Farage set to back new party

Nigel Farage (right) with UKIP’s former Scottish leader David Coburn who joined him in resigning over new leader Gerard Batten’s shift to an anti-Islam agenda

Following his long-expected resignation from UKIP – the party he led for nine years including its greatest successes at the 2009 and 2014 European elections and the 2015 General Election – Nigel Farage gave the first indication yesterday that he is planning to endorse a new breakaway party.

During an interview with the Sun on Sunday, Farage said:
“There is huge demand for a party that’s got real clarity on this issue. You can see and hear the frustration welling up out there. It’s clear the political elite want to stop Brexit in its tracks and the prime minister doesn’t have the strength or inclination to see this through.
“…If the government goes back on its word and betrays the millions of people who voted for Brexit then we need a party prepared to stand up and fight for it. I’m fully prepared for article 50 to be extended or revoked and if that happens, I will re-enter the fray.”

Rather than backing any of the existing post-UKIP parties, Farage said he is likely to support one that is presently being registered by UKIP’s former economics spokesman Catherine Blaiklock, who wrote for the Salisbury Review before Christmas explaining her conclusion that “UKIP is dead”.

Catherine Blaiklock, former UKIP spokesman, is launching The Brexit Party

Ms Blaiklock began the process of registering this party with the Electoral Commission on January 11th, which leaves very little time to complete the process if we were to face a snap general election, or if delays to Brexit entail our involvement in the European Parliamentary elections on May 23rd.

It had been assumed that UK MEPs, including Farage himself, would have left by then and their seats would be redistributed among the EU’s remaining member states. But as with so much about the Brexit process, even this is now uncertain.

Farage has indicated he would be prepared to stand again in May, and might also be tempted to stand in a likely parliamentary by-election in Peterborough, which will occur if Labour MP Fiona Onasanya fails to overturn her conviction for lying about a traffic offence.

Anne Marie Waters on the by-election campaign trail with former BNP election guru Eddy Butler: her party For Britain has now become an affiliate of the largest European alliance of anti-immigration parties, alongside Marine Le Pen and Matteo Salvini.

UKIP’s activists and donors would then be left with a dilemma: should they follow their old leader; stick with their new leader; or opt for one of the three other main alternatives offered by leading figures who have quit UKIP during the past year or two – Anne Marie Waters’ anti-Islamic For Britain Movement; the Democrats and Veterans Party led by John Rees-Evans; or the Social Democratic Party endorsed by MEP and former Express journalist Patrick O’Flynn.

For Britain was recently accepted as an affiliate of the Movement for a Europe of Nations and Freedom, which includes Marine Le Pen’s ‘National Rally’ (RN), formerly the National Front; the Austrian Freedom Party; the Flemish Vlaams Belang; and the Italian anti-immigration party Lega headed by Deputy Prime Minister Matteo Salvini.


Farage quits UKIP

UKIP leader Gerard Batten (left) with EDL founder Stephen Yaxley-Lennon (alias ‘Tommy Robinson’) whose increasingly close relationship with the party has now prompted Nigel Farage to resign.

Former UKIP leader Nigel Farage quit the party this week, after another row with the current chairman Gerard Batten. Farage was a founder member of UKIP, formed by homosexual libertarian Dr. Alan Sked in 1993. Before UKIP they had been in the Anti-Federalist League, and previously the Conservative Party, which they quit in 1992.

Farage was firmly against Batten’s plan’s to bring former BNP member and EDL founder Stephen Yaxley-Lennon (alias ‘Tommy Robinson’) into UKIP, and to focus more on being anti-Islam than anti-EU.

Former National Front official Martyn Heale (right) – a UKIP councillor from 2013 to 2017 – with Nigel Farage

However, when Farage was UKIP leader he let a number of former NF officials join the party without any problem – including Martyn Heale, the then UKIP chairman of the Thanet South constituency where Nigel Farage was the party’s candidate at the 2016 general election. Heale was a leading member of the National Front in London in the 1970s, and its Hammersmith branch organiser in 1978.

