League”.
This would have a disastrous effect on our national game, and no one with genuine roots in English life would ever contemplate such a plan.
As has rightly been mentioned even by ex-footballers of well-known leftwing sympathies such as Gary Neville and Gary Lineker, those behind the plan self-evidently have “no loyalty to this country” and no roots in our traditions and heritage.
A fans’ backlash, and the unprecedented response by a Conservative government threatening to “drop a legislative bomb” on capitalist conspirators, led to the six English clubs withdrawing from the scheme within 24 hours and desperately trying to cover their tracks. It is to be hoped that the billionaire cabal will still face punishment, and reforms to the structure of football ownership that will prevent any similar future plot.
Should we really be surprised?
Let us look at those involved,
The mastermind of the entire project is Sir Len Blavatnik, a Ukrainian-Jewish oligarch who was for many years a close friend of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
The key men at the six English clubs involved include the following:
Chelsea owner Roman Abramovich, a very controversial Russian-Israeli tycoon.
Tottenham Hotspur chairman Daniel Levy and his business partner, Spurs owner Joe Lewis – an East End Jew, currency trader, tax exile, and close associate of George Soros.
Manchester United chairman Joel Glazer, part of an American-Jewish family who bought the club in 2005, with consequences viewed as disastrous by many United fans. (The Glazer family’s right-hand man Ed Woodward resigned as United’s vice-chairman as the ‘Super League’ began to collapse. Characteristically the club lied about the reasons for his resignation, pretending that Woodward’s departure had nothing to do with the Blavatnik conspiracy.)
Liverpool chairman Tom Werner, Jewish-American television executive and since 2010 co-owner of Liverpool alongside the non-Jewish American tycoon John W. Henry.
American (non-Jewish) billionaire Stan Kroenke, owner of Arsenal. The former chief executive of Arsenal, South African born Ivan Gazidis, now at AC Milan, is another key player in the European Super League scheme.
Manchester City chairman Khaldoon Al Mubarak, a close confidant of Abu Dhabi crown prince and de facto United Arab Emirates ruler Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed Al Nahyan. For the past decade the dictatorial royal families of the Emirates have been developing ever-closer relations with Israel, a process accelerated recently by Donald Trump and the gangster ruler of Saudi Arabia.
G.K. Chesterton knew all about such people, whom he described in his poem The Secret People, one verse of which almost prophesied the betrayal of English football.
They have given us into the hand of new unhappy lords,
Lords without anger or honour, who dare not carry their swords.
They fight by shuffling papers; they have bright dead alien eyes;
They look at our labour and laughter as a tired man looks at flies.
And the load of their loveless pity is worse than the ancient wrongs,
Their doors are shut in the evening; and they know no songs.
But as Chesterton also foresaw, there remain “the people of England” who “have not spoken yet”.
At H&D we remain confident that the people of England will eventually speak; will eventually rebel against those new unhappy lords, those rootless cosmopolitans who have stolen our birth-right. H&D‘s editor and assistant editor are fortunate not to be directly involved with these megabucks ‘super’ clubs: we support grassroots football including the Lancashire clubs Chorley and Mossley!
(And we know that H&D‘s Jewish friends in the USA reject the values of supposedly ‘Jewish’ globalist tycoons, and also support locally-rooted football clubs!)
The establishment parties are more frightened than ever, following the ‘European Super League’ betrayal and are scrambling to pretend that they are on the side of the millions of ordinary English football fans who adamantly oppose this plan.
Yet the fact is that Labour, the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats are co-creators of the rapacious, rootless global capitalist model that lies behind this disgrace.
The hitherto silent people of England will not forget this week’s events. They will not forget that the global greed machine brought English football to the brink of disaster.
We hope and believe that the collapse of the Blavatnik Plot is the beginning of the end for the internationalist cabal that distorted so much of European civilisation during the second half of the 20th century. Bring on the Great Reset, which racial nationalists should view as a promise, not a threat!
H&D joins the Nationalist 100 Club!
