Westminster Bubbles – can any politician cast the first stone?

Following the resignation of Health Secretary Matt Hancock over breaching Covid regulations in connection with an extra-marital affair, Westminster and Fleet Street rumour mills are working overtime.

The two frontbenchers most in the spotlight are Labour’s deputy leader Angela Rayner and Cabinet Office minister Michael Gove. Coincidentally Rayner has been responsible for shadowing Gove ever since Labour’s misfired reshuffle.

But the rumours have nothing to do with politics.

Rayner split up from her husband, union official Mark Rayner, last year and has for some time been very close to her former campaign manager, Ilford MP Sam Tarry – a former employee of the ‘anti-racist charity’ Hope not Hate. Both Tarry and Rayner are married with children: indeed Rayner (though only 41) is a grandmother.

Hope not Hate boss Nick Lowles sprang to Tarry’s defence before the 2019 election when his former aide was accused of having links to ‘antisemites’ in Jeremy Corbyn’s Labour Party.

At least Rayner and Tarry are involved in a straightforward, old-fashioned, extramarital affair.

The Tory scandals are far more exotic, involving swingers’ parties, cocaine, and perhaps their very own Philip Schofield about to ‘out’ himself.

Michael Gove reporting for the BBC on a Gay Pride march in 1993

Covid regulations make this sort of thing much more complicated: at one time a Tory MP might have thought ‘lockdown’ had something to do with Miss Whiplash in a Shepherd Market flat. But now even the highest in the land are subjected to the Daily Mail‘s middle-class morality.

Fortunately for Michael Gove (who once shared a flat with gay businessman Ivan Massow and gay Tory Nick Boles) a large part of the British media belongs to Rupert Murdoch, who has always seen Gove as his man – so you can guarantee that whatever stories break this week, they won’t be Sun exclusives!

Mr Gove has in some respects always been proud of swinging both ways. In February this year he was challenged in the House of Commons about his claims to have sung The Sash, but professed that in addition to this loyalist anthem he also sang the republican favourite Fields of Athenry and the Scottish nationalist Flower of Scotland.

Civic nationalism crashes to defeat in Yorkshire by-election

For Britain Movement leader Anne-Marie Waters leafleting in Batley & Spen

Parts of the Batley & Spen constituency in West Yorkshire were among the strongest racial nationalist areas in Britain during the first decade of the 21st century. The BNP’s David Exley won the mainly White working-class Heckmondwike ward at a by-election in August 2003 – one of a series of BNP victories either side of the Pennines, triggered by the Oldham riots of May 2001. Cllr Exley retained his seat in 2004 and a second Heckmondwike councillor was gained in 2005. Even as late as 2010 when the local BNP fought its last campaign, they managed 17.6%.

Admittedly this is just one of the six wards that make up Batley & Spen, but the party also polled very well elsewhere in the constituency in the 2000s, including the Tory wards Liversedge & Gomersal and Birstall & Birkenshaw. Any parliamentary by-election in Batley & Spen should have been (and should still be) good news for any serious pro-White nationalist party.

David Exley (above centre) congratulated by his BNP colleague Nick Cass after he won the 2003 Heckmondwike by-election

Yet when such a by-election first occurred here, it was in dramatic circumstances that made racial nationalist campaigning appear distasteful. A week before the Brexit referendum in June 2016, Batley & Spen’s Labour MP Jo Cox was murdered by a deranged Heckmondwike resident who was quickly labelled a ‘far right terrorist’ by the media. Despite living in Heckmondwike, Thomas Mair had no connection whatever with the BNP and was totally unknown to any other British nationalists, apart from the eccentric Alan Harvey (a former NF member long resident in South Africa) to whose newsletter South African Patriot Mair subscribed.

The other mainstream parties gave Labour a clear run in the ensuing by-election held in October 2016 and Labour’s Tracy Brabin won a majority of more than 16,000, with the civic nationalist English Democrats in second place on 4.8% and a much-diminished BNP third on 2.7%.

Reaction to Jo Cox’s murder only briefly disguised an anti-Labour trend among White voters. As in neighbouring Dewsbury, many White voters have been repelled by what they see as an Asian takeover of the local Labour party and by policies of the Asian Labour-led Kirklees council. To some extent these voters (using Brexit as a proxy issue for unmentionable racial concerns) have drifted to the Tories in recent elections. Even though UKIP and the Brexit Party failed to make much progress here, a former UKIP activist formed a populist movement called the Heavy Woollen Independents (a reference to the former staple industry of this area) who polled 12.2% at the 2019 general election, leaving Labour even more dependent on the presumed loyalty of Asian voters, concentrated in the Batley part of the constituency.

