H&D issue 120 will be published soon

The new issue (#120) of Heritage and Destiny magazine is out soon. The 28-page, July – August 2024 issue, has as its lead:

Whatever the result of the General Election – there will be no meaningful change. This is merely a changing of the guard. The only difference between the old gang parties is the colour of their rosettes.

Issue 120.

July – August 2024

Contents include:

  • Editorial – by Mark Cotterill
  • The “Transitional Programme” and the way forward for nationalism – by Ian Freeman
  • Right to Reply – The ‘Ladder Strategy and Community Politics’? – It has its weaknesses, but it is a part of the tactic of ‘Revolution from Below’ – by Steve Frost
  • The Enemy has the English countryside in the crosshairs – by Frederick Dixon
  • 2024 Elections – the Asian resistance and the White surrender?  – by Peter Rushton
  • Book Review – Léon Degrelle in Exile – 1945-1994 – by José Luis Jerez Riesco – Part I of a review by Peter Rushton
  • Multi-racialism – The experiment that went wrong – by Hugh Perry
  • Book Review – Enemies and Neighbours: Arabs and Jews in Palestine and Israel, 1917-2017 – by Ian Black – reviewed by Alec Suchi
  • From the Other side of the Pond – by Kenneth Schmidt
  • Two full pages of readers’ letters
  • Movement News – Latest analysis of the nationalist movement – by Peter Rushton
  • Movie Review – Civil War – reviewed by Mark Cotterill

If you would like a sample copy of this issue, please send just £7.00 or $15.00 to H&D, 40 Birkett Drive, Preston, PR2 6HE, England, UK – or if you would like to subscribe, please go to – http://www.heritageanddestiny.com/publications/journal/ – for full details or email – heritageanddestiny@yahoo.com

Ireland’s anti-immigration revolt fizzles out

As H&D predicted a month ago, Ireland’s much-hyped anti-immigration movement turned into a divided and mostly feeble electoral challenge last week. (Though Ireland voted on Friday, results weren’t declared until the following Thursday.) Two right-wing independents were elected as MEPs and a third (in Dublin) narrowly failed, but these were conservatives rooted mainly in anti-abortion and other Catholic social conservative movements, rather than in the anti-immigration protests.

While H&D readers can celebrate the fact that Sinn Féin has lost many votes due to its pro-immigration stance and general wokeism – and SF’s former Westminster MP Michelle Gildernew hilariously failed in her bid for a European seat – it would sadly be wrong to conclude that any coherent anti-immigration movement has yet emerged.

In the European elections, the tragi-comic National Party’s competing factions polled 0.8% and 0.7% of first preferences in the Dublin constituency; and 0.6% and 0.5% in the Midlands/NW constituency. In the South constituency neither faction put up a candidate.

(Bear in mind that in both the European and local council elections in Ireland, the STV electoral system helps smaller parties to maximise their support, because there is no such thing as a “wasted vote” – unlike in the UK’s first-past-the-post system where smaller parties usually struggle for credibility.)

In the local elections, the deputy leader of the Reynolds faction of the NP (Patrick Quinlan) did manage to win one of the five seats in the Blanchardstown-Mulhuddart ward of Fingal County Council, to the west of Dublin. Parts of this area have suffered serious deprivation and crime problems for decades: some of the background to recent anti-immigrant riots involves conflict between native Irish gangsters and imported criminals.

Patrick Quinlan (above left), deputy leader of one of the bitterly divided National Party factions, won a local council seat on the outskirts of Dublin but polled only 0.7% in the European Parliamentary seat.

But this was the only success for either National Party faction across the whole of Ireland.

The Irish Freedom Party – which is the main voice of the ‘Irexit’ movement and has also adopted a milder version of anti-immigration policies – also won just one council seat in the entire country. This was in the Palmerstown-Fonthill ward of South Dublin County Council.

In the Lifford-Stranorlar ward of Donegal County Council, the independent anti-immigration campaigner Niall McConnell (known to some H&D readers for his online broadcasts where he has interviewed several prominent figures on the right) polled 7.7% of first preferences. He picked up about one-fifth of the transfers from the more ‘moderate’ conservative party Aontú, and a few transfers from a protest vote party that campaigns on housing issues, but these transfers were nowhere near enough to gain Mr McConnell a seat.

In the European elections, the Irish Freedom Party polled 0.9% in Dublin, 2.0% in Midlands/NW (where their candidate was the party leader Hermann Kelly, once associated with Nigel Farage), and 1.8% in South.

A smaller fringe party involved in the anti-immgration protests, ‘The Irish People’ fared even worse with 0.7% in Midlands/NW; 0.7% in South; and 0.5% in Dublin.

Veteran Marxist and ‘Official IRA’ activist Malachy Steenson has recently become an anti-immigration independent and won a Dublin City Council seat. It’s not clear how much of this old leaflet he still endorses.

In most of the country, the more substantial electoral challenges came from longer-established parties and independents who combined an element of anti-immigration politics with traditional Catholicism, and in several cases had a background in the IRA or other anti-British, republican terrorist causes. British patriots should be very careful indeed in welcoming these successes, since regardless of their stance on immigration, many of these Irish ‘nationalist’ individuals and parties are fundamentally our enemies.

Aontú, led by a former Sinn Féin activist and including defectors from both Sinn Féin and the traditional conservative-republican party Fianna Fáil, polled 2.8% in Dublin; 6.0% in Midlands/NW (where their candidate was party leader Peader Toíbín); and 2.1% in South. They retained several local council seats.

The strongest results for the Irish ‘right’ were obtained by Independent Ireland (a party created last November by reactionary conservative businessmen who had fallen out with the old gang parties) and by various other independent candidates who became well-known for their roles in the recent referendum campaign, where Irish voters resisted demands for wokeist changes to their country’s constitution.

Two independent candidates were elected to Dublin City Council, including Malachy Steenson who describes himself as a ‘republican socialist’ and was a veteran activist in the ‘Official IRA’ and its Marxist political front, the Workers Party (known as ‘the Stickies’), but now associates with a jumble of anti-woke causes as well as versions of Marxist republicanism.