Subsequently Heale spent over twenty years in the Conservative Party, including three years as Chairman of Ramsgate Conservative Association, before joining UKIP about fourteen years ago. He was a UKIP county councillor for the Ramsgate division in Kent from 2013 to 2017. In August this year Heale applied to rejoin the Conservative Party, but his application was rejected as being liable to bring the party into disrepute, despite his earlier two decades as a Tory.

Nigel Farage has always denied claims that his father Guy Farage had himself been a member of the NF in the 1970s.

Martyn Heale as a London NF activist

Rather more serious than this row over alleged ‘extremism’ is UKIP’s continuing identity crisis. The party will surely struggle now to fight a serious campaign, if Theresa May’s Brexit troubles lead to a general election next year. Realistically there isn’t much time for Farage and his financial backer Arron Banks to start a new party, and none of the splinter groups that broke away from UKIP during the past year or two, such as the For Britain Movement or Democrats & Veterans, have really built up momentum.

Are we heading back to a period of two-party politics? And if so, will this be an interlude before the emergence of a radical anti-immigration party?

Labour promise post-Brexit immigration nightmare

Diane Abbott – seen here (right) with Jeremy Corbyn – today announced Labour’s post-Brexit immigration policy

Some H&D readers were always sceptical about Brexit, fearing that immigration policy would actually get worse after we left the European Union. UKIP spokesmen regularly argued that they would prefer immigrants from India (and by implication English-speaking countries in Africa) to those from Eastern Europe.

UKIP of course is now semi-extinct, so that party’s views on race and immigration are irrelevant, but there is a real possibility that post-Brexit Britain will have a Labour government. Today we found out what that might mean.

Diane Abbott – who has been such a disaster as Shadow Home Secretary that she was hidden away for most of the 2017 election campaign – today announced Labour’s immigration policy, and many H&D readers might now be thinking we would be better off in the EU than risking this open door disaster.

Diane Abbott and Jeremy Corbyn were seen in the 1980s as the ‘loony left’, highlighted in this Tory election poster, but Tory failure now leaves these extremists on the brink of power.

Ms Abbott said that a Labour government would end any preferential system for Europeans:

“Sadly at the current time we have a class system for migrants.

“Commonwealth migrants and other non-EU migrants are treated in a way that is tantamount to making them second-class migrants.

“They struggle to bring partners or spouses here. They have to meet minimum income targets. They can lose their right to residency simply by travelling home for family reasons.

“It’s not fair, it’s not humane, it’s not reasonable.

“Labour will end the established system of first and second-class migrants. And we will do so, not by treating EU migrants as appallingly as Commonwealth and other non-EU migrants have been treated for a long time. We will end the first and second-class system by treating everyone fairly.”

We fear that Ms Abbott was not thinking of South African, Australian or other White Commonwealth migrants. We all know the type of people who will be queuing up to take advantage of a Corbyn-Abbott run Britain.

Simon Heffer on ‘The English revolution’

Simon Heffer addressing the Traditional Britain Group

In this week’s New Statesman, Enoch Powell’s biographer Simon Heffer has an excellent article putting Brexit in the context of previous attempts by Tory elites to respond to ‘the condition of England’.

The ‘condition of England question’ was first formulated in 1839 by the great Victorian writer Thomas Carlyle (long out of fashion) whom Heffer rightly admires. Like the 19th century Whigs whom Carlyle criticised for their blindness towards the desperate state of the Victorian working class, David Cameron ignored a blatant malfunction of the political system that had promoted him.

As Heffer puts it: “The democratic malfunction that millions of voters felt between 1975 and 2016 was that however they voted they would not alter membership of the EU, and the EU had an increasing impact on their lives and economic prospects. If you school people in the notion that the establishment of their social order relies on their ability to vote and not on deference to a Carlylean aristocracy – a properly progressive argument – then denying them a choice on a fundamental issue for decades will, when the choice is finally presented, resemble the bursting of a dam. So it was two years ago.”

