Friday, 3 January 2014

Some thoughts on recent nationalist news.




I see that there's a fair bit of news today on the nationalist circuit about the bankruptcy of Nick Griffin, leader of the British National Party. I had intended the following thoughts to be a comment to another site discussing this matter, but as ever, it grew a bit too long, so I have put it here instead.

I can't say I take all that much pleasure from seeing what I assume will be the further fall of a nationalistic party political force. One that most of us here, at one point or another, will have been a part of and will have had hopes for.

Yet of course, like many others, on the whole, I am otherwise rather cold to it now and even of the opinion that it may need to be put out of its misery (or adapt) rather than left to limp on - something which Mr Griffin may once again succeed in doing.  

After all, the bankruptcy of Mr Griffin is not the same thing as that of the party itself.

It is however, not all that unexpected, given what has been going on over the last few years and given that things were heading that way with reports of bailiffs and such in the advent of the ROMAC situation (and various other antics).

It was these disturbing antics which went on a few years ago (too numerous to mention, too farcical to not be a comic and probably too disgusting for newer BNP supporters to ever believe) that drove away so many good people.

The thought that so many would leave (with some estimating 80% of the old membership) would have been incomprehensible shortly prior to the collapse of faith - when the party was on a popular high and on the verge of entering a much bigger league.

This walk-out was because we were not talking about a couple of minor things which could still be brushed under the carpet and ignored "for the greater good" (like they had been before with various things).

No, it was scandalous to such a degree that most people with any integrity and insight into what had been going on could just not bring themselves to have allegiance with it any more. 

Well, I will rephrase that. I mean it became a matter of conscience and a matter of whether one was capable and willing to excuse it all in the hope that things would once again become good in the future. Some chose to battle on regardless because they, perhaps rightly, continued to see it as the main and most well known nationalist entity in the country.

I could understand that and appreciate that, but I did personally not share the ability to forgive and forget and to continue to put my faith in the kinds of ways things were being done. I did not take the decision lightly, in fact it was quite difficult for me to come to terms with the end of an era.

In some cases it reached the point where people who once championed Mr Griffin could no longer even stand the sight and sound of him (and those he kept close around him).

A local meeting I attended at the time things were going haywire had brochures everywhere that had pictures of Nick Griffin (in various fake poses) on almost every page. It had become far too sycophantic and thus hard to stomach to many in the party.

We had also been shown why the British National Party would never escape the little pool to dive into the bigger pool required of it. It was at the limit of current capacity - and could not be carried forward whilst operating in the same manner it had been, especially when good people were being forced out of the party whilst liabilities were routinely and mysteriously being kept on, including people who were not even members and were running rival parties!

I suppose that the crushing and heavily demoralising defeat in Barking and Dagenham was the main straw that broke many a camels' back though, particularly amongst those not privy to what had been going on internally -  simply because it was was so crushing of our hopes and efforts. To watch the whole lot slide away like that was pretty uncomfortable.

However, unlike many other issues that were driving people away, I do not believe that the results in Barking and Dagenham can be wholly pinned upon the British National Party and Nick Griffin in particular. On this, it was outside the control of Nick and the BNP - and outside the control of nationalist party politics.

This is because it was revealed on the 2011 Census that Labour had effectively gerrymandered or conditioned the demographics there - to the degree where Barking and Dagenham lost around 20% of the White voter base in a decade!

However, it was (in the end) just part of a combination of internal and external factors that made it ever less viable to continue supporting the very model upon which it was all based and, by extension of supporting the party and the leadership, what had been going on at their hands.

Calls were of course made for a refreshing and renewal of the British National Party, but once again, various underhand deeds were set up to scupper these hopes and desires.

What should have further modernised the party, allowed further delegation away from a "one man party" and what should have given us some necessary purges of liabilities, was denied to us. We can still see the same old antics and same old cliques carry on what is left of the party we knew, in the same old ways.

In general though it was (or should have been) becoming clear that the model of party politics was becoming infeasible. It was being shown to be weak due to the fickle audience it may have temporarily accrued - whilst simultaneously being subject to the influences of outside factors beyond our control (and what will always be outside of our control). 

What Labour did (along with their supporting entities) also showed many of us that we do not really live in a democracy - and that even if we did, to win futile seats that cannot be maintained (or sustained with guarantee) is very likely going to be a waste of everybody's time and effort. 