In Dublin’s four-member European constituency, Independent Ireland’s candidate – radio celebrity Niall Boylan – finished fifth after transfers from other conservative and anti-immigration candidates just failed to gain him a seat. Boylan had taken 8.1% of first preference votes.

Peter Casey, a wealthy right-wing conservative, polled 3.1% in Midlands/NW, where the strongest broadly ‘right-wing’/conservative candidate was Independent Ireland’s Ciaran Mullooly with 8.4%. Mullooly, who like his colleague in Dublin is a former journalist and broadcaster, was eventually elected in fifth place, while Sinn Féin lost their seat. This means that Michelle Gildernew, who gave up her Westminster post as Sinn Féin MP for Fermanagh & South Tyrone to contest this European seat in the Republic, is now unemployed!

Similarly in South, barrister and independent candidate Michael McNamara (a former Labour politician who was one of the leaders of the anti-woke ‘No’ campaign in the recent constitutional referendum) eventually won one of the five European seats after polling 8.2% of first preferences and picking up many transfers from defeated ‘right-wing’ candidates. The far-left Putinist MEP Mick Wallace lost his seat, as did his fellow Putinist Clare Daly in Dublin.

Unsurprisingly, reactionary conservative forces whose main concern is preserving Ireland’s traditional Catholic social values, have proved to be a far stronger political movement than those who are mainly concerned with immigration.

95-year-old Ursula Haverbeck in court again this week

The 95-year-old German scholar and publisher Ursula Haverbeck returned to court this week, for an appeal hearing against a prison sentence for political ‘crimes’. (In the photo above, Ursula is discussing an earlier case with her lawyer, Wolfram Nahrath.)

Ursula’s ‘offence’ is to have raised questions about the orthodox version of 1940s German history (a history which she lived through, unlike the vast majority of today’s Germans).

On Friday 7th June she appeared in court in Hamburg (a journey of more than 130 miles from her home) in relation to a conviction that dates back to 2015. Appeal hearings in the case were delayed several times, partly due to a backlog of cases during the pandemic. Additional hearings are scheduled for 12th and 26th June.

Ursula has repeatedly been charged (and convicted) since 2004 for questioning the alleged extermination of six million Jews in purported homicidal “gas chambers”: an alleged mass murder presumed by orthodox historians to have been carried out on the orders of Adolf Hitler – even though these orthodox historians have never been able to produce the slightest evidence for such orders, nor establish how and where the murders took place.

German courts refuse even to discuss the evidence concerning this alleged “Holocaust”. They frequently impose jail sentences on dissident historians, scientists, and publishers.

Ursula Haverbeck with her fellow patriot and scholar, the late Dr Rigolf Hennig.

The German-Canadian Ernst Zündel was deported to Germany in 2005 and arrested on arrival. He was held in Mannheim prison for exactly five years until his release in March 2010, having also been imprisoned from 2003-2005 in the USA and Canada awaiting deportation.

The scientist and historian Germar Rudolf was extradited from the USA to Germany in 2005 and imprisoned until 2009. Many other countries including France, Austria, and Russia also criminalise historical revisionism, but the Federal Republic (today’s occupied Germany) has some of the most severe punishments.

Ursula Haverbeck herself served a jail sentence in Bielefeld from 2018-20, and is due to serve a further jail sentence confirmed by a Berlin court in 2022. The main difficulty in enforcing this sentence seems to be that few prisons (or even prison hospitals) have appropriate facilities to accommodate a 95-year-old prisoner.

Among the last survivors of the wartime generation, Ursula Haverbeck has ensured – by her remarkable tenacity, intelligence, and courage – that the pursuit of historical truth continues, in defiance of politically-directed courts and enemy-occupied governments.

The latest state repression against Vincent Reynouard

The heroic revisionist scholar Vincent Reynouard, who as regular readers of H&D and the Real History blog will know, was imprisoned in Edinburgh from November 2022 until his deportation to France in February 2024, is facing further efforts by the Parisian courts to silence him.

Vincent’s ‘crime’ is to have raised serious questions about the orthodox history of the Second World War, in particular the alleged homicidal gas chambers at Auschwitz, and (in his most recent work) the legend of Oradour-sur-Glâne, where the Waffen-SS is accused of having killed 643 civilians.

In an article at his blog, Vincent has described the latest stages of the French state’s repressive efforts against him. Here is an English translation of his article (click here for a German translation).


On April 17 at the Paris High Court (tribunal de grand instance), I appeared before a sentencing enforcement judge (JAP). Why had he summoned me? Because France has begun an “extension of surrender” process against me. This means that after having obtained my extradition from Scotland, the French courts will ask the Scottish authorities for their consent so that two sentences and one further court order issued against me in France between 2017 and 2021, while I was in England, can be made enforceable.

A desire to silence me as quickly as possible

Reduced expectations

Article 695-18 of the Code of Criminal Procedure makes clear:
When the public prosecutor who issued the European arrest warrant has obtained the surrender of the person sought, the person cannot be prosecuted, convicted or detained with a view to serving a custodial sentence for any act whatsoever, prior to the extradition and other than that which motivated this process.

However, the French authorities obtained my extradition specifically over seven videos that I published on the internet between September 2019 and April 2020. They did not invoke the two sentences and the additional French court order, because although, taken together, they inflict on me fifteen months of incarceration, taken separately, each one sentences me to less than a year in prison, which makes an extradition request impossible.

Consequently, when, on February 2nd 2024, I was handed over, handcuffed, to the French authorities, an investigating judge indicted me and placed me under judicial supervision for the seven videos mentioned in the arrest warrant.

I am accused of “public denial, minimisation or relativisation of a war crime”, “publicly disputing the existence of a crime against humanity committed during the Second World War” and “public incitement to hatred or violence due to [racial or religious] origin…”. As preventive detention does not exist – or not yet – for these so-called “publishing” offences, that same evening, I walked free from the court.

I still won’t shut up

For my opponents, this was a great disappointment, because some had already assumed I would be incarcerated. When, on October 12, 2023, the Scottish justice in the first hearing authorised my extradition, the president of the National Association of the Families of the Martyrs of Oradour-sur-Glane, Benoît Sadry, proclaimed : “We can rejoice that he is coming back to be imprisoned!