Might Heffer himself be starting to recognise that the Thatcher revolution of the 1980s (when combined with mass immigration) had a corrosive effect on society, and that free market ‘right-wingers’ (who are in fact Victorian-style liberals but misnamed ‘conservatives’ on both sides of the Atlantic) have been just as blinkered as the Whigs in their assumptions about benign historical ‘progress’?

Click here to read the full article.

 

Will Brexit mean more Asian immigrants?

Curry lobbyist Pasha Khandaker (left) with Tory minister Justine Greening

Curry lobbyist Pasha Khandaker (left) with Tory minister Justine Greening

While many sections of our movement enthusiastically campaigned for ‘Brexit’ and are still celebrating victory in this year’s referendum, a little-discussed subplot of the Brexit drama developed further this week.

For most Brexit voters, immigration was the most important issue at stake in the referendum.  Yet among their fellow Brexiteers were lobby groups such as the Bangladesh Caterers Association, representing Britain’s curry restaurant trade.  They backed Brexit on the basis that reducing immigration from European countries would mean increasing immigration from the Indian subcontinent.

Now the curry trade is further inflaming the debate.  According to the Financial Times, Pasha Khandaker, president of the Bangladesh Caterers Association, has said that he is disappointed by the current rhetoric of Theresa May and her Home Secretary Amber Rudd, who have indicated their aim to reduce annual net migration to below 100,000.

Mr Khandaker sees this as a betrayal, since he believed that Brexit would lead to an “Australian style points system” which would benefit his industry’s case for more Asian immigrants.

H&D would make two points here.  First, this exposes yet again the absurdity of nationalists arguing for an Australian-style immigration system, which every informed person knows has for many years been a disaster for White Australia.

Second: Mr Khandaker shouldn’t be too worried by Tory rhetoric on immigration.  If past experience is any guide, the present Prime Minister (just like her ‘Iron Lady’ predecessor) will talk a great deal about immigration, then preside over a further ethnic transformation of our country.

Even if today’s Tories succeed in cutting net immigration to 100,000, the ethnic complexion of those new arrivals will be a great deal darker than when we were in the EU.  Good news for colour-blind Ukippers perhaps, but a disaster for racial nationalists.

Politically incorrect religion: the PM and the two covenants

The wedding of Theresa and Philip May at her father's church in Oxfordshire. mrs May's father, the Rev. Hubert Brasier, stands second right with Mrs Brasier, by then confined to a wheelchair.

The wedding of Theresa and Philip May at her father’s church in Oxfordshire. Mrs May’s father, the Rev. Hubert Brasier, stands second right with Mrs Brasier, by then confined to a wheelchair.

Giles Fraser – a left-wing but pro-Brexit Anglican vicar – has recently drawn attention to the religious background of Theresa May, newly appointed Prime Minister.  It is well known that Mrs May is a vicar’s daughter. Less well known (as Fr. Fraser points out) is that her father was on the most extreme Anglo-Catholic wing of the Church of England.  This carries politically incorrect implications that Fr. Fraser chooses not to discuss.

During Mrs May’s childhood her father – Fr. Hubert Brasier – was successively vicar of two countryside parishes near Oxford: St Kenelm, Enstone, from 1959 to 1970; and St Mary the Virgin, Wheatley, from 1970 until his death in 1981.

In her appearance on the BBC’s Desert Island Discs in 2014, Mrs May chose as one of her eight records the hymn ‘Therefore we before him bending’.  As Fr. Fraser writes in his Guardian article:

Now this really is a fascinating choice. First, because no one who wasn’t a proper churchgoer would ever have heard of it. And, second, because it betrays the enormous sacramental influence of her high church father. Benediction, the worship of the blessed sacrament – or “wafer worship” as Protestant scoffers often describe it – is pretty hardcore Anglo-Catholic stuff. That’s why she was named after a 500-year-old Catholic saint. As time goes on, this background is bound to shape her ministry – and yes, that’s how she will think of it.

