Floundering in the Ashes

By Max Musson:

Griffin 5The internet forums would have been aflutter with jubilation and speculation as to what this ‘momentous’ turn of events might have heralded, had it happened three or four years ago, but today’s announcement that Nick Griffin is to ‘step aside’ as British National Party Chairman, was met with what can only be described as a mixture of mild disinterest and derision in nationalist circles. Indeed there seems to have been more of a reaction from media hacks eager to gloat over the long awaited ‘death rattles’ of a now tarnished and fatally flawed political career that once offered such promise and potential.

On the BNP website, the two brief sentences announcing this development provide little detail apart from informing us that former “Deputy Chairman, Adam Walker will, has accepted the role of Acting Chairmen”, and that “Nick Griffin has taken up the position of President”.

Quite what role Nick Griffin will play in future as ‘President’ of the BNP we will have to wait and see, but it is difficult to imagine that this movement is anything more that cosmetic, and I am reminded of Vladimir Putin’s brief period as Prime Minister of Russia, only to return to the Russian presidency when it suited him. Perhaps Griffin has learned a trick or two during his sojourn in Brussels.

As for Adam Walker, his ascendancy the chairmanship, even in an ‘acting’ capacity, is hardly likely to fill the party’s increasingly sceptical members with confidence. According to the Guardian newspaper he has a Japanese wife, hardly the kind of ‘accessory’ that will boost his personal standing where it counts, and he has had a troubled time in recent years culminating in a lifetime ban from teaching for alleged ‘aggressive behaviour’ in dealing with two mischievous boys at a St George’s Day celebration in 2011.

My advice therefore is to not let such developments deflect us from the path we have chosen. We know that the electioneering political party model is now defunct as far as racial nationalism is concerned and we shall see much more of this kind of manoeuvring in the years ahead from the nationalist micro-parties that the collapse of the BNP has spawned.

I am advised that the British Democratic Party will soon provide us with more such irrelevant ‘seat swapping’ when their leadership elections take place and those among their current leadership finally admit that like Griffin, they too are burned out and devoid of new ideas.

Thankfully, we at Western Spring continue to build our organisation and make progress towards our goal of acquiring the Six Prerequisites, and we urge those who are at last beginning to realise that there is not going to be any easy road to power to consider this: that power will always elude those who refuse to embrace the strategies that we outline here and here on the pages of this website.

By Max Musson © 2014

# # # #

 

46 thoughts on “Floundering in the Ashes

  1. Enlightened Patriot

    - Edit

    Sad to say, a little too late in the day – by about 4 or 5 years I would guess. His replacement gives me little comfort. The words `deck chairs’ and `Titanic’ spring to mind. As a previous BNP member, activist and local council member candidate, I had such hopes…
    In the meantime I do hope and pray that Western Spring will succeed, where the BNP has failed, in eventually bringing this country it’s much needed salvation, albeit via a different path.

    1. Yes, this has come about 4 or 5 years too late. Griffin should have resigned after his disastrous Question Time appearance when he fell right into the Establishment’s trap by associating the BNP with David Duke and above all the Establishment’s favourite way to castigate nationalists ie Holocaust denial. In other words, he couldn’t have done more on that ONE programme to damm the BNP in the eyes of the British electorate for all time. What is sad and tragic is that increasing numbers of British electors were slowly but surely coming around to the idea of ‘crossing the rubicon’ ie voting BNP until that programme aired.

      I also was a BNP member and party activist for a while. The BNP has been permanently damaged goods for a few years and won’t revive even if it had a brilliant politically astute leader with bundles of personal charisma hence its present status as a pariah party that only serves to divert the hard-of-thinking into a political dead end. Even the other Nick (ie Nick Clegg) is leading his party with more astuteness and that is saying something!

      1. Here’s Griffin’s October 2009 Question Time appearance, condensed down to 10 minutes (and a bit) – all Youtube permitted at the time. I don’t think he could have made a better appearance; the idea he was a ‘disaster’ is propaganda. The mass produced BBC varieties of lies were not combattable in the BBC’s format, but Griffin did well.

        1. BritishActivism

          - Edit

          On the contrary. I’m afraid you will find that a selectively pieced together selection of video snippets (which fails to recognise the car-crash scenario that actually took place) is the actual “propaganda” being given out here.

          (As is the rather amazing idea being given that he did well within that environment – and even going as far as to state that “he could not have made a better appearance” on our screens on what should have been our time to shine on a topical debate show broadcast to millions of people).
          .
          When will people get it through their heads that it is NOT about the accuracy (or the rightness) of whatever he DID say to defend himself, but about the overall impact of the programme aired?
          .
          That Nick was correct in the bits he was saying is thoroughly lost when you put the programme into the original environment. The stunt they pulled on Mr Griffin made the programme THEIR piece of propaganda, not ours.
          .
          Nobody in the general public would understand the distinction between a “violent and a non-violent KKK club”. They are not nationalists, they are only going to be operating on the reputation and all that comes along with it.
          .
          They won’t know who David Duke is, or if they do, they will again only know the outline of propaganda given about him. That is why they brought it up, because to the wider public (and their ignorance) it is indefensible on all counts irrespective of what the reality was. It is a ‘when did you stop beating your wife?” question to them, and they knew it.

          Nobody would understand the point about Mr Griffin not being able to talk freely about the Holocaust without fear of arrest in different countries either, let alone be of the mind to even understand what it could have been objected about.
          .
          They would be more caught up in joining in with the mocking by Jack Straw that “there is no law here” to prevent him saying anything, to make it all look like excuses and an evasion from answering.
          .
          With a four-to-one (or five-to-one, if you count Dimbleby) attack base and a baying audience who laugh, jeer, boo and hiss like a pantomime crowd whenever he set about explaining his positions, Nick’s honesty about various parts of the British National Party (and nationalist) history is simply not able to penetrate into the minds of the viewer.
          .
          The overall impact of the programme, aside from the damage recovery operation later, was therefore without any shadow of a doubt a disaster for the party and for a ‘window display’ for nationalism. This is exactly why they did it to him!
          .
          Nick’s fault, if anything, was to try and be truthful and genuine about these matters and thus trying to ingratiate himself whilst being attacked from all sides – in a debate designed to do nothing but reinforce all the stereotypes about nationalists and make him/us look stupid.
          .
          We know that what he was talking about is important, but that is why the BBC did it, make us look like idiots. They get away with this because, unfortunately, most of the people in Britain today ARE idiots on these matters, as they have been brainwashed to such a degree that they cannot even appreciate the issues being presented.

          Face it, the BBC had a propaganda win against the party by framing it up in the way they did. On that basis, the programme was a disaster zone for our movement – and no, I would not suggest that it was all Nick’s fault, because in those conditions I doubt anybody would get out of it in good shape if they had continued, like he did, to participate in the entrapment process.
          .
          Maybe somebody like Oswald Mosely could have once barked out some sharper barbs across the bows. Maybe the late Jonathan Bowden could have out-witted them, or if we had our own equivalent of George Galloway, perhaps turn and dominate the discussion. Who knows?
          .
          But you can only count such people on one hand, and I think even they would have struggled to make nationalism gleam when under such a hostile environment that was designed from the start to serve a purpose.
          .
          So again, please try and differentiate between the effect of the aired programme upon the public perception of us – and that of the actual points Nick Griffin was making. They are two entirely different things.
          .
          It is no use stitching together the snippets of pieces we want to hear, that we agree with and understand – and then presenting that as the programme and what we ought to take from it. That is not what happened on the night, or how people will remember it.
          .
          The only good thing about it was the utterly blatant abuse of the programme to serve a purpose of crucifying Nick Griffin and the ‘then’ surging of the British National Party, which could have led the party and the movement onto bigger, better things.Mr Griffin aptly used this snidely manufactured environment to his advantage later in an attempt to mop up the damage.

          Maybe that establishment stunt awoke a few people to the nature of our opposition and how controlled, or biased, our media is. Yet I wouldn’t bet on the numbers of those people being huge though. Besides, they will have forgotten all about it by now, along with the rest of the country, with a bit of luck.
          .

          1. You seem to be suggesting that Griffin should never have appeared on the BBC. Fair point, of course. His policy was that he had to appear; otherwise he’d look like one of the shady characters on TV programmes about shady crooks being doorstepped and slipping away. I haven’t correlated the programme with actual election results very carefully; however that broadcast was in 2009. These are BNP General Election votes (from Wiki)

            2001 | 47,129 | avg votes per candidate 1,428
            2005 | 192,746 | votes per candidate 1,620
            2010 | 563,743 | votes per candidate 1,668

            So there doesn’t seem to have been a disastrous failure. I’d guess the whole thing bemused most people, who of course had no chance to put their own questions.

