By Max Musson:
It is gratifying that in recent months groups whose aims and outlook are similar to Western Spring have begun to respond positively to our outreach and we now find that new a movement is beginning to take shape, one of which Western Spring is a part.
The common characteristic of these groups and the movement of which they are the ‘green shoots’, is that we are indeed post-nationalist in the sense that we recognise our role, not as the ‘rear-guard’ of the old nations either of Britain or of Europe in the wider sense, but as the vanguard of a new nation built upon the idea of race and which is emerging through a process of rebellion against the old order. The following podcast by Nick Grifford of White Independent Nation describes this very well.
Electoral politics is a fruitless endeavour for those of us who seek to preserve our people, our race and our culture, and we recognise that we do not need the ‘stamp of approval’ from our corrupt body politic in order to begin immediately fashioning new communities and building a bright new future for ourselves and our children. We can begin today the task of building intentional White communities and all that is needed for our eventual success is that we begin to trust each other more than we trust the corrupt agents of the old nation state that is dying all around us, and as the old state collapses, make ready to emerge young, fresh and vital, in a new world of our own making.
For more podcasts and articles by Nick Grifford: https://www.win-white.org/
By Max Musson © 2014
# # # #
Michael Woodbridge
- Edit
The message contained in this podcast is absolutely essential if we’re to forge a strategy for survival. We have to slough off our tendency towards moral justification by posing as the victim and become the intellectual aggressor instead.
A few years ago Nick Griffin launched an anti-mugging campaign with the slogan “Racism cuts both Ways”. Nothing wrong with that, it was widely thought! On the contrary, he was congratulated for providing irrefutable evidence that whilst the indigenous inhabitants of these islands are cowed into believing that there is something shameful about their racial instincts in resenting the alien colonisation of our land, the afro-Asian colonisers regularly attack and rob our folk on a much, much greater scale with seeming moral impunity.
However, by accepting the Marxist concept of “Racism” as an evil and standing it on its head in order to illustrate the hypocrisy of our opponents Nick Griffin conceded vital ideological ground. If we’re not nasty bigoted racists who are we? Nice cuddly racialists perhaps?
The sad demise of the British National Party, has enabled us to think ‘outside the box’. We can say and do things which we can’t do so well as a political party. John Tyndall once joked, that whilst he was not embarrassed to describe himself as a “racist” it would be amusing if when canvassing he knocked on someone’s door and said, “Good morning I’m your racist candidate”. Now he could, because none of us have any need to seek media approval.
Although the need for a regular political party has its place we have to think much further ahead and start building up our resources as a movement. When the time comes to launch ourselves through the ballot box it will be because we’ve already established ourselves as a cultural force, ethically and ethnically. After the intellectual dishonesty and double dealing which has plagued so much of our political activity, a number of us have seen the need for a binding but non-dogmatic religion based on our Aryan racial values, of honour and truth in all things.
frederickdixon
- Edit
This is good stuff and very thought provoking. The only caution I would enter is that we should be careful about drawing too sharp a distinction between “reactionary” Old Rightists and the new wave of revolutionary racialists as the line between them is blurred and the same people can sometimes be found on both sides. In particular, we must be very careful to avoid any hint of opposition between these two tendencies – we all want the same thing, more or less.
Further, we must never write off ANY nationalist effort as pointless and failed (I do not suggest that Nick Grifford is doing so), because sometimes it is the most surprising and unlikely development which is favoured by evolution.
AAA
- Edit
I agree with this perspective in that reactionaries –insofar as I find the adherence to electioneering, patriotic flag and institution worship, and absurd notions of the nation-State (in its present conception) to be most unfortunate and not the epitome of Nationalism– are not simply of the old ways and thus superfluous or detrimental to the Cause.
.
Some who are described as ‘reactionaries’ might simply be well-meaning old-hands who are not aware of (or do not agree with breaking their tried-and-tested ways to meet) the ‘second wave’ of Nationalism that Nick Grifford quotes John Londen citing.
.
