By Michael Woodbridge:
The ramshackle remnants of British Nationalism afford us a unique, ideological, opportunity which can provide a revolutionary framework for the future. Bold courageous thinking is in order. In this article we’ll take a brief introductory look at the historical context of British Nationalism and examine a way forward as suggested by the American writer and religious founder Ben Klassen.
Up until 2010, when the British National Party was still largely thriving, there was a possibility, just a possibility, that by “not rocking the boat” and adhering to its intellectually dishonest but populist agenda, our movement might just break through to establish at least a toehold in “the corridors of power”. Not so any longer! In fact with hindsight the demise of the BNP might be seen as a blessing in disguise. Without the requisite ideological weaponry any form of British Nationalism is bound to fail sooner rather than later. This is not a personal criticism of the many fine men and women who made untold sacrifices out of an altruistic sense of duty. However, if anyone should doubt the futility of their course they would be advised to follow the fortunes of the United Kingdom Independence Party over the next few years. By adopting the same superficially, patriotic agenda, but in an even more watered down form than the BNP, Ukip will follow the BNP into the same political cul de sac. As such and without the foundation of an honest Racist ideology, Ukip will only ever be a useful irritant against the political establishment but never in itself a means to effect necessary change.
Had a miracle occurred and had the BNP won a parliamentary seat at Dagenham during the 2010 General Election or even advanced sufficiently to be in a winning position for the next round this year, the Party would have still remained ideologically half-baked. Terms such as “Democracy” and “anti-White Racism” abounded in BNP literature. It should have dawned on the leadership that by adopting the nomenclature of the enemy they were fighting the enemy on its own home turf. The term “Democracy” was used by the BNP to imply all that’s good, just and desirable in modern society. Unfortunately, the word has become increasingly identified with the American/Zionist agenda whereby innocent citizens are terror bombed from a great height in order to effect “regime change” and the “democratic” blessings which are supposedly going to flow from it but never do. The other major mistake the BNP leadership made was to adopt a negative connotation to the word “Racist”. So we had glossy pamphlets announcing that “Racism cuts both ways”. Yet in their eagerness to turn the proverbial tables on their “politically correct” opponents the BNP leadership ended up wearing politically correct clothes themselves, leaving no space for a principled Racist ideology. Vainly might we try to disentangle the term “Racialism”, “Racial Loyalism” or “Racial Nationalism” from the term “Racism”. But the BNP leadership had already scored a home goal. In any case we were never going to persuade a hostile media that while those nasty “Racists” down the road might be bigoted morons who probably write poison pen letters and allow their pit bull terriers to foul the pavement, we nice, cuddly “Racialists” want nothing more than to champion the sweet reason of identity and the true diversity of “humankind”.
Rather than confront our enemies full on by adopting the term “Racist” as our own, the BNP leadership avoided using the “R” word altogether and so retreated ideologically by discovering “Ethno-Nationalism”. The problem with “Ethno-Nationalism” though is that it avoids a scientific definition of Race. Ethnicity is as much a cultural concept as a racial concept and although we know Race and Culture are dependent upon one another the distinction between them becomes blurred. When asked about the concept of Ethno-Nationalism at a Red White and Blue rally, the late and hugely lamented Jonathan Bowden replied that he was a Racialist … the idea was a fudge, and he wasn’t going to lie to the British people. He might have also quoted the Victorian statesman who wrote, “All is Race, there is no other truth.” Another quote from the same source, which the BNP in its eagerness to play the victim card might have taken on board was, “Never complain, and never explain.”
In the propaganda war, of which we’re a part, we should never allow our opponents to frame the argument. On the contrary, we should wear their attempted demonisation as a badge of honour. We should become our enemy’s worst nightmare. Of course if we simply reacted in a ridiculous way to every false accusation and started behaving like “Hollywood Nazis”, we would also be allowing our opponents to frame the argument. Those who might wish to act in such a way are as much our enemy as, shall we say, Russell Brand might like to dream he was.
Aficionados of the cinema might notice how Soviet propaganda films from the Second World War never referred to the German enemy as “Nazi” or “National Socialist”, but always as “Fascist”. This is for the very good reason that the Soviets considered themselves to be the guardians of true Socialism and couldn’t bring to themselves to acknowledge that the Germans might have felt the same way about themselves.