            The reason I extracted ALL Griffin’s broadcast comments (not just some of them) was to cut down fifty minutes to ten. Personally, I agree with the commenters here who wanted Griffin to attack back fully, but at the time I don’t think enough revisionist work had been done, for example on the Second World War, Stalin, and science fraud. That’s not Griffin’s fault, but doesn’t say much for the revisionists. And I also agree that Griffin could take no challenge to his position, such as it was. But I do think times are chanaging, though imho the BNP site is now behind the times.

            1. You make some good points here Rerevisionist. I think Griffin’s Question Time performance was more disastrous for his standing among nationalists than it was among the British public at large. I have met people who joined the BNP as a result of Griffin’s appearance on Question Time, some who decided not to join and others who resigned as a result.
              .
              All of this goes to show that it was the cumulative effect of a range of mistakes that Griffin made following his election as an MEP that resulted in his declining popularity and the declining popularity of the party. His less than forthright performance on Question Time was however the first major set-back for him and one from which he never fully recovered.

          2. BritishActivism

            - Edit

            Thanks for the polite reply, re-revisionist. I know I can get a bit carried away and in hindsight I may have sounded a bit curt.
            .
            I think that Max hits a nail on head when he remarks that the show was perhaps more of a disaster for our nationalist expectations…however, for me, it was not only in terms of the fans of Nick Griffin, but for the shop window of nationalism as a whole. Who would be ‘converted’ or enamoured to investigate our positions after that show? Not very many, I would think. That is what I am driving at.
            .
            I remember the mood of the nation at the time of this appearance, and the sway was generally behind the BNP. It is a bit like how in recent years you could not move for UKIP supporting comments in the mainstream media comment sections and with people being interviewed on the streets saying they support UKIP, and that kind of thing. That was once the kind of upward swing of Nick and the BNP.
            .
            On this, I am thus not too sure what the vote figures would actually prove. For example, if the votes did go up slightly that year, it would never be known as to whether it could have actually been double that figure, if not for the appearance.
            .
            I am quite sure that Nick Griffin was correct to try and defend his corner to some degree, and I think if the situation had been normal, or less baying, he could have held his own and gone to work expressing the realities of our positions on all sorts of matters, including some things that touch on revisionist history.
            .
            However, seeing as the BNP is operating on a party-politics platform, revisionism, in theory, should not even be on its platform. It should, technically speaking, be more an expression of what we are about, how we are to improve this country, what the policies are to achieve these things, making them sound attractive and workable, etc.
            .
            Like I said, I could not really fault what he did manage to say when you jam it all together…but in the actual program that was aired, it was all buried under an avalanche of ‘mock-disbelief’ gasps, laughing, jeering, and the endless smears and interjection by the other panellists (and the so called ‘impartial’ BBC host!).
            .
            This destroyed any sensible analysis of what he was saying – and the whole environment was designed so that our wares could not be peddled to the masses, as had been hoped. Remember, things were on the up and up…we were becoming “mainstream”, it was our big moment to show what we were really about – there was a lot riding on this program coming off well for us.
            .
            In the end, the liberals had their way and made the situation virtually impossible to come out of well – either in terms of being understood, or our image. So therefore, for nationalism as a whole, I still think it was a disaster zone. If we listed a load of objectives it ought to have fulfilled, I don’t think many of those things could be ticked off as being a success.
            .
            Despite what some people say about him, I am not really bashing Nick over this (other than the alleged lack of preparation and ‘plan B’ option for such an ambush). I certainly couldn’t have done it, and I don’t know many who could. It was a tough one.
            .
            Like I said earlier, I don’t know if anybody could have really commanded such a scenario, even some real bulldogs or the ultimate of quick-wits. After all, it was around 4:1, discounting the audience – who were allowed to run riot in comparison to the regular Question Time show. There was just no chance provided to talk sensibly, explain anything, or do anything.
            .
            In different circumstances, I think we could have held our own on many aspects of the BNP policy and positions. Nick was competent and knowledgeable enough to bat away many “curve-balls” that could have been directed at him. We could have advanced our agenda and removed some of the stereotypes and mystique around what it is we are actually about.
            .
            However, this was not to be. This is what the whole arrangement of the show was designed to do to nationalism and the (then) rising support of the BNP. I think it was only the blatantly unfair treatment and circus act that may have drawn people in, playing on the notorious “underdog” trait of the British that do not like such blatant displays of unfairness.
            .
            This whole affair is another reason as to why I think it is wise to move away from heavy reliance on party political strategies at this time.
            .
            The structure of the party/organisation can easily be undermined and attacked by going for the ‘leader’ in this way. The media, as you know, can also control whatever it wants and with party politics we are left in their hands / at their mercy.
            .
            Like you say, ‘revisionists’ have just not been reaching the masses – certainly not for long enough for people in the general public arena to listen patiently what has to be said. The same with political positions and ideological positions, people are not ready to be “told”. They are often not ready for the concepts, or the counter arguments to what is the prevailing orthodoxies – whether that is history, or matters like rebuffing homosexuality, gun bans, or whatever else.
            .
            These things take what seems an eternity to break through, particularly when using traditional party politics and micro-cultures on the fringes of that. Only when the public are already accustomed and supportive of what the issues we raise are, can politics and TV debates on these matters really work.
            .
            The media is completely knee-jerk over the slightest of thing, so perhaps burrowing away in the background instead is a better idea, honing the debating skills, honing down our messages and narrative to a truly precision format – and thus gaining a following that can give us more credence.
            .
            If the issues are too vast in number, people will just fall through the cracks. If people carry on like (the American) Alex Jones, weaving and bobbing together a thousand issues to try and prove some massive conspiracy, the real matters at hand (such as ensuring our continuance) get ever more lost, as people get distracted and for some, it all becomes too fantastical for people to believe or take seriously.
            .
            This is why I think precision and relevance is important, and that different things should not be mixed up. Let politics be about policy. Let the New Right be about ideology. Let Western Spring and so on be about securing a future. There is bound to be some overlap, but I hope you can see what I mean. There needs to be purpose and coordinated results towards a goal….otherwise, we tend to just go around in circles.

  2. ”My advice therefore is to not let such developments deflect us from the path we have chosen. We know that the electioneering political party model is now defunct as far as racial nationalism is concerned and we shall see much more of this kind of manoeuvring in the years ahead from the nationalist micro-parties that the collapse of the BNP has spawned.”

    What Max is saying here HAS TO BE SAID AGAIN, AGAIN, AGAIN, AGAIN AND AGAIN UNTIL EVERY LAST NATIONALIST UNDERSTANDS THAT DEMOCRACY ISN’T THE ANSWER….

    I haven’t read it yet; but the ideas presented (from what I’ve learned through reviews) in Arthur Kemp’s Nova Europa are the answer. That mean: work! Yes, that means we can’t delude ourselves with some moronic election every four years and expect the Zio-plutocratic-Criminal System to yeild to our demands. Why should they? We OWN nothing.

    Look at it like this: demographics determines destiny. If we all live in a certain area and we OWN the proporty and all that within the area — we OWN the area. Simple. Also, within enclaves, White people could operate as an organzied minority and pool our resources, intelligence and emotional intelligence; we could, within 20 years, be movers and shakers — then the capricious, credulous, bestial masses would have a reason to change thier ”loyalties”.

    As for strategy — please, read about the history of the Scottish against the Romans. The Scottish (not called the Scottish then) kept the Romans out of their area, built up their hatred for their opporesers, and then, over a certain period of time, the Great Empire faded away. They remained intact!

    Look at like this: we can outlast the Zio-plutoctraic culture with all their minorities if WE ORGANIZE OURSELVES AS A RACE.

    Read about the history of the Celtic people — learn how they existed as warrior tribes — and tell me we can’t organize a resistence to the scum ruling over us! Please, forget about democracy and all that nonsense — let’s get organized as a race and start gaining POWER!!!!!

    1. Shaun, I would wait until you have actually read Arthur Kemp’s ‘Nova Europa’, before you declare it ‘the answer’. The strategy outlined in Nova Europa is virtually identical to the Second Prerequisite, and so while it is indeed a very important part of the answer, it is not the whole answer.

