Max Musson at the South-West Forum

Last Saturday the 6th May, I spoke at a meeting of the South-West Forum organised by Julie Lake and attended by about thirty nationalists.

Those attending the meeting were in a buoyant mood  and clearly enjoyed both the speeches and the refreshments that were provided during the interval.

Following the disturbance that occurred at the last South-West Forum meeting, security was stepped up and a very professional security team was present, organised by one of our members, Richard. He is to be congratulated for a very slick operation that was effective without being overly conspicuous or obtrusive.

The speakers included, Peter Rushton of Heritage and Destiny, Nathan Griffiths and Kevin Bryan, the next Chairman of the National Front.

All Nationalists living in the South Wales and the South-West of England should try to attend future meetings so that our fragmented movement can heal and go forward as a united force in future.

By Max Musson © 2017

# # # #


Western Spring is not just a website. We are a community of people dedicated to achieving the Six Prerequisites and thereby acquiring the wherewithal needed to win political power and through that secure the future survival, proliferation and advancement of the British people and other White peoples of European descent, wherever they may live. Please join us:

# # # #

8 thoughts on “Max Musson at the South-West Forum

  1. Thank you for coming all that way again Max…It really does show, that although uniting under one party, would never work, due to different ideologies, co-operation and a healthy respect for other views, shows the movement is committed. To see different factions, all in one room, endorses the fact, that we have a lot of work to do, but co-operation, repairs some of the warring factions, that we have seen in the past.
    This is the only way forward. We can not change anything, all the time, we are fighting among ourselves. I do believe, that most of us, see that now.
    While some continue to attack other factions, the evidence that this is counter productive for them, is shown in the amount of interest, we have had in the Forums.
    After the meeting, i posted the success of the day onto social media, and within minutes, i had messages in my inbox from nationalists, asking if they can attend the next one.
    Considering, the SW Forum is still relatively, in it’s infancy, the growth has been astonishing and further more, Antifa are clearly concerned about the Forums.

  2. Good talk. I particularly agree with the comment on the decentralised, disconnected, and often competing blogs and publications. There should be a British version of The Occidental Observer where speakers and writers consolidate and express themselves under one influential platform. At the moment it is difficult keeping up with everything.

  3. You speak and write well, but the proposed methods are not (in my view) realistic.

    I don’t want to subordinate myself to an Idea. I just want to support people who know what they’re doing – which includes knowing how to arrange for workmen to come and fix the street lights, knowing how to chair a residents’ association meeting, knowing what to do about potholes, knowing how to run a complex organisation or having worked at some serious level in business or the public sector, and so on. I can’t take seriously anybody who wants to Save The White Race™ unless they can demonstrate that they have some grip on reality. You can sneer at that, but my belief is that most ordinary people see things the same way and want those qualities to reflect back at them in their elected representatives.

    However I realise that the sentiment will be misrepresented (as usual), so for completeness I will elaborate.

    First, I am not suggesting that Nationalists should water-down their beliefs. The issue is not ideology, but methodology and presentation.

    I agree greater unity is needed, but that has to be among pragmatic, sensible people. Of course, pragmatism and good sense are not synonyms for moderacy, and sometimes sensible people need to resort to extreme measures. However at this point in time, we are not there – and I sincerely hope we never will be. I’m a National Socialist (after a fashion) and I’m not afraid of being called a ‘fascist’ or ‘Nazi’ or ‘racist’, etc., but ‘normal’ people are. They don’t want to have those labels and don’t want to attend meetings at which the Holocaust is discussed and the entertainment includes a fight during the intermission.

    The point about the electoral system, which keeps being ignored at the expense of simplified conspiracy theories, is that gaining local power and influence is an important part of a long-term strategy. All successful political movements have done this.

    You state in your video: “At the moment, electioneering is a waste of time and effort, and we need to recognise that.”

    I beg to differ, but with an important caveat. Electioneering is not a waste of time and effort when it is done correctly. When it is done professionally, with modest goals initially, with candidates who are committed to their local communities and well-known locally, using propaganda that appeals to a broad base of people, then we could make progress; and, even if we don’t win many council seats, the experience of involvement in communities and gaining political skills will help us build a base of serious, capable activists.

    You mention about building an alternative media (or an alternative part of the mainstream media, at any rate). That is already happening organically on platforms like YouTube – i.e. Red Ice Creations, Rebel Media, etc. – which are taking audience share away from the mainstream operators. It’s in its infancy, and they are not Nationalists per se, but it may go in the direction you envisage. If we had a serious political movement, that would also contribute to the objective, especially if we had elected councillors who could apply to sit on the relevant governing boards of public and quasi-public organisations that influence somewhat the mainstream press and media.

    UKIP have done very well, but they are now finished. The question is: What will replace it? I can understand if you want to argue that Nationalists shouldn’t be too hasty about setting up a new political party. I agree with that at least, but there is an opportunity to fill a niche. Probably Farage and Banks, who don’t seem to understand nationalism, will set up a new neo-liberal civic patriotic party, which will be a dead-end. What will Nationalists do? Unfortunately I still don’t believe any of the ‘names’ in this ‘Movement’ have stepped forward with an answer.