During the ‘Cold War’ we in the ‘West’ were constantly told that Communism and National Socialism were evil twins. Since 1989 and the triumph of Global Capitalism the position has shifted somewhat. Former Trotskyites in America, largely Jews, have become Neo-conservatives, super patriots and warmongers. The Trotskyite/Marxist agenda of “Political Correctness” with its unrelenting pursuit of an unobtainable, universal equality has become the leading dogma of our age. This suits the establishment very well because neo-Marxist deconstructivism breaks down tradition and resistance leaving the way open for the insatiable greed of the Capitalist system. Both Marxist deconstructivism with its brainchild “Political Correctness together with unbridled Global Capitalism perform a pincer movement in our planned destruction. Between them they have become an out of control juggernaut. It’s been referred to elsewhere as the “Greed Machine”. The Capitalist half of the juggernaut views with contempt those who object to its progress by describing them as “Nimbeys” (Not In My Back Yarders). In truth, those lucky enough to have a backyard know that it’s their one legitimate breathing space where they can retain some control over their lives.
In opposing our racial and cultural extinction many of us have been drawn to National Socialism. Yet, at the heart of National Socialism is a paradox because, as exemplified during the Second World War, there could be a conflict between an intense loyalty and love for one’s own country and one’s paramount duty to ones race. To take just one sample, the case of of John Amery, son of Leo Amery, Churchill’s wartime Secretary of State for India, who was hanged for treason after the War for recruiting British prisoners to fight against the Bolshevik menace on the Eastern Front. Who amongst us could now say that John Amery who not only risked his life but his reputation and honour, was any the less patriotic than the countless thousands slaughtered on the battlefields in a dysgenic war fought on behalf of our countries enemies? When he faced Albert Pierrepoint, the hangman, he quipped, “Mr. Pierrepoint, I’ve always wanted to meet you. Though not of course under these circumstances.” Pierrepoint acknowledged that John Amery was the bravest man he’d ever hanged.
It was the realisation of the limitations of Nationalism that led many progressive minded patriots after the War to look for an ideology that, without betraying their cultural heritage, would take us beyond the small Nation State. Prominent amongst these were Sir Oswald Mosley and Francis Parker Yockey, both of whom favoured a European Union. However, whilst Mosley and Yockey thought of Europe primarily in cultural and geographic terms it took Ben Klassen and his American based Church of the Creator to put Race firmly at the forefront of the political agenda with his ideology of Racial Socialism.
In some ways it would take an American such as Ben Klassen to clearly understand the pre-eminence of Race in determining culture. Born of German speaking parents in Russia he was brought up and educated in Canada. During his career he had been a farmer, a schoolmaster, an inventor of the electronic tin opener and a Florida State Legislator. It was in his book, ‘Nature’s Eternal Religion’ that Klassen developed his Racial Socialist theme.
Ben Klassen found that each of America’s multiplicity of cultures was defined by its Race. As John Tyndall once said, “America is a melting pot which refuses to melt”. So we’re left with Native Americans, Afro-Americans, Latin Americans, Jewish Americans and European Americans. Thus Race rather than National background becomes important. It’s also important to note that just as men from various countries in the Waffen SS during the Second World War fought together in comradeship as one army, so White Racial Loyalist Americans will have more in common with others from various national backgrounds than they have with degenerates of their own nation.
Rejecting all political dogma, Ben Klassen defines Racial Socialism simply as, “Organised Society”. This is the polar opposite of Mrs Thatcher’s Capitalist view when she said, “There’s no such thing as Society”.
As Klassen said, “What we are really concerned about is: what is the most practical and viable type of organised society for the White man to live in? What is best for the White Race?” He says that Racial socialism is teamwork elevated to its highest perfection for the welfare of the whole Race and led by its ablest leaders. Rejecting “individual enterprise” as fraud, Klassen cites the game of ‘Monopoly’ in which the eventual winner gains the upper hand long before the game is over. As he says the White Man’s natural mode of living is as a member of the tribe, as a member of a larger group. Were he to live outside it and live as an individual, again, his society would break down and he would perish.
