More than a week after we were supposed to have left the European Union, and more than a week after solicitor Robin Tilbrook, head of the English Democrats Party maintains that legally we did leave the EU, Theresa May is still just about managing to slither over or under, or around all of the obstacles placed in her way, and to stumble on in the insistent and blinkered belief that her Brexit deal is ‘The One’. Sadly however, as time goes on, she seems more and more to be the only person who believes that.
Half of the Conservative Parliamentary Party believes her agreement will not give the EU enough power over us if it forms the basis of an eventual Brexit, while the other half believes it is ‘BINO’ — Brexit it name only – an arrangement that will leave the UK permanently locked into satellite status as a vassal state of the EU.
In desperation May has over the last few days attempted to negotiate with Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn, a version of her deal that might win the support of Her Majesty’s opposition, however, the Labour party is just as divided as the Tory Party where Brexit is concerned, albeit for different reasons, and the cross-party talks appear to be grinding to a halt.
Theresa May now has until the EU summit on Friday, to cobble together a deal with Jeremy Corbyn or else she will go to Brussels, cap in hand once more, to plead for a further extension to Article 50. Such a development will be fraught with danger however, both for Theresa and for the EU.
Theresa May wants a short extension, while the EU want a longer extension that will keep us trapped within the EU for a further year and which will involve the UK in participating in the European Parliamentary elections in May.
The EU are reluctant to grant a short extension to Article 50, on the grounds that with nothing new to offer there is no point allowing Theresa May any further time to continue hawking her tired old, three times rejected deal to a parliament and a British public who just don’t want it. Without an extension, the UK will leave the EU on May 20th on World Trade Organisation terms and it is likely that Mrs May will feel she has no choice but to step down from the Tory leadership.
If the EU force Theresa May to accept a year-long extension, the European elections will almost certainly see pro-Brexit parties like UKIP, the English Democrats, For Britain and Nigel Farage’s new Brexit Party win lots of seats in the European Parliament, as long as they don’t stand against each other and split the anti-EU vote. The prospect for the EU of having perhaps thirty or forty anti-EU MEPs in the European Parliament is not something they would relish and this may bear heavily on their eventual decision as to whether or not they should grant any further extensions to Article 50. Already pro-Brexit MEPs, such a Nigel Farage and Patrick O’Flynn have been forewarning EU leaders that they will do all in their power to disrupt the proceedings of the European Parliament if the EU chooses to keep us trapped within the by granting May a further extension.
There is the very real possibility therefore, that while EU leaders would prefer to keep the UK trapped in BINO, and might still want to keep us trapped within the EU for years to come, they will decide they are better off without us and say no to Theresa May’s requests on Friday.
Should this happen it is likely that Labour would put forward a motion of no confidence in the Prime Minister in the hope of provoking a general election.
As things stand however, with the Tory Party in disarray, Labour would decimate the Tory Party at the polls. Tory MPs are therefore likely to demand that Theresa May steps down so that they can elect a new leader and give that person several months at least to re-unite their party and make some headway in negotiating trade deals before facing a public vote.
Should there be an early general election, and Labour win, Jeremy Corbyn would have the ultimate ‘Get Out of Jail Free Card’, as no matter what a ‘dogs breakfast’ he may make of running the country, he will be able to blame it on Theresa May’s bungled Brexit for years to come.
For the Conservatives however, they will have no such convenient scapegoat. Whoever wins the Tory leadership will face the white-heat of public opinion and should they stumble or falter in that role, compounding the incompetence displayed by Theresa May, they can expect no mercy. While some leading figures within the Tory party may battle for the top job once May resigns, wiser heads will recognise it as a ‘poisoned chalice’ and prefer to step back and let someone else take the fall, in the hope of eventually securing the leadership some years hence, once the memory of the debacle we have all witnessed has dimmed considerably.