  3. “Thankfully, we at Western Spring continue to build our organisation and make progress towards our goal of acquiring the Six Prerequisites, and we urge those who are at last beginning to realise that there is not going to be any easy road to power and that power will always elude those who refuse to embrace the strategies that we outline here and here on the pages of this website.”

    None of the “Six Prerequisites” will come into fruition without a Seventh.

  4. I see the BNP hasn’t changed much in one respect, directly under that short statement is a request for money!
    I don’t think the Titanic will resurface anytime soon!

    1. Well, it appears they do know that money and lots of it is the fuel that all political parties have to have if they are make any kind of advances. The problem though is that Nick Griffin and company also know how to waste vast quantities and not get the maximum return on this kind of investment!

  5. Digital Alba made an interesting prediction sometime ago that NG might put his daughter forward in the style of the Le Pens in France & then take a back seat as she might be more acceptable to new supporters.
    But so far I haven’t heard anymore about her stepping into the political spotlight.

    1. So Far Adam Walker has been adopted as ‘Acting Chairman’ only. This means there will be new leadership elections in due course to decide elect a new long-term chairperson, and it will be interesting to see if Griffin’s daughter comes forward then.

      1. The problem though Max is that Griffin made sure the party could only grow to a certain extent and not really go to the next level. This I believe is what both he and the Establishment were afraid of. If this had happened (and up until he was elected to the EU parliament) it was in the first tentative stages of occuring then more middle-class and professional people would have joined the party and this group would have provided it with a few decent potential leadership candidates to choose from and they would (crucially) have had no political ‘baggage’ hanging around their necks like Nick Griffin had. The Establishment want all genuine nationalist parties to remain just below this ‘escape velocity’.

        In stark contrast, France’s FN has been beyond this stage for quite a few years now and as a result has some credibility with middle-class and professional people.

        Nick Griffin was content to grow the party to a certain size so he could tithe the party faithful and make a fairly decent living out of it. Also, Nick Griffin was quite fearful of promoting any talent within the party lest such a person or persons become rival leadership contenders.

        Nigel Farage also acts in the same way though not to quite the same extent.

        1. Poppycock!! Griffin invited any and all potential leaders to join him He put the best people as prime candidates in all the Euro regions( like Brons). he even went against his own better instincts and let people like Butler and Beverly have positions of influence in the Party, because their supporters touted them as good potential leaders who had merely been “misunderstood”. He invited the Ulster activist Dowson in as well. No one was more inclusive that Griffin.
          And what did all these ” leaders do?? They viciously attacked each other I have seen the emails.
          It was easy for people like Butler and Dowson to spread disunity, because there were few in the Party leadership cadre who understood the need for solidarty. There were many rumor mongers like Steven who spread the rumor that Griffin was all about living off the the donations he could attract. Such Idiocy is pathetic. A man of Griffins talents and education could have made a huge pile working with the City rather then against it. A small cottage in Wales on a few acres and a bankruptcy is what Griffin has to show for all his effort, In fact If not for Jackie’s job as a nurse he would not even have that.
          I do not know if you are a fool or a state sponsored troll but either way Steven, you are disgusting.

          1. Enlightened Patriot

            - Edit

            Is this the same Griffin that has surrounded himself with criminals and pornographers? The same Griffin that has professed to love his country and its people but whose very actions seem to have disproved that by not standing down for someone more capable/acceptable when the time was right? The same Griffin who has managed to keep the BNP bumping along at the bottom without any real effect on the political landscape to act as a lightning conductor for Nationalist dissent (and his personal ‘fiefdom) giving the impression that he might have been `got at’? Why have so many people (who have made so many sacrifices in so many ways) turned away from him in disillusion? Have they all been wrong? He, single handedly, managed to wreck all the hard work put in by an army of loyal British Nationalists for many years. I wrongly put my faith in him as I did with Tony Blair. No, you are way off beam.

          2. I see john b is holding true to the party line & should win a prize for loyalty but for the rest of us, we tired of NG years ago & don’t believe a word of this.

          3. If NG truly was a man of talent, he should have made a load of money & then he could have funded a party free from interference but by all means have a membership fee.
            But that won’t happen now.

          4. I NEVER spread disunity or ANY rumours about Mr Griffin. The fact is Mr Griffin is not politically astute as that utterly disastrous Question Time programme showed. Did he even prepare for it? If he did, then his performance on it gave no indication that he had done so. It was obvious to all but the most politically naive the programme’s format would be ripped-up and changed for just that one edition and Griffin would be ‘got at’. He FELL RIGHT INTO THE TRAP snobby David Dimbleby intended him to fall into by denying the holocaust and associating the party with David Duke (why not just simply say it is a topic for historians to discuss and ordinary people can look at both points of view on the internet?) so whose fault was that?

            It is a shame this blogger is no longer writing but he has the measure of the failures of ‘nationalist’ parties in Britain and how we should rectify them:

            http://durotrigan.blogspot.co.uk/2012/02/beyond-fringe-building-credible.html

            Griffin needed to reform the party properly and he had started to do this but this process was not pushed as far as it needed to be nor as quickly. Griffin needed to tell the party some ‘home truths’ and if people didn’t like it they should be leave but he failed to do this and reforming a party takes some courage on the part of the leader but REAL leaders take on board the risks and do it anyway!

  6. Unfortunately i all your “alternatives”to the BNP i see little understanding of what has truly transpired in the British body politic. or the BNP. For one thing you do nationalism a disservice when you fail to acknowledge that the events of 2010 in the BNP were primarily the fault of an overoptimistic party cadre of activists who failed to understand both the sentiments of the British Public and the power and ruthlessness of the western oligarchy. You blame Griffin for your own failures. You here are no different in that respect from Brons, Kemp, Bean, or any of the other finger pointers.
    You neither understand your history nor your disconnect from the British public at large. You also fail to understand that a hard support of Three percent and a soft support of about thirteen percent, which is what the BNP had in 2010 was no where near enough to take even partial power against the ruthless and determined establishment.
    You fail to recognize that what Griffin has done over the last decade is to help make enormous changes in the attitude of the British voting Public, The most important thing he has done is to be a steady voice in the ongoing erosion of support for the Lib Lab Cons. The fact the two thirds of the people no longer vote is of enormous consequence to the establishment, because it means that they no longer believe that people like Cameron Milliband or Glegg will solve any of their problems NOR DO THEY BELIEVE IN UKIP and the Farage mirage.
    Before people will support radical change it is first necessary that they lose all confidence in the political establishment. That preliminary groundwork has been well laid. the second thing necessary is a crisis large enough to motivate large masses of common people to become politically active. that has not occured – yet.
    I must confess that before i had much correspondence with Max that I was rather suspicious of his motives for being yet another voice blaming Griffin for the failure of the BNP to transform the downtrodden and well brainwashed British public into some nationalist equivalent of the communist pipe dream of the ” new Soviet man” or Hitlers equally mad dream of the ” Aryan superman” . Utopians always dream of some mythical transformation rather that deal with the real human beings that make up our society. Utopians fail to understand the common people that their massive ego has led them to presume themselves to be the leaders of.
    Griffin did not fail to understand that. He knows not only where the common people are at politically, and he also knows what the power structure is doing. And that is the trouble with most nationalist activists. they have no concern for the people they profess to be the leaders of ,nor do they have any understanding of the motives and schemes of the oligarchy.
    Griffin has now removed himself as a whipping boy for fools. No doubt the whingers will continue to blame him for their own failures for some time to come. Get over it
    There is a new generation out their that wants to be listened to not preached at. If want to influence their way of thinking you will first need to both understand them and to talk to them. This mad idea of setting up isolated utopian communities in which you presume the state agents of propoganda will allow you to indoctrinate your children with your pipe dreams is a waste of time. Their are real people out there. Get to know them, and become their friends. Then you might be able to influence them.

    1. Thanks for that rambling diatribe Johnboat, but of we’re to read more of what I have written about the Decline of the BNP you would realise that I have been one of the few ex-BNP activists not to place all of the blame on Griffin’s shoulders.
      .
      Instead, I have blamed the consequences of organising as an electioneering political party. Griffin however does have to accept his fair share of the blame, after all he did opt to become an ‘absentee leader’ when he was elected as an MEP and he did preside over the collapse in support. Furthermore, he did betray all of the voting members at that EGM in 2011 when he used several hundred proxy votes to out-vote them all.