Walter Greenway
- Edit
You know where I would like the artillery positioned along the Nen valley Michael. It was a pleasure talking to you on the way home last summer. I hope you forgave me for hedge hogging.
For anyone that doesn’t understand Northamptonshire colloquialism without the superfluous stuff – go and learn.
SigBrit
- Edit
AKA ‘Ethno community’ socialism, ‘Geneto’ socialism, ‘Northern’ socialism, ‘Euro’ socialism, ‘Atlantic’ socialism, ‘Hyperborean’ socialism, ‘Aryan’ socialism, ‘Germano’ socialism, ‘Solar; (sunwheel) socialism, ‘Asa’ (Asatru) socialism, ‘Nordo’ socialism. Or something like that…
frederickdixon
- Edit
Mike, thank you for an excellent and thought provoking article. One query: in adopting the word “racist” as our own are we not opting to fight on ground chosen by our enemies?
Acknowledging that we are “racists” does not avoid the need to distinguish our kind of racist from the kind who do allow “their pit bulls to foul the pavement”. Mainstream politicians and media go to great lengths to distinguish “the vast majority of peace loving Moslems” from the nasty kind, they are unlikely to do the same for the “vast majority of peace loving racists” – meaning that whatever word we choose to call ourselves we are always going to have to explain that we are not THAT kind of racist. I don’t what the solution is.
Reverend Jane
- Edit
It is great to see an article on Racial Socialism in Western Spring. Well done to the author. Now for a little nit-picking.
The author states: we nice, cuddly “Racialists” want nothing more than to champion the sweet reason of identity and the true diversity of “humankind”.
I would just like to make it clear that Ben Klassen took the opposite view in that he would not regard the White man as any custodian of non-Whites and indeed stressed that diversity was a divisive thing within our race as well. For example, nationalism is divisive and we should not be concerned with preserving dying languages and national cultures.
I would also like to point out that the term “ethno nationalist” was well-fitting to the BNP since “racial nationalist” is an oxymoron with race being beyond national identity.
Having cleared up those points I look forward to more articles from this author.
Max Musson
- Edit
Hi Reverend Jane, I think you have misread Mike’s article. He was not attributing the statement you quote to Ben Klassen and neither was he suggesting that racial nationalists should “champion the sweet reason of identity and the true diversity of ‘humankind’.”
.
Mike used that phrase in order to describe the folly of populist nationalism attempting to pander to multiracialist and Marxist sensibilities by trying to differentiate between ‘wicked’ racists and ‘nice, cuddly racialists’.
.
Mike’s argument is that we White nationalists and racial socialists should embrace racism/racialism as one and the same, and as laudable and virtuous modes of thought.
.
As for the semantics of the term ‘racial nationalism’ and whether or not it is an oxymoron, I would say that racial boundaries don’t always coincide with national boundaries and neither do either always coincide with ethnic boundaries, but this does not make such terms oxymorons. If one visualises one’s race as one’s nation, as White nationalists do, then racial nationalism is a perfectly valid term. Indeed, I believe that Ben Klassen on occasions described himself as a ‘White nationalist’ and was therefore himself a ‘racial nationalist’ according to this definition.
mancinblack
- Edit
Speaking of nit-picking….Online, I’ve increasingly found people describing their race as their religion and often Creativity is mentioned. However your flag tends to be ridiculed. A lot. This may seem like a small point but symbols play an important psychological role by connecting to a mass of undifferentiated feelings and impulses that influence our behaviour in a powerful way, and your flag appears to be having a negative impact.
Personally, I want to see Creativity grow because I believe Klassen to have been correct. Without becoming hyper-ethnocentric we can’t survive.
Congrats on becoming a Rev. btw.
Reverend Jane
- Edit
Interesting what you say about our flag being ridiculed. I have never heard of this happening. In what way is the Creativity flag inappropriate according to these critics? Would these critics happen to also detest the religion generally? People who feel it is a threat to their own religion for example? It would be helpful to know what the issue is. I can only guess that it is an objection to being associated with National Socialist Germany. The implication then would be that the critics believe in a dishonest, “soft” approach of some sort – like political parties.
mancinblack
- Edit
Thanks for your reply, Jane. I thought it best that you read what people say in their own words, so I’ve put a comment on a couple of sites, and asked for a response.