Former Batley & Spen MP Jo Cox, who was murdered in 2016

So when Tracy Brabin won the inaugural mayoral election for West Yorkshire in May this year, causing a second Batley & Spen parliamentary by-election in five years, one can understand eyes lighting up across various populist and broadly nationalist movements. All the more so because of a mini-scandal that pushed Batley into nationwide headlines in March this year, when a teacher at Batley Grammar School was briefly suspended for showing his pupils a cartoon of the Prophet Mohammed.

A crowded ballot paper of sixteen candidates for the by-election – held on July 1st – included several from the spectrum of pro-Brexit, populist, Islam-obsessed or broadly civic nationalism. Perhaps the best known to H&D readers were Anne-Marie Waters – the multiracialist but Islam-obsessed leader of the For Britain Movement, whose party includes several experienced racial nationalists even though its leader and her coterie are sincerely ‘anti-racist’; and Jayda Fransen, the anti-Islam campaigner and former deputy leader of Britain First who is nominal leader of Jim Dowson’s donation-hunting enterprise that calls itself the British Freedom Party (even though it isn’t and perhaps never will be a registered political party – so Ms Fransen had to stand as an Independent).

At the start of her campaign Ms Waters publicised an endorsement from ‘Tommy Robinson’, an ultra-Zionist career criminal who founded the English Defence League. Perhaps she hoped For Britain could become the political wing of the now defunct EDL – if so it was a foolish ambition.

Anne-Marie Waters outside Batley Grammar School during the campaign, where she attempted to make an issue out of the school’s suspension of one of its teachers for showing pupils a cartoon of the Prophet Mohammed

The results declared early on the morning of July 2nd told their own story. Ms Waters finished twelfth of sixteen candidates with 97 votes (0.3%), while Ms Fransen was fifteenth with 50 votes (0.1%). This was little short of a disaster for civic, Islam-obsessed nationalism – especially since unlike Ms Fransen and her paymaster Dowson, Ms Waters and For Britain had attempted to fight a serious campaign, with seasoned political veterans including Eddy Butler and his wife Sue travelling from Essex, and former BNP activist Gary Bergin travelling from the Wirral.

Nor can they point to any other candidate from the same spectrum having cornered the White vote, as this entire spectrum polled poorly. The English Democrats (who at least had a relatively local candidate) fared best of a bad bunch with 207 votes (0.5%), followed by UKIP on 0.4%, the anti-lockdown Freedom Alliance on 0.3%, the SDP (once a centrist party but now pro-Brexit populists) on 0.1% a fraction ahead of Ms Fransen, and the ex-UKIP splinter Heritage Party (absolutely no connection to H&D!) polling even worse than Ms Fransen with a truly microscopic 0.05%.

Unlike the May local elections covered in Issue 102, one cannot explain these results in terms of a resurgent Tory Party taking the votes of pro-Brexit, racially conscious Whites. Contrary to expectations, the Tory vote actually fell here compared to 2019, and despite maverick charlatan George Galloway taking most of the Muslim vote, Labour managed to hold the seat, confounding pundits and bookmakers’ odds. The Tory campaign in the final few days was handicapped by the scandal that forced health minister Matt Hancock to resign last weekend, but almost every observer assumed this would merely reduce the size of an expected Tory victory.

The by-election result declared at 5.20 am. Candidates on stage include Anne-Marie Waters (second left); Labour winner Kim Leadbeater (with red rosette next to returning officer, centre); and George Galloway (far right). Jayda Fransen is not present, since she and Jim Dowson again fought no real campaign, in another cynical betrayal of British Freedom Party donors.

I’m writing this article within hours of the result, so this is very much an instant analysis, but these are some of the lessons I think we can draw from what was surely the most significant by-election in years for our broadly-defined movement.