      1. Max you misunderstand me, or maybe i failed to make myself clear I do not blame you as an individual. As you said, your beef with Griffin is the way he used Proxy votes in 2011 to impose his will. The YOU in my post was collective for all the blame it all on Griffin bunch. In fact if you (collective) look back you ( collective) will see that I have praised several of your ( singular) articles.
        I simply strongly disagree with lets go hide in isolated communities strategy. I see that as abandoning the field.of battle
        I recently read a very good book on British History that was published in 1887. I strongly recommend that you follow this link and see it for yourself. Basically it lays out the history of the oppression of the British people starting at the time of William the conqueror. You all will undoubtedly find some information in that book very interesting.
        one of the things i I find there, is that the ideas of Wycliffe who was only able to publish and preach his thoughts because both Edward the 3rd and John of Gaunt were strongly supportive of his ideas of the supremacy of the power of the Civil government in all things temporal, verses the Papacy which was at the time demanding greater and greater monetary and real estate tribute. Wycliffe’s ideas about the responsibility of the King to administer justice and of the people to read an follow the bible bore fruit a century later in the Lollards who were the precursors of the Puritans, John Locke’s ideas of the rights of man and Tyndale’s English language bible all flow from this ” morning Star of the reformation”.
        What has this to do with nationalism? everything! The doctrine of the rights of the British people as individuals not serfs or subjects of a monarch flow from this But it took five hundred years before the reforms of Disraeli actually gave limited sovereignty to the people.
        Since Disraeli’s times the power structure has had to increasingly hide the mechanisms by which it controls society as a series of political parties, ostensibly in opposition to each other, but actually working in concert, servants all to the oligarchy. The mechanisms that are utilized; bribery, deception, and blackmail, have developed into a complex web. Just recently, one of these mechanisms sexual blackmail has been exposed, and Max published an excellent article on this very subject.
        The point I am making, albeit in my “rambling fashion” is that political ideas that contradict the dogma of the establishment spread very slowly and if they are to spread at all, must have constant advocacy thru every communications channel available. Rather that abandon the field, i propose we beard the lion in his den and go directly to the campuses with well though out logical tracts, and plenty of video cameras to record the assaults of the rabid left..Also the book I have mentioned provides us, in combination with the simple Gospel of the New Testament, the power to challenge and defeat the modern day Spanish Inquisition of the COE.
        In short rather than a retreat to isolated communities, I propose a direct intellectual attack on our enemies very much as Golden Dawn has done in Greece.

        link The Pilgrims and the Anglican Church
        By William Deverell
        http://books.google.com/books?id=lobnX0dArXwC&pg=PA38&source=gbs_toc_r&cad=4#v=onepage&q&f=false

        1. Johnb, You struggle under the misapprehension that our White enclaves are places for our people to hide in, thereby deserting the field of battle. This is not the intention. The enclaves are simply be the first pieces of the British isles that we will claim exclusive right to and physically occupy. They will be nuclei from which we will then expand to once again occupy the whole of our country.

        2. There is a place for challenging the left on their own turf! The point Max is making, however, is we won’t be able to engage in these types of vital activties if we don’t form enclaves where we can organize ourselves as a quick, organized unit.

          Think about it like this: if you have twenty activists living in twenty different towns it will be hard to bring them together on a regulur basis. If we have an enclave, and if we have our own bar in this enclave, we will be ready all the time — enclaves will be legal, but they will also be bases to work from.

          Also, as Max has explained in his essays on organized minorities —- we will have business opportunities if we stick together in our target areas. No one will be hiding — each one of us will be willing to do make the sacrifices needed to secure the existence of our race and a future for White children.

          By the way, I’ll read that book; we can always find inspiration through history.

        3. “I simply strongly disagree with lets [sic] go hide in isolated communities strategy.”
          .
          Well, John, I do agree with a re-interpretation of that point: an army –sensing that it’s losing a battle, that it’s wasting its time following its present strategy– decamps, rests, re-forms and constructs a new strategy of attack. Unfortunately many of our Brothers in the Cause fail to see this point and continue with the same old tried-and-tested rhetoric and methodology.
          .
          That is to say, I suggest we decamp and hold our own and foment our position –both financially, socially, intellectually, and demographically before we as David take on this Goliath Establishment.
          .
          That is why I am onboard with Western Spring/Movement of National Salvation. They ramify with ideas I was putting forth many years ago when I realised we were wasting our time by playing by the System’s rules –rules that they, as referee, dictate. There is no fairness, no gallantry in this “democratic” action –only is there a magic trick into which we have become under their spell.
          .
          In my opinion the only way for us to advance our Cause in the struggle is to reject party politics and stop playing their game. From then on, once we have achieved the Six Prerequisites, we will be in a much-better position to defend ourselves and advance in self-defence. We are the victims but we will steel our nerve and fight back.
          .
          I leave you with a passage from, in my opinion, our greatest cultural hero:
          .
          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!
          .

          1. Well said AAA but whether you are quoting Shakespeare or urging men to follow ” Harry the King” I would suggest to you that the real politics of men shedding their blood in France to advance the pretensions of a Norman ruler to his French possessions was naught but another ” Brothers war” where men were goaded into the field of slaughter for the wealth of oligarchy. Let us not confuse drama with reality and the reality is that then as now this same oligarchy robs the peasants of their land and property. Let us also not forget that the real William Shakespeare was a minor noble, a bard in the Tudor court. Further let us not forget that the common English had no freedom at all until they began to organize as socialists in the latter half of the nineteenth century, A current day equivalent to Harry fives exhortations, real or fictionalized, would be the drumbeat for war in the Ukraine that the Main stream media are pounding right now. All that’s missing to complete this theatre is a parade down the mall by the Coldstream Guards and the band playing ” God save the Queen”
            Romanticizing the past is not a profitable activity for a social reformer.

      2. The BNP’s collapse is not all Nick Griffin’s fault but a large part of it is. He failed to reform the party sufficiently so that it didn’t attract cranks and nutters and obviously didn’t do this because he lacked the courage to do it but that is what ALL good leaders have to do even if the consequences in the short term can be not ideal.

    2. No one at Western Spring is blaming Nick Griffin for the failure of British nationalists to defeat the Zio-plutocrats who dominate the modern Western politics. No one is whinging. What we are trying to do is find out one question: why! Why has the nationalist movement failed! Nick Griffin, a man who has sacrificed for his people, did try his best; but he lead the party into a marginal political movement because he failed to understand the central principles of counter-state politics! It is simple as that.

      As for a utopian sense of mass political change, I disagree that anybody on this site expects a radical ontological change shift from our people. We know the situation: we have to deal with conformism, liberalism, consumerism, racial self-hate — we have a mass of people who have been programmed for racial suicide. We have to start with the awakened and build from there — not with words, infighting, and ”democracy”. No, we need to start with a shift in how we tackle the System. Whingers and political thinkers can go and join the Labour Party. We need men of action; the day of the amateur has ended.

      Organizing amongst each other (rather than gutless rants (behind a keyboard) provides the first step to forming the prerequisites needed for a later challenge to the System. We hold no power within the System, so we need to develop power outside of it. As always, this power should be concentrated within an elite that offers the ”real people” a choice to jump ship. This can only be done when nationalists form their own enclaves and use this commune-environment to step away from the keyboard and form effective, efficient strategies for the everyday world. Full-time activism —- we need to live it!

      Of course, the System will attack all-White enclaves. But even if they do, even if they flood them with non-Whites, are we just going to run away like all the other gutless nationalist have done n the past? Be a man; be a White man; be the type of person that carries on with an idea in his heart until the enemy realizes we are serous. It’s our country; start thinking like it….

  7. David Yorkshire

    - Edit

    Here is the main problem with Nick Griffin, as shown in two documents. Have a look at his performance on Question Time and then have a look at the altercation with Andrew Brons & co. in Brussels, both of which are available on Youtube. He was all too flustered, sweaty, nervous and meek on Question Time, when it was his chance to shine, and all too comfortable and arrogant when bullying good nationalists of long-standing like Andrew Brons and Richard Edmonds in Brussels. That is not a leader.

    1. I think all of us with a heart and common sense can appreciate the fact he was nervous when going onto Question Time as it was an bearpit and a complete set-up with a truely bigoted and biased presenter but he made if worse for himself as I am sure he failed to prepare by anticipating the kind of questions he was likely to have been asked ie the obvious one of Holocaust Denial. To respond to that he should have just said he was a politician and not a historian and that this question is one for historians to discuss and if people want to know alternative versions of what may or may not have happened all they had to do was go onto the internet and research the various theories and make-up their own minds. He should have left it at that. He did get in some good lines like the one about Jack Straw’s dad being a pacifist during WW2 whilst his own father voluntarily and proudly served in the air force.