The first was left on the “Czech Republic President Milos Zeman : We must all say ‘I am a Jew’ ” thread at the Daily Slave. The other at UK site Morgoth’s Review
https://nwioqeqkdf.blogspot.co.uk/2015/03/just-another-300-little-white-girls.html
Hope this helps.
Augur Mayson
- Edit
Hi Reverend Jane,
These are a couple comments I made to mancinblack, posted on yet a third thread when I noticed he had asked the same question on two different sites, reposted here as per his request.
Very best wishes.
—
Augur Mayson > mancinblack •2 hours ago
That was a very interesting question you just asked two different places exactly the same way asking for feedback about Creativity’s flag and getting feedback about both the flag and the philosophy from two different sites that think they’re each pro-white.
Interestingly you got two sharply different sets of responses, at the one site you got warm and receptive salutes about the philosophy with respectful but candid critique of the flag’s aesthetics, whereas at the other site you got quite negative feedback about both from pretty much everyone, with open mocking of the flag itself and the philosophy.
—
Augur Mayson > mancinblack •an hour ago
Wow I like that Reverend Jane. No need to port over an exclusive patriarchy in the religious class, I guess. My only reason for critique was the same as you, to wish to see them succeed and grow. I didn’t get that same constructive vibe from that other site’s commenters though. I like that she doesn’t think softening our positions will do anything but weaken us. I’d say stick a Swastika right on it if I were speaking of personal preference but that might cause it to be rejected as a religious organization and considered a political organization most places, or worse. I think on further reflection the color scheme accomplishes similar without such a concrete association.
A religion would be a way for serious pro-white whites to push for white nationalism in lots of countries, to benefit from the experiences of other pro-whites and to learn from their mistakes, to support them from afar when possible and shoulder-to-shoulder when practical, economically, legally perhaps depending on resources and membership.
And whites are basically forbidden from being considered a protected class, so that’s why all racism charges are one way typically. Making a white religion gets around that and whites would be granted protected status as a minority group as a token of that religious classification which is paramount to obtain, to be classed as a religious organization for tax purposes, I think, would be what would secure the rights and ease of operation that a religion would be expected to have. It would be a tremendous asset for white people and could advance pro-white interests pan-nationally. The enemy we all face, that we seem to have such trouble coming together against, follows the same strategy and it is one we should mirror, organizationally that is. We need a worldwide reach of likeminded pro-white people.
White people simply have no organization like that right now. Every other race seems to…
The courts would have a difficult time in America denying whites a race based religion when the Jews pretty much have exactly the same thing. It would crush every notion of religious freedom Americans believe their government stands for. It would give us our pro-white church if it happened; it would give us full proof of anti-white hate by the feds otherwise, while they hypocritically let the Jews have the same thing.
—
Reverend Jane
- Edit
In case any readers are unsure of which religion Ben Klassen founded, as it is omitted from the article, the religion is called Creativity. Klassen founded Creativity in 1973 as a non-theistic religion exclusively dedicated to the survival, expansion and advancement of the White Race. I am a Reverend of Creativity.
quicksilver
- Edit
Klassen’s own creation failed him and offered him no solace in the end when he decided to take his own life. Such a religion as atheism( call it what you will,non-theistic) will never be able to install the fighting spirit it takes to conquer your enemies. Medieval,fanatical Christianity is what is needed like that of Charles Martel and the Christian Crusades.
Max Musson
- Edit
You are welcome to your view quicksilver, but you must remember that Jesus, one element of the ‘Holy Trinity’, ‘a God in three persons’, created the very people who put him to death. One could therefore argue that Jesus committed suicide in an indirect fashion and deduce that Christianity “will never be able to instil the fighting spirit it takes to conquer our enemies”, especially as Christianity has massively declined in vigour since the days of Charles Martel.
.