Others probably thought that after fifteen months in prison in Scotland, an extradition and an immediate indictment involving judicial supervision, I would henceforth keep silent, wishing to avoid making my case worse.

They were wrong. The very evening of my arrival in France, I gave a video interview to Jérôme Bourbon and Florian Rouanet. Then came those carried out by Égalité & Réconciliation and Nereus Osa. The apotheosis was my participation in the show Deep Geopolitics, presented by Mike Borowski, in the company of Alain Soral and Alexandre Juving-Brunet.

There are also weekly conferences, organised throughout France. I have already traveled to Nantes, Chartres, Quimper, Rouen, Montauban, Perpignan, Le-Puy-en-Velay and Lyon. Other meetings are planned, from Vannes to Strasbourg and from Dunkirk to Savoie.

Finally, I write articles published in the columns of Rivarol, on my blog with its Newsletter as well as on my GAB page.

Using the most extraordinary exceptions to the Penal Code

In June 2023, the director of the Jean Jaurès Foundation’s Political Radicalism Monitoring Centre, Jean-Yves Camus, declared: “faced with an ideologue like Reynouard, unfortunately, imprisonment is the only way to silence his propaganda.” Since February 2, 2024, my opponents have followed this advice.

Hence this “extension” approach initiated against me. It is based on article 695-18 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. As we have seen, this prevents France using the two judgments and court order (issued against me while I was in exile in Britain) as grounds for throwing me into prison.

But it also provides for exceptions. The French authorities cannot enforce these court decisions, except “when the judicial authority of the executing Member State, which surrendered the person, expressly consents”. Paris will therefore ask Edinburgh for its consent.

In my presence and in front of my lawyer, the sentencing enforcement judge admitted that this was a fairly unusual step, and that in relation to any UK court, it was a first for publishing offences.

He also underlined that the actions criminalised in the two sentences and in the court order were “old ”: these involve three publications (two videos and a book I believe) dating from 2014, 2017 and 2019, i.e. actions going back five, seven and ten years.

Let’s press on!

But no matter: my adversaries absolutely aim to gag me; after having moved heaven and earth to obtain my extradition, they will do everything to proceed against me as quickly as possible.

The “extension of surrender” provides for a hearing to be held in Edinburgh. At the end of the debates, the Scottish court will rule on whether or not to authorise France to make the three legal decisions taken against me enforceable.

My lawyer assumed that, given bureaucratic tardiness, the case would not be decided for another year. But the judge said France hoped for a Paris hearing within a week, and a hearing in Edinburgh before the summer. Yes, really, they aim to incarcerate me as quickly as possible…


Looking for a brave Scottish lawyer

We are already preparing for the hearing in Scotland. A Scottish lawyer will be contacted.

A lawyer exhausted by the revisionist fight

I will dismiss the one who defended me when I was imprisoned in Edinburgh, because I gained the distinct impression that over the months he became timid.

In November 2022, he was enthusiastic about defending me. He warmly assured me: “If we condemn revisionism and throw people in prison for this reason, then we can also restore slavery. Human rights are indivisible.”

But later he confided to me: “I received calls from many newspapers, including Israeli ones. I defend you on the basis of Law; I refuse to be your spokesperson. I want to die peacefully, in my bed.”

As the weeks went by, I noticed that together with his colleague, he adopted a minimal defense. In particular, he did not want me to speak in front of the judges. During the hearings, I was there, sitting like a fool. My destiny was at stake, but the judges ignored me and my lawyer refused to allow me to speak.

I still hear the prosecutor claiming that my videos conveyed “frightening levels of anti-Semitism”. However, my colleague had transmitted to the Defence a file which included everything I had said on the Jewish problem since 2018. It demonstrated beyond any possible dispute that I was “Judeo-indifferent”, not by strategy but by conviction.

It was time for my lawyer to produce it. He did nothing, simply responding that my videos should be judged in their entirety, not on a few extracts presented out of context. He was right.

However, instead of analysing them and quoting passages to emphasise that they developed rational arguments, without any “hatred”, he opted to engage in legal debate over whether the nature of my comments was “offensive” or “grossly offensive”. Unsurprisingly, the prosecutor called them “grossly offensive.”

Defend full freedom of expression

To give my lawyer the opportunity to respond, I sent him the judgment in Handyside v. United Kingdom (December 7th, 1976). The European Court of Human Rights declared:

Freedom of expression […] is applicable not only to “information” or “ideas” that are favourably received or regarded as inoffensive or as a matter of indifference, but also to those that offend, shock or disturb the State or any sector of the population. Such are the demands of that pluralism, tolerance and broadmindedness without which there is no “democratic society”. 

I had also brought to the attention of my lawyer the preface to Robert Faurisson’s Mémoire en Défense. Written by the Jewish author Noam Chomsky, who emphasised:

even if Faurisson were to be a rabid anti-Semite and fanatic pro-Nazi […] this would have no bearing whatsoever on the legitimacy of the defence of his civil rights. On the contrary, it would make it all the more imperative to defend them since, once again, it has been a truism for years, indeed centuries, that it is precisely in the case of horrendous ideas that the right of free expression must be most vigorously defended; it is easy enough to defend free expression for those who require no such defence.

Arguments on legal technicalities are of no use in a trial for revisionism

I hoped that my lawyer would produce this material to assert my right to present, calmly and rationally, my historical and political theses, without their character being judged as “offensive” or “grossly offensive”, but even when he asserted that the use of the law sanctioning “grossly offensive” remarks was being abused in the present case, he failed to back this by citing the Handyside judgment and Noam Chomsky’s preface.

Responding to the prosecutor’s allegations, he responded timidly: “I consider that my client’s comments could be seen as offensive without being grossly so.”

At that moment, I knew that the game was lost, because instead of fighting on the ground of reason and invoking the very clear opinions expressed by people above all suspicion, the Defence had been drawn onto the ground of a subjective choice between “offensive” or “grossly offensive”? It was talking about the sex of angels… The not-so-courageous judges would quite naturally claim that my publications were “grossly offensive”.