We are all (however methodologically divergent we presently may be) nevertheless on the same side. This fact must be emphasied more than any nuanced approach to the Cause that many groupuscules are, since the demise of the BNP and the recognition of the futility of party system, now undertaking.
.
Let us reach out to all nuances of the Cause and avoid dogmatism. The ‘second wave of nationalism’ (of which I would include, as Londen did not, Golden Dawn) is a tide we ought to ride and peruse a fresh approach, Brothers and Sisters.
John Londen
- Edit
@AAA [quote]”Let us reach out to all nuances of the Cause and avoid dogmatism. The ‘second wave of nationalism’ (of which I would include, as Londen did not, Golden Dawn) is a tide we ought to ride and peruse a fresh approach, Brothers and Sisters.”[unquote]
In the podcast, I am quoted as included the “grassroots of Golden Dawn” within what I call the Second Wave of Nationalism.
Shaun
- Edit
This Nick Grifford guy has something that we should all be thankful for: a fresh, realistic perspective. His anaylsis of our people’s situation is groundbreaking. Of course, why should we react? Why not build? Remove ourselves from the System, develop a nationalost reality and watch our people flock to what we’ve created.
Despite what the Zio-media says about evil Whitey, NO RACE can compete with us when it comes to invention, creativity and vision. Can you imagine the parrellels between White enclaves and the multiracial sewers of our inner cities — they, the anti-White hordes, will try to wreck it, but I don’t think they’d get a second chance. Something tells me thier decaying System is all they have.
Michael Woodbridge
- Edit
Frederick Dixon makes a very good point about our need to avoid artificial distinctions between “Reactionaries and “Revolutionaries”. A tendency all too prevalent in Racial-Patriotic circles is our attempt to avoid the opprobrium of the enemy by heaping scorn on other factions who in essence believe in the same things as ourselves.
Thus we have followers who remain loyal to the legacy of Sir Oswald Mosley describing those who oppose the Brussels dictatorship as “Far Right”. Yet who could doubt that those on the so called “Far Right” wouldn’t find Mosley’s vision of a united Europe of
White patriots infinitely preferable to the multi-racial hell-hole we have today? Mosley himself didn’t help matters when he described Enoch Powell as an “hysteric”.
Similarly, there was a distinct tendency in the 1980’s and beyond for those drawn to the ideology of National Socialism to dismiss Adolph Hitler in favour of his National Socialist rivals, the Strasser brothers, Otto and Gregor, thus avoiding the stigma associated with many of the lies told about that period.
Certainly, we need to be extreme revolutionaries if we are to destroy the forces that are attempting to destroy us, but with three provisos…
Firstly, we must work from our essential racial traditions, we can’t be revolutionaries in a cultural vacuum. Secondly, we must remember that it has taken some of us years to wake up to the full reality of our situation, so don’t let’s make cheap ideological points at the expense of the slow learners, those who haven’t quite caught up with us such as of the more innocent followers of Ukiip. Where appropriate treat them gently. And, thirdly, we must have the courage of our convictions so that we are forced to act honourably at all times. Otherwise we become little more than a paranoid criminal gang frightened of its own shadow. Hitler, lived in times rather more menacing than our own but he insisted on complete openness amongst his followers, nor was his moustache a means of disguise.
francis
- Edit
Yes I agree we should not play the victim card but we can certainly use the Equality Act 2010 to force change.
Section 10(2) of the Act enables people of certain beliefs protection from discrimination because of their beliefs. The guide to the Act says that a belief can only be protected characteristic if that belief does not undermine the fundamental rights of others.
We have seen time and time again multiculturalists forcing their beliefs only everyone else, however their beliefs undermine our fundamental rights to oppose immigration and so on.
Similarly Islamic beliefs consider that their religion has supremacy over non muslims thereby undermining non muslims fundamental rights. So therefore Islam is not a belief that can be protected under the Act, and neither can a belief in multiculturalism. What a conundrum for them.
PharmaPhil
- Edit
It would be interesting to see how that plays out in a court case, however at present I don’t think your view would be accepted, they would find a way of saying that as whites don’t have minority rights, they won’t take it seriously.