    You can say I’m being ‘negative’. I really don’t care. I don’t have any children and I have no stake in this whatever. I’m happy just to sit back with my popcorn and watch the show. It’s good for laugh, if nothing else. Please keep up the entertainment! It’s bloody funny.

    But the serious point is that, in my view, a much more searching and thorough examination needs to be undertaken than has happened so far, to the point where you might even want to consider consulting on and publishing a written strategic plan that sets down goals, aims, strategies and tactics for a new embryonic campaign group.

    I would be genuinely impressed if people like you and Kevin Bryan and similar others got together for that purpose on the basis that all egos and organisational alliances have to be put aside, with no sacred cows whatever.

    1. Hello Tom,
      You do not think that our ideas are realistic, and yet I wonder how closely you have examined what we propose? Perhaps you have listened to a single speech and made your mind up based solely upon the limited amount of information that can be disseminated in a speech?
      You “don’t want to subordinate [your]self to an idea”, however my speech was not on this occasion directed to you, or people like you who sit on the side-lines and merely criticise, it was aimed at those people who are already committed nationalists and who are already active in one way or another, albeit misdirected in the majority of cases.
      You state, “I’m a National Socialist (after a fashion) and I’m not afraid of being called a ‘fascist’ or ‘Nazi’ or ‘racist’, etc., but ‘normal’ people are. They don’t want to have those labels and don’t want to attend meetings at which the Holocaust is discussed and the entertainment includes a fight during the intermission”, however you again make the mistake that I am directing my speech towards ‘normal people’, which I am not, and you misinterpret our light-hearted references to ‘entertainment’ literally. We take great care to make sure Antifa do not have prior knowledge of our meetings, and we do this in order to avoid violent confrontation of the sort that occurred back in January. In this respect, we are just like ordinary people and so your criticisms are again misplaced.
      You disagree with my assertion that electioneering is currently a waste of time and effort, stating that electioneering simply needs to be done professionally. What you fail to point to is an organisation that has achieved the kind of success that you claim is available to us, and I would suspect that you have never tried standing as a candidate in an election, representing a nationalist political party. I doubt that you have ever tried to gain through the existing mass media the same kind of unbiased reporting that establishment candidates take for granted, I doubt that you have ever tried to organise a public meeting at which to promote your ‘National Socialist’ beliefs, and furthermore, I doubt that you have had first hand experience of the gaping potential that exists for electoral fraud by those who wish to prevent nationalists from gaining or holding on to elected office no matter how lowly. Gaping potential that my own experiences have convinced me has been widely exploited by those within the established electoral system for decades.
      While Red Ice Creations and Rebel Media, etc., are indeed taking some audience share away from the mass media, members of the public must first be sufficiently motivated to seek out such embryonic nationalist media, and so it is only that small percentage of the public that have the capacity for independent thought that currently are being influenced by our ideas. For our ideas to influence the masses, as the mass media do, we need to first capture an audience with programme content that holds their attention irrespective of political inclination. This is why the vast majority of the content of a future online nationalist TV station must superficially appear to be indistinguishable from the output of say the BBC. Only when the majority of our audience watch our broadcasts for their entertainment and informative content will we be in a position to sway them politically as the mass media do.
      UKIP are indeed on the slide, however as they collapse their niche within the electoral spectrum will be occupied as you have already guessed by a new libertarian/free trade party probably launched by the likes of Nigel Farage and/or Aron Banks. They will have the advantage of sympathetic media coverage and millions of pounds in funding that will guarantee that no genuinely nationalist political party will be able to fill UKIP’s shoes in their place. You really do have much to learn!
      Your real motivations in making the comments you have become obvious when we read, “I’m happy just to sit back with my popcorn and watch the show. It’s good for laugh, if nothing else. Please keep up the entertainment! It’s bloody funny”. The displacement, replacement and engineered auto-genocide of a whole race of people, is no laughing matter and it does not reflect well on you that you choose to criticised from the sidelines instead of placing your shoulder to the wheel.
      As for me and those who do care, we will get on with the job of saving our people, irrespective of whether or not the likes of you are “genuinely impressed”.

  4. Tom, in reply to ” Why hold meetings about odd and esoteric subjects of no interest to the public?”… That question, is exactly what has held back recruitment, nationalism per say, and created the divide within factions.