The consequences of an uncompromising fight for the truth

Today, I am convinced that my lawyer received calls and messages that, rightly or wrongly, intimidated him. I don’t blame him, because by asserting my National Socialism, I am largely responsible for it. Of course, I explain that National Socialism is not Hitlerism: Hitlerism is one manifestation of it at a given time, in a given country, to resolve given problems. It involved numerous contingencies, such as euthanasia of the mentally-handicapped, experiments on human guinea pigs, radical anti-Judaism or the opening of concentration camps.

You can be a National Socialist without wanting to imitate everything that was done under the Third Reich. But very few people listen to my explanations. For the vast majority, a “Nazi” is a madman who wants to massacre Jews, “sub-races” and the mentally-handicapped, while he locks up opponents in concentration camps and fanaticises the young, destroys culture and reduces women to the rank of progenitors. Therefore, the simple fact of saying to a lawyer: “Are you defending a Nazi?” is often enough to intimidate him.

Hold Scottish justice accountable for its responsibilities

So I hope to find a Scottish defence counsel who will show more courage. We will inform him of the hysterical repression raging in France.

Our goal is for him to hold his country’s justice system accountable by saying: “Violating British tradition which requires offering the right of asylum to politically persecuted people, you have handed over a French citizen whose only ‘crime’ is to express historical and political opinions that displease the powerful. Are you going to commit another ignominy by authorising France to incarcerate him, following court decisions rendered in the name of a repressive law which does not exist here?”

Will we find a lawyer brave enough to adopt this strategy? And if so, will the judges back down from committing a new ignominy? Hopes are slim, even illusory. But no matter: even without hope of victory, we must fight and denounce the scandal.

Faced with the importance of the issue, I will not remain silent

Should we deduce from this that before the summer or at the start of the next school year, I will return to prison? No, because if Scotland accedes to the wishes of the French authorities, then I will oppose the two judgments and will lodge an appeal (in cassation) against the judgment. The first two cases will start from scratch and the third will be examined after several months.

During these several months, I intend to give as many conferences as possible and write as many articles as possible. I have dedicated my life to revisionism: blows and threats will neither keep me silent nor force me to recant.

Some will criticise my stubbornness. “You have already sacrificed your family in a fight that does not interest the French. People worry about the future which is played out in the present, not the past.” It is true that according to a recent survey, the French are above all concerned about crime, inflation, the environment, social inequalities and the economic situation of the country.

But if, truly, the past were irrelevant, then the authorities would leave me alone. However, as we have seen, they are struggling to silence me as quickly as possible.

This is all the more revealing since I have no support in the major media, no complicity in the academic world or any appreciable financial assistance: for thirty years, I have published my works myself and I have earned my living as a private tutor. The repression that is launched against me as a revisionist historian of the Second World War demonstrates that this period weighs on the present, and therefore on the future.

To those who doubt this, I would remind you that a brochure published by the Education Ministry warns:

the Shoah does not belong to the past. From 1945, the resurgence of liberated nations after the most absolute dehumanization that the world has ever had to endure, gave rise to new institutions.

Among these institutions is the United Nations. On September 26, 2018, their Secretary General, António Guterres, proclaimed: “The origins of the United Nations themselves are rooted in the need to learn the lessons of the Holocaust.”

Youth, first target of the guardians of Memory

Engraving the Shoah in the soul of humanity

Hence the propaganda targeting young people. At a time when the last of the wartime deportees are dying, some pass on the “Memory” to young people so that they can internalise it and pass it on in their turn. Addressing young Belgians heading to Auschwitz, the director of the War Heritage Museum, Michel Jaupart, declared:

Today, you will encounter history, and become memory-bearers […] You will be able to relate this journey to your parents, to your friends, and later to your children.

Elsewhere, a young Frenchman who became one of these “memory-bearers” confirms that he understood his mission: 

Talking about the Shoah, in class and outside, raises our awareness. No one remains indifferent when I tell what I learn, and I intend to continue to bear witness, so that later my future children will in turn become ambassadors of this memory.

The journalist who reports these remarks concludes: “Holocaust survivors need not worry: young people are taking over“. This is the objective of the authorities: to perpetuate the memory from generation to generation.

In 2006, commemorating the anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz, Israeli President Moshe Katsav stated:

Now that the stain of the Holocaust is etched into the soul of mankind forever, Yad Vashem is the faithful guardian of the path of memory for the Jewish people and all of humanity, for all time.

Technology to perpetuate memory

In order to achieve this objective, “Memory” is disseminated everywhere, partly thanks to new technologies. In Eure, a history professor announces:

We want a plaque for Jewish deportees from Eure to be placed in 2025 in Évreux. Next year, we would like to do podcasts, and we have the idea of ​​creating a route around the city using QR codes.

The use of new technologies will make it possible to create “memory 2.0”. The Shoah Memorial explains this as follows:.

The Shoah Memorial, a participant in the field of education, wishes to initiate a debate on the issues of transmission 2.0
Writers, actors, influencers, historians, YouTubers, today have a vital role to play as transmitters of memory and spokespersons […]
By mobilizing influencer ambassadors of the young generation, through a unique 100% digital “infotainment” format, the Shoah Memorial confirms its ambition dynamically to move the lines, so as better to raise awareness among young and adolescent audiences.

Already, survivors have been filmed and reproduced in the form of holograms: not only can they repeat their testimony endlessly, but artificial intelligence coupled with voice recognition software allows people to ask questions and have them answered by these virtual people. Former deportees who have been dead for ages will therefore be able to continue transmitting “Memory”.

Memory: a propaganda weapon in the service of globalism

A teaching that is in no way neutral

But the authorities’ objective goes beyond the transmission of memories of the past. It is also — and above all — political: the authorities seek first and foremost to combat anti-Judaism. The author of an article entitled “Teaching the Shoah in a civic education approach” concludes:

This teaching, even very incomplete, of the Shoah within the framework of the civic education course […] goes beyond the issues of memory, the empowerment of future generations in the face of any new avatar of anti-Semitism being the main objective.

It is so obvious that the young recruits are aware of it. After hearing the testimony of Ginette Kolinka and visiting Auschwitz, a student from the Saint-Avold high school, Lother, declared:

She always encourages students to be the guardians of this memory which must never disappear. This is why we are committed to this project so that this memory never disappears and that Holocaust denial and anti-Semitism never take over .