As for British nationalism, whichever way the Brexit saga plays out, we have been afforded a golden opportunity with which to capitalise on the demonstrable incompetence of the establishment parties and win new recruits. Let us work together, lets us redouble our efforts and fill our boots!
By Max Musson © 2019
# # # #
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:
[contact-form-7 404 "Not Found"]# # # #
John Stephens
- Edit
“As things stand however, with the Tory Party in disarray, Labour would decimate the Tory Party at the polls”. This is not a given, Max. As with the B.N.P. just a few years ago, a shock surge, or even an outright victory, could see U.K.I.P dismantle the status-quo.
That would of course, be a good thing regarding breathing space for Racial Nationalists, but would also draw a line as to how far “right”, the general public would go. Looking at the comments of youtube blogger sites, many other more professionally constructed sites, and political articles, there is a groundswell that tells a different story.
There are even genuine signs, that the so-called “British government”, are preparing to deploy non-British troops, from U.N. and N.A.T.O. countries, in case of a coup attempt, or mass civil strife. This nearly happened in the 1970’s, when high ranking S.A.S. men, were concerned with the antics of the then, tax-grabbing Labour government.
May, and Corbyn, are traitors. They will have been advised on the reliability or not, of British troops and Special Forces, firing on their own people. Recently, we saw Soldiers employing Corbyn, as a “target”. Now then, let that sink in.
Max Musson
- Edit
If a general election was called today, I believe that Labour would be returned with a sizeable majority. This is based primarily on the fact that the Tories have no scapegoat for their involvement in the current Brexit fiasco, whereas Labour do. Labour can with some credibility blame the Tories and the buck stops on Theresa May’s desk.
As for nationalists, it would still be futile to hope for electoral victories in a general election, with the first past the post system still in place. In any European elections that might be held, I believe, as I have already said that UKIP, For Britain, the English Democrats and Nigel Farage’s Brexit Party etc could possibly do well and get as many as 30 anti-EU MEPs elected.
The big dividend however should come from nationalist activist recruitment rather than the winning of elections. It is in this respect that the current situation should allow us to fill our boots.
Not-withstanding light hearted pot-shots at photos of Jeremy Corbyn, soldiers will do what they are told by whoever is paying their salaries unless of course someone high up gives them what Harold Covington used to call, a ‘permission slip’. Sadly the upper echelons of our armed forces, as exemplified by William and Harry, are full of politically emasculated ‘Tim, nice but dims’, and waiting for them to issue a permission slip will be like waiting for Godot.
Stefan
- Edit
Quite frankly if the Right can’t make headway in the forthcoming elections, then they never will.
First up we have the Council elections, which often allow voters to vent their spleen on the incumbents.
Despite the fact Councils aren’t the Government.
There is pretty much no doubt that we will be having to take part in the Euro Polls & the Right will put forward the awkward squad to stand as MEP’s, so another perfect chance for the establishment to get a kicking.
Maybe the EU will want to kick us out.
Then the General Election, where most of the mainstream parties will take a beating, as punishment for their ineptitude.
Not only over Brexit but the relentless crime wave.
I think it is correct to say that many voters are now “Leavers” or “Remainers” rather than being Conservatives or Labour or Liberal.
So they will vote for who they think will deliver their choice & that may well be for so called extremists.
My forecast is that maybe Labour will have more MP’s than the Conservatives but be a minority government having to do deals with a rag bag of independents & extremists.
It could be like Italian politics, rather unstable & volatile.
UKIP say they will push for PR, which I am keen on.
They have a chance of a few MP’s but not “Tommy”.
The BNP have well & truly missed the boat.
Maybe Nigel Farage might well become a MP but as a party of one.
The Greens have a chance too, I guess the SNP will continue pretty much uninterrupted for the moment.
If Corbyn is PM, will that be allowed by certain interest groups or will he be removed?
I can’t see him having much in the way of power for any length of time.
Stefan
- Edit
Another thing is this nonsense that another referendum will answer anything.