    As one example… Go to Stormfront and note how many threads are running, and how many topics, they cover. It is a vast, wealth of topics, ranging from the very basics, to the esoteric. If nationalists were one entity, under one Party, with one policy, such as the origins of UKIP, then yes. Yet, that it is not the case. You are entirely missing the purpose of the Forum meetings and Western Spring. When there is a movement, a section of society, with opposing ideologies, to encourage nationalists to get involved, and bring them in activism, you must cater for all. It’s horses for courses. If you limit meetings, those open to all factions, to one ideology, you’re finished, before you start. Kevin Bryan, speaking about visual activism, and Max speaking about the ideology of Western Spring, may be poles apart, yet, if brought different nationalists into the same room. Some left with their application forms to join the National Front and some asked me, about Western Spring. When you only go down one route at a meeting, one ideology, you risk, many not coming back, because it didn’t cater for their own wants and needs. That’s why nationalism stagnated. It needed a massive kick start and this is the way forward. The alternative, is to watch existing Orgs and Parties, slide more into the stagnation and at the same time, watch ridiculous little new groups set up with no experience, no money for decent election campaigns, and no real commitment to our country, other than a deluded belief, they will be the next Farage. Just look at some of the pathetic election results coming out last week, from nationalist parties. The BNP lost all council seats and elsewhere, some new Org consisting entirely of rehashing old policies, who wouldn’t know a marked register, if it bit them on the backside, managed a humiliating 11 votes. That was coming from some who believed they were experienced in electioneering. That does not help nationalism, it humiliates it. No wonder Antifa were laughing their socks off, and the Antifa turning their attention to the Forums, and not bothering with these silly little groups of five people. Ten silly little groups competing for votes is what damages the movement, yet get them together, in one room, with mutual respect for differing ideologies, then you see hope, an end goal, unity and determination.

    When you say, ” Why hold meetings about odd and esoteric subjects of no interest to the public?”…. Then, that is why nationalism has fractured, in a nutshell. What you are saying really, is that, YOU don’t find them of interest and thus, assume, that the public won’t either. How can you possibly state, what interests the public and what doesn’t ?

    Further more, in the past ten years, especially, we have seen splinter groups borne out of splinter groups. None have taken off, and no new Org will take off either. It splits the activist base for one. This is because, there are too many self appointed wannabe leaders, rather than get together, to find a way forward.

    I set up the South West Forum to bring together what i called the Homeless bats in the SW. It was criminal to see so many good activists from the past, doing nothing, because either Griffin purged them, they left, or they just didn’t see an Org, they could trust enough again, to get involved once more. What would you rather have Tom ? All those good people, doing nothing? If i set up meetings, for just one ideology, then meetings would resemble the shambles we have seen in the past. By involving and being open to all ideologies, there is something for everyone, from different factions, to come along and participate, moving together as one entity, while retaining their individual ideology. The only way, this would fail to work, is when nationalists, believe in superiority.

    Western Spring is not some knee jerk little Facebook group, who couldn’t fill a smart car, let alone a hall, for meetings. It is a long term strategy, focusing on an end goal. If it wasn’t, we’d be bowing our heads in shame, in some school gym when the returning officer reads out, 11 votes, while the other candidates gloat. If you look at the nationalists who stood as independents, and see their returns, it is clear, they did exceptionally better, than nationalists standing for Nationalist parties.

    Finally, since the creation of the Forums, attendee numbers have grown and grown. That is solid evidence, that it is wworking and reaching not only, fractured nationalists, but also, members of the public.

  5. I’d just like to make a comment about the lack of a Nationalist Party to fill the gap left by UKIP. I have just seen this headline on an article on the British Democratic Party web site.

    ‘It’s Our Time Now As UKIP Electoral Meltdown Leaves The Way Clear

    This ridiculous outfit was started four or five years ago and a few lost souls, including yours truly thought they were being serious. However, since then they have fought a few elections, managed to lose most of their tiny membership, not attempted to set up any sort of infrastructure, and now these deluded people think their time has come.
    One of the big problems is that very few Nationalist Leaders/Groups have any credibility amongst the non-aligned Nationalists out there.

    1. Hi Eddy, I was initially consulted by those who set up the BDP, but they excluded me from the steering committee when I advised them that simply setting up a new party that is identical to the BNP would not in itself bring success.
      The founders of the BDP believed that Nick Griffin alone was the cause of the decline of the BNP and that they need only create a new political that is identical to the BNP in every way, save for the exclusion of Nick Griffin and success would be theirs for the taking. I advised them to the contrary, that a party that is identical to the BNP would suffer the same fate as the BNP and time has proved me right.
      This does not mean that the founders of the BDP are bad people, they simply allowed their personal hatred of Nick Griffin at that time to overrule their better judgement.
      If nationalism is to succeed, we need to learn how to build a large organisation, and in any large organisation there are going to be individual people who don’t get on. There are going to be some people who positively hate each other, and so if we are to build a large organisation we need nationalists to subordinate their personal egos to the needs of our race and nation. We must be prepared if necessary to work with individuals we positively hate, if by doing so we advance our cause and bring salvation nearer.
      It would appear from articles in the news that influential individuals from within UKIP, which I believe include Arron Banks and probably Nigel Farage, have been evaluating the possibility of launching a new political party with the aim that it will replace UKIP and occupy the electoral niche, just to the right of the Tory Party. Such a party would have relatively favourable treatment from the mass media, would have the benefit of leaders who are household names, and would have the benefit of multi-millionaire financial backing. Such a party will therefore trounce the likes of the BDP should they go head-to-head in any elections and so the electoral path to power is blocked to us until we have accumulated the assets needed to level the playing field.
      This means we must concentrate our efforts on acquiring the Six Prerequisites that I keep talking about. It may take several years, it may even take decades before we acquire them, but we will not succeed electorally to any significant degree until we do.

Comments are closed.