Wednesday, 9 March 2011

Finding the Right Standpoint

By Mister Fox

There is a discussion of ideology to unite the nationalist movement taking place and Green Arrow has made the great and positive move into opening up a debate on what we are and what we believe. I would like to add this paper to the debate and hope for some positive responses.

I suggest we must avoid a formal written down ideology like a "How to book" which tells people how to think and behave, but find the right words to express our natural emotional bonds and the need for a place to belong and our duty to coming generations. Formal ideology grew out of the Enlightenment to replace religion with a secular programme of thinking and behaving and those who deviate have to be corrected. This began the development of the rulers from an aristocratic class based on blood and land to rule by secular elites united by thinking and saying the right things - an "Ideological Caste."

In "The Triumph of the Political Class" journalist Peter Oborne analyses how the ruling elites lie and deceive to keep power and make themselves rich and how they formed across party lines. He misses the central unifying factor - a shared ideology of Political Correctness. To achieve success the ambitious have to say and do the right things and if they say the wrong things they are destroyed like leading scientist James Watson or top football manager