Anti-Judaism is not the only target, however. The brochure Memory and history of the Shoah at school explains:

vigilance against the possible return of barbarism cannot be reduced to this corpus of knowledge and patiently built critical consciousness, which we call culture; we must also think differently about ‘otherness’, and understand cultural diversity as the very essence of humanity. An education open to the world, to outsiders and ‘otherness’ is one of the best defences against prejudice and racism.

Engaging young people under the banner of anti-racism

The final objective is therefore to use “Memory” to encourage anti-racism. The evidence abounds.

For the years 2023-2026, the “National Plan to combat racism, anti-Semitism and discrimination linked to origin” established by the DILCRAH (France’s Interministerial Delegation to Combat Racism, Anti-Semitism and Anti-LGBT Hate) provides for fifteen “flagship measures”. The first is the following:

Organise a historical or memorial visit linked to racism, anti-Semitism or anti-Gypsyism for each student during their schooling .

Beyond, therefore, the fight against anti-Judaism, “Memory” serves to recruit young people under the banner of anti-racism.

In this context, Auschwitz and Oradour are equally important. At the end of August 2020, after a revisionist inscription was painted on the Oradour Memory Center, the head of CRIF (the Representative Council of French Jewish Institutions), Francis Kalifat, reacted by announcing:

There is no difference between a Holocaust denier and a denier of Oradour-sur-Glâne or a denier of another genocide. These are the same people who fuel Holocaust denial and who are entering this field today, which is a new development […] These same deniers are now attacking the very memory that constitutes the identity of France.

Train good anti-fascist democrats

Six years earlier, participating in the commemorations of the seventieth anniversary of the Oradour-sur-Glâne tragedy, Manuel Valls (then French Prime Minister) had declared:

Oradour represents a Europe that was to be destroyed to the finish, it is humanity that was to be murdered to the finish. And in this tomb of ruins that we have just visited, in this silence, the walls do not speak. They shout ! […] And behind these cries, those of the six hundred and forty-two victims, rise other cries, those of the millions of dead in the camps .

And Valls added:

Oradour is also a warning to keep fighting and never let ideologies of death flourish. We know it well, […] they have not disappeared […] Fanaticism, radicalism always have their leaders, their doctrines sowing the seeds of terror, to have no consideration for human life or civilian populations – and it is up to us, democracy, it is up to France to concede nothing, to leave no breach and to act with the greatest determination. Here and everywhere in Europe, in the entire world.

It is clear: from Oradour to Auschwitz, memories merge to give rise to anti-fascism and, beyond that, anti-racism. All this in the name of democracy. The authorities do not hide it. France’s Official Bulletin of National Education explains:

As part of its historical dimension, the teaching of the Shoah has a civic purpose and responds to a moral obligation. It is not just a question of transmitting memory and knowledge: we must give all students the elements of culture and reflection enabling them to reject all forms of racism and discrimination and to understand that, contravening the Declaration of human and citizen rights, they make democracy impossible.

Memory is therefore a tool intended to format young people in order to transform them into good democrats.

Building a morality of non-discrimination

Therefore, we will not be surprised to hear Amel, 16 years old, a young “memory-bearer”, declare on his return from Auschwitz:

It enriched me in terms of general culture, and also in a human sense, because it makes us understand the present; it’s the same as all other forms of racism, such as homophobia.

For its part, the Canopé network offers teachers educational materials to maintain “Memory” in order to fight against discrimination. They presents it as follows:

Implementing a memory project within your class or your school, building a collective memory, opening dialogue and getting students to reflect on republican values ​​contributes preventing and fighting against discrimination.

Among the documents offered is a work entitled: Lessons of the Shoah. Its author, Gérard Rabinovitch, writes:

The purpose of this work is to attempt to outline – supported by facts exhumed, explored, recorded – how the Shoah, in its indelible lesson, calls for thoughtful perspective, alert syntheses, ethical warnings. It is not just a question of “duty to remember”, it is a question of taking stock of the fact that “Nazism constituted for the West a historical milestone and a transformative episode to which contemporary societies remain dependent”, as highlighted by the jurist and psychoanalyst Pierre Legendre.

The terrors of the 20th century, this “permanent liquidation machine” as the writer Imre Kertész calls it, mobilise historians as vigilantes of the facts; call upon political philosophy to rethink its founding questions. What is a good life? What is a good society? What is good collective action? They call for a non-soothing anthropology, demystified by evidence, and lucid by necessity.

We see that the Memory of the Shoah serves to build a morality, that of non-discrimination.

Hence the “gas chamber” placed at the centre of History. In a work intended to combat Marine Le Pen, we read:

as they indelibly mark the memory and consciousness of all humanity […] the gas chambers are at the centre of the History of the Second World War and at the centre of History. 

In other words: the “gas chamber” is a heritage that all of humanity must embrace in the present, because it contributes to shaping consciences.

A repression which requires, on the other hand, mutual assistance

In such a context, the revisionists are quite naturally ranked among the main enemies to be fought. Gérard Rabinovitch writes:

Teaching the history of the Shoah, restoring the entirety of its facts, against the falsifiers, the deniers or the rhetorical boasts, is to do an educational work as well as a civic one.

But against revisionism, teaching remains insufficient; judicial repression must complete it. Under the title “Denying the Holocaust is a racist crime”, the vice-president of the Advisory Center for Jewish and Israeli Relations (CIJA), Richard Marceau, and his collaborator Emmanuelle Amar state:

Denying the Shoah is an indicator, yes, of hatred of the Jew. But it is also a troubling marker of radicalisation, for which society as a whole will one day inevitably pay the price. What begins with the Jews never ends with the Jews.

Hence the need, they conclude, to criminalise revisionism in order to protect all of society.

In Europe, this criminalisation is well advanced: many countries have adopted so-called anti-revisionist laws. The UK is among the exceptions. But by accepting my extradition, she sent a clear message: the island will not become a refuge for hunted revisionists. The relentless persecution endured by free researchers demonstrates the capital importance of the past.

I am living proof: compared to the means available to the guardians of “Memory”, I am destitute. Faced by their vocal pronouncements, I can only whisper. But this whisper is still too much. My opponents want to silence me as quickly as possible. If, truly, the past had no importance and if the official story offered all the guarantees of solidity, then such relentlessness would not exist.

