No doubt we all been duly outraged by Afua Hirsch’s proposal to remove Nelson from his column, an outrage which Ms Hirsch will have both expected and enjoyed. I don’t intend in this article to dwell on the ongoing assault on the cultural icons of the white race, and thus on the white race itself, as H. Millard has dealt with it far more effectively on this website than I could have done.
I prefer to look at what Ms. Hirsch thought that she was doing with her provocative suggestion, and the lessons which we can draw from it. Ms Hirsch is an interesting mixture – genetically and culturally – of Jewish intellectualism and Negro resentment, and all the more dangerous for it. Her purpose was not to actually topple Nelson from his perch (not yet) it was to plant in the public mind on this side of the Atlantic, or rather that part of the public mind which is accessible to “progressive” notions, those concepts of “white privilege” and “white supremacism” which already obsess the universities and the media of the United States. That in turn calls into question “whiteness” itself, meaning a society formed according to the assumptions of European culture. Nelson’s statue is nothing more than an attention grabbing symbol of those things.
The lesson for us is that we should not evade displaying our beliefs in full public view for fear that it will attract the hostility of the media and political establishments, or even the hatred of the orcs of Antifa. All of that we have already suffered and continue to suffer even though we strive to present ourselves to the public in non-threatening guises as the “Democratic this” or the “Freedom that” or even the “National other”. No – we are Racialists, and our organisations should shout it from the rooftops, not least in their very names – why not a “Racialist Party”?
Of course such an open avowal of racialism would be outrageous. Those who take such a bold step would have to suffer screams (and worse) of “racism” and “Nazism”, but those on our side of politics get that anyway, and it is not too difficult to answer such slurs. As with Ms. Hirsch’s proposal the outrage is the very point – it brings to public attention the fact that there are people who are prepared to argue for ideals which are beyond the pale of acceptable opinion, and thus draws attention to the ideals themselves. Those ideals, the preservation of traditional racial and cultural identities and a secure and exclusive homeland for all ethnicities, are set out in an article on this website – “The Twin Principles of Racial Nationalism“. Although one may agree or disagree with those ideals they are intellectually coherent and morally defensible and provide a foundation for programmes of political action and social reconstruction.
There is one caveat to my argument: while an open avowal of Racialism is proper for bodies engaged in politics, in debate and in propaganda, those groups (if any such exist) which are interested in building local community groups of our people would have to take a milder approach, basing their appeal on patriotism rather than open racialism.
By Frederick Dixon © 2017
# # # #
JOIN WESTERN SPRING
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:
# # # #