  • Lunatic acts of political violence are a disaster for every wing of our movement, since even the most moderate civic nationalists are tarred by association in the minds of many potentially sympathetic voters. I’ve no doubt that many racially conscious folk cast their votes for Labour’s Kim Leadbeater because she is the sister of murdered MP Jo Cox.
  • Outside Northern Ireland and some Scottish islands, very few Whites in the UK now define their politics in religious terms – and they regard those who do as a bit mad. No offence to those H&D readers who are religious believers and for whom this is the centre of their lives, but we should not fool ourselves about faith’s lack of electoral impact. Even racially conscious voters do not respond well to a campaign that is ‘over the top’ in shrill references to Islam. We can imply such things in sensibly worded racial nationalist leaflets, but hysterical ‘Islamophobia’ is not a vote-winner.
  • George Galloway won most of the Muslim vote in Batley by campaigning on issues related to Palestine and Kashmir; but there is no equivalent bonus to be won among White voters by wrapping oneself in the Israeli flag. Aggressive Zionism is not a vote-winner among non-Jewish Britons, neither does it serve as an alibi for ‘racism’ as some former BNP veteran campaigners seem to believe.
  • While Kim Leadbeater undoubtedly lost many Muslim votes because she is a lesbian (in addition to other factors depressing the Asian Labour vote), and Anne-Marie Waters perhaps lost a few socially conservative White voters for the same reason, homosexuality is no longer an issue for the vast majority of White voters, though the ‘trans’ nonsense is another matter.
  • There continues to be no electoral benefit in campaigning against the government’s handling of the pandemic. Several parties focused on anti-lockdown policies all polled very poorly, especially the one for whom Covid-scepticism is its raison d’être, the Freedom Alliance whose candidate attracted only 100 votes (0.3%).
  • Brexit’s electoral relevance is at last fading, and the Tory party’s hold over sections of the White working class is a lot weaker than many pundits have assumed. It’s Hartlepool (the ultra-Brexity constituency that fell to the Tories by a big majority two months ago) that’s the exceptional ‘outlier’; there are far more constituencies broadly similar to Batley & Spen, including neighbouring Dewsbury, presently held by the Tories.
  • Kim Leadbeater won mainly due to White voters retaining (or returning to) traditional Labour loyalties. She lost most of the Muslim vote to George Galloway. In the probably unlikely event that Galloway can recruit high quality Muslim candidates to his new ‘Workers Party’, Labour might have difficulties in some other seats, but it’s more likely that they will just have problems turning out their Muslim voters after Keir Starmer’s shift of Labour policy away from hardline anti-Zionism. Most especially the modern left’s obsession with issues such as ‘trans rights’ will be a handicap in Muslim areas across Britain.
  • The many and various consequences of multiracialism continue to provide rich electoral potential for racial nationalists, if and when we get our own act together. Many For Britain activists logically belong in the same party as British Democrats leader Dr Jim Lewthwaite and Patriotic Alternative leaders Mark Collett and Laura Towler, as well as many other movement activists and veterans of the old BNP who are (temporarily?) in political retirement.

All of these questions and more will be the background to a discussion of nationalist strategy post-Brexit and post-Covid. We look forward to hearing readers’ views in forthcoming editions of H&D.

Neocon propaganda report targets H&D contributors and ‘Iranian network’ in UK

In June 2021 a neocon propaganda outfit (based in London but named after a notoriously pro-Zionist US Senator) published an alarmist “analysis” of “Iranian Influence Networks in the United Kingdom”.

The report was issued by the Henry Jackson Society, named after Sen. Henry Jackson (1912-1983) who led the most pro-Israel wing of the US Democratic Party in the 1960s and 1970s.

Author of the report is Dr Paul Stott – once a leading activist in the violent anarchist group ‘Class War’ – who became a supporter of the ‘right-wing’ United Kingdom Independence Party (UKIP) and is now an Associate Fellow at the HJS.

Anarchist turned neocon Dr Paul Stott

The “Iranian Influence Networks” highlighted by Stott include three individuals who have aired pro-revisionist and/or anti-Zionist views on the Iranian television channel Press TV: Dr James Thring, Dr Nicholas Kollerstrom, and Lady Michèle Renouf.

Dr Thring (author of Peace with Iran) was organiser of a scheduled meeting at the House of Lords in 2012 that was blocked after lobbying by the Jewish Chronicle and other Zionist groups.

Stott complains that:
“In 2008, Press TV gave Kollerstrom a platform to present Holocaust denial, in an article for the Press TV website entitled ‘The Walls of Auschwitz’. Here he argued that the massacre of Jews during WW2 was ‘scientifically impossible’. In the cases of both Thring and Kollerstrom, their conspiracy-laden world view finds some accord, or a platform, with Iran.”

(The HJS report does not mention the row that ensued when the Jewish Chronicle attacked Press TV for this Auschwitz article, later publishing letters in reply from Lady Renouf and Dr Kollerstrom. One Israeli settler fanatic then published a death threat against Lady Renouf on a Canadian neocon website, inciting his fellow Zionists to “send Renouf ricin in a get-well card”.)

Stott goes on to quote the US academic Dr George Michael – “The most notable instance of propaganda sharing between the extreme right and militant Islam has been in the area of historical revisionism” – and identifies two very different Iranian presidents (Rafsanjani and Ahmadinejad) as supporters of revisionism.

He does fairly and accurately quote from the 2006 Tehran conference as follows:
“In December 2006, Iran hosted the two-day International Conference to Review the Global Vision of the Holocaust. Among those given a platform was the British activist Lady Michèle Renouf. In Tehran she gave a passionate speech in support of the Iranian government:
“‘I have come to Tehran to congratulate the Iranians, and those people who voted Dr Ahmadinejad as their president. For this valiant statesman, just like my noble revisionist colleagues, whose right of open debate I proudly champion, seek to speak the truth bravely, and no matter for their personal cost in being demonised, ostracised, or even imprisoned as they are in Europe and Canada, for their rational opinions, which we thought was the glory of our civilisation.’”

