Post-Brexit civic nationalists face High Noon in Yorkshire and Devon by-elections

Disgraced “gay Muslim Tory” MP Imran Ahmad Khan, whose criminal conviction prompted the Wakefield by-election

Nominations closed this afternoon for two parliamentary by-elections to be held on 23rd June in the West Yorkshire constituency of Wakefield and the Devon constituency of Tiverton & Honiton.

Each of these by-elections follows scandals that disgraced the previous Conservative MP. In Wakefield a homosexual Muslim Conservative – overseas readers might think we are making this up but it’s absolutely true – resigned after being convicted for sexually assaulting a teenage boy. He has since been imprisoned.

In Tiverton & Honiton, the local Conservative MP resigned after he admitted viewing pornography on his phone while at work in the chamber of the House of Commons. Readers will appreciate that parliamentary proceedings can be boring, but this was probably not the best way to relieve the tedium.

Each by-election has attracted a range of civic nationalist, populist and/or anti-Islam candidates.

In Wakefield voters can choose between:
Ashlea Simon of Britain First, an anti-Islamist party backed by former BNP official Paul Golding – as reported in the current edition of H&D, Miss Simon achieved the best nationalist vote at the recent local council elections, polling 21.6% in Walkden North, Salford;

Jayda Fransen, Mr Golding’s former partner both in Britain First and in private life, who is now based in Northern Ireland where she works for Christian businessman Jim Dowson and his political frontman Nick Griffin – they call their outfit the British Freedom Party but it is not in fact a registered political party, so Ms Fransen is listed as Independent on the ballot paper;

Nick Griffin and Jayda Fransen promoting the ‘British Freedom Party’: the only problem is the party doesn’t exist, so Ms Fransen has to stand as an Independent

Chris Walsh, a Wakefield gym owner and the most local of the civic nationalist candidates, representing the Reform UK party backed by former Brexit Party and UKIP leader Nigel Farage;

Therese Hirst, a frequent candidate in Yorkshire elections for the English Democrats, a party led by Essex solicitor Robin Tilbrook which campaigns for an English Parliament – Ms Hirst (a Theology graduate of Durham University) finished runner-up at the Batley & Spen parliamentary by-election in 2016, polling 4.8%;

Jordan Gaskell, who at the age of 19 received UKIP’s best vote at the recent local government elections: 10.4% in Hindley ward, Wigan – like Ashlea Simon he has what might prove a big disadvantage of coming from the wrong side of the Pennines, though unlike Jayda Fransen he is at least based in England.

Other anti-establishment parties contesting Wakefield include the CoVID-sceptic ‘Freedom Alliance’, the Christian Peoples Alliance, the Yorkshire Party, and the left-populist Northern Independence Party.

Wakefield’s Conservatives have (perhaps surprisingly) selected another Asian candidate. There is also an Asian independent standing, as well as the ‘Monster Raving Loony Party’, and the usual Labour, Liberal Democrat and Green parties.

The by-election is almost certain to be won either by Labour or the Conservatives, but an unusually poor or good result might either finish off one of the crowded field of nationalist or semi-nationalist parties, or give one of them the boost required to raise their profile.

At present none of these parties has anything like the profile achieved by the National Front in the 1970s, the BNP in the 1990s and 2000s, or UKIP and the Brexit Party in the 2010s.

Frankie Rufolo (above right) with For Britain Movement leader Anne-Marie Waters

Tiverton & Honiton in contrast to Wakefield is almost certain to be a battle between the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats.

Here there is a slightly different range of civic nationalist candidates:
Frankie Rufolo is Exeter organiser of the For Britain Movement, the anti-Islamist party founded by former UKIP leadership candidate Anne-Marie Waters. Mr Rufolo has stood several times in Exeter City Council elections, most recently polling 7.7%.
Andy Foan, a former Royal Navy and RAF pilot, is standing for Reform UK.
Ben Walker, also a Royal Navy veteran, is standing for UKIP, for whom he was once a councillor in South Gloucestershire. In 2019 he was fined more than £11,000 for breaking building regulations.
Jordan Donoghue-Morgan is standing for the Heritage Party, which has absolutely no connection to H&D and is a splinter from UKIP.

Since UKIP were runners-up with 16.5% in this constituency in 2015, there is a fairly substantial civic nationalist or populist right-wing vote to share between these candidates, especially given the Conservative Party’s recent problems.

As in Wakefield, an especially good or bad result for any of the above four candidates could propel their party either into significance or into extinction.

Other candidates in Tiverton & Honiton are the usual ‘big four’: Conservative, Liberal Democrat, Labour and Green.