      Yes, the overall way he presented himself on the programme didn’t do him any favours. I am sure Jean Marie Le Pen must have been as equally nervous when he was asked to appear on the French version of Question Time in 1984 but Jean Marie probably prepared himself better. Certainly, after his appearance the French FN really started to take-off.

      1. I agree about Griffin having to face a hostie crowd on Question Time.
        .
        How can you win when the whole crowd and panel are against you?
        .
        Answer: knowledge. Sorry, applied knowledge!
        .
        He should have blinded the morons with truth: that would have taken him outside the culture. He wasn’t prepared to do that — Griffin, however, is a good human being. He just wouldn’t tell them what they were — that was all what was needed.
        .
        He was against a British establishment that has abused our nation since the 1600s, the upper-classes with their putrid Norman-genetics taking people’s land, culture, and pride. Now the establishment are attacking us. They lack the intelligence to realise the non-elite Whites created the modern world. Read Plato (our elite couldn’t understand him), our elite are about power and nothing else.
        .
        As a nationalist, I think we need to seperate ourselves from all this nonsence and say, after we select the best of our people, we will use our minds to take ourselves away from the petty animalism of herd thought, unessential wars, and, most important, dysgenic civilisational pratices. We need to, starting from the bottom, acknowledge that the establishment have been taking our people to the brink of civilsational destruction. Eygpt, Greece, Rome — they all were ruined by the type of thinking that defines the raison d’etre of our elites.
        .
        Think about it.
        .
        My point is Griffin was arguining with an inferior breed of people: the British establishment. Read Plato, read about the mentality of people who JUST seek power — understand that there can be no victories when we can’t accept that such people have put the human race in a postion where we are capable of creating our own extinction instead of climbing to the stars. Nationalists need to overpower the ”elite” with a superior mode of thinking —- Nick Griffin going on Qyestion Time pulled him into the remedial nonsense of our worthless elite. These are my thoughts.
        .
        Also, Griffin didn’t understand that the West is dead. We have been occupied becuase our leaders couldn’t organize themselves against the advance of globalsim and all its consequeneces. The chaos of this situtaion where the predatory nature of man expresses itself with non-White races chipping away at our people.
        .
        We at Western Spring wouldn’t take Question Time seriously. Their ideas are death, decay, and destruction. The poiny I’m making is we need to rise above these talking heads of the media, and show them, throigh their actions, they are not designed for the next stage of evolution — forget the System, expand away from it.
        .
        The answer isn’t democracy (a vote every four years), so the coming years will have to distil a new type of European — ethnotric, high IQ, and iconoclastic — who will be represent a certain section of mankind evolving to the next level. Forget about Homo sapiens. The application of eugenics holds the key to us discovering the secrets of the cosmos through our own collective struggle towards the highest stratas of DNA’s possibilities.

      2. David Yorkshire

        - Edit

        Steven, you’ve missed my point. The point is the difference in his two behaviours – the behaviour of a bullying coward, confident and sneering when he has his minders about him and with those he has power over and trembling in the face of real adversity whom he cannot control.

  8. An analogy which many people will understand, when a football team or athlete starts losing races no matter how good the coach they will change them. It is not the leader in this example it is the people, if they do not wake up they will lose their country if they haven’t already done so. It must be a heartbreaking job leading this party considering what is ranged against them.

    1. It is heart-breaking for anyone who has had significant involvement with the BNP over the years, I personally gave the party almost seventeen years of my life and I daren’t think how many thousands of pounds, only to see my effort and that of thousands of others rendered naught.
      .
      While some must accept greater responsibility for that failure than others, the greatest failure and one being repeated by the current leadership is to not realise that it is reliance upon the electoral system as the sole means by which we strive to defend our racial and ethnic interests that makes us impotent, and that if we are to succeed in that respect we must use other avenues through which to advance our cause.
      .
      Leading the BNP is therefore only the heart-breaking task you envisage so long as one refuses to think ‘outside the box’ as they say. If Griffin and Walker, or any of the leaders of the other nationalist micro-parties were to join forces with Western Spring in our campaign to acquire the Six Prerequisites, then before we new it salvation would be accelerating towards us and our future prospects would be transformed.
      .
      Griffin. Walker, Brons and others however continue to insist on wearing blinkers and while they do the future for them will hold nothing but heart-break, and so it must be for the members of the nationalist parties to realise that Western Spring hold out the only hope for our nation and for them to do as I have repeatedly requested and email me with their contact details.
      .
      Nationalists are so fond of willing the public to ‘wake up, but it is nationalists who must ‘wake up’ also.

    2. I agree that the British people doing the impression they live in a permanent coma doesn’t help but one of the aspects of being the leader of a nationalist party is taking that into account and framing the party’s policies and the way it conducts itself into one that ATTRACTS people to join and vote for it and NOT REPEL them – a test the BNP comprehensively failed under Nick Griffin and the previous leader.