Our adversaries fear revisionism because it endangers their weapons of political propaganda. By dedicating my life to the revisionist fight, I have certainly sacrificed a lot, including my family, but I fight for all the children of France and Europe, so that we stop instilling in them a false memory from which arises a morality favouring the poison of globalism. Thank you to those who support me in this mission.

Political prisoner Sam Melia barred from access to his children – a new low for British ‘justice’

Sam Melia, Yorkshire organiser of Patriotic Alternative, who is presently serving a two year prison sentence for the ‘crime’ of distributing anti-immigration stickers via Telegram, has now been told that he is no longer allowed contact with his children.

This decision has been made not by a court, but by the prison authorities at HMP Hull, in collaboration with bureaucrats from the National Probation Service. Sam was moved from Leeds prison to Hull two weeks ago.

As many H&D readers will know, Sam and his wife Laura Towler (deputy leader of PA) have a two-year-old daughter Catherine, and a month-old baby Violet.

There has never been any suggestion that the ‘crimes’ for which Sam was convicted have any connection to children in any way; nor has he ever even been charged with any offence relating to children. Even Sam’s worst enemies would concede that he has been a loyal and hard-working father.

But the prison and probation authorities have now decided – for entirely political reasons – to classify Sam as a Person Posing Risk to Children (PPRC).

Sam and Laura last October celebrating the first scans of their second daughter Violet. By the time Violet was born, Sam had already been imprisoned.

When asked the reasons for this wicked lie, the authorities admit they do “not state he poses a direct risk of serious harm to children, but by the child/ren being exposed to posters, insignia, literature and attitudes assessed as racist and offensive.”

Remember, this is a man who is in a prison cell in Hull, where quite obviously he has no access to “racist and offensive” material. Moreover, no reasonable person could imagine that a two-year-old child and a one-month-old baby could be influenced (for good or ill) by political material, whether “racist” or of any other kind.

But the authorities’ ukase bars Sam from being visited by his infant children; receiving phone calls or photographs from them; or even from receiving news about them from his wife (or from anyone else).

As Laura wrote yesterday on the PA website:
“These restrictions are complete overkill for a ‘criminal’ such as Sam and amount to nothing more than the political persecution of a loving father and husband. Sam is heartbroken at the prospect of not being able to see his children and although our newborn baby has no idea what’s going on, our toddler is confused as to why she’s no longer allowed to see or talk to her daddy.”

Due to having been identified as a ‘PPRC’, Sam will automatically be subjected to these appalling restrictions until an ‘assessment’ of his case is carried out by prison and probation bureaucrats. This process has now started, and to begin with Sam had to complete forms for each of his children, explaining why he believed he was entitled to be in contact with them.

As Laura points out, they now have to wait for the bureaucracy to grind out its judgment, which could take weeks or months. “This means that Sam will miss out on maintaining a strong relationship with our toddler, building a relationship with our newborn baby, and our children will miss out on seeing and speaking with their dad.”

Sam and Laura have been regular guests at H&D events. Here Laura (above right) shares the platform in Preston with (left to right) Dr Jim Lewthwaite, Keith Axon, Peter Rushton and Isabel Peralta.

H&D encourages our readers to contact HMP Hull, explaining why Sam Melia’s treatment is an outrage to all normal standards of justice and decency. Please use polite language despite the provocation!

The prison governor, Mr Shaun Mycroft, can be contacted either by email at candc.hull@justice.gov.uk or by post at the following address:
Complaints and Correspondence Hull
HMP Hull
Hedon Road
Hull
HU9 5LS

As with any correspondence referring to Sam Melia’s case, please quote his prison number: A3370FC.

Readers should also be aware that on 9th June, Sam will be celebrating his 35th birthday – behind bars, and now without access to his children (or even to news about his children).

Birthday cards can be sent to Sam at the following address:
Samuel Melia
A3370FC
HMP Hull 
Hedon Road
Hull
HU9 5LS

We would also encourage all readers who have not already done so, to sign the Free Sam Melia petition which is online here.

30 years on – French nationalist tribute to Sébastien Deyzieu

On Saturday, thirty years after the death of their comrade Sébastien Deyzieu – killed when Parisian police attacked a nationalist demonstration – his successors paid a fine tribute on the streets of the French capital.

Deyzieu was part of a demonstration that sought to highlight disastrous consequences of the Allied invasion of Europe and the post-1945 political settlement – Soviet Russian domination of Eastern Europe and American global capitalist domination of Western Europe.

Parisian authorities banned this May 1994 event, organised by the nationalist student group Groupe Union Défense (GUD), and Deyzieu was killed during an ensuing confrontation with police.

Every year since then, GUD has been part of a cross-party ‘9th May Committee’ that organises a memorial event.

As happened last year, the traitors’ who rule French politics attempted to prevent this memorial march from taking place, but once again the 9th May Committee succeeded in defeating the ban. 1,200 comrades marched through the streets of Paris. A magnificent tribute to Sébastien Deyzieu ensured that his sacrifice was not in vain and his spirit continues to inspire the hearts and minds of new generations of Europeans.

The chaotic truth about Irish ‘nationalism’

On 7th June the Republic of Ireland will have local council elections as well as electing the fourteen Irish members of the European Parliament. Will some form of racial nationalism prove stronger in Ireland than it was in last week’s English local elections?

As regular H&D readers will know, racial nationalist politics in England is struggling to recover from damage inflicted more than a decade ago. This weakness was reflected in last week’s council contests.

Online racial nationalist commentators have become very excited in recent months about Irish resistance to mass immigration and ‘wokeism’, especially after recent demonstrations in central Dublin; the decisive defeat in referendums on 8th March of two attempts to liberalise the Irish constitution in the direction of feminism and ‘LGBT’ rights; and anti-immigration riots in Dublin last November.

Close examination of political reality, however, suggests that these commentators have vastly overrated racial nationalism in Ireland, and that in fact our movement on the other side of the Irish Sea (whether broadly defined as anti-immigration, anti-woke and socially conservative, or narrowly defined as racial nationalist) is organisationally and electorally weaker even than the movement in England.