There’s a very good chance it won’t.
Even if it went in favour of “Remain”, I can’t see it being a huge majority, there is still a large anti establishment block of voters.
I am a little tired of “Remainers” complaining about those who couldn’t vote in the referendum due to being too young.
Well I was too young back in 1973, when Thatcher was enthusiastic about us being in the EU/Common Market & I have had to wear the result for many years until having another chance due to Cameron’s fatal miscalculation.
Now I want to see the alternative.
Another bugbear of mine is this talk of “Forever”, no such thing in human terms, only “a long time”.
The EU is not going to last forever, I’d be surprised if it outlives me.
Some things look their strongest at the moment of their imminent collapse.
JH
- Edit
The latest twist in the Brexit saga is that there has to be ‘compromise’ and ‘negotiation’, according to Theresa May, otherwise there will be ‘No Brexit’ at all. I beg to disagree. Brexit is non-negotiable and there can be no compromise. One is either in OR out of the EU just as one is either alive OR dead. One cannot be both in AND out of the EU any more than one can be alive AND dead at the same time. (Though with some folks I do wonder!).
Alec Suchi
- Edit
The Referendum of 2016 was to decide whether we remained or left the European Union. It was said that the result of the Referendum would be binding while “Remainers” have since rationalised that it was merely advisory which Parliament could disregard.
It was clear at the time that leaving would involve a clear break from the institutions of the EU, that is leaving the Single Market, Custom’s Union, not being bound by the European Court of Justice and not paying further funds.Admittedly various proponents of “Leave” had argued that trade deals would be negotiated as it would be in the individual member state’s interests to continue trading with the UK.
Since the exercise in democracy whereby 17.4 million voted to leave, vested interests and their useful idiots have argued that people had been misinformed, that the electorate did not understand both the implications and consequences of leaving. Furthermore we have been further advised by the same hostile forces that there has been a change of attitude and more would vote to remain and that young people who were ineligible to vote in 2016 should be allowed to exercise their democratic rights in a “People’s Vote”.
It is possible that ” Remainers” could win should their be a second referendum, but if it was by a narrow majority the situation would hardly be permanently resolved. “Leavers” would not recognise its validity as “Remainers” had not recognised the original referendum’s validity.Furthermore “Remainers” have argued that the only two questions on the ballot paper sould be whether to remain or accept the “May’s deal, hardly enticing prospects for devoted Brexiteers.
Gerrard Batten, leader of UKIP, had accused the political class of being traitors, quislings and collaborators with much justification.
frederick dixon
- Edit
Alec, should there be a second referendum so many Leavers will refuse to vote (what, after all, is the point when Parliament won’t implement a Leave victory?) that Remain will almost certainly win – BUT, quite possibly, with fewer votes than Leave obtained in 2016, which would call into question the validity of the second referendum result! Oh dear, what would happen then is anyone’s guess.
As no-one can foresee what might or might not happen then, Max might well be right that it would be an opportunity for nationalists “to fill their boots”. But exactly how that opportunity could be realised in the absence of a significant, unified, nationalist party I’m not sure; would that we still had the BNP of 10 or 12 years ago, but we don’t.
As for the populist soft right in this country, Ukip and the Brexit party are in no position to contest anything at the moment – Ukip apparently are proposing to fight only a dozen seats at the forthcoming local elections and the Brexit party is presumably keeping its powder dry for the Euros, when the two parties will cancel each other out.
BUT the collapse of trust in democracy, the lurch of Labour to the far Left, the loss of faith in the centre ground (although the Lib Dems will do well in the short term) and the presence of a gaping void in our political landscape – on the populist right – all point to the likelihood of something emerging to fill that void. What will that something be? Who knows? – but if a sufficiently charismatic personality appeared with the ability to combine fragments of Ukip, the Brexit party, various nationalist outlets, and even parts of the collapsing and disintegrating Tory party, then we could be in for an interesting time.