Lady Renouf (above right) with President Ahmadinejad in Tehran

Stott adds:
“Lady Renouf denies being on the Far Right and declares that she is motivated not by Holocaust denial but by a desire to ensure ‘debate denial’ does not occur. She has justified her positions by saying ‘People should have the freedom to question the accepted view of what happened. That questioning is part of our culture.’”

The operating assumption of Dr Stott and his ilk is that ‘holocaust denial’ and ‘conspiracy theory’ are inherently ‘extremist’ and in this instance part of a sinister Iranian network to promote anti-Zionism.

It would of course be anathema to Stott and the Henry Jackson Society were anyone to present a corresponding notion that the orthodox historiography of the ‘Holocaust’, and the framework of tyrannical laws established to defend that orthodoxy, are themselves part of a long-established network designed to promote Zionism. (It’s probably no coincidence that within days of Stott’s report, the US Government began moves to censor Iranian-owned news networks.)

Boris Johnson – a few months before he became Prime Minister – addressing a Henry Jackson Society event at Westminster, alongside the Society’s executive director (above right) Dr Alan Mendoza – a Conservative parliamentary candidate and trustee of the President Reagan Memorial Fund Trust.

That such a network exists would seem evident – take the Henry Jackson Society itself. The UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson wrote the foreword to an HJS report on “Global Britain” in 2019. The HJS was co-founded by former MI6 chief Sir Richard Dearlove, and has been financed by the American-Jewish heiress Nina Rosenwald and Anglo-Jewish businessman Stanley Kalms (now Lord Kalms), a former treasurer of the Conservative Party. It has also taken money from the Japanese Embassy in London to promote anti-Chinese propaganda.

President Trump’s Secretary of State Mike Pompeo at a Henry Jackson Society event in 2020

However one of the men who co-founded the Henry Jackson Society at Cambridge in 2005, defence and foreign policy consultant Matthew Jamison, has denounced the Society’s recent activities:
“Never in my wildest dreams could I have imagined that the Henry Jackson Society, when it was founded, would become a far-right, deeply anti-Muslim racist organisation, run in the most dictatorial, corrupt and undemocratic fashion and utilized as a propaganda outfit to smear other cultures, religions and ethnic groups. Indeed, the far-right anti-Muslim racist nature of the HJS has helped to lay the intellectual groundwork for much of what President Trump and his Breitbart reading ‘alt-right’ movement is attempting to do against Muslim people and immigrants in the United States. The HJS for many years has relentlessly demonised Muslims and Islam.”

‘Racism’ at the ballot box?

Despite general politically correct acquiescence to every feature of the multiracial, multicultural society, voters sometimes rebel in the privacy of the ballot box.

Whenever a non-White candidate receives a lower than expected vote, the liberal media shames the area concerned for ‘racism’. A notable example was the Cheltenham constituency in 1992, where the Conservative Party selected a black barrister (John Taylor) to contest an almost entirely White, safe Tory seat. Against the national swing, Mr Taylor contrived to lose Cheltenham to a (White) Liberal Democrat – and the Cheltenham result is still quoted today as an example of genteel ‘racism’.

A smaller-scale example in the opposite direction was in the Audley ward of Blackburn at the 2004 council elections, where all three seats in the ward were up for election due to boundary changes.

Long-serving Labour leader of Blackburn Council, Sir Bill Taylor was one of the three Labour candidates. The other two were Asian.

When the ballots were counted, Sir Bill (who was also agent for Blackburn’s Labour MP Jack Straw) found that Audley ward’s majority Asian population had voted for his two Asian Labour colleagues and for an Asian Liberal Democrat, but not for him.

To be fair to Audley’s Asians, Sir Bill was only 73 votes short of election.

Sir Bill Taylor – Labour leader rejected by Blackburn Asians

A far more blatant example of voters exercising an ethnic preference at the ballot box occurred last week in the Kersal & Broughton Park ward, Salford. This is (according to the 2011 Census) the most Jewish ward in Britain. Moreover the Jewish population here is more religiously observant, and more conservative (socially and politically) than in most of England’s more cosmopolitan Jewish areas.

Last week’s council elections in Salford – like Blackburn in 2004 – were all-out contests with all three ward council seats up for election. In the above-mentioned ward, the Conservative candidates were two Jews and an Asian. Readers will not be astounded to learn that the two Jewish Tory candidates were easily elected, with 1,797 and 1,679 votes respectively, while the Asian Tory candidate finished well down the field with 711 votes, defeated by a Jewish Liberal Democrat for the ward’s third council seat.

Had this been a non-Jewish White area showing such ‘discrimination’ against a non-White candidate, there would have been a media outcry, but we can safely assume that H&D is the only magazine to have reported this result.

In principle of course we cannot object to Salford’s Jews or Blackburn’s Muslims exercising an ethnic preference for ‘one of their own’. We do regret however that indigenous Britons have been conditioned to regard such behaviour as ‘racist’ and to adopt instead (for their own communities) the lemming politics of multiculturalism.