  9. BritishActivism

    - Edit

    It is astonishing that some people can still cling so solidly to the BNP party line and attack others for being somehow disloyal because they criticise the party and aspects of the leadership.
    .
    I suppose I know how it goes though, because like many others, I was once a ‘Griffinite’ and ardent BNP supporter myself; and I duly repeated the party propaganda because it was what I wanted to believe and because I did not wish to ‘damage the party’ etc.
    .
    There had been various bouts of trouble in the years previous to the big schism within the BNP, but anybody who was involved in (and soaked in) the nationalist cause at that time knew that things were getting beyond excusable and that a whole circus of events – which were quite frankly unforgivable to many decent nationalists – led them to leave in droves.
    .
    In the paranoid delusional mind of the BNP leadership, they were of course all out to “wreck the party” and so on. But whilst there might well have been some antagonistic stirrers and plants in the past at times, it was not really the same this time. Whilst there may have been some state disruption going on, it was certainly not just the same as before – and hundreds, if not thousands, of long established, credible, sensible, articulate and experienced nationalists left the party in mass exodus.
    .
    Do I really need to mention Romac Press and the lack of £44,000 payment (and nine lost jobs) that ultimately led to the Grifffin family being threatened (and a court case)? A fine example of a self inflicted, shoot yourself in the foot problem by doing the dirty on one of the few companies that were prepared to print the material for the party.
    .
    How about the late accounts (and fines!) several years running, despite every year saying it would not happen again, or that it was all in on time. Or the granny pornographers all over the papers (who were defended at the time, not removed), the porn shop owners who say they are nationalists for ‘family values’, the people pictured with their pants around their ankles and toting replica fire-arms, the people (who are still around Griffin!) who were making jokes about “drowning Pakis” on facebook prior to elections (that people had worn their shoe leather out in an effort to get these Muppets elected?)
    .
    Then there was the apparent stitching up of Richard Barnbrook with the nomination papers, the endless “get elected quick” publicity “brainwaves” such as driving around with ‘pigs in skips’, the deliberate comments about ‘shooting asylum seeker boats’ (which he knew would be taken the wrong way), getting BNP people to dress up as army personnel when they are not and never have been in the armed forces, and banging on about issues for an election drive which their own organisers said would be a mistake of focus.
    .
    Then we have had the shocking video of Carlos Cortiglia being interviewed in barely legible English by the mainstream media for the London Mayoral elections (which was yet another waste of nationalists time and money!) – who I seem to recall proceeded to ride roughshod over almost every traditional nationalist position in existence, denied many of our own historic policies and principles- and thus made us look like fools.
    .
    There is a difference between trying to be ‘media savvy’ and genuinely making a mockery of all we stand for and what our policies and principles are! (In fact, going as far telling us nationalists that WE have to change our positions!). What was the BNP becoming? What was it being changed into? Many of us were rightly concerned at the directions it was heading, not by force, but by choice.
    .
    We then have the thousands of pounds of self inflicted court costs through Mr Griffin simply not following the law and due procedure. In fact, we have the wasted money here there and everywhere like this whilst the party is having the cheek to ask pensioners to donate the ‘price of a pint’ – later a ‘cup of tea’ – to help the party out! Shameless. Inexcusable.
    .
    The leadership challenge was the last straw for many people, who hoped that the party could move ahead with a fresh broom and get into the gear required to really modernise whilst keeping the party ideology intact.
    .
    Yet even that became a farce, with alleged dirty manoeuvres going on (such as a lack of giving web presence to opposing candidates, and even taking the link to one of their blogs off the front of the site!) – and the sudden support of postal voting efforts that let Mr Griffin win by just 9 votes; let alone there being changes made in the party constitution without anybody’s approval!
    .
    With such a shocking showing of dissatisfaction and lack of faith, anybody with an ounce of self consciousness would have stepped aside or at the very least made some radical efforts to transform things.
    .
    Did we get it? No. In fact, it went worse, and went all “EDL” for a while, before yet another “about face” and running an (actually quite good) expose on such types when the wind was blowing the way of being ‘Jew aware’ again on the nationalist scene. It has been all over the place, being neither one thing or another.
    .
    How much more of this utter nonsense were we supposed to put up with at the time? How much more should we have been expected to ignore, cover up, propagandise over so as to protect Mr Griffin and ‘not rock the boat’ of the BNP vehicle for ‘the greater good’?
    .
    (Only it was not really for the greater good in the end, it just allowed things to carry on bumbling along).
    .
    Like others here, I think the Question Time appearance was ‘car-crash’ TV. Yes, it was absolutely a stitch up. Yes, Mr Griffin hardly got nine consecutive words out of his mouth. I and many others at the time appreciated that it was a lions den.
    .
    What we did not know at the time it was aired is that there were no real preparations and practice runs made for the programme in the months prior to the appearance. What we did not know is that there was no real back up plan in case it was such a stitch up. Walking out gracefully would have been better than smirking and clapping like a seal and laughing along with Bonnie ‘No such thing as indigenous British’ Greer.
    .
    The BNP in general were believing their own hype and perhaps thought of themselves as untouchable. They were on the crest of the wave, and probably thought they could surf home no matter what. Mr Griffin was getting quite good at TV appearances and probably thought he could handle it – but had not expected such a strong ambush to deliver blow after blow.
    .
    To Mr Griffins credit, he managed to turn the appearance around to his advantage and he milked the sympathy card very well. He did a very good job of damage limitation, announcing how unfair it was – and showing the BBC set-up for what it was. In fact, he did such a good job at it even some of the mainstream media reporters, including some lefty ones, were saying that the BBC had shot itself in the foot with the obvious sabotage of the appearance.
    .
    I also greatly appreciate the extent of the gerrymandering of the voter base in Barking and Dagenham that wiped away every single councillor. It was a crushing defeat for the party, but anybody who has studied the demographic change of the area over the years that the BNP were trying to set up stall there will realise that the area had been radically transformed and thus made it extremely hard to retain seats and win further seats, particularly against a well funded machine like Labour.
    .
    I am certainly not going to blame Mr Griffin for that collapse, even though I agreed with others at the time that the campaigns they were running down there (such as Bring Our Boys Home) were not what people would be going out to vote on locally.
    .
    (He was apparently told all this, but as usual, he knew better – and when the going got tough, it was also back to the tactics of 80’s for some people involved, like the smear leaflets featuring Margaret Hodge which appeared at the election time).
    .
    Yet the collapse happened there and in Stoke too. Years of work and money up in smoke over night. It was a combination of the idiocy going on within the party on the one hand and the massive blow to our prospects on the other that really put the knife into the BNP (and electioneering in general).
    .
    People did not leave lightly. People did not turn their backs on what was deemed the only viable nationalist political party for nothing. It was a wrench for many of us. We did not know what to do or where to go next.
    .
    We were not “destabilisers” or “disrupters”, we were not “plants” and “state stooges” who were out to “do the party down”. Far from it, we wanted the party to improve, go forward and do better!
    .
    The majority of people who left were in my opinion the cream of the crop, people like Brons, Kemp, those in the temporary Brent Group, and so on. They were not fools, they were not liabilities. They had some grace and refinement about them, they had command of knowledge and insight, not just rabble-rousing populist rhetoric and slogans. In due course, regional organisers vanished, the truly active people thinned out, unable to carry on and heavily demoralised with the whole lot.
    .
    This change in the party that was deemed necessary was clearly not possible with the way things were. It seemed there had been little delegation, little training of others to take up front line roles, everybody who was any good and a threat seemed to be got shut of. Mr Griffin was the BNP and the BNP was Mr Griffin.
    .
    The two things could no longer be separated, and that was always a bad position for the party to be in. Many people on the doorstep informed activists that they liked the policies but could not stand Mr Griffin.
    .
    Of course, some would have had the opposite view, but it would have been prudent to establish the degree of the “Marmite” nature of Mr Griffin himself (of course, the Marmite thing was yet another blunder, along with dressing up some poor sod as St.George to deliver the then new BNP manifesto on live TV. The manifesto itself and the speech was pretty good – by why the theatrics that made us look a bit weird and amateurish?)

    I once had a glossy BNP magazine sent to me and Mr Griffins face was posing on almost every single page of it! People were sick of seeing it and sick of hearing the tired clichés all the time, which were getting robotic. He was often a good speaker, he is knowledgeable, I would have perhaps thanked him for the service to the cause despite the glitches – but there’s only so many times you can hear the same drum banging.
    .
    On all these antics going on, the BNP had nobody to blame but itself. I do not ascribe it all to the fault of Mr Griffin, as he cannot be responsible for every act of idiocy that went on, he had some good attributes and probably still does…..but some people were plain liabilities, and rather than being sacked or removed from the party, they were allowed to continue on and create more division. Maybe Mr Griffin was being kind hearted to keep them on, who knows, but it was not always in the interests of the party.
    .
    But all this talk of the BNP and what happened to it is now pointless anyway. That ship has sailed, quite possibly never to return.
    .
    The country itself is slipping through our fingers every year that passes, but Nationalist “politics” is now back to square one and starting again from pretty much scratch. New crops of members, new crops of supporters, all slowly repeating the cycles that were so easily busted apart last time.
    .
    There is nothing, absolutely nothing, to prevent Labour and the wider establishment doing what they did in Barking and Dagenham all over again. There is nothing to stop them “disrupting the party”, if that is what people believe happened, all over again. Then what? Start all over again, again?! It just does not make any sense at all – yet people carry on with it regardless!
    .
    Now we are treated to videos like that of Clive Jefferson the other year brawling down a megaphone outside a cafe whilst trying to rile Nigel Farrage – but ultimately just spouting complete nonsense and making the BNP look a laughing stock. Once again, the deluded fools over at the BNP site would have thought it was marvellous – “Yeah! You tell ’em Clive!!” they would no doubt be saying.
    .
    The BNP circus clearly continues, the delusion continues, the same limitations, the same stunts, the same old nonsense mixed in with some very genuine and heartfelt positions and supporters caught up in it – and no doubt due to be chewed up and spat out in a few years time when they come to see sense and see it for what it is.
    .
    Will it ever achieve electoral success to save this country from itself, or even “push” the rest of politics “rightward” enough to make a real difference? It is a joke to me to even suggest it could, without some magical gift of circumstances appearing.
    .
    As for the others, where are they? Where is the BDP presence, are the NF storming politics? Even more liberal parties like LibertyGB and Freedom Democrats and a whole raft of others, where are they in the public sphere? What is their chance of becoming prolific and turning the whole state of affairs around?
    .
    I am sure, like current BNP members, they are still active somewhere and are still keeping the faith with the best of intentions. I do not doubt any of their sincerity and nor do I wish to undermine any of their efforts, but I do think they should step back and reassess the methodology of what is being done.
    .
    I suppose I used to be bitter about how things turned out with the BNP. Now though, in a way, I am glad it happened because I think we all needed to stop kidding ourselves that politics and political parties is the solution to our problems and stop kidding ourselves that we had any chance of impacting the future through the organs of the state and the established order like that.
    .
    The collapse, although painful, forced us to think about what may have to be done instead. That is why people are at Western Spring today. I don’t think anybody in party politics today could refute the logic behind the Western Spring programme or convince anybody that pursuing the same tired tactics of the past will deliver lasting results in the future.
    .
    It is time to recognise that things have moved on – both in nationalism and in the country. It is time to reassess the state of the game and the state of play.
    .
    If anybody can refuse to see what Western Spring is about and still go off and prop up Mr Griffin and the BNP, or any micro-nationalist party come to that, then I don’t think they can be helped, as I would feel that they are not yet at the required level to appreciate what has to be done, are not appreciative of what is being laid out for them and as such, they are perhaps best left to their own devices.
    .
    One day they may come to realise the mistake they have made – and the ease at which their efforts and wishes could come to nothing again in the future.
    .
    People at Western Spring have been down that road already, they understand the stage things are at and what we are up against – and many people involved here are not intent on repeating it all again.
    .
    Of course, I wish the BNP luck and I hope they can someday storm politics and really challenge the established order……but I think the chances are very slim, especially if the wider strategies suggested by Western Spring are not also in place.
    .
    What is ironic about these arguments is that being involved with Western Spring does not even stop people still being involved in the BNP or other organisations, which further highlights the stupidity of this “whose team are you on” – “I am with such and such a party, and you are all traitors for not unquestioningly supporting our leader and our party” nonsense within traditional nationalist party politics.