Alec Suchi
- Edit
As a matter of interest Frederick, UKIP are contesting over 1400 seats at the forthcoming local elections which is nearly three times as many as last year. No doubt Farage’s “Brexit” party, which lacks the organisation to contest local elections, intends to participate in any future European elections and in the process will split the anti EU vote.
Should a further referendum be called it is possible that many who originally voted to leave may decline to vote again on the grounds suggested by Frederick or they become more determined as a result of a perceived and actual betrayal . It is further possible that others who may have voted to remain may feel offended that the democratic will had been obstructed and instead vote to leave as a protest. I have spoken to several people of that particular disposition.
It remains to be seen what is to transpire and we all wait with bated breath!
LJP
- Edit
The coming EU elections will be interesting irrespective of whether UK takes part or not. ‘Populism’ is undoubtably on the rise throughout Europe and these elections will be an indication of how far it has progressed. There was a recent speech by Thiery Baudet of the emerging FVD party in Holland (now the biggest party in the Dutch Senate) that could have been made by Nigel Farage in his prime castigating both the Dutch government and the EU. How will the Orban-Salvini nexus play out? If the populist vote increases seismically how will it effect the mindset Old Soviets in Brussels? Throw in a wedge of recalcitrant British ‘Leavers’ and a ‘fun time’ will be had in Strasbourg. At this moment, I would imagine there are a lot apparatchiks looking at the polls nervously.
JH
- Edit
It should not be automatically assumed that Brexit parties will do well in the forthcoming EU elections (should they take place). UKIP might have more than trebled its vote in the recent Newport West by-election but it still polled less than 10% of the total votes cast. The fact that so many voters returned a pro-Remain Labour MP in a Leave constituency is hardly grounds for encouragement. This, and the fact that the sheeple still voted Labour in Rotherham after exposure of the grooming scandal and when there 1,400 solid reasons for NEVER voting Labour again.
We have too many turkeys who are in favour of Christmas, and too many lemmings who look forward to their own (and our) destruction. Many of them will be voting for Remain parties in forthcoming elections.
In any case Farage’s Brexit Party and UKIP will split the anti-EU vote. Was the BP set up to undermine UKIP (in the same way as UKIP was set up to undermine the BNP)? Time will tell.
The most single damning thing about the Brexit saga is that it exposes the shambles that is parliamentary democracy. PD is the worst form of government as it attracts the wrong kind of people – talkers and not doers, or men of action. Count out the hours, days, weeks, months, even years, wasted in the endless time-consuming debates that Brexit alone has generated. MPs bobbing up and down, making speeches, passing motions, raising amendments, etc. You couldn’t run any business along these lines with one half of a board endlessly slagging off what the other half was up to. The company would soon end up in Queer Street (go bust). That’s the reason why nothing ever works or gets done in this country.
Parliamentary democracy is also a contradiction in terms as it takes power from the people and vests it in the hands of a professional political class, which is why we are in this mess in the first place.
Max Musson
- Edit
Parliamentary democracy would work if our Monarchy upheld their side of the bargain and were prepared to intervene to prevent the abuses, distortions and flaws that you describe. Our monarch is the head of the armed forces and our armed forces swear allegiance to the monarch thereby enabling the monarch to intervene by force of arms if necessary, to prevent treason – and to prevent malfeasance in public office by our elected politicians.
The implied pact between a monarch and their people, is that the people lavish untold wealth and privilege upon their monarch, such that the monarch is incorruptible, is beyond bribery and can be trusted to always act in the best interests of the people – in the best interests of the nation. In return for that great wealth and privilege, the monarch and the royal family pledge to give their lives if necessary in the service of their people.
This has been forgotten. The monarch has allowed the mass media to exercise too much power in moulding public opinion and in thereby perverting the outcome of elections. We now have a political class that feel they can ignore the wishes of our people because our monarchy has been emasculated and our monarch has accepted the role of merely ‘rubber-stamping’ legislation, instead of providing the leadership traditionally expected of the monarch.