Early results from ‘Super Thursday’ elections

This week saw the largest set of local and regional elections in the UK since the reorganisation of local government almost half a century ago.

Most counts will take place during Friday or Saturday, but a few were counted overnight.

As H&D has previously explained, the 2021 elections mark the end of the Nigel Farage era: his old party UKIP is now almost extinct, and the Brexit Party which he launched in 2019 has been rebranded (ineffectively) as Reform UK.

Racial nationalist parties are still in the process of reviving and reorganising themselves after a decade in Brexit’s shadow, but we expect a handful of strong results for several nationalist/populist candidates.

H&D editor Mark Cotterill is contesting Preston City Council and Lancashire County Council seats: when not involved in counts we shall be reporting here on these and other results.

Labour’s Sean Fielding – leader of Oldham Council – has lost his seat to a local independent

Overnight the biggest breaking news was the defeat of Oldham Council leader Sean Fielding (Labour), who lost his seat to former police officer Mark Wilkinson, leader of the Failsworth Independent Party. Perhaps even more sensational for those of our readers who remember the glory days of Oldham BNP was that young Conservative candidate Beth Sharp defeated Labour in St James ward. In the old days this was the top BNP target and a no hope area for the Tories.

Ms Sharp’s victory is an early sign of what will surely be the main narrative of this week’s elections: the continuing success of Boris Johnson’s Conservative Party in areas that were once solidly Labour. This fragmentation could in the long-term be good news for nationalist parties, if we can get our act together.

An extraordinary civil war within Oldham’s Asian community saw Asian Labour candidates lose one Asian ghetto (St Mary’s) and almost lose another (Coldhurst) to Asian independents, while losing the racially split Medlock Vale ward to an Asian Conservative! (This is partly a consequence of local Labour bosses choosing to defy Muslim elders in a row over an Asian feminist councillor.)

In Oldham, UKIP and Reform UK did at least manage to avoid standing against each other, but nevertheless obtained appalling results with all four of their respective candidates finishing bottom of the poll: their votes ranged from 0.8% to 3.8%.

John Evans – re-elected as Reform UK councillor for Alvaston ward, Derby

Elsewhere early results mostly confirmed that Reform UK (the rebranded Brexit Party) will fizzle out within months of its launch. Overnight there were just two Reform UK victories, both in Derby, with Tim Prosser elected in a freak result for Boulton ward, after the Conservative candidate withdrew to give him a free run against Labour; and John Evans retaining the Alvaston ward seat that he first won for UKIP in 2016 before his move first to the Brexit Party and now to Reform UK. The party’s other Derby candidates were heavily defeated.

Most other Reform UK results were very poor indeed: notably in the Hartlepool parliamentary by-election. This had been the Brexit Party’s main target seat only seventeen months ago at the 2019 General Election, where their candidate was Richard Tice, now leader of the rebranded party.

Yet Reform UK polled only 1.2% yesterday, down from Tice’s 25.8% in 2019. Almost all of those pro-Brexit voters swung behind the Conservatives, whose candidate won a historic victory. Most humiliating for Reform UK was that Claire Martin, candidate of the tiny UKIP splinter Heritage Party, polled 468 votes (1.6%) to push Reform UK into fifth place.

Those in our movement who believed that anti-lockdown or Covid-sceptic politics would prove an effective electoral strategy will be sobered by the mere 72 votes (0.2%) won by the Freedom Alliance candidate who finished bottom of a sixteen-strong field in Hartlepool.

In the old UKIP stronghold of Thurrock, two Reform UK candidates finished bottom of the poll, and their rival ex-colleagues from the old UKIP, now standing as Thurrock Independents, lost all the seats they were defending.

Sunderland is one of the few UKIP branches that has remained largely intact with few activists defecting to Farage’s Brexit/Reform, and UKIP managed a substantial local slate of 19 candidates. However they were all heavily defeated: their best result was 18.4% in Redhill ward, which they had won in 2019. The two other Sunderland wards that UKIP won in 2019 were Tory gains from Labour this year, in one case electing an Asian Tory councillor, with UKIP polling 8.1% and 8.8%.

We expect the For Britain Movement (an anti-Islamist party whose leader Anne-Marie Waters is ‘anti-racist’ but whose candidates include high-profile BNP veterans) to poll very well in some areas. However the party’s overnight results were poor, including heavy defeats in two eastern Newcastle wards – 3.5% in Walker and 1.7% in Walkergate.

Three members of the same family contesting Southend wards as For Britain candidates polled 4%, 2.3% and 2.1% respectively.

Ulster’s uncertain future as Northern Ireland marks centenary

One hundred years ago today Ireland was partitioned with six of Ulster’s nine counties becoming the new province of Northern Ireland.