Irrespective of which religion appeals to us on a spiritual level, the important thing is that we believe in the need to secure the survival of our race and a future for White children. If Christianity does it for you, then fine. Each to his own.
quicksilver
- Edit
But thats just it. The religion of atheism dosen’t make an appeal to humanity on a spiritual level. It dosent believe in God, Gods, Angels, Devils, Demons or spooks. Atheism or non-theistic religions dont believe in life after death, a heaven or a hell.
.
Out of respect for the dead i have held back my critique on Ben Klassen. But surely you would agree he had his demons, that his religion failed him, but even more important than that he surely must of broke the hearts of those who loved him most, his family. He not only betrayed his White race that he had claimed as his religion but he betrayed those of his family who had counted on him most, specifically his daughter, by taking his own life. Sorry,but such a man is no hero nor someone who can be said was a leader of the White race. Such a tragedy, it really is heartbreaking because i do believe he was a good man whose demons got the best of him.
.
Your analogy comparing Christ death to that of Ben Klassen taking his own life is not compelling. Christ allowed his life to be taken so all those who believed in him would have eternal life while Ben took his own life in the belief that it would end his life for all eternity. Ben i believe will be judged by God and perhaps God will find Ben worthy on the grounds he did not love this life, but actually hated it, hated it enough to end it. But his betrayal of his family,his daughter and yes, the betrayal of his race by setting a bad example for other Whites who are not so strong,that don’t have a Faith that gives them strength to fight off their demons when they are being overwhelmed by matters in the mind,where i believe the real battles that count the most are being waged spiritually, causes them to do what their true oppressors want them to do,the same oppressors who is busy ensuring that their White race is dispossessed in their own lands and genocided out of existence through self-hate, White guilt, miscegenation, inciting all non-Whites to hate us, rape us,torture us and kill us. They are the oppressors who have created hate speech laws and hate crime laws that are meant to have us silently submit to such without ever raising a hand to defend ourselves and to ensure that the invasion of all non-White peoples from other third world countries continues with the least resistance possible. I am with you brother but i will be damned if i ever give up my shield which is my Christian Faith to a bunch of pagans who can not put their own families interest first, to fight til they are no longer able to suffer their end in this earthly life. A religion that dosen’t offer comfort,that dosen’t offer a way of dealing with tragedy, that doesn’t offer the hope to their Loved ones that there is indeed life after death is a religion i want no part of. To believe in such a religion and influence your own sons and daughters to believe in such is more twisted and pathological than the thoughts that run through the minds of antifa-anti-racists, communists, cultural marxist and those who call themselves gods. If one dosen’t believe in an after-life, a supreme creator of life than one is not mentally fit to bring children into the world,for they offer them no comfort when Father Time comes calling on them…
.
But as you say, to each his own.
Max Musson
- Edit
Hi quicksilver, it seems that you did not pick up on my signal that we don’t wish to start a religious feud here on the pages of this website. We have Christian supporters, we have Creativity supporters, some Pagan supporters and some Cosmotheist supporters, and some supporters who are just plain Atheist, and we welcome them all and are prepared to give each of them the opportunity to express their views in a positive way.
.
Ben Klassen was seventy-five years of age when he committed suicide, and he did this shortly after the death of his wife and some time after he had passed the leadership of his church on to someone else. It cannot be said that he died a spiritually broken man because he wrote and published no less than four books during the last two years of his life. Furthermore, he did believe in life after death, but in a physical sense, not a spiritual sense. He was survived by his daughter and his religion urges its adherents to maximise life after their death by having as many children as possible.
.
Out of respect for our Christian supporters I don’t intend to rebut all of your assertions, except to point out that it seems to be only Christians (in addition to Muslims and Jews, of course) who want to passionately disparage the religion or lack of religion of others. It is only Christians who tell us that they won’t support us because we tolerate the other religions found among our supporters. We have so far not had any advocates of Creativity, Paganism, Cosmotheism or Atheism decrying Christianity in quite such fervent terms as some Christians feel the need to denigrate others. We however welcome all White people who believe in the need to secure the future survival of our people and a future for White children.
TiglathUK
- Edit
Yes Max, we all learned in Sunday School that God/Jesus (just 2 different forms of the same being) created all the races, but this goes against the rest of Bible and Apocryphal teaching.