Our current Royal family enjoys the privilege and wealth afforded them, but they fail to ‘earn’ their privileged positions. They have forgotten how to act like a real monarchy. The Kings and Queens of old would turn in their graves at the sight of what our monarchy has become.
Wolf of the Sun
- Edit
Exactly Max: the definition of our constitutional arrangements is “Parliamentary sovereignty under a constitutional monarchy”. Let me repeat that: under. Unfortunately, our monarchy has become no better than a tawdry soap opera, as unable as it is unwilling to contribute positively, through leadership, to our national fabric or existence.
Max Musson
- Edit
We agree.
John Beattie
- Edit
The Monarchy can only flow with the wishes (voting) of the will of the people. What people ? The wishes of invaders ? I know for a fact that the current Monarchy took a brave stand, behind the scenes, here in Canada in 1978, and onwards for a few years. But that was back then.
LJP
- Edit
In my lifetime, the Monarchy has been nothing more than a soap opera for octogenarians. John, could you elaborate on its ‘brave stand behind the scene in Canada in 1978.’ I would like to hear something positive about this crumbling institution. As I don’t watch soap operas, and am not an octogenarian, I can’t think of any added value it gives to the British State or any Commonwealth country.
John Beattie
- Edit
” Adminstrator ” as in Canada’s Constitution is unique. Even Wiki acknowledges. My web site: britishpeoplesleague.com has link on right side of page to my Youtube posts,wherein I have recounted much. Also scrolling down on the BPL Site you find 3 witness statements that I know are true and factual. I am still working on draft for book: ” Canada’s Secret Civil War 1978 Until ? ” But as for Monarchy in 2019, I am most reluctantly in agreement with Max and LJP above.
JH
- Edit
The problem, as I see it, is that we have no written constitution. There are no checks and balances on either the executive or legislature. This means that MPs can pass legislation on any subject under the sun; a majority vote of ONE will suffice – as was the case the other week when ‘honourable members’ ruled out a no deal Brexit.
MPs do not need a mandate from the electorate to initiate legislation. And even if they have one, they can ignore it with impunity (as both parties did with their Brexit election pledges). MPs can change parties, commit criminal offences, but they are still allowed to sit in Parliament and vote.
Tell me, what other trade or profession would tolerate such dishonesty? In any other walk of life this would result in the sack and possibly criminal prosecutions for FRAUD as well. Those who have broken pledges, changed parties, or committed criminal offences have neither legitimacy nor mandate, and should have no right to sit in Parliament at all. If these ‘honourable members’ had any honour they would immediately stand down and seek re-election (or better still, retire).
But as things currently stand, the only way of bringing MPs to book is through election system once every five years. There must be a better way of running things than this . . .
What could the Crown do anyway? In the UK, the Crown is supposed to be non-political. Its powers to dismiss ministers & dissolve parliaments are only nominal and have long since lapsed. The last time Royal Assent was withheld was over three centuries ago (in 1707). As a useful institution, a tailor’s dummy might just as well sit on the Throne.
Apologists for the monarchy will say they have been ‘badly advised’, but the Royals have been more than willing accomplices to all the post war calamities that have afflicted Britain. Whether that is supporting our accession to the EU, endorsing ‘multiculturalism’, or rubber-stamping Acts of Parliament that have killed off freedom of speech & democracy, and turned Britain into a servile Stasi state.
Max Musson
- Edit
‘What could the Crown do anyway?’, The Queen could start by acting like a Queen, or if she is too old and frail to act in such a way, Prince Charles or Prince William should act on her behalf. The monarchy has become an irrelevance over many years because successive monarchs have meekly submitted to the direction of the government and because successive politicians and establishment toadies have found that our monarch is too timid to oppose them. Fear of causing a constitutional crisis is allowing our nation to be progressively destroyed, and what is the point of adhering to constitutional niceties in such a situation?