Neither of the two fastest-growing nationalist organisations in Britain is contesting either of these by-elections. Patriotic Alternative is not yet a registered political party so cannot yet appear on ballot papers. The British Democratic Party has decided (probably wisely) not to enter a crowded field that is likely to turn into a media circus.

Nationalist results at 2022 local elections

Britain First candidate Ashlea Simon (above centre) with her campaign team at the Salford election count.

Votes have been counted across most of the UK in local council elections, as well as crucial contests for the Northern Ireland Assembly.

As previously explained in H&D, there were much reduced numbers of candidates this year from the UK’s various racial and civic nationalist parties. The once-mighty BNP now seems totally defunct, having no candidates anywhere in the country and no longer even a functioning website.

By far the best result so far was achieved by Ashlea Simon of Britain First, who finished runner-up in Walkden North, Salford with 508 votes (21.6%). H&D has been very critical of Britain First’s leader Paul Golding on both ideological and personal grounds, but we have to admit this is a very good result and a credit to Ms Simon and her campaign team.

The other nationalist party making progress this year is the British Democrats, and even they only had four candidates nationwide. Lawrence Rustem achieved 117 votes (13.7%) in Shepway South ward, Maidstone. Last year Mr Rustem polled 25 votes (2.6%) in the same ward as a For Britain candidate.

British Democrat leader Dr Jim Lewthwaite finished third of six candidates in Wyke ward, Bradford, with 214 votes (7.1%), slightly up from 6.2% in the same ward last year.

Among other Brit Dem candidates, Chris Bateman polled 100 votes (4.6%) in Laindon Park, Basildon. This was the first ever British Democrat campaign in Basildon. Similarly breaking new ground for the Brit Dems was former BNP candidate Michael Jones who polled 253 votes (5.7%) in East Wickham ward, Bexley.

By contrast the For Britain Movement seems to be going backwards: its leader Anne-Marie Waters was heavily defeated in De Bruce ward, Hartlepool. Click here for our analysis of that result.

What had been For Britain’s strongest branch in Epping Forest was marking time this year with token campaigns. Eddy Butler polled just 11 votes (1.3%) in Loughton Alderton, and former BNP councillor Pat Richardson 16 votes (2.0%) in Loughton Broadway.

Former BNP activist Gary Bergin polled 57 votes (1.7%) as For Britain candidate in Claughton ward, Wirral, down from 1.9% last year, while in nearby Shevington ward, Knowsley, Christine Dillon managed only 18 votes (1.0%). One of the party’s few substantial branches is Exeter, where organiser Frankie Rufolo polled 192 votes (7.7%) in Exwick ward. Mr Rufolo’s Exeter colleagues fared a lot worse: Eric Bransden polling 35 votes (1.2%) in Topsham ward, and Chris Stone 25 votes (0.9%) in St Thomas.

Among the other early results was Langley Mill & Aldercar, Amber Valley, where the National Front’s Tim Knowles polled 28 votes (2.6%), a fraction down from 2.7% in 2018. Another veteran NF candidate Chris Jackson (once North West regional organiser for the BNP) yet again contested his home ward of Todmorden, Calderdale, polling 101 votes (3.1%), up from 2.3% last year.

On the civic wing of nationalism, Reform UK – the main faction of the old UKIP, backed by Nigel Farage and led by Richard Tice – is fading badly. In Chipping Ongar, Greensted and Marden Ash ward, Epping Forest, Reform UK’s Peter Bell finished bottom of the poll with 26 votes (2.7%), behind Robin Tilbrook of the English Democrats with 72 votes (7.5%).

Other English Democrat results included 8.3% for Maxine Spencer in Dearne North, Barnsley and 5.5% for her neighbour Janus Polenceusz in Dearne South.

Alan Graves was one of two Reform UK councillors re-elected in Derby

Reform UK seems now to have just one strong branch – Derby, where they held on to the two council seats they were defending – plus one semi-strong branch, Bolton, where as in Derby they had a full slate of candidates, three of whom managed above 10%. In the rest of the country the party barely exists.

The remaining fragment of UKIP – which was the country’s largest party at the 2014 European Parliamentary elections – had only seventeen candidates for English councils plus eleven candidates for Scottish councils. Only Jordan Gaskell in Hindley ward, Wigan with 10.4% achieved a remotely credible vote.

Two UKIP splinter groups still just about function. The Heritage Party, led by half-Jamaican former London Assembly member David Kurten, had fourteen English council candidates and one Welsh, plus one candidate for the Northern Ireland Assembly. Their best vote was 7.9% for Nick Smith in Cippenham Green ward, Slough, while most others polled tiny votes. An even smaller UKIP splinter is the Alliance for Democracy and Freedom, the best of whose five English council results was 7.3% for Phillip Moulson in South ward, NE Lincolnshire.