During her Desert Island Discs interview, Mrs May recalled:

“a hymn which sometimes, if my father and mother and I were alone in the church, we would just kneel down and sing …’Therefore we before him Bending'”

There is a reason why this hymn would have been sung by the vicar’s family in the absence of the congregation: this particular hymn (known to Roman Catholics down the centuries as Tantum ergo) is theological and political dynamite!  It is sung during a service formally known as ‘Benediction of (or with) the Blessed Sacrament’‘.

This service is seen by the more Protestant (‘low church’) end of the Church of England as illegal: earlier in the last century there would sometimes be legal action taken against Anglo-Catholic vicars by parishoners if Benediction was introduced into their church. Very likely this was the reason for Fr Brasier singing this service in private with his family. Certainly the current website of St Mary’s, Wheatley, does not suggest that it is today an exceptionally “high church” parish.

Benediction of the Blessed Sacrament - the service celebrated privately by Theresa May's family during her childhood - was once seen as 'illegal' in the Church of England

Benediction of the Blessed Sacrament – the service celebrated privately by Theresa May’s family during her childhood – was once seen as ‘illegal’ in the Church of England

Several decades later a wider issue is raised by the words of the Tantum ergo (written by the great scholar St Thomas Aquinas in the mid-13th century).  Latin being a very precise language, there is no room here for modern liberal fudging: St Thomas writes that we venerate the blessed sacrament – the body and blood of Christ – as we celebrate the transition from the old covenant (between God and his ‘chosen people’, the Jews) to the new covenant (between God and Christians).

The English words of the hymn sung by Theresa May and her family are obscure, but the Latin original is clear: et antiquum documentum novo cedat ritui.  The ancient document – the old covenant – gives way to the new rite, represented by the substance of Christ’s body and blood in the form (the ‘accidental’ appearance) of bread and wine.

Cedat is the important word here: the Latin verb cedere meaning to surrender, yield, or give way – as in English to cede territory after a war, to concede in an argument, or indeed to succeed – as Prime Minister May has succeeded David Cameron.

Modern, liberal Catholic spokesmen have sometimes argued that the old covenant with the Jews remains in force alongside the new covenant sealed by Christ’s death and resurrection. Ironically Fr. Brasier’s old parish at Enstone includes the village of Heythrop – which was the original base of Heythrop College, London University’s specialist theological college founded by the Jesuits.  Modern tutors at Heythrop – such as former principal Brendan Callaghan – have been in the forefront of those arguing that the divine covenant with Jewry remains valid. Pope Francis recently insisted that the Church “recognises the irrevocability of the covenant and God’s constant and faithful love for Israel.” He added: “it is clear there is an inseparable bond between Christians and Jews.”

Yet if Prime Minister May truly believes the words of the hymn she sang as a child – the words she chose to take with her to the BBC’s putative desert island – she cannot believe this, any more than she could believe that David Cameron retains Prime Ministerial authority alongside her.

This raises a contradiction for Mrs May, who has identified herself very strongly with the Zionist bandit state of Israel – whether through conviction or political convenience, one cannot tell.

In April 2015 (as Home Secretary) Mrs May addressed Britain’s largest Zionist youth movement in a speech celebrating the 67th anniversary of Israel’s foundation, a catastrophe known to Palestinians as the Nakba.

Mrs May explicitly referred to commemorating Yom Hazikaron, the day on which “We remember the sacrifice of those who fought to achieve and protect that independence.”

This means most notably those Zionist terrorists who died fighting against British forces and Arab civilians during 1945-48, and includes those who were executed for atrocities such as the murder of Lord Moyne and his driver Lance Corporal Arthur Fuller.