When it comes to the electoral side of politics, racial nationalists in 2024 tend to have only a childish level of understanding, partly because a generation has grown up informed by online speculation rather than experience.

A bus burning during the November 2023 Dublin riots

This gets worse when overseas observers look at the UK and Ireland, for several reasons. One is the Anglophobia which colours many overseas perspectives on the Irish question, especially in Catholic countries and/or among a generation of 21st century ‘nationalists’ who think in ‘Third Worldist’ or ‘anti-imperialist’ terms, and for whom the Irish are lionised as heroes of an anti-imperialist, anti-British struggle.

Another problem is that racial nationalists persistently overrate street demonstrations. Racial nationalists will tend to get more excited by a group marching down the street with banners, or shouting in a city centre, or even throwing petrol bombs, than by a political party building support with a properly organised branch structure nationwide, or engaging in serious ideological training of its cadres.

Partly this is due to learning the wrong lessons from a Hollywood version of national socialism. And partly it’s because (for younger movement activists especially) politics conducted in the style of football hooliganism is more exciting than educating themselves ideologically, attending meetings, and building support among the general public.

Therefore both the English Defence League and assorted anti-vaccination campaigns attracted support from racial nationalists, even though their respective causes were ideologically confused (at best), and despite the style of their activism being counter-productive and off-putting to the vast majority of Britons.

Perceptions of Irish anti-immigration politics are similarly unrealistic. What is actually happening in the southern portion of the Emerald Isle?

The headquarters of Aontú, which is probably the most signficant of the ‘right wing’ parties standing in the Irish elections, though it is much more a socially conservative party than a racial nationalist party.

Nominations have now closed for the European elections, and though there is another week before local council nominations close, most parties have announced their candidates.

At the European election Ireland is divided into three giant constituencies, using the Single Transferable Vote method, which allows voters to list candidates in order of preference (and to choose between the candidates offered by each party rather than accepting the priority listed by the party).

Dublin elects four MEPs, and the other two regions (Midlands/NW and South) five each. In practice STV means that a winning candidate needs both a fairly solid level of first preference support, and a certain level of appeal to supporters of rival candidates giving their second preferences, etc.

The positive aspect of this system for any well-organised anti-immigration party is that there is no such thing as a ‘wasted vote’ under STV, so really there is no excuse for the ‘right’ not to poll its maximum vote.

In Dublin this year there will be no fewer than eight rival slates standing for varying types of anti-immigration policies and social conservatism.

Some of these are old-fashioned Catholic reactionaries, emphasising an anti-abortion and anti-LGBT agenda, but also including aspects of anti-immigration politics. Others are closer to Reform UK and are linked to opposing the European Union (though calls for ‘Irexit’ remain quite marginal). And one or two are something resembling a racial nationalist movement, but divisions within that scene are even more bitter and intense than anything we see in the UK.

For example the closest thing to a racial nationalist party in Ireland used to be the National Party, but this has split into two factions, each of which seek to use the party name, and each of which are standing in Dublin, both for the European Parliament and in the city council elections.

The hostility between the two National Party factions has descended to a tragi-comic level, with the rival leaders engaged in legal battles over ownership of a stock of gold bars stored in an Irish bank vault. The farcical situation can be seen in the video above where Justin Barrett (leader of one faction) attacks his rival James Reynolds.

A third faction (which includes some former National Party members) has formed the Ireland First party, whose leader is a noted Putinist and whose Dublin candidate was a prominent anti-vaccination campaigner.

Anti-vaxx conspiracy theorists are also involved in a fourth group calling itself ‘The Irish People’. Their Dublin candidate Andy Heasman was involved in the recent anti-immigration demonstration, but so were representatives of other factions, including several who will be rivalling Heasman on the European ballot paper next month.

Independent Ireland – a social conservative party that has been involved in anti-abortion activism – is also on the ballot, as is the larger social conservative party Aontú which has had candidates in both the Republic and Northern Ireland (though of course Northern Ireland like the rest of the UK is no longer part of the European Union so has no elections on 7th June).

Farage-style, anti-EU politics is represented on the ballot by the Irish Freedom Party.

And last but (in his own eyes) not least, is independent candidate Malachy Steenson, a veteran leftwinger who has reinvented himself as a populist conservative and anti-abortion activist. Steenson was once a leading activist in Republican Sinn Féin, political wing of the terrorist splinter group ‘Continuity IRA’.

Malachy Steenson, now a ‘right-wing’ independent candidate, has formerly stood for the Workers Party – the Marxist political wing of the old ‘Official IRA’ – and more recently was active in ‘Republican Sinn Féin’, political wing of the terrorist ‘Continuity IRA’.

Similar patterns are repeated in the other two constituencies. In the Midlands/NW constituency the two rival ‘leaders’ of the factions who each claim the name ‘National Party’ (Justin Barrett and James Reynolds) are standing against each other. The leader of Aontú, Peadar Tóibin, is also on the ballot paper in Midlands/NW, as are candidates from ‘The Irish People’, ‘Independent Ireland’, and ‘Ireland First’.

A fourth ‘right-wing’ party leader is also on the ballot in the Midlands/NW constituency: Nigel Farage’s Irish ally Hermann Kelly, leader of the Irish Freedom Party.

In the South constituency several of the right-wing parties are again present, with the exception of the National Party, neither of whose factions are standing. Also on the ballot in the South is the barrister Michael McNamara, who was one of the leaders of the winning ‘No’ campaign against the proposed feminist and LGBT constitutional changes in this year’s referendum. McNamara is already a member of the Dublin Parliament.

At the previous European Election in Dublin the Greens won most first preferences – 17.5%. Then the two old parties (Fine Gael and Fianna Fáil) in second and third. The far-left Independents for Change polled 11.6%, ahead of Sinn Féin.

Eventually the Sinn Féin second preferences split very heavily in favour of Independents for Change, pushing them ahead of Fianna Fáil into third place.

Ultra-left ‘Independents for Change’ MEPs Clare Daly and Mick Wallace (seen above visiting Iraq in 2021) have become discredited by their pro-Moscow views and are unlikely to be re-elected next month.