It is also depressing and demoralising to have to keep building things from scratch on this basis only to keep securing the same kinds of marginal percentages in the election results.

How many of us would still be prepared to keep being a part of this process? How many are going to take up leafleting hostile wards, standing in seats that cannot realistically be won? How many are doing nothing for the whole year (or years) in between these election pushes?

The whole idea was looking a farce, particularly expectations of achieving the relevant gains required to implement our objectives for this country (in the time we have left as a majority population).


Despite being buoyed with an influx of new working class "patriots", the resulting slow decline of the British National Party has led to a quite a severe collapse in the old guard of nationalism over the last few years and as I say, I think it has been pretty painful to witness.

Many of us have since become politically homeless and desperate for something to come along that suited us, or for something that was viable to get something real changed out there. However, we are now where we are - and those things cannot be undone. Those opportunities cannot be taken again.

On the positive side, it is precisely this process of collapse and disillusionment that has given us the rise of new opportunities - and new opportunities to have a re-think about our models, approaches, routes.

Perhaps this wobble was just what was needed to really jolt us out of blind faith (or just sheer blindness) as to be throwing everything into one route - a route which was enveloped by the British National Party and Nick Griffin (as the two were and currently are unfortunately seen as one and the same thing to many people).

This time for reassessment is where Western Spring has come into the picture -  set amongst a whole raft of British National Party clones, various (failed) "cultural nationalist" parties, ideas such as petitioning groups, various counter-jihad / cultural marxist entities.....and all sorts of weird and wacky throwbacks to the 1930s that most people in this country would find hard to take seriously.

Western Springs' recent article about the bankruptcy of Nick Griffin is quite scornful and playfully antagonistic towards the British Democratic Party too.

However, I am not going to be quite as scornful of the British Democratic Party.

I can understand why some people may have a problem with their policies/positions on homosexuality and why they will be frustrated at their lack of "telling the full truth" (because of their chosen model of approach within party politics), but that is not enough for me to launch into attacks, smears or other dismissive hostilities.

This is because I look at it for what it is trying to be: A clean cut and respectable ethno-nationalist political party that retains a vast bulk of genuine nationalist policies and positions.

That is the model they have chosen, and on that basis, despite me not being a member and having no real allegiance forcing me to say this, I think it has the basis of being one of the best nationalist parties and 'political party' vehicles out there at the present time.

The people in it and around it seem like decent people, intelligent people and articulate people. The founding videos and videos of their meetings were in my view excellent and a step above the ones I had been used to in the British National Party.

On this basis, I would not expect to see the kinds of antics going on within it that disgusted so many of us with Mr Griffin and the British National Party either.

I think that the website is good for their purposes. The articles are generally good, the policies are good, the constitution and internal procedures sound to be much better than the British National Party -  and as such I think it gives a good impression and overview of what bread and butter nationalist "political" policies and positions are.

It fulfils the purpose of the model they are using. It is informative and explanatory, whether it be energy, self reliance, identity, immigration, transport, etc, as well as the thorny issue of race. It is therefore somewhere I could redirect friends and family to, if need be, to give further impressions and explanations of what kind of things I stand up for.

I do not therefore like to think of them and their followers as being "the other" or some kind of opposition. If one still believed in party politics, it is perhaps the party that many of us would have wanted to appear for years. What they are like in reality and "on the ground", I do not know, for have not got myself involved.

Yet this is where the praise for the BDP ends. You see, like Max Musson over at Western Spring, I have no faith in the democratic 'party politics' route any more. I have no faith in the model of operation. I have no hope for the fruition and sustainment of their activities. 

To my knowledge, there is nothing really all that wrong with the people, the policies, etc within the party, it is just the kind of vehicle they are clinging blindly to that keeps me from being interested.

I am also aware that some of the people have not exactly been flattering of Western Spring and are perhaps the reasons as to why Max is a little hostile when he alludes that they are not interested in any sort of unifying efforts and why he suggests they have no imagination or perceptiveness.

That kind of blanket stubbornness is never helpful, particularly when the British Democratic Party make no efforts to set out why they believe their 40+ year proven failed model can win this time, or why the excellent proposals set out by Western Spring are not correct and not worth trying.