Gary Butler – who has contested elections during the past twelve years for the National Front, BNP and English Democrats – this year polled 49 votes (3.3%) as an Independent in Heath ward, Maidstone. His wife Melanie Butler polled 94 votes (5.8%) in Shepway North, Maidstone.

Graham Williamson – a leading activist in the National Front during the 1980s – has long since abandoned racial nationalism in favour of ‘community politics’. He was easily re-elected in South Hornchurch ward, Havering, for his ‘Rainham Independent Residents Association’.

Click here to see full breakdown of nationalist / UKIP type candidates and their results.

Is this the end of ‘For Britain’?

Anne-Marie Waters gambled on an alliance with anti-Muslim hooligan Tommy Robinson (above right) but failed yesterday in her attempt to win a council seat.

Anne-Marie Waters – founder and leader of the For Britain Movement – was heavily defeated yesterday in her attempt to win election to Hartlepool Borough Council. Ms Waters had moved to the area and campaigned intensively for a couple of years, believing that various local scandals including the ‘grooming’ of young girls by Asian Muslims would push voters towards her anti-Islam party.

Karen King won Hartlepool’s De Bruce ward in 2019 to become one of For Britain’s first elected councillors, alongside Julian Leppert in Epping Forest. Boundary changes then led to an all-out election for the entire Hartlepool council in May 2021: Anne-Marie Waters and Ms King both contested De Bruce ward, where each elector had three votes. Ms King lost her seat by only 15 votes, though Ms Waters finished much further down the field.

This year Ms King chose not to stand and Ms Waters was For Britain’s only Hartlepool candidate, again in De Bruce ward, but was again badly beaten, finishing third of four candidates with 203 votes (14.5%), down from 479 votes (22.2%) last year.

In the run-up to this year’s campaign, Ms Waters forged a high-profile political alliance with Tommy Robinson, founder of the English Defence League. Several activists quit For Britain because they didn’t wish to be associated with Robinson’s hooliganism and criminality.

It seems that the gamble of admitting Robinson to For Britain has failed. Only the prospect of electoral success had held Ms Waters’ party together, as there are fundamental disagreements between the party leader (whose views on many issues are liberal and multiracialist) and the ex-BNP activists in Epping Forest who control her only substantial branch.

During today and tomorrow we will report on other nationalist or semi-nationalist election results from across the UK.

Huge increase in Le Pen vote – but another defeat

Marine Le Pen conceding defeat this evening

Marine Le Pen – leader of the nationalist party Rassemblement National (formerly the National Front) –has lost the French presidential election to former banker and ‘centrist’ Emmanuel Macron by a margin of 58.5% to 41.5%.

More than 13 million French voters backed Le Pen. This is by far the strongest vote for a nationalist candidate in postwar French history – up from 33.9% (10.6 million votes) in the equivalent second round in 2017, and 17.9% (6.4 million votes) when Marine Le Pen was knocked out in the first round in 2012.

When her father and party founder Jean-Marie Le Pen reached the second round in 2002, he polled 17.8% (5.5 million votes). His daughter Marine took over as leader of the Front National in January 2011, then renamed the party as Rassemblement National (National Rally).

Nationalists in France and elsewhere will naturally be disappointed by Marine Le Pen’s third presidential defeat, and there will be much speculation as to whether she can credibly campaign for a fourth time in 2027.

The initial challenge will be to present a unified nationalist campaign at the National Assembly elections in two months’ time. As with the presidency, the two-round electoral system is weighted against nationalists, because even if they ‘win’ the first round, RN candidates tend to face a united front of liberals, leftists and ‘moderate’ conservatives in the second round.

Marine Le Pen with her father and party founder Jean-Marie Le Pen: their views of nationalist strategy eventually diverged

One of Marine Le Pen’s greatest strengths has been her ability to build RN support among working-class voters in depressed post-industrial areas such as her home constituency of Hénin-Beaumont in the northern French region of Pas-de-Calais.

However her determination to ‘dedemonise’ her party led to an obsession with avoiding allegations of ‘racism’ or ‘antisemitism’. The RN became utterly determined to remove any racial component to its nationalism, and to denounce the wartime government of Marshal Philippe Pétain (even though in his time Pétain was supported by an overwhelming majority of French citizens).

This rewriting of history and redefinition of French identity provoked many traditional French patriots this year into rejecting Marine Le Pen in favour of rival nationalist candidate Éric Zemmour. Among those to endorse Zemmour was the RN leader’s own niece Marion Maréchal, as H&D‘s Tony Paulsen explained in an article for this website.

Eventually Zemmour’s presidential campaign collapsed and he polled only 7.1% in the election’s first round two weeks ago, compared to Marine Le Pen’s 23.2%.