    1. David Yorkshire

      - Edit

      A very good analysis by BritishActivism. I would also add that in my view Griffin contributed to the premature death of one of the greatest nationalist thinkers and orators of all time: Jonathan Bowden. Griffin’s petty jealousies of anyone with more intelligence and charisma resulted in a whispering campaign against Bowden, whereby he was deliberately falsely identified with a paedophile who shared the same name. This led to Bowden’s mental illness and, ultimately, his heart attack. Bowden could easily have gone into cushy jobs in academia or media where his old schoolmates went, but was committed to the nationalist cause for no personal gain. In contrast, Griffin has milked the cause dry. Where did those Trafalgar Club funds go, I wonder? What is there to show of the hundreds of thousands of pounds that passed through the BNP over the years of success? Unlike with UKIP, which was also growing at the same time, nothing of any permanence was created.

    2. Clive Jefferson may not be articulate but he has kept the accounts balanced and in the black for 3 years running. That is more than any one else has done.

      1. BritishActivism

        - Edit

        Once again, it seems the wood is failing to be seen for the trees.
        .
        There seems to be a instant desire in some people to scrape up any bonus points in order to try and put a positive spin on what is otherwise a diabolical situation within this country and within the party political platform.
        .
        There is no use in people ignoring all the problems that befell the BNP at the time, trying to cover it up or make excuses. All the things I stated happened, both internally and externally to the party.
        .
        Who was exactly responsible for what no longer matters, because it is the actual methodology and nature of the BNP itself (along with other parties) that is the primary problem.
        .
        If we are to discuss the BNP though, there is no point in people ignoring the way the party operates, ignoring the methodology of what was being done, ignoring how it all looks to the wider public (and how badly out of place it all is in professional party politics) – and them instead focussing on the little things that may have (finally) been done right, in an effort to defend the party at all costs.
        .
        To do that, I am afraid, is a bit delusional and showing a lack of self awareness of how things are perceived outside the bubble of the BNP.
        .
        People within it seem that eager to be positive about any little thing. So much so that they grasp at straws – and thus unfortunately, through their wish to show their support at all times, can end up giving their positivity and encouragement to the very kinds of antics which only further make the public reject the party.
        .
        When it comes to Clive Jefferson – whose activities I only brought up to highlight this general problem – I have actually met him a few times at meetings and on some leafleting drives in the past.
        .
        I am not here to cast judgements upon the integrity of others and their individual character. I therefore do not want to unfairly make it about Clive – who on my brief experience seemed a dedicated man doing the best he could, particularly with his trouble in getting around.

        I know he has been put in all sorts of roles, that he seems to keep busy for the party and so on. On all this, I do not have any reason to doubt his sincerity or faith in the cause.
        .
        Whether he is articulate or not is not really the issue, nor the point that was being made by me bringing up such an example. The point was the actual activity itself, irrespective of who it was doing the brawling.
        .
        The point I was therefore making is that the BNP (on a more general basis) is seen as a ramshackle and rather odd organisation on the fringes of society.
        .
        It is an organisation that seems to have no concept of how to organise and structure itself as a professional political party; ie, one that inspires faith and trust in people regarding the competency needed to run the country, a council, or even the proverbial get together in a brewery.
        .
        Within “politics”, these wider things like trust, faith, competency, professionalism etc matter. Unfortunately, the BNP and some of the other small nationalist parties often fail to realise this.
        .
        It is all well and good them taking a stand on particular issues, yah-booing over controversial things as part of a wider ’cause’, ramping up the rhetoric down megaphones and on comment sections – and generally flitting from one ‘current affairs’ issue to another – but people out there, ie the “wider electorate” they hope to catch (as a “political party” needs to do) will be looking at the party as a whole……and asking themselves if they trust the future of the country, and their children, to the British National Party and ‘these people’.
        .
        I’m afraid to say that they just do not inspire such confidence and professionalism in the masses they are aiming to win the vote of. Success tends to breed success, but for various reasons, both internal and external, this has been stymied.
        .
        They generally do not act like a normal party. They do not even seem to know at times if they are a protest group or a political organisation. It is more a ’cause’ they are waging, a ‘backlash’ they are performing, being some kind of bulwark to the actions of others (and the state) rather than being an actual serious political force to be reckoned with.
        .
        Not only do the establishment cast them as the outsiders (as is to be expected), but their own actions and methodology, the antics, and so on, only further the sense of abnormality and the ‘rough and ready’ nature that sets them apart. In these ways they have not really developed further than a particular ceiling that is largely of their own making.
        .
        Of course, I am sure it will be argued that “well, who wants to be the same as everybody else anyway! We want to be different!”……….but if “politics” is the name of the game chosen – which for the BNP it is – then I am afraid to say you therefore have to play that game and learn to play it well.
        .
        UKIP seem to do this for their own particular agendas. On the inside of UKIP, it may well be chaos for all we know. But from outside, from how they generally present themselves, how they generally conduct their activities, the wider public would tend to trust UKIP to do the job of running the country much more than the BNP. It may be unfair, it may be down to the media to some degree, but that is unfortunately the way it is.
        .
        It is often said that the BNP needs to become more like the FN in France, which appears to have transformed itself into a better political machine than it was the past.
        .
        As has been explained in this site though, even the apparent rise and ‘success’ of the FN in France is hardly a speck on what is required to turn things around over there…..but let us run with the fantasy that the BNP could be the same here and that it actually means something.
        .
        It can be argued – and I would tend to agree – that the turnaround in fortunes for the FN has been somewhat correlated by corroboration with some Jews and other self-interested influences in recent years – which have afforded them some favourable funds and coverage or, at the least, more air time in which to properly explain themselves.
        .
        I would also suggest that there has been some degree of watering down of their traditional principles and so on…..but I think that is an unfortunate consequence of the political process itself – and the requirement of it to capture a largely “brainwashed” electorate.
        .
        I am sure that the more UKIP progresses in this country – and the more popular it seeks to be – the more it will shave the edges off whatever it is it stands for. They will have to bend to reach the edges of the present hegemony that dominates.
        .
        This is something that has been defined and commanded by our opposition for such a long time now that people struggle to even think along radically different lines, let alone vote for them.Therefore, turning things around is a pretty slow process when the reliance is only on the pursuit of politics.
        .
        UKIP may nudge things in politics a bit more their way, but I suspect much of it will also be lost along the way….which means things would then have to be nudged again by something stronger – ie, a harder party being successful enough to take their place in the future and push things a bit more, and so on.
        .
        Unless some miracle happens, this is all the BNP is likely to achieve. Have we really got time for this process to happen? I do not think so, even if the BNP and wider nationalist culture was reinvigorated and started to change its presence and fortunes immediately.
        .
        Even then, suggesting for a moment it did romp ahead, if it got a whiff at a major breakthrough, there is no guarantee whatsoever that the party will not be destabilised at that point. This is the problem with the format, the structure, the method itself.
        .
        There is no guarantee either that the opposition elements won’t just exclude the party (like they have a ‘Cordon sanitaire’ against some parties in Europe), or that the fickle electorate (who are not going to be ‘hardcore nationalists’) would actually stick with the party if something else was offered to them as ‘a carrot’ by the others.
        .
        It is therefore a complete “long shot” which is based upon nothing solid and lasting whatsoever, even assuming the party was a fit for purpose winning machine now, which it isn’t. The whole premise is also based on using the rules and structure of our opponents, and that of the media!
        .
        It took UKIP something like 25 years to get anywhere serious at all. The BNP is once again pretty much back to square one – and we only have something like another 30 years left as an indigenous majority in England.
        .
        A vast majority of our own people are not likely to vote for the party through either ideological reasons, things like mixed-race ties and associations (which can only get worse), or more generally via future generations getting even more lost to the “mixture” and “normalising” of the state of the country around them (and them thus knowing nothing different and being accepting of it).
        .
        The long held cry in nationalism is that “people will wake up” by then. That “the worse it gets, the better it will be for us”. But people do not always “wake up” – there is no guarantee this will happen either.
        .
        They may just ‘crack on’ with it, like hundreds of thousands do already in our cities. Or they move away and more meekly ‘crack on with it’ to a lesser degree on a ever downward spiral of whatever locality remains the whitest. They might even go the entire other way, embrace it, give in to it, fling themselves into it because it is seen that there can be no other way to live.
        .
        It is bad enough now (regarding demographics, the complexities of families and societies and the acceptance of what is coming) – but just imagine what it could be like in 10,15,20 years time, if nothing really changes ‘politically’ otherwise!
        .
        This is the society that the BNP could have to be working/operating within in order to “win votes” enough to command the country!
        .
        The Western Spring approach is vastly different to this ‘wing and a prayer’. It sets out the prerequisites and strategies required to have a solid basis in the future, some aspects of which have already been well established and proven to be successful within the Jewish and Muslim communities.
        .
        Nationalism has been blinkered for so long that it seems intent on carrying on with the same sole methodology – despite witnessing that other groups have proven their own success over us at doing things differently. Are we saying that our people cannot even do what Muslims and Jews are doing?
        .
        Even if the ultimate aim of Western Spring fails, we should at least have some ethnically aware strongholds and a future generation that has been given a sense of self identity.
        .
        What if the BNP methodology fails in the future, like the last 50+ years of nationalist politics has failed? What will we have to show for it? Pretty much nothing. (Just like it has given to us at the moment).
        .
        So, I am sorry, but as to whether Clive Jefferson has now managed to submit the accountancy files on time (for change) or balance the books within this larger situation is neither here nor there.
        .
        It simply does not matter any more, and is hardly something we ought to be impressed with after 32 YEARS of the party’s existence. That is, 32 years of effort, 32 years of peoples dedication, time and money. 32 Years of membership churn as people come in, get fed up, then drop out.
        .
        If people want to continue blindly on down the same routes, still do the whole political party thing, I am not really all that bothered. I have stated why I don’t see the sense in it, the material on this site goes much further in explaining an alternative.