It is that inability to pierce the logic of Western Spring that disappoints me and that they cannot even seem to explain why, for example, there would be any point going through the whole rigmarole and footwork of standing a candidate in wards like mine (which they already have done against the British National Party candidate!).

My ward is part a slowly transforming area of town. Whites are on the decline, Pakistanis are moving in. Most other wards making up the town are now around half (or majority) Pakistani origin too. The council chamber is pretty much dominated with Pakistani councillors, whether they be Labour, Lib Dems or Conservative. If not them, then delusional white liberals.

The British Democratic Party - or any nationalist party - simply cannot retain the area, they cannot ever control the council, they just seem to be leafleting and going through the motions of trying to win a "winnable" seat here; one which has shown a decent BNP turnout in the past.

What though, is this going to achieve? Where do they go from there? What is the next step for the area? Can they prevent the White flight and naturally occurring elderly decline of the locals? It is the same thing magnified for elsewhere, regions, pockets of the nation. There is no master plan, just the same old plodding away in the hope that a better party without Nick Griffin will race to success.

So, I see no answers to any of this. Nor to the kinds of situations we saw at Barking and Dagenham. They are, to me, therefore trying to build a solid political house of cards upon quicksand. Sands shift and the winds of change will doubly tend to blow it over and so it collapses all over again.

We cannot carry on doing this over and over. This is what Western Spring aims to tackle.

When one considers the (albeit Herculean) proposals and tactics linked to by Max Musson at the bottom of his article (linked to above), carrying on with the same blind hope in party political models and strategies seems somewhat of a cruel joke. One that you want other people to avert being the unwitting butt of.

This is perhaps why it frustrates Max so much that the good folks over at the British Democratic Party cannot see the benefits of his approaches and, thus far, to my knowledge, cannot seriously challenge those articles beyond that of the usual cynicism and wafer thin (or off-the-cuff) disregarding.

However, I can appreciate the doubts of a commenter there. He asks as to whether there is actually anything going on with Western Spring, or whether it is all hopes, dreams and talk. I think a lot of people will be thinking this way - and I include myself at times. Western Spring is wide open to that accusation.

I suspect that Western Spring has a fair wedge of members now who are contributing financially and perhaps in other ways to the "movement of national salvation" - but it is still, after a year of my signing up, pretty much a black hole when it comes to being privy to visible and provable successes that are going on, information as to what is being achieved or planned next, or how much money has been raised to date and so on.

Whilst I still have faith and trust in Max Musson (and the wider Western Spring venture) and whilst I still see it as far superior and better thought out than 'party politics' - there will come a point where people will need to see some kind of hard evidence if they are going to continue throwing funds and such into the pot.

Myself, I am that sick and weary of it all (nationalism) that I have no enthusiasm or will to roll my sleeves up right now and make a nuisance of myself with Western Spring. There is something in me, at nearly 36 years of age, urging me to crack on with the rest of my life, establish a family and so on, instead of fretting about it all.

Rightly or wrongly, that noise is the loudest in my ear when considering the state of play out there in the country today. Doing that, in fact, may be the best contribution I could make to the cause! But, for the moment, I am still in the fortunate position of being able to help the cause via Western Spring through my monthly funding. 

That is (sadly) the extent of my contribution at the moment and for the foreseeable future.

I am not one to be phoning around and demanding to know what is being done and where, so I have no intentions of chasing Max Musson around and making a nuisance of myself to gain 'evidence' of what may be being said in response to criticisms - especially when I am not of the mind (at the moment) to get something established myself. 

I also appreciate the caution that has to be taken when revealing information and specifics, but I do think that all the contributors need some indications via the Western Spring site (and not unverifiable emails) as to how things are developing and what is currently being worked on.

Have we bought buildings, houses? Have we got any significant backers? Has anybody managed to infiltrate the areas suggested in the programme.....

Up to press, the wider readership and membership have nothing much other than a website.

I fear that without some indications of progress being given, people may lose faith and trust in the project and that, perhaps like myself, will in turn be at risk of packing it in and walking away from everything. I could not blame them, but I would rather it did not happen. 

For those who are not familiar with the Western Spring project, please follow the link in this article and read the batch of articles which Max Musson has supplied at the bottom of his article here: http://www.westernspring.co.uk/nick-griffin-declared-bankrupt/