Mark Cotterill reports as Heritage and Destiny reaches its first centenary edition.
Heritage and Destiny has now joined the very exclusive group (known as the 100 Club) of UK nationalist publications that has made it to issue 100 – which no doubt will upset many of the loons who post on the nutzi online forums who said we would never reach issue 50, let alone 100!
We join the esteemed ranks of Spearhead (438), New Frontier/British Nationalist (207), The Flag (147), Voice of Freedom/Freedom (143), NF News (126), and Identity (103), all of whom published over 100 issues, but are sadly no longer with us.
Then there is League Sentinel – published by the League of St George, which recently published issue 124, and of course Candour – published by the AK Chesterton Trust, which is still going after over 60 years and has just published issue 873! If I have missed any out, a thousand apologies, as my good friend Mustafa would say after he had skipped his round!
Our very first issue was published way back in the summer of 1999 as “The Newsletter of the American Friends of the BNP” (AF-BNP). It was only eight pages, but it was a start of better things to come.
Issue 1 included: My editorial, introducing Heritage & Destiny, and The American Friends of the BNP; an article written by me from The Spotlight newspaper on the British National Party; a report on a recent Council of Conservative Citizens Conference; a CD Review: Blue Ridge Kind of Love, by Jim Houck & Friends, a book review: My Awakening by David Duke and an obituary for Pauline Louise Mackey, in fact many of the same features that still appear today, in this issue 100.
The H&D “team” for issues 1 to 4 consisted of just myself and Carl Knittle and was produced in a very basic format (cut and paste!) in the basement of Carl’s home in Ashburn, in northern Virginia.
By issue 5 we had recruited another expatriate “Brit” – Carl Clifford – to the H&D team. Carl transformed the magazine using desk top publishing – PageMaker. Also joining the “team” for issue 5 was long-standing American national socialist Martin Kerr – which meant we were now four strong (two Brits and two Yanks).
The magazine was now twenty pages and was being produced from my apartment in Falls Church, Virginia – which doubled up as the AF-BNP HQ. We also had a website (thanks to Carl Clifford) and we were holding regular meetings and even demonstrations in the Washington DC area. It was all go!
Strangely many years later Carl Clifford’s wife Stephanie ran (unsuccessfully) a couple of times in Democratic Party primaries for the Virginia state senate. As my old mate John Ross would say, “they would never believe us back home!”
The final American issue – number 9 – was published in the summer of 2001, shortly before the Federals (on the instructions of the SPLC) closed the AF-BNP down. I would have liked to have reached issue 10 stateside, but oh well, that’s life, I guess.
The American government (INS) issued me with a ten-year exclusion order the following summer and I finally vacated “the land of the free and home of the brave” on November 3rd 2002 and returned to ‘good Olde Blighty’ (Blackburn in East Lancashire to be exact).
It would be another six months before H&D was finally resurrected on this side of the pond, with the help of Peter Rushton, who volunteered to help me start it up again (and has been with us ever since), and with Martin Kerr and Carl Knittle looking after the American side. In February 2003 (I think!) we published issue 10 – dated winter 2003.
We managed quite easily to open up a UK H&D bank account (which would be a lot harder to do now) as well as a Blackburn PO Box for our main postal address. We also had a new PO Box address in Ashburn, Virginia, as our American address that was run by Carl Knittle.
Issue 10 included articles: No One Likes Us (the English): But We Don’t Care! – by Stephen Davies; The Columbians: Founding Fathers of American White Nationalism – Part I of what was to become a 8 part history of the American movement by Martin Kerr; Tolkien: Ring-bearer for racial nationalism, by Paul Comben; A Movie Review: Lord of the Rings – Part I, The Fellowship of the Ring, reviewed by Martin Kerr; A CD Review: Ballads for the New Britain, a Red White & Blue compilation, reviewed by Jamie Richards. And three book reviews – Imperium, (2nd edition with foreword by Mark Weber), reviewed by Martin Kerr; Race, Genetics and Society: Glayde Whitney on the Scientific and Social Policy Implications of Racial Differences, reviewed by me; and Old Thunder: A Life of Hilaire Belloc, by Joe Pearce, reviewed by Paul Francis.