How can an educated person at one and the same time believe in the words of St Thomas Aquinas in the Tantum ergo – the traditional teaching of the Christian church down the centuries – yet at the same time celebrate the creation of the State of Israel as a fulfilment of the old covenant with Jewry, which had – according to that Christian doctrine – been abrogated?

How can a British political leader publicly “remember the sacrifice” of Jewish, anti-British terrorists as though they were heroes?

Perhaps for an aspirant Prime Minister any heresy, any betrayal, any hypocrisy is conceivable for the sake of personal ambition.

New Prime Minister Theresa May, alongside Sir Eric Pickles (chairman of Conservative Friends of Israel) declares "I am a Jew"

New Prime Minister Theresa May, alongside Sir Eric Pickles (chairman of Conservative Friends of Israel) declares “I am a Jew”

Corbyn’s cowardice betrays British workers

Corbyn - turban

Among all the acres of newsprint presently devoted to Brexit and its consequences, one of the most perceptive articles is by veteran political journalist Stephen Glover in the Daily Mail.

After noting Jeremy Corbyn’s extraordinary betrayal of his own principles – the Labour leader has spent most of his life as a committed opponent of the European Union, yet half-heartedly campaigned for Remain rather than taking a principled stand at the head of Labour’s small pro-Leave faction – Glover writes:

The reason he failed to do so was not simply a kind of bumbling cowardice. Ensconced in his Islington redoubt, he is surrounded by metropolitan lefties such as his neo-Stalinist director of strategy, the former Guardian journalist and Winchester College-educated Seumas Milne, who neither know nor care about Labour’s working-class voters.
Corbyn is unable to relate to their fears. In his handbook of international socialism, immigration is an unalloyed good which must be promoted at every opportunity. It doesn’t matter to him or to his advisers that millions of Labour voters have seen their wage rates undercut by EU workers, and pressure placed on their schools, hospitals and GP surgeries by uncontrollable EU migration.
I’ve no doubt, too, that Corbyn can’t understand the deep patriotism — and the desire not to be bullied by bloodless Brussels-based Eurocrats — which so many of these decent people feel. His neighbouring Labour MP in Islington, whom he has promoted to be Shadow Defence Secretary notwithstanding her almost total ignorance of her brief, is Emily Thornberry.
Having been sacked from the Shadow Cabinet by Ed Miliband after she had sneeringly tweeted a picture of a family home draped with flags of St George, her banishment did not last long. Corbyn obligingly rehabilitated her soon after his election as Leader.
His almost bone-headed inability to grasp the effects of mass immigration on working-class communities was paraded by him in the most shaming way last Sunday on BBC1’s The Andrew Marr Show.
Having loftily blamed the pressure on housing and schools on the Tory Government’s spending cuts, he asserted with absurd myopia: ‘There is no “uncontrolled immigration”. There is freedom of movement that goes both ways: more than two million British people are living in Europe.’ No wonder Labour supporters voted as they did!

To read Glover’s full article, click here.

England Arise!

Referendum images

The British people – and in particular the White working class of England – have delivered a stunning rebuke to their political leaders in what amounts to the first revolutionary moment in British politics since 1945.

Prime Minister David Cameron has quit – his career in ruins – after the United Kingdom voted by 52% to 48% to leave the European Union.  When Cameron’s Conservatives won last year’s general election, the turnout was 66%. This week’s referendum saw a 72% turnout (73% in England).

While the bastions of privilege that are Cameron’s natural home voted heavily in favour of Remain, there was a Leave landslide in White working class areas. Kensington & Chelsea voted 69-31 for Remain; Oldham voted 61-39 for Leave.

Further analysis of this result will soon appear on this site and in the new edition of Heritage and Destiny, which will be published in a week’s time.

For now we leave you with the old socialist hymn England Arise!  Finally voters have recognised that the Labour Party no longer speaks for England.  Whether UKIP can radicalise itself sufficiently to do so remains to be seen.  A nationalist movement will surely rise from the ashes of the BNP.