Marion Maréchal (above left) endorsed Éric Zemmour in the first round of this year’s presidential election. Will she be able to repair relations with her aunt Marine Le Pen? And is Marion Maréchal still the eventual successor as leader of French nationalism?

Will there now be a swing in favour of the new Zemmour / Maréchal party Réconquete? And will that party be able to strike electoral pacts with RN candidates at the Assembly elections in June?

Most critically, what will the new balance be within French nationalism? Marine Le Pen’s social nationalism aimed at repairing the extreme inequalities in post-industrial France, or Zemmour’s focus on reassuring the middle-class? Zemmour’s outspoken engagement with racial questions, or Le Pen’s multiracial civic nationalism?

H&D will focus on these and related questions in our next edition to be published early in May, and will have further analysis later in 2022 of the choices facing European nationalists.

Happy St George’s Day!

The Editor, Assistant Editor and all involved with H&D wish all Englishmen, not just in England, but in the British Isles and worldwide, a very happy St George’s Day.

How did a man born in Cappadocia in AD 270 become the patron saint of England? For our overseas readers, here are ten facts about Saint George.

St George’s Day takes place on 23 April, which is traditionally accepted as being the date of his death in AD 303.

St George was beheaded for resigning his military post and protesting against his pagan leader, the Emperor Diocletian (245-313 AD), who led Rome’s persecution of Christians.

The Emperor’s wife was so inspired by St George’s bravery and loyalty to his religion, that she too became a Christian and was subsequently executed for her faith.

Before the cult of St George was brought back from the Crusades, the top choice for England’s patron saint was Edmund the Martyr (died 869 AD), King of East Anglia. According to the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, Edmund was killed by an invading Viking army. He is also the patron saint of pandemics, torture victims, and wolves.

St George is the Patron Saint of Scouting and on the Sunday nearest to 23 April scouts and guides throughout England used to parade through the streets, until it was seen as “racist”!

His emblem, a red cross on a white background was adopted by Richard the Lionheart and brought to England in the 12th century, when the king’s soldiers would wear it on their tunics to avoid confusion in battle.

Aside from England, other countries that celebrate St George’s Day include Canada, Croatia, Portugal, Cyprus, Greece, Georgia, Serbia, Bulgaria, Romania, Bosnia & Herzegovina, and the Republic of Macedonia.

Though celebrations are somewhat muted in modern PC England (unlike St Patrick’s Day which is highly promoted), some Englishmen – including those at H&D – can still be seen to mark St George’s Day with quintessentially English traditions such as Morris Dancing, eating fish and chips or going to the local pub/club!

The most famous legend of St George is of him slaying a dragon, with the dragon commonly used to represent the Devil in the Middle Ages. The slaying of the dragon by St George was first credited to him in the 12th century, long after his death and it is therefore likely that the many stories connected with St George’s name are fictitious.

The date of 23 April was also the date of the death of the English playwright William Shakespeare. UNESCO marked this historic date by declaring it the International Day of the Book and it is also traditionally when Shakespeare’s birthday is celebrated.

King Henry speaking to English soldiers besieging Harfleur, from Shakespeare’s Henry V:

Once more unto the breach, dear friends, once more;
Or close the wall up with our English dead.
In peace there’s nothing so becomes a man
As modest stillness and humility:
But when the blast of war blows in our ears,
Then imitate the action of the tiger;
Stiffen the sinews, summon up the blood,
Disguise fair nature with hard-favour’d rage;
Then lend the eye a terrible aspect;
Let pry through the portage of the head
Like the brass cannon; let the brow o’erwhelm it
As fearfully as doth a galled rock
O’erhang and jutty his confounded base,
Swill’d with the wild and wasteful ocean.
Now set the teeth and stretch the nostril wide,
Hold hard the breath and bend up every spirit
To his full height. On, on, you noblest English.
Whose blood is fet from fathers of war-proof!
Fathers that, like so many Alexanders,
Have in these parts from morn till even fought
And sheathed their swords for lack of argument:
Dishonour not your mothers; now attest –
That those whom you call’d fathers did beget you.
Be copy now to men of grosser blood,
And teach them how to war. And you, good yeoman,
Whose limbs were made in England, show us here
The mettle of your pasture; let us swear
That you are worth your breeding; which I doubt not;
For there is none of you so mean and base,
That hath not noble lustre in your eyes.
I see you stand like greyhounds in the slips,
Straining upon the start. The game’s afoot:
Follow your spirit, and upon this charge
Cry ‘God for Harry, England, and Saint George!’