        It does not really affect Western Spring if people are in the BNP or not, for Western Spring are not “rivals”, they are an “alternative” – and an “alternative” that does not even prevent people still supporting parties and politics if that is what they want to do.
        .
        Myself, I think it is folly to not broaden those horizons and simultaneously consider the practicalities being put forward by this site. Nor do I think it is wise to misconstrue the strategy in the name of trying to shore up a political party or turning people away from what is being said here.
        .
        We are not rivals who have to be ‘done away with’ for our disloyalty. We are not interested in party schisms between the BDP, BNP, NF, LibertyGB, Britain First, or whoever else. I hope they have some success. Personally, I would just not continue to put all my eggs in those baskets.
        .
        The people at Western Spring are establishing a different project that sets to work on a whole range of areas that party politics is not even designed for achieving.

        1. British activism: you have treated me to one of the best anaylises of the British nationaist struggle I have ever read!

          For a start, you’re right about the British Political System. Most of the mainstream poltical parties are populated by public-school-educated careerists, sure — but the masses look at these people as being more able to rule the country than people like Clive Jefferson. It’s a natural thing to place a high regard on people who have high social status. Clive Jefforson may be a good guy, but people wouldn’t want him working behind a desk at 10 Downing Street! Although Jefferson, as a man, is a far better person than them tratiors who populate our mainstream poltical parties!

          There is one main reason why our people are self-destructing infront of our eyes: the metaphysics of crowds.

          This is easy to explain: only a small amount of people CAN think for themselves! The Marxists thought the free-thinking strata was around 5%. That may be true, but within that 5%, there is only a small amount of these people who also have the alturism, descency and virtue to challange an oppresive society. There are a lot of ”free thinker” types who understand what is going on; but they are perverted by the culture, so they go after money, comfort and power. Despite thier abilties to seperate their thoughts, feelings, and world-views from the ”accepted” standards of their culture, they would never dream of looking out for the interests of their race. Tony Blair comes under this catogry, so do a lot of the cretin-Goys in the mass media.

          This makes the erection of a multiracial state a numbers game. If you can keep things nice & easy with a ready supply of goods, services, drugs, sitoms, package holidays, and all the rest of the nonsense that passes for today’s Western culture you will be able to get most people to accept whatever reality you throw at them. As long as the TV tells these people that everything will be ok in the end, the masses will NOT accept the warnings of fringe characters who seem to lack the credibilty of the people who are in POWER.

          Why? The average person hasn’t got the mental strength to accept the truth! If a smarmy, slimey freak like Ed Milliband gives him a few slogans about Britain’s Great Future that’s enough to keep him in his little bubble. We must, as nationalists, accept that a lot of our people are that pathetic!

          The mass-man, however, will always exist as long as human socitety is based on the basic foundation of all human socities: leaders and followers. As Francis Parker Yockey concluded in his masterpiece Imperium, all socital advancement is ordered by a tiny culture-bearing elite who question the present standards of thier culture and create something new. if we didn’t have the mass man, we wouldn’t have society. No one would follow orders. A poltical movement has one key function: direct the mass-man in a new direction.

          The trouble is the natural leaders of our race remain hidden, so the mass-man is misdirected towards his racial destruction by the Zio-globalists who control Western civilization, and he will stay that way until HE IS OFFERED SOMETHING NEW THAT ALLOWS HIM TO MAINTAIN HIS ILLSUIONS OF BEING IN CONTROL OF HIS OWN DESTINY. HE NEEDS TO FEEL SECURE ENOUGH TO JUMP SHIP. That’s why fringe poltical movements like Golden Dawn in Greece seem to grow when the state collapses — people change sides when their old side is no longer able to satiate their illusions.

          The Cultural Marxist society that we have all been thrown into has created strong barriers against supporting nationalist movements, so — with rare exceptions — the small amount of high-Q, virtous people out there amongst the masses who are capable of ACCEPTING the context of the nationalist struggle and leading our people away from their destruction are nowhere to be seen; they know, if they speak out and get active in their race’s defence, they could lose everything of value to their lives.

          Look at Enoch Powell. He might have been Prime Minister if he kept his mouth shut. Look at the Jew Keith Josepth. He spoke out against miscengination, mass immigration, and, if you read between the lines, supported eugenics, and look what happened to his aspirations to become the next Prime Minister? — Margret Thatcher beat him to the punch. The borders remained open. Just how the System liked it!

          A lot of the masses are highly ethnocentric, but they, by their ontological nature, are incapable of seeing the big picture and they are also incapable of organizing themselves in their own defence. In short, unless a new elite can be formed that is STRONGER than the current elite, the masses will watch on while their whole race is destroyed infront of their eyes. They won’t just wake up; they need stern, ordered, and FORCEFUL leadership.

          At the moment, the best thing the nationalist movement in this country can do is search for that hidden elite. You need to make it attractive for our best to come foward, and you need to offer them a WORKABLE PLAN. Thank God for Western Spirng, that’s all I will say. …Then, through MASSIVE amounts of effort, once we form this elite, we need to organize ourselves as a people OUTSIDE the System, so we have the financies, poltical power, informational reach, and sense of collective destiny to make a credible attempt at our own survival. It really is in our hands —- if we survive as a race, it will be because our elite was better than theirs. It’s as simple as that! Deep down, when it comes down to it, we all know that we are smarter than our enemies, don’t we? Well, it is time we all make a personal vow to do something that has never been done in British nationalist history: WORK HARDER THAN OUR ENEMIES AND WITH MORE DEDICATION!

    3. The reason the BNP has failed is two fold; the stupidity of the plodders and the rabidity of the race haters. There is a clear difference between preferring the company of people of your own ethnic background , understanding that many people in other races hate white people and on the other hand yourself hating other people. Hatred is corrosive. Normal people have a few friends of other ethnicity some close others not, but all normal people feel cultural affinity with their own kind.

      Even Walker understands that is a horse of an entirely different color, that race hatred destroys . Griffin went to Damascus to stop a war. He really felt for the ordinary Syrian people who may not have been great fans of Assad and his tribe but knew he was streets ahead of the rebels who were mostly Sunni Islamic extremists. Few recognize what a courageous act that was, to throw a monkey wrench in the establishment war machine.

      Now that we see the full blown horror of ISIS we can well imagine what the situation would be like if they had captured Damascus a full blown Shiite Sunni war with Russia siding with the Shiites and The US and Brits with the Wahabi fanatics.

      No thanks I’ll oppose this with all my strength. No WW3 on my watch.

Comments are closed.