I could describe in great detail what steps our Monarch could take, however this is not the time or place for such flights of fancy on my part. Simply use your imagination and think of past Monarchs: such as Alfred the Great, Edward Longshanks, Henry V, Henry VIII, Richard II, Elizabeth I etc., and imagine how they would have dealt with the situation now facing our Queen? And who would oppose a forthright monarch, having seen the vast crowds that assemble in the Mall on special royal occasions and bearing in mind the widespread disaffection with our current political system?
John Stephens
- Edit
Max.
Prince Charles is essentially Left-Wing, and pro-Muslim. The Queen was stripped of power way back when. In fact, it was I think, in D’Israeli’s day that Monarchical power was defused.
Max Musson
- Edit
I appreciate that John, however becoming a King or beginning to act as a King is not a matter of sitting on one’s hands and waiting to be invited to act, it is a matter of stepping forward and claiming the right to rule over others, and this is something that requires both gumption and more than just a little courage — attributes that are woefully lacking in our current Royal family.
JH
- Edit
When I was a lad I was taught that English Kings & Queens fell into four categories – strong or weak; good or bad. The examples you cite are all of the strong & good variety (though I have doubts about Richard II). We were also stuck with the weak & bad kings (Edward II, Henry VI, John) who were only removed through insurrection, whilst the strong & bad types (William I) declared war on their own people and did immense damage. Salvation will not be found in the monarchy; it has served its purpose. None of the current lot have been brought up to govern, and none of them have the intelligence or strength of character to precipitate the kind of constitutional crisis that could break the Brexit deadlock.
Alec Suchi
- Edit
The House of Windsor are spendthrifts and wasters and with little redeeming qualities. The Institution of the monarchy offends the degenerate Liberal-left as it stands in contrast to egalitarianism. If the Monarchy is to continue, a replacement line to the Windsors needs to be approved, preferably from the Anglo-Saxon line if possible.
The example of historical monarchs is probably not appropriate for today’s circumstances as previously the monarchy was directly involved in decision making with a body of advisers and the early parliaments bear little resemblance to what we recognise today within a party system.The English Civil War and subsequent Restoration decided matters in favour of the “people” over the king.
It could be argued that if the monarchy today” attempted to thwart parliament or the executive it would hasten its abolition as egalitarians would decry that an unelected institution was attempting to subvert “democracy.”
If Members of Parliament were required to represent the views of their constituents rather than reflect the demands of their respective parties or act in a way solely in accordance with their own preferences, then a genuinely democratic system would emerge which would reflect the national mood, such as opposition to mass immigration and support for the restoration of capital punishment as well as the UK leaving the EU.
Tony L
- Edit
Much of Brexit is unknowable. The only thing that can be known is that this golden opportunity for Nationalism will be let slip because there isn’t a Nationalist party worthy of the name.
The Brexit party will eat into UKIP’s vote because the elections are fought on a regional list system. I shall vote for Farage’s Brexit party. Furthermore, I believe he is THE anti-EU talisman and consequently, I think they’ll hoover up most of the UKIP vote, much of the Tory vote and even some of the Labour vote.
Max Musson
- Edit
I think you are right Tony.
JH
- Edit
Given a choice between UKIP and the BP, I would go for the former. I would only vote BP in the absence of UKIP. If both parties are unrepresented I would sooner despoil the ballot paper. No point in voting for any of the other Nationalist ‘parties’ – if that is the right word for them– as none now have a shred of credibility.
Batten has turned round a moribund UKIP, which sails very close to the wind at times. We have Farage to thank for getting the referendum but he has always distanced himself from Real Nationalists. The press reports that BP ‘won’t even be discussing Islam’, and that the party ‘expect to have Muslim candidates’. BP publicity makes extensive use of non-Whites, presumably to ‘prove’ that it is not a ‘racist’ party.