Or from the football terraces – before the Woke FA / PC brigade banned it –

Keep St. George in my heart keep me English,
Keep St. George in my heart I pray,
Keep St. George in my heart keep me English,
Keep me English till my dying day,

No Surrender, No Surrender, No Surrender to the IRA!

End note:
The St George Cross and Three Lions flags, proudly fly from H&D Towers 365 days a year – not just on ST Georges Day!

Conservative Future?

England’s most racially divided borough might soon see the first niqab-wearing Conservative councillor.

Fajila Patel is contesting the Bastwell & Daisyfield ward of Blackburn with Darwen borough council in North West England. In 2011’s census the equivalent ward was 85.3% Muslim. Its inhabitants are from varying backgrounds in the Indian sub-continent, some originating in Pakistan but others in India.

According to that 2011 Census, 7.1% of households in the borough had no-one who spoke English “as a main language” – and in Bastwell ward this figure was 26.1%. The main languages spoken in Bastwell other than English are Gujarati, Punjabi and Urdu.

Last year Mrs Patel’s husband – taxi driver ‘Tiger’ Patel – won the neighbouring and similarly Asian-dominated Audley ward, after the campaign video below. These two wards form the core of Blackburn’s Asian population which has expanded into numerous other areas of the town during the decades since Asians first arrived in the borough in the 1960s.

As with many other old industrial towns in the region, including Oldham and Preston, Asians first arrived to work in the declining cotton mills and other manufacturing industry, whose owners liked these immigrants because they would work for low wages and were happy with unpopular shifts such as night work.

When most of this industry disappeared, the Asian communities typically moved into taxi-driving and the retail and food industries, but also experienced high unemployment and crime.

Politically they were exploited by the Labour Party, who treated them as clients who were dependent on the state’s largesse and would therefore have to accept Labour’s ultra-liberal ideas on social issues, many of which are anathema to conservative Muslims.

Typically Labour chose to promote very Westernised, ‘feminist’ Asian women who were in no way representative of their communities, and this led to a backlash. ‘Tiger’ Patel defeated one such very ‘modern’ Muslim Labour woman in Audley ward last year.

The Conservative Party has cynically struck a deal with hardline Muslims in these areas. There could be two defeats for Labour in their former Asian heartland: Mrs Patel stands a good chance of repeating her husband’s victory, while in Audley ward there could be a second shock. Incumbent councillor Yusuf-Jan Virmani is standing for re-election as an independent, after being expelled from Labour last year for alleged ‘anti-semitism’.

What’s certain is that neither Labour nor the Conservatives will speak for Blackburn’s indigenous British. H&D‘s editor Mark Cotterill was elected as a councillor in the mainly White Meadowhead ward of Blackburn in 2006, but since he left the area and moved to Preston, no racial nationalist candidate has come close to being elected.

The Conservative Party’s adoption of an extreme Muslim agenda in Blackburn highlights the desperate need for a party that will address the concerns of the indigenous British. Across the whole of England this year there are very few such candidates. H&D will report on their campaigns, on the results achieved, and on the prospects for a long-overdue realignment of pro-British politics.

Le Pen heads for second round run-off in French presidential battle

Marine Le Pen is contesting her third (and possibly last) presidential election, having polled 17.9% in 2012 and 21.3% in 2017

Marine Le Pen – leader of the French nationalist party Rassemblement National (‘National Rally’ formerly the Front National) is heading for a second-round showdown with the incumbent French President Emmanuel Macron, after winning the support of more than 8 million French voters, almost 500,000 more than she obtained in 2017. The second round will be in two weeks time, on April 24th.

Macron was the clear first-round winner with 27.8% (slightly better than the final opinion polls had suggested) ahead of Le Pen on 23.2%. The far-left candidate Jean-Luc Mélenchon was in third place with 22% (well ahead of his opinion poll ratings).

Le Pen’s nationalist rival Éric Zemmour – who had won the support of Marion Maréchal, granddaughter of FN founder Jean-Marie Le Pen, and many former RN activists – had been running level with Le Pen until late February, each with about 16%, but finished in fourth place with 7.1%, ahead of the conservative candidate Valerie Pécresse who fell to a historic low of 4.8%, only just ahead of the Green candidate Yannick Jadot on 4.6%.

Both Zemmour and Pécresse fared worse than polls had predicted. Since February’s opinion polls, Mélenchon has doubled his vote, while Zemmour’s vote has halved and Pécresse’s shrunk by two-thirds!

This is a disastrous result for French conservatives, who spent a fortune on their campaign believing they had a chance of overtaking Le Pen and qualifying for the second round. It had seemed inconceivable that they could fall below 5%, a vitally important threshold for qualifying for millions of euros in campaign subsidies from the French state.