Like Peter Rushton, I had been purged from the Griffin BNP, so H&D became an independent racial-nationalist magazine. We were, as our masthead proclaimed, “The Radical Voice of British Nationalism”. It took Peter and myself a couple of issues to find our feet, but from 2004 onwards we just never really looked back.
From issue 14, H&D became “The Radical Voice of White Nationalism”. This reflected both the magazine’s growing readership overseas and our commitment to White nationalism. The Union Jack flag on the masthead was replaced by the Teutonic Knight carrying the Celtic Cross flag instead.
However, the Celtic Cross only lasted five issues, and was replaced in issue 18, by the Teutonic Knight carrying a “3 Lions” (or Leopards if you wish) flag. This reflected the magazine’s support for the England First Party, for which I would be elected a Borough Councillor in Blackburn just over a year later.
The slogan on the masthead also changed yet again (for the final time!) to “Stand Men of the West – today is the day we fight”. I felt this slogan (from The Lord of the Rings movie) best summed up – in a one-liner – what we are all about.
Issue 20 included articles: America the Big Lie – by Walter Mueller; Time to get back to the streets – by Eddy Morrison; An Obituary to Dr. Samuel Francis – by me. A movie review: The Alamo (2004) – by me. And book review: Tom Sunic’s Against Democracy and Equality, the European New Right reviewed by Peter Rushton.
The magazine increased to twenty-four pages from issue 22 (the John Tyndall obituary issue). And issue 29 was the last to feature the Teutonic Knight on the masthead. From issue 30 the masthead had instead a more professional looking three lions/leopards oblong banner, which we have kept to this day.
Issue 23 (Jan-March 2006) was the last time we used the Ashburn, Virginia PO Box as our American address, as Carl Knittle who had looked after the H&D correspondence stateside up until then was moving out of state. From issue 24 (April-June 2006) we had a new address in Falls Church, Virginia, only a few miles from the original AF-BNP PO Box, which had also been in Falls Church. Our American assistant editor Martin Kerr took over the running of things stateside.
Issue 30 included articles: Manfred Roeder arrested at Heathrow and excluded from UK; and 40 Years of the National Front, Part I – both by Peter Rushton. Book Review: Shots Fired – Dr Sam Francis on America’s Culture War, reviewed by Ian Freeman. Movie Review: Ghosts of Cité Soleil – reviewed by me. And a DVD Review: The BNP Chronicles, Vol. 5: Tomorrow Belongs to Us, reviewed by David Ryan.
Issue 38 (Oct-Dec 2009) was the last time that we used a UK PO/BCM box as our contact address. From issue 39 (to this day) we have used a real address – H&D Towers in Preston, Lancashire. Contrary to what many keyboard/internet nationalists may say/think about using a real address, H&D Towers has never been attacked (yet!) by Reds/Jews/Immigrants, although to be fair we have been attacked (twice) by local drug dealers, but such is life on a former Preston council estate!
Issue 40 included articles: Suez 1956: A Tale of Collusion & Zionism – by Ronald Rickcord; American Renaissance Conference Proceeds Despite Far Left Threats, by Jared Taylor. Book reviews: Defence of the Realm: History of MI5 reviewed by Peter Rushton and The British Free Corps, reviewed by Martin Kerr; and movie review: The Firm, reviewed by me.
In October 2010 H&D held its first John Tyndall Memorial Meeting (JTMM), in Preston, having taken over the event from Ricky Fawcus. A report of the meeting was published in issue 43. This was the 5th annual JTMM and H&D would go on to host another seven meetings in Preston, with attendances ranging from just under 50 to just over 130. The final JTMM hosted by H&D (the 12th) was held in October 2017 and featured on an ITV Exposure programme! A report of this meeting was published in issue 81.