While the terms “Ulster” and “Northern Ireland” are often loosely treated as synonymous, the sad truth is of course that three Ulster counties – Cavan, Donegal and Monaghan – were consigned to rule from Dublin a century ago.

Ulstermen in these three counties who remained loyal to the United Kingdom – as well as their fellow loyalists in the three other Irish provinces of Connaught, Leinster and Munster – were abandoned by the London government for whom they had fought in the Flanders mud just a few years earlier.

Nor was this a straightforward religious divide. Many Catholics across Ireland remained loyal to the Crown, a topic that will be discussed in a forthcoming H&D book review. While today’s anniversary partly represents the successful resistance by generations of Ulstermen to malign plots by 20th and 21st century liberals and trans-Atlantic “new world order” advocates, it also reminds us of that original betrayal of loyalists abandoned (often to a bloody fate) south of the border.

The original Ulster flag (above) was replaced by the six-pointed modern Northern Ireland flag (representing the six counties, as opposed to the nine counties of Ulster).

Ironically the centenary of Northern Ireland coincides with a political crisis in Ulster’s largest political party – the Democratic Unionist Party. Whoever becomes DUP leader will have to negotiate treacherous political waters during the Brexit transition process.

Though Boris Johnson is technically leader of the “Conservative & Unionist Party”, the latter half of his party’s name seems to have been forgotten in Westminster and Whitehall.

It will be the job of loyal Ulstermen and their friends on the mainland to remind Johnson (and if necessary his successor) that the “sovereignty” supposedly regained by Brexit is meaningless if accompanied by the betrayal of almost two million of our compatriots, and the surrender of sovereignty over more than 5,000 square miles of Northern Ireland.

We look forward to the day when the British Isles are again reunited in some form of federal structure, when England, Scotland, Wales, and Ireland (north and south) stand together in the common struggle for racial and cultural survival.

Northern Ireland (at the 2011 census) was 98.2% White – by far the Whitest component of the British Isles. For all its founders’ pretence of ‘nationalism’, the Irish Republic is by contrast only 92% White and getting darker every day, especially in Dublin; Wales and Scotland are roughly 96% White; and England is of course the most multi-ethnic part of the UK – roughly 85% White.

A Happy St Patrick’s Day to all H&D readers worldwide

St Patrick

This article was first published in Heritage and Destiny magazine, #71 (March-April 2016), but is still very valid today. (See also our article on ‘St Patrick: Patron Saint of the USA?‘)

Enoch Powell’s Suppressed Article (on St Patrick, Ulster and the Scots Irish Identity) Rediscovered – with introduction by Peter Rushton, H&D Assistant Editor

After the Conservatives returned to government under Margaret Thatcher in 1979, Enoch Powell hoped Ulster’s status as an integral part of the United Kingdom would be reaffirmed. Some of the leading figures on Thatcher’s wing of the Conservative Party were Powellites, and until the eve of the 1979 election the Tories’ Northern Ireland spokesman had been Airey Neave – a strong and determined Unionist. Tragically Neave was murdered by a car bomb at the House of Commons in March 1979, and his successors pursued a very different policy: commitment to Ulster’s identity was progressively weakened through the 1980s.

Powell came to believe that the CIA had a hand in Airey Neave’s murder, and it is now established that MI6 and CIA operatives had been pursuing a deal with the IRA since the mid-1970s.

In January 1981 however (still believing that Thatcher’s government would defend the Union) Powell proposed that the Foreign Office should produce articles and booklets for the American public to explain Ulster’s distinct identity. It was agreed that Powell would write a brief article to be published in U.S. newspapers on St Patrick’s Day (17th March 1981) and that a 1965 booklet – Scotch-Irish and Ulster – would be reprinted, both with Foreign Office support.

Although Powell submitted the article and welcomed republication of the pamphlet, both were sidelined: the anti-Ulster faction in Whitehall and Washington triumphed. The article and related official correspondence remained classified until February 2015, and H&D now reveals the story for the first time after I obtained the documents from the National Archives.

Enoch Powell on the campaign trail

If St Patrick has a Member to represent him in Parliament, I must surely be that man. My constituency in the House of Commons is Down South, the southern half of the county of Down, which looks across the Irish Sea beyond the Isle of Man to Cumberland and Galloway. From that southern half there projects a peninsula which the ancient geographers were already calling Dunum, or Down; and Downpatrick, the town which stands at the isthmus of that peninsula, happily combines the name of the place and that of the British missionary with a late Roman surname who we believe brought Christianity from the largest to the second largest of the British Isles.