Meanwhile the Mayor of Paris and candidate of the once-powerful Socialist Party, Anne Hidalgo, polled only 1.7% – tenth of the twelve candidates on the first round ballot paper – confirming her party’s slide into irrelevance. The socialists have less of a financial crisis than the conservatives, because they knew from the start they were not going to reach the 5% hurdle, so they cut their spending accordingly.

Overall turnout was 74%, the second-lowest in modern French history (though higher than any UK election since 1992).

Eric Zemmour had until a month ago seemed likely to challenge Marine Le Pen for leadership of French nationalism, but first round results have confirmed that his campaign ran out of steam

The biggest surprise is that Zemmour did not win a single region, even in the south of France where Marion Maréchal has her power base. It had been thought that while Marine Le Pen would be stronger in the north and in working-class areas, the southern middle-class would desert her for Zemmour.

Le Pen did indeed poll strongly in the north, winning the Hauts-de-France region with 33.4% and taking her strongest département within that region – Pas de Calais – with 38.7%.

But Zemmour’s challenge collapsed in the south.

Le Pen won the Provence-Alpes-Côte d’Azur (PACA) region in south-eastern France with 27.6%, while even though this was predictably Zemmour’s best region he finished fourth with 11.7%.

Zemmour did finish ahead of Le Pen in Paris, though neither of the nationalist candidates are very strong in the increasingly multi-ethnic capital. Le Pen took only 5.5% of the Parisian vote compared to Zemmour’s 8.2%. If one includes the entire Île-de-France region which includes both Paris and its outer suburbs, some of which are very multi-ethnic, the winner was far-left candidate Mélenchon with 30.2%, no doubt boosted by a heavy turnout of immigrants alarmed by Zemmour’s anti-Muslim rhetoric.

Marine Le Pen is far better placed than any previous nationalist candidate to persuade working-class voters who might have voted Mélenchon in the first round to back her against Macron in the second, though left-wing activists and media will campaign hard for an ‘anti-fascist’ vote.

Woke censorship of UK Latin teaching

The tide of ‘woke’ political correctness has finally reached one of the final bastions of traditional British education – the small number of schools that still teach Latin.

Classical education was fundamental to many generations of Britons, including those who built and ruled the British Empire (often in conscious emulation of the Romans). Now that traditional education is deemed to have transgressed against the holy commandments of ‘woke’.

At the centre of the row is the Cambridge Latin Course, a series of books first introduced in 1970 and now used in the vast majority of those British schools that still teach Latin. (Although when I was taught Latin from 1978-1984, we used much older textbooks, and until this row developed I knew nothing of these Cambridge books.)

The books teach children their first simple Latin phrases by introducing the household of a Roman called Lucius Caecilius – a real man who lived in Pompeii, the city largely destroyed by volcanic eruption of Mount Vesuvius in 79 AD. Caecilius himself had probably died seventeen years before this eruption, but his home can still be seen in the ruins of Pompeii and some of its contents are in the Naples archaeological museum.

The problem for modern politically correct censors is that Caecilius – like all wealthy Romans of his era – owned slaves. These slaves were probably White, but the racial politics of our own era means that any mention of slavery requires all White people to grovel in apology, however absurd, ahistorical or otherwise meaningless such apologies are.

The teaching of history is no longer an end in itself – still less is it allowed for Europeans to have any pride in their classical ancestry. Rather, it is compulsory to search for aspects of the past that lead to denigration of our own civilisations.

In addition, the school and university curriculum must be purged of anything that might cause offence to any protected group. The league table of protected groups is headed by Jews, then extends via ethnic minorities, the infinitely expanding variety of sexual minorities, and eventually to women in general. The only group without a victim card to play in this game are White men.

And the problem with the Cambridge Latin Course is that the slaves in Caecilius’ household are portrayed as going about their daily tasks in a normal and even happy environment.

A nuanced approach to teaching Latin (and Ancient History) would have to accept that there were many brutal realities, or just very strange aspects of life in the ancient world that are not suitable for young children, so inevitably when they are introduced to this world it will be in a sanitised and incomplete form.

But for the woke generation of teachers, the whole point of teaching any subject is to instil wokeness. So the Cambridge Latin Course seems likely to be scrapped, and replaced by something that better suits the brainwashing agenda of the 2020s.

Perhaps one of Roman history’s traditional villains will be reinvented as a hero for the 2020s?

Publius Clodius was a vicious gangster and pervert whose murder by a rival gangster in 52 BC led to one of the great speeches by Cicero, the most famous legal orator in history, who successfully defended Clodius’ murderer Titus Annius Milo.