 

England, arise! The long, long night is over,
Faint in the East behold the dawn appear,
Out of your evil dream of toil and sorrow –
Arise, O England, for the day is here!
From your fields and hills,
Hark! The answer swells –
Arise, O England, for the day is here!

People of England! All your valleys call you,
High in the rising sun the lark sings clear,
Will you dream on, let shameful slumber thrall you?
Will you disown your native land so dear?
Shall it die unheard –
That sweet pleading word?
Arise, O England, for the day is here!

Over your face a web of lies is woven,
Laws that are falsehoods pin you to the ground,
Labor is mocked, its just reward is stolen,
On its bent back sits Idleness encrowned.
How long, while you sleep,
Your harvest shall it reap?
Arise, O England, for the day is here!

Forth, then, ye heroes, patriots and lovers!
Comrades of danger, poverty and scorn!
Mighty in faith of Freedom, thy great Mother!
Giants refreshed in Joy’s new rising morn!
Come and swell the song,
Silent now so long;
England is risen, and the day is here!

Desperation of pro-EU lobby

MoS - 160605 - Mark Collett

Britain’s press barons are closing ranks behind an increasingly desperate Prime Minister David Cameron, as the City of London elite begins to fear that the referendum vote might be moving in favour of Brexit.

Their latest tactic in today’s Mail on Sunday is to declare that “racists” are “hijacking the Brexit campaign”.

We suggest that the Mail‘s journalists should take their medicine, sit down and think about the realities of referendum politics.

Any referendum by its very nature reduces the complexities of politics to a simple Yes/No dichotomy.

Inevitably therefore both the Remain camp and the Leave camp will contain individuals who on other issues would strongly disagree with each other.

Individuals featured in the Mail‘s story, such as Eva Van Housen, Mark Collett, Richard Edmonds, Kevin Layzell and Tony Martin all have the political maturity to recognise this. Sadly the Mail‘s journalists haven’t yet worked out this basic political principle.

As for “hijacking”, readers should bear in mind that nationalists who support Brexit do so at their own trouble and expense, without the slightest prospect of financial gain.  Unlike journalists who sell their integrity to billionaire press barons.

Eurosceptic Parliamentary Group Collapses

The UKIP-dominated group of Members of the European Parliament has collapsed, costing UKIP more than £1.6m.

Earlier this year Heritage and Destiny explained that the supposed growth of the Right in European politics – meaning anything to the right of mainstream conservatism – was in truth divided into at least three broad tendencies.  This meant that in practice it would be difficult for any of these tendencies to recruit sufficient members from different European Union countries to form a valid group within the European Parliament.

Parliamentary rules require that such groups must have MEPs from at least seven countries.  Farage’s UKIP-dominated alliance earlier this year managed to entice one member of Marine Le Pen’s French Front National to defect, meaning that his ‘Europe of Freedom and Direct Democracy’ group (EFDD) had hit the required target with members from the UK, Italy, Sweden, France, Latvia, Lithuania and the Czech Republic.

Unfortunately for UKIP the Latvian MEP Iveta Grigule has now defected to sit as an independent, so the EFDD no longer clears the seven-country hurdle.

The proposed nationalist group of MEPs led by Marine Le Pen had already failed to clear this hurdle several months ago, as it had only secured members from France, Italy, the Netherlands, Belgium and Austria.

Mme Le Pen had earlier chosen to exclude from her planned group harder-line nationalists from Germany, Hungary and Greece.

So now we are left with a situation where there is no valid group within the European Parliament representing any of the three broad tendencies of the European Right: those obsessed by the constitutional issue of the EU; those who recognise racial realities but are embarrassed by some aspects of 20th century European nationalist parties, including the ‘Jewish question’; and those who continue to maintain traditional racial nationalism unafraid of such questions.

Next Page »

  • Find By Category

  • Latest News

  • Follow us on Twitter