The peninsula where he landed, baptised his first converts, built his first church and laid his bones to rest has still a palpable individuality. When I drive into it – its traditional name is Lecale – from some other part of my constituency, I am always conscious of crossing a threshold. But the same is just as true of the whole north-eastern part of Ireland to which that peninsula is attached: it is distinct and separate from the rest, as if by a decree of nature. Geographically and geologically it had its own pattern, a mountain ring enclosing an inner central plain, long before man came there at all; and its earliest inhabitants were linked by blood and intercourse with the neighbouring mainland. The passage which St Patrick made was no voyage of exploration: he took a ticket on a two-way traffic route rather like that across the English Channel between Dover and Calais (which in point of fact is somewhat longer).

This north-east part was called “Ulster” centuries before Henry VIII (no friend of St Patrick’s!) used the word to dub one of the four administrative provinces into which he divided his Irish kingdom. Whatever elements, across the centuries, came to Ulster were drawn into its distinct identity. The Norman baron who, with a handful of knights and the king’s permission, rode north from Dublin into Ulster in the 1170s founded an independent principality – the earldom of Ulster, which is today held by the Queen’s cousin, the Duke of Gloucester. Into Ulster flowed settlers from England and Wales as well as from Scotland, long before the Plantation of James I; and the separateness of the province claimed and enveloped them all.

St Patrick’s grave

That happened pre-eminently to those Scots who were the major element in the settlement of the forfeited lands at the beginning of the seventeenth century. Research has proved that they by no means displaced the earlier Ulstermen so comprehensively as was intended and is often believed. It is also true that they only represented one, albeit the largest, of a series of contingents earlier and later who returned across the narrow North Channel to the land from which the ancestors of many of them had originally come in remote, even prehistoric times. The great fact, however, is that, like the rest, they became part of Ulster.

The vocabulary of American history has called those people Scotch Irish. The truer name is that by which they liked, and still like, to call themselves – Ulster Scots. For they were indeed, and remain in virtue of many ties, Scots; but above all they were Ulstermen. This therefore was the Ulster, unique from its beginning, which contributed a disproportionate share – including at least ten presidents – to the foundation and to the spirit of the American nation right from the origins of its independence. It is a contribution as distinct from the rest, and as distinctive, as any other, whether Irish, English or Scots.

The modern search for national roots is, I believe, as healthy as it is popular and expanding. It has already brought many Americans, and not only those with demonstrable ancestral ties, to Ulster, to learn on the spot – the only sure way – the truth about its past and its present. Those who come are coming to the place which, of all spots on the globe, is peculiarly and forever St Patrick’s. On his day America is remembered in Ulster, as Ulster ought to be remembered in America.

Editor’s note: J. Enoch Powell (1912-1998) was Ulster Unionist MP for South Down, 1974-87, having earlier been Conservative MP for Wolverhampton South West, 1950-74. His career in Conservative politics ended when he was sacked as the party’s defence spokesman in April 1968, following his famous “Rivers of blood” speech which criticised Britain’s racial transformation, which can be read online here.

Brexit Party changes name to Reform UK

Nigel Farage (third from right) visiting Donald Trump in happier times at Trump Tower soon after the President’s election victory in 2016, together with Raheem Kassam, Arron Banks, and colleagues from UKIP and Breitbart

Having received approval from the Electoral Commission, the Brexit Party has changed its name to Reform UK.

Former UKIP leader Nigel Farage founded the Brexit Party in 2019 to contest the European Parliamentary elections at a time when it seemed possible the 2016 referendum result might be overturned or diluted.

Having won 29 European seats in that election, the party collapsed six months later when having selected almost 600 parliamentary candidates Farage agreed to withdraw from more than half of these contests in order to give Boris Johnson’s Conservatives a clear run.

This morning Farage and Brexit Party chairman Richard Tice have written to members and supporters explaining the change. In their email (seen by H&D) they write:

“We must reform our approach to Covid, the House of Lords, the Civil Service and the BBC. We need to campaign hard on reforming the voting system and critically, we must reform the economy so that it incentivises the self-employed, entrepreneurs and small businesses. Faster growth for all will be achieved by reforming our taxes, unnecessary regulation and wasteful government spending.”

This makes fairly clear that unlike UKIP, or the 2016 referendum campaign, or the Brexit Party itself, which sought to be ‘all things to all men’, the new party’s pitch is radically neo-Thatcherite, US-style libertarian.

One problem is that (with the exception of electoral reform, which Farage is promoting for self-interested reasons, as would most small parties) this pitch is similar to one wing of Boris Johnson’s cabinet – the likes of Priti Patel, Dominic Raab, Kwasi Kwarteng and Liz Truss.

Another problem is that such ‘free market’ policies would (at least in the short term) be a disaster for many of the ‘left behind’ areas of England that voted for Brexit.

The ‘Movement News’ section in the new Issue 100 of H&D being printed today includes an update on the new Reform Party, its antecedents and competitors in post-Brexit, post-Covid Britain.

Superspiv Farage now backs Blair!