In this speech (Pro Milone) Cicero refers to Clodius’ part in one of the greatest scandals of Ancient Rome some ten years earlier, when Clodius disguised himself as a woman in order to infiltrate the traditional women-only religious rite of the Bona Dea.

This was an all-night festival conducted at the home of Rome’s ceremonial chief priest (on this occasion Julius Caesar), but in an environment that was not only all-female but which had to be ritually cleansed of all male associations before the ceremony (even of male animals or works of art portraying men).

So when Clodius dressed as a woman and attended the event, it was a major scandal, inevitably involving rumours of sexual perversion involving Caesar’s then wife and even Clodius’ own sister. Modern readers are perhaps most familiar with the case because of the phrase Caesar used when divorcing his wife: although there was no proof that she had connived with Clodius, “Caesar’s wife must be above suspicion”.

The scandal of Publius Clodius at the rite of the Bona Dea, as depicted in 1810 in an engraving by Silvestre David Mirys

Clodius was prosecuted for incestum (which in Roman law meant ‘sacrilege’ rather than what we would now call ‘incest’, though one of the allegations was that he had indeed committed incest with his sister).

He was eventually acquitted because a powerful political ally bribed the jury. In 2022 the verdict of woke historians does not need to be bought. After all in our world, we are no longer permitted to recognise biological differences between men and women, so the Bona Dea ceremony itself would be unacceptable and Clodius would be judged a pioneering transsexual hero!

Perhaps the cross-dressing adventures of Clodius will replace the now-unacceptable Cambridge Latin Course as a means of introducing children to the classical world?

Or more likely the entire history of that world will be scrapped, and replaced by something more suitable for teaching European children that they must bow down before Africans.

London’s giant Holocaust Memorial blocked by High Court

The giant Holocaust Memorial was planned for a site near Westminster Abbey and the Houses of Parliament, but the High Court has now quashed the proposal

This afternoon plans for a giant Holocaust Memorial close to Westminster Abbey and the Houses of Parliament were blocked by a High Court judgment that quashed planning permission for the project.

Regular readers will know that in 2019 H&D’s assistant editor Peter Rushton submitted a detailed and fully documented memorandum to the initial planning inquiry into this grotesque project. Quoting from official British archives, he revealed that when such a memorial was first planned in the 1980s, it had been denounced by senior ministers and officials. Then Foreign Secretary Lord Carrington – who had won the Military Cross for his bravery during the Second World War – wrote: “The whole idea is preposterous”.

Other senior officials had written that the project seemed to be part of an Israeli propaganda drive. Click here to read the full story as we revealed it in 2019.

That inquiry by Westminster City Council’s planning committee ruled against the Memorial, but was overturned when the British government appointed a planning inspector, reporting to a government minister who ruled that the project should go ahead.

Now the High Court in London has quashed that ministerial decision.

This means that unless there is a further appeal, the Memorial will not go ahead.

Victoria Tower Gardens as it is today: a park that would be wrecked by the proposed Memorial

In the first place this is a great victory for all campaigners who like ourselves submitted objections during the original planning process. Most objections focused on the damage that would be done to one of central London’s few remaining parks.

This preservation of green space is of course an important issue. But we hope that the defeat of this shocking proposal will cause Britons to reflect on why they should tolerate a politically motivated minority imposing their special version of history.

In 2018 Peter Rushton of H&D and Lady Michèle Renouf of Telling Films made a video with the late Richard Edmonds denouncing the proposed wrecking of Victoria Tower Gardens by this grotesque Memorial, click below to watch this short film.

As we reported yesterday, H&D will soon be launching a special website section devoted to ‘Real History and the True Europe’, where we will resist political correctness and present fully documented analyses of historical controversies, as well as defence of Europe’s true culture.

The last week has been a bad one for those who seek to impose an officially and legally protected version of history. First the leading funder and promoter of ‘Holocaust’ history – oligarch Moshe Kantor – was subjected to sanctions because of his role as facilitator and propagandist for Vladimir Putin.

And then the proposal for a giant Holocaust memorial in Westminster was defeated.

The task now is to roll back the tide of propaganda and oppressive laws that was swept over Europe in recent years. Keep reading this website to find out more as the campaign for Real History and the True Europe takes off.

Tony Blair’s favourite oligarch hit by sanctions: ex-PM and ‘Holocaust’ lobby under scrutiny

Moshe Kantor hosting a conference in Terezin, Czech Republic, where he demanded that laws against ‘Holocaust denial’ be extended across Europe

As far back as 27th February H&D raised questions about former Prime Minister Tony Blair and his favourite oligarch Moshe Kantor, a close friend of both the ex-Labour leader and the Kremlin godfather Vladimir Putin.

We pointed out that since 2015 Blair has been chairman of Kantor’s ‘European Council on Tolerance and Reconciliation’, which campaigns for ‘tougher laws against extremism’.