Max Musson
- Edit
Hi TiglathUK, As I have already stated we are happy for you to base your political beliefs on any form of spirituality or religion as long as you don’t foment arguments within our ranks by insisting that everyone else has to acknowledge that you are right.
James Mac
- Edit
Hello Western Spring. The Creativity Alliance has shared Michael’s article to the website. Hope you are okay with that. James.
https://creativityalliance.com/racial-socialism-the-search-for-a-new-ideology/
Max Musson
- Edit
The Creativity Alliance are most welcome.
Reverend Jane
- Edit
Regarding what my previous comment I apologise as I got the wrong end of the stick and made an assumption that may have been ill-founded due to having dealt in the past with an assertion that good racial loyalists and true Aryans would have a concern not simply with our own race but for the well being of other races.
I now appreciate that Michael was not making this point – and hope that my criticism will just be taken as a general criticism of those who do have such a perception of “the White Man’s Burden”.
By searching “Racism Cuts Both Ways” you can view a pdf of the pamphlet referred to in the excellent article, should this be of interest.
Max Musson
- Edit
Thanks Reverend Jane, we accept that your criticisms were well intended and in respect of Klassen’s teachings vis-à-vis the correct attitude towards other races you are quite correct.
TiglathUK
- Edit
Some veteran nationalists fall for the University approved and Jewiki definition of their favourite term ETHNIC Nationalist = ‘characteristic’ or ‘culture’. No, it means RACE and nation–just a big family of the same race.
Socialist Worker
- Edit
A thought provoking article. The use of the term ‘race’ is problematic. Of course we fight for our people, but that doesn’t mean we have to indulge in Judaic fantasies of being a special/chosen race and therefore above everyone else. We are a unique race – as every race is – with qualities of our own, just as others have qualities of their own. What is outstanding about this article is the use of the term Socialism! It is time that people who mistakenly think they belong to the ‘right’ stopped cowering and embraced this word.
From the SWPE site:
A grave mistake of many anti-Capitalists is to fall for the lie that the solution to the International disease which places people as servants of finance, is Marxism. This is clearly wrong. Marxism is but the same disease expressed using the lexicon of scientific and statistical analysis.
The greatest menace to all of humanity is Internationalism. It doesn’t matter one jot whether this is presented as Free Market Capitalism, or as Borderless Marxism, for it amounts to the same. Those who exploit us through the use of the international banking system are more than happy to rub shoulders with those who speak about a universal brotherhood of man.
For the Capitalist, the people are nothing but economic units who exist to serve as consumers and producers in the monopolised big business world. For Capitalists, borders and nations are boundaries to trade, and so must be abolished. When one considers the reality that the multinational corporations are steadily merging to create a single global corporation with no loyalty to nation, culture or people, the undeniable fact is that this differs from the Marxist dream of a world without frontiers, only in the propaganda used to justify it.
A great anti-Marxist and defender of humanity – a man who was judicially murdered by the international Marxist-Capitalist cabal – William Joyce succinctly summed up the true nature of Socialism thus,
“Nationalism stands for the nation and Socialism for the people. Unless the people are identical with the nation, all politics and all statecraft are a waste of time. A people without a nation are a helpless flock…a nation without people is an abstract nothing or a historical ghost.”
The only safeguard from universal slavery is the natural unity of the people with the land to which they belong. Only borders and the sacred unity of blood and soil can stand in the way of Internationalism. Karl Marx was no friend of the working man. He was a materialist, fighting for the imposition of a global materialistic system. By sleight of hand he simultaneously expressed opposition to Capitalism whilst ensuring those who followed his dogma would implement Capitalism in its purest form. His most disastrous legacy has been his theft of the term Socialism, which his followers have employed in support of an international agenda which is identical with multinational corporatism, aka, Capitalism.
True Socialism cannot be anything but National. Socialism is the continuity and advancement of the People, and the protection of their cultural, spiritual, ethnic, linguistic unity. Marxism Is Capitalism, and is the opposite of Socialism. Marx was a willing tool of the Bankers and their ilk. All Socialists must spit on his memory and take every opportunity to distance his lies from free, organic Socialism.