We hope to be able to hold another JTMM sometime in the near future, maybe even later this year, but that of course depends on the Covid lockdown situation, and if we can even legally hold large indoor meetings ever again.
From issue 49, the magazine changed from a quarterly to a bi-monthly and has remained so to this day. To be honest with such a lot of hard-copy movement publications folding during the previous ten years, it was a bit of a gamble turning H&D into a bi-monthly in 2012. But we hung in there and are still publishing today!
Issue 50 was a bit of a milestone itself, and included articles: English Identity in an Olympic Jubilee Year, by Peter Rushton; Gigolo Cops and Neurotic Transfer by Simon Sheppard; The Mullin Family – by Harry Mullin; Movie Review – Wrath of the Titans, reviewed by me. And CD review – Killing Joke’s MMXII, reviewed by Ian Webb.
Issue 58 (Jan/Feb 2014) was the last time we used the Falls Church, Virginia, PO Box as our American address, as we were experiencing a number of problems with the local post office. From issue 59 (March/April 2014) we had a new address in Silver Spring, Maryland, and the running of things stateside was taken over by former AF-BNP member Sidney Secular, who to this day remains H&D‘s top distributor stateside.
Issue 60 included articles: Nationalism in Europe 2014, and BNP in the Last Chance Saloon: 2014 Local Elections – both by Peter Rushton; Ukraine Crisis: a new perspective – by Ivan Winters. Book Reviews: Franco’s International Brigades – reviewed by Adrian Davies; and Rangers FC – We Don’t Do Walking Away – The Incredible Inside Story – reviewed by Gil Caldwell.
Issue 70 included articles: The original British National Party and its secret MP by Peter Rushton; Cuba Revisited, by David Astin; Horst Mahler – Victim of Democratic Tyranny – by Richard Edmonds and Lady Michèle Renouf; Rhodesian Prime Minister Ian Smith, The Debunking of a Myth: Part III – by Stephen Goodson; and Book Review: Black Nazis II!, reviewed by Gordon Stridiron.
From issue 70, January/February 2016, we inserted an extra sheet of A4 (a Subscribers’ Update, carrying internal news and small ads on one side and bigger adverts on the reverse) giving us in fact 26 pages. This has proved very popular with most subscribers, so we have kept this format ever since.
Issue 74 (Sept/Oct 2016) was the last time we used an American address. To be honest although it was nice (and quite impressive!) to be able to have H&D addresses both sides of the pond, it was just not cost effective anymore. The vast majority of American subscribers were now paying online, and those who could not did not seem to mind posting their checks to our UK address, so reluctantly we closed down our Silver Spring, Maryland address.
From issue 78 (May-June 2017) Martin Kerr stepped down as one of H&D‘s two assistant editors (the other being Peter Rushton who is still going strong!). Since the death of Matt Koehl in October 2014, Martin had been playing a much more active role in New Order, eventually taking over as the group’s Chief of Staff. He just did not have the time to do both. Martin remains a staunch friend and supporter of H&D as well as being one of our main distributors in the USA.
Issue 80 included articles: White Sharia, by Simon Sheppard; The Infantilization of Modern Man – by Richard Duchesne; and Carl Klang and his music – by Eddy Morrison. Book Reviews: The Racial Loyalist Manifesto, reviewed by Martin Kerr; and Mark Collett’s The Fall of Western Man – reviewed by Peter Rushton.
Issue 90 included: A Spectre Haunting Europe, nationalist and populist parties on the march – by Peter Rushton; The Anglo-Saxon Kingdoms at the British Library – by Tony Paulsen. A double Book Review: After the Reich: From the Fall of Vienna to the Berlin Airlift, and Orderly and Humane: The Expulsion of the Germans after the Second World War – both reviewed by Ian Freeman. A Movie Review: Outlaw King – reviewed by me. And Old Poet’s Corner: The Crown in the Thorns – by Eddy Morrison.