Never forget that Farage is first & foremost a showman; he basks in publicity and loves to be the centre of attention – just look at the body language. It’s egotism verging on narcissism.
Alec Suchi
- Edit
Gerard Batten, leader of UKIP speaks well and with a quiet authority and his erudition is far more in evidence than his illustrious if not traitorous predecessor.Of course he emphasises that neither he nor “Tommy Robinson” are “Far-right”, but this is hardly surprising. Even taking the position he has regarding aspects of Islam and his criticism of a leftist agenda which he has described as Cultural Marxism has drawn much feigned moral indignation.
Mr Batten remains calm during what often constitutes an interrogation and holds his position, refusing to retreat or apologise, for example when he has criticised what he describes as the “ideology” of Islam or when he described our political class as being quislings, traitors and collaborators.
In view of how woefully the former leader of the BNP, Nick Griffin, performed during Question Time in 2009, Nationalists would benefit by taking a leaf from Mr Batten’s not unimpressive metaphorical book in how to speak publicly. As JH had stated, Mr Farage is very much ostentatious and conceited, and he will attract many voters who are easily impressed. Given a choice I would unequivocally support UKIP under the auspices of Mr Batten rather than the opportunistic Brexit Partry.
Max Musson
- Edit
I too prefer UKIP under Gerard Batten as a prospective political party to support in the long-term, however it would appear that because of his showmanship, Nigel Farage’s Brexit Party is likely to garner more votes in the forthcoming European elections. If there is to be any hope of salvaging a clean-break Brexit from the current political mess, I think we need the strongest possible showing for a pro-Brexit party in those European elections. Therefore I am inclined to advocate voting for the Brexit Party this once.
In the long-term however, I do not believe that Britain will be better governed by the Brexit Party, and in any forthcoming general election I would be inclined to support UKIP, my underlying lack of faith in the current electoral process not-withstanding.
If Gerard Batten wishes to see UKIP flourish however, he needs to revisit and reverse the current ban on ex-BNP members joining UKIP. Recent denigration of UKIP by the mass media has proven once again that no patriotic political party is ever going to be able to avoid being ‘tainted’ by association with ‘far-right’ political parties of the past and present. UKIP will continue to be treated as if they are the BNP resurrected, whatever they do, and so they need to grow a backbone and a thick skin where alleged ‘far-right’ associations are concerned, and need to brazenly admit nationalists, declaring that no-one on the right is ‘beyond the pale’.
Alec Suchi
- Edit
Even under the auspices of Nigel Farage, UKIP was criticised as being “Racist” and by extension “Far-right” as controlled immigration based on the “Australian Points system” was advocated. However Mr Farage often emphasised that during his leadership no former members of proscribed parties like the NF and BNP were admitted.It could be argued that UKIP attracted a certain support which it may not have otherwise gained if it was associated or connected to racial nationalist parties.
However Mr Batten, although distancing himself from the nationalist cause speaks as a patriot would be expected to. His position seems very close to that of a civic nationalist, although he wouldn’t formally confirm that view.He publically stated that in itself immigration is not harmful but it depends on numbers,the motives of the immigrants, whether it is controlled and more importantly “WHO IS COMING”! The later part is so important. Notwithstanding the need to maintain a sustainable population, White Americans, Australians or White South Africans would not be an issue as they are our racial cousins, while other groups would cause demographic hazards.
It remains to be seen how UKIP responds to future challenges . I would surmise it will, in the immediate future at least, avoid admitting nationalists to any noticeable degree, especially if well known. Other s could join discreetly: i have been a member for five years and have stood twice in the local elections.
Tony L
- Edit
I have known others to have joined UKIP and not been turfed out. The key points are to not have a ‘name’, not own up and preferably have moved.
.
Then again it doesn’t matter what they do because the English will not vote in their own self interest if the press tells them it’s not respectable. Pathetic, but there you are.
.
Accordingly nothing will change unless the press are treated as the enemy they are.