Naturally the extremism Blair and Kantor wish to criminalise involves such things as publishing a magazine or running a bookshop. For this type of extremism the likes of Blair and Kantor endorse the approach of Spanish prosecutors, who wish to jail Pedro Varela for twelve years, or German prosecutors who wish again to jail the 93-year-old Ursula Haverbeck, or German border guards who defy their own laws and their country’s obligations under the European constitution to deport the 19-year-old student Isabel Peralta.

Invading a neighbouring country is, by contrast, not ‘extreme’: not if the invader is Moshe Kantor’s close friend Vladimir Putin.

Moshe Kantor has founded and sponsored Jewish lobby groups and ‘academic’ foundations around the world: he is now under sanctions for his ties to the Kremlin’s campaign of propaganda lies and brutal aggression against its neighbours

Yesterday – more than five weeks after we raised these questions – the British authorities belatedly acted against Kantor, adding him to their sanctions list.

Kantor’s many leading positions in international Jewry and Zionism include President of the European Jewish Council; Vice President of the UK’s Jewish Leadership Council (a registered charity); Chairman of the Policy Council of the World Jewish Congress; and President of the World Holocaust Forum Foundation.

In many of these roles he has worked closely with Tony Blair, who was one of the most pro-Israel Prime Ministers in UK history.

In 2015 Kantor organised a conference in the Czech Republic where he called on European governments including the UK to adopted standardised laws criminalising ‘Holocaust denial’. Defying the views of scholars and legal experts who wish to repeal these ‘historical memory laws’ that jail people for their opinions, Kantor wanted to make the laws stricter and the punishments harsher.

Tony Blair joined Kantor in promoting these arguments and demands for legal crackdowns on opinion-crime, via a major article in The Times newspaper.

The main vehicle for demanding these new debate-denial laws was the ironically named European Council on Tolerance and Reconciliation, with Kantor as President and paymaster, and Tony Blair as chairman.

Now Kantor himself is facing legal sanctions – not for opinions, but for his documented ties to the Kremlin’s war machine and lie machine.

Moshe Kantor and Tony Blair honouring Prince Albert of Monaco for his obeisance to the Holocaust lobby

It is now beyond dispute that for the past twenty years or more, Vladimir Putin has used Holocaust propaganda as an instrument of Russian diplomacy and as a justification for Russian military aggression.

Now is the time to ask the forbidden questions. Whatever European courts might say, it’s time to demand historical truth.

Back in 2007 – in a letter prominently published in a national newspaperH&D‘s Peter Rushton discussed the way that Israeli Prime Minister Golda Meir had used Holocaust propaganda to pressure US governments into allowing Israel to get away with nuclear proliferation. His letter ended: “Should a self-interested version of 1940s history be allowed to dictate the nuclear power politics of the 21st century, with potentially disastrous consequences?”

In 2022 the same question becomes more urgent, and we can no longer allow the risk of prosecution in many European countries to silence that question.

In 2015 Tony Blair and Moshe Kantor demanded new laws to crack down on ‘antisemites’ and ‘Holocaust deniers’.

Therefore this week H&D will launch a new website section – Real History and the True Europe – in which over the coming months we shall ask the important questions about Europe’s history and culture, including the ‘Holocaust’.

On this website, in our magazine, and in a book to be published later this year – The Dogs That Didn’t Bark: British Intelligence, International Jewry and the Holocaust (the first of a series examining aspects of Britain’s secret history with the aid of new archival discoveries) – we will examine whether, just as Moshe Kantor and Vladimir Putin have exploited ‘Holocaust’ stories for propagandist purposes, other official and unofficial propaganda agencies were behind parts of the original ‘Holocaust’ narrative in the 1940s.

We shall re-examine the work of revisionist scholars including the late Professor Robert Faurisson, including work newly available in English translation.

We shall have interviews and court reports from across Europe, as politically biased judges seek to jail nonagenarians for ‘criminal’ opinions.

And we shall reveal other political abuses of the judicial system, where a new generation of European political activist is threatened with prosecution to distract from government treachery and failure to enforce immigration laws.

This online project and publishing venture will look at many other topics besides the ‘Holocaust’, but we shall not be afraid to challenge the establishment consensus. Europe is again at war. Historical and political truth is too important for us to tolerate its restriction by the courts.

Vladimir Putin and Moshe Kantor during an ‘international forum’ that Kantor sponsored on the 60th anniversary of the Soviet ‘liberation’ of Auschwitz

Next Page »

  • Find By Category

  • Latest News

  • Follow us on Twitter

  • Follow us on Instagram

  • Exactitude – free our history from debate deniers