Former UKIP and Brexit Party leader Nigel Farage once again displayed his lack of principle this week by publicly endorsing Tony Blair as head of a vaccination drive to end the Covid pandemic!

While H&D contributors and readers hold a range of divergent views about the merits of vaccination and the nature of the pandemic, I would guess that we would all agree Tony Blair is just about the last person who should ever be entrusted with political power ever again.

Yet Farage said this week:
“It is time to have a government, and to have people leading it, who’ve got genuine talent even if they disagree on many other policy matters. …Much as I don’t like Tony Blair, he does get things done, he commands respect, he is seriously bright. Why not get people like Tony Blair involved to help us solve a national crisis?”

Brexiteers at war: Farage’s criticisms of the government are rooted in bitter splits within the 2016 referendum campaign – Farage (above left) now prefers Tony Blair to Brexiteers such as Johnson and Dominic Cummings (above right).

The truth is of course that Nigel Farage knows absolutely nothing about Covid or the various medical/scientific issues involved.

The sole reason he is now boosting Blair is his residual resentment against Boris Johnson and Johnson’s former adviser Dominic Cummings. Now that the Brexit issue has (perhaps) been resolved, Farage is looking for another headline and ludicrously hopes he might secure some influence in a Blair-led or Blair-influenced “government of national unity”.

No serious analyst imagines that any such national unity government will happen; if it did, there is next to no chance of Blair leading it; and if by some incredibly remote chance Blair did so, there is zero chance of his rewarding or promoting Farage.

The whole idea is a scam, dreamed up to impress certain weakminded voters who periodically express halfbaked notions about national unity governments.

Only one thing is interesting about this bizarre Farage statement: the fact the this superspiv of British politics seems to have calculated that there is no mileage for him in aligning with lockdown sceptics and anti-vaxxers.

Lib Dems drop mayoral candidate in ‘anti-semitism scandal’

Geeta Sidhu-Robb, Liberal Democrat candidate suspended over ‘anti-semitism’

The Liberal Democrats, struggling to hold on to their status as the UK’s third largest political party, have run into a storm over ‘anti-semitism’ as they attempt to select a candidate for next May’s London mayoral election to take on Labour’s Sadiq Khan, arguably the most powerful Muslim politician in the Western world.

London Lib Dem members were set to choose between two potential candidates in a postal ballot this month, but one of those candidates has today been suspended after discovery of a video from more than twenty years ago where she made an ‘anti-semitic’ attack on senior Labour politician Jack Straw.

Straw is an Anglican Christian of partly Jewish ancestry, who served in several prominent roles under Labour Prime Ministers Tony Blair and Gordon Brown, most famously as Foreign Secretary during the Iraq war.

At the 1997 general election Geeta Sidhu-Robb was the Conservative candidate against Straw in his Blackburn constituency. Malawi-born Ms Sidhu-Robb tried to stir up Pakistani voters in Blackburn’s Asian ghetto, telling them via megaphone: “Don’t vote for a Jew, Jack Straw is a Jew. If you vote for him, you’re voting for a Jew. Jews are the enemies of Muslims.”

As a committed Europhile, former corporate lawyer Sidhu-Robb later defected from the Tories to the anti-Brexit Lib Dems, and ended up on the shortlist to become London mayoral candidate, until her ‘anti-semitic’ record was discovered this week.

Watch Tory candidate (now Lib Dem) Geeta Sidhu-Robb making an ‘anti-semitic’ attack on Labour’s Jack Straw. (The relevant section of the video begins after a few seconds.)

What surprises H&D is that alarm bells hadn’t rung sooner among the Lib Dem leadership. It was reasonably well known during the Straw years that several Blackburn Tories encouraged antisemitic anti-Labour campaigns in Asian areas of Blackburn, and Ms Sidhu-Robb’s remarks were actually broadcast in a Channel 5 documentary more than 20 years ago!

Perhaps the Lib Dems were so pleased to tick three political boxes with Ms Sidhu-Robb – ex-Tory defector, non-White, and female – that they didn’t engage their brains. Moreover some concerned activists, including former mayoral candidate Siobhan Benita, have alleged that Ms Sidhu-Robb was being courted by the party because of her wealthy connections and her role in the anti-Brexit pressure group Open Britain and its new campaign ‘Democracy Unleashed’, formerly known as the ‘People’s Vote’ campaign.

Today Ms Sidhu-Robb issued a grovelling apology in an effort to save her rapidly sinking political career:
“I am deeply ashamed of the ignorant and abusive language I used on one occasion in the 1997 General Election campaign. As shown in the footage, I instantly regretted my appalling behaviour, which I continue to do.
“Those words are entirely inconsistent with my views and values, and though there are no excuses for my actions, there is some context; that is, that I was under a great deal of strain and retaliated to the racial abuse I was receiving in Blackburn ‘like for like’.”

Next Page »

  • Find By Category

  • Latest News

  • Follow us on Twitter