Because of their extreme Putinism, I very much doubt Independents for Change will poll as well this time. A lot of their vote will go instead to the Trotskyist party, People Before Profit, or back to Sinn Féin.

The ‘shock’ for H&D readers (and for racial nationalists worldwide who entertain delusions about the strength of racial nationalism in Ireland) will be that despite all the demonstrations, riots, and online noise, Sinn Féin’s vote will increase in June, compared to the last Euro election in 2019.

Readers can probably perceive what a shambles this is. In theory STV would allow all of these ‘right wing’ votes to transfer eventually to the strongest candidate/party (which would almost certainly be Aontú), but it’s more likely to end up a total failure and a triumph for the establishment parties, with the most substantial challenge to the political elite coming from the far left rather than from the broadly defined ‘right’.

At local level, ‘Independent Ireland’ are defending thirteen seats – former independent or Fianna Fáil councillors who defected to the new party mostly in rural areas. As with the European seats (though of course on a smaller scale) local councillors in Ireland are elected in multi-member LEAs using the STV system, which unlike the English first-past-the-post system means that smaller parties (including the ‘far right’) do not have to combat the ‘wasted vote’ argument.

But given the chaos outlined above, it would be unrealistic to expect any significant breakthrough even at local council level for any of the tiny, disorganised and squabbling anti-immigration factions.

A weekend to celebrate!

Congratulations to Laura Towler and Sam Melia (respectively deputy leader and Yorkshire regional organiser of Patriotic Alternative) who this week welcomed baby daughter Violet – a sister for Catherine.

As most H&D readers will know, Sam is presently serving a prison sentence for the ‘crime’ of distributing political stickers. The situation is reminiscent of Sir Oswald and Lady Mosley in 1940, who were interned as political prisoners when their son Max was eleven weeks old.

We know that Laura and Sam are resolute and committed patriots who will not be deterred by these difficult circumstances.

This morning’s news of the latest addition to the Melia family adds to a weekend of celebrations.

And it’s appropriate to mark April 20th with this video of Sir John Eliot Gardiner, who is 81 today, conducting a motet by Anton Bruckner at last year’s Coronation of King Charles III.

Sir John’s father Rolf Gardiner was a prominent racial nationalist and pioneer of organic farming. He shared the ‘blood and soil’ ideology of the Third Reich’s agriculture minister Walther Darré.

In the latest edition of H&D, Isabel Peralta discusses the crucial relevance of ‘blood and soil’ in today’s Europe.

Rolf Gardiner, racial nationalist and advocate of ‘blood and soil’, at his wedding in 1932 to Marabel Hodgkin. The guard of honour is from the North Skelton sword dance group.

H&D Issue 119 published

The new issue (#119) of Heritage and Destiny magazine is out now. The 28-page, May – June 2024 issue, has as its lead:

Reform UK – Is this really the best “the right” can offer voters at the next election?

Issue 119

May – June 2024

Contents include:

  • Editorial – by Mark Cotterill
  • Vincent Reynouard extradited from Scotland: backdoor criminalisation of revisionist history? – by Peter Rushton
  • Right to Reply – The British Democrats and Community Politics – by Matt Godden
  • The Agricultural Question: A Problem of Blood and Soil – by Isabel Peralta
  • The multicultural chickens come home to roost: anti-Zionist maverick wins Rochdale by-election – by Peter Rushton
  • Book Review – A Heretic’s Manifesto: Essays on the Unsayable – by Brendan O’Neill – reviewed by Gordon Chatfield
  • Carry On back to an England, the like of which we will sadly never see again – by Alec Suchi
  • Obituary – Judith Ann Lyons – The Fiery Redhead – 1955-2022 – by Jack van Tongeren
  • First, They Came for VDARE … – by James Knight
  • The people who ride in a hole in the ground! – by Jack Antonio
  • Book Review – Anglophobia – The Unrecognised Hated – by Harry Richardson and Frank Salter – Part II of a review by Ian Freeman
  • Into the Countryside – by James Collyer
  • From the Other Side of the Pond – by Kenneth Schmidt
  • Two full pages of readers’ letters
  • Movement News – Latest analysis of the nationalist movement – by Peter Rushton
  • Movie Review – Golda – reviewed by Mark Cotterill

If you would like a sample copy of this issue, please send just £7.00 or $15.00 to H&D, 40 Birkett Drive, Preston, PR2 6HE, England, UK – or if you would like to subscribe please go to – http://www.heritageanddestiny.com/publications/journal/ – for full details or email – heritageanddestiny@yahoo.com

Beating the bans! Isabel Peralta social media update

On Good Friday (29th March) Isabel Peralta was banned from YouTube and Twitter, without explanation, but she now has a new Twitter account @EvropaInvicta1

English-subtitled versions of many of Isabel’s banned videos are available on the H&D channel at Odysee

The latest video is from a recent visit to Athens, where Isabel found a stark contrast between the archetypal Greece – birthplace of Western civilisation – and the Greece of today, a territory completely stripped of its national, cultural, racial identity. In this video (in Spanish with English subtitles) Isabel visits both the glories of the Parthenon and the sadly contrasting disgrace of multiracial central Athens.

Click here for a regularly updated list of Isabel’s social media accounts

An English-subtitled version of Isabel’s new video, in which she discusses the basis and implications of Spanish nationality law, is also now online.

As Isabel points out, Spanish nationality law is rooted in the victor’s ‘justice’ of 1945, which led to the abandonment of concepts of nationality based on blood – the traditional jus sanguinis.

Readers might be surprised to discover that Spanish nationality law is today actively biased against fellow Europeans, and in favour of so-called “Ibero-Americans” (i.e. those whom Americans term “Hispanics”), even if the latter have no Spanish blood.

Another facet of the “great replacement” of Europeans!

But we should not despair. The European resistance is growing – and the courage, intelligence and loyalty of our European correspondent Isabel Peralta is a beacon of hope for our movement.

Isabel’s latest article for H&D appears in the recently published Issue 118, click here for details. A new article about the fundamental nationalist question of ‘Blood & Soil’, and the implications of the present European agricultural crisis, will be in Issue 119.

Next Page »

  • Find By Category

  • Latest News

  • Follow us on Twitter

  • Follow us on Instagram

  • Exactitude – free our history from debate deniers