Issue 92 (Sept-Oct 2019), was our twentieth anniversary issue, which was quite a feat in itself. However, I’m pleased we have got at long last to issue 100. As they say anything after that is just a bonus!
It’s frequently pointed out to me by many social-media nationalists (most of whom don’t even subscribe to H&D as they find £28 too hard to part with) that it would be much cheaper and much easier if we were to go completely online. Dump the hard-copy, with the envelopes and stamps into the history dustbin, like most of 21st century nationalism has already done – they cry.
Even most websites seem old-fashioned and out of date, to this new breed of revolutionaries. They tell me that H&D should be blogging, and tweeting (I admit we do tweet a bit!), but most of all carry on the fight for Race and Nation, via Facebook, as that’s where the real battle is! Be it on smart phones, tablets and/or other assorted “devices”, that’s how we will win our country back – they tell me!
However, I must beg to disagree. They are welcome to carry on their heroic crusade online, and I’m sure it must do some good for the cause (I think?), but there are whole groups of our people out there who do not go on Facebook, Twitter, Telegram, Instagram and TikTok, or even have internet access. Many do not even bother to go on the internet, they don’t have smart phones, tablets or even laptops, either by choice or because of their individual life situations.
And these are not just elderly people (although to be fair they do make up a sizeable part of the non-internet crowd). There are also an admirable minority among the under-60s who have made a deliberate and calculated decision to remove these machines (including TVs) from their lives forever. I spoke with one of these guys a while back in Devon and he told me that it was amazing, living with no internet and just having a phone that you can talk through! He explained it like it was as if you had left the big city, full of mental smog and you’re out in the clear, fresh air again and you can actually think that much more clearly.
Oh, if only I wasn’t the editor of the H&D, and if I didn’t have to do what comes with the job, I’d like to join my Devon comrade in his world – well maybe for a few hours anyway!
The social-media nationalist crowd don’t seem to understand that someday – maybe pretty soon with the way things are going (i.e. with Covid 19) – we are going to lose the internet. Boris and his Indian friends will just turn it off, and there’s little or nothing we can do about it. When that happens, since we lack the courage to physically oppose them, we will have to take the old photocopy machines out of the garage, dust them off, and rush downtown to stock up on paper, ink, envelopes and stamps again.
I remember speaking to a group of youngsters from National Action after a JTMM and telling them this was going to happen, sooner rather than later, and the sheer look of horror in their faces said it all. I explained to them, that I was not sure at the time how this would happen, but one of these days we are no longer going to have access to the internet.
It may come via some diktat from Downing Street or Thames House, that just begins with the arrests and jailing of bloggers and social-media posters for simple dissent (as recently happened in Australia), or because the balloon will at least partially go up and internet service will go down, or be interrupted by civil disorder, economic collapse or cyber-attack.
Hard-copy publications like H&D where our people are actually required to sit down and read a block of text for content, which few people born after 1980 and almost no one born after 2000 or so can do, are also still necessary because actual literacy, as opposed to looking at images on an electric screen, is a vital skill that White people must re-acquire and preserve in the dark days to come.
That is why hard-copy publications like H&D, must keep going, for as long as possible. But can we keep going as a hard-copy magazine – perhaps for another twenty years? Well the odds are against us, but who knows what the future may bring?
Back in 2012, I wrote in my editorial for issue 50, that we should not forget the publishers of the first Heritage & Destiny magazine – Richard Lawson and Steve Brady – who way back in 1980 launched the first issue of H&D mark I. For without them we would not have had the inspiration to start up H&D mark II. Sadly, they only published six issues, but their articles were of the highest quality. They were men ahead of their time. We follow in their footsteps and keep the torch of nationalism burning.
Footnote: All back issues of H&D are still available for £4.00 each or any six issues for £20.00 (including p&p – UK only – for overseas rates please ask) although be warned we have fewer than ten copies of many of the early issues left now.
H&D Issue 99 published
The new issue (#99) of Heritage and Destiny magazine is out now. 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?
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.
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.)
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.
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
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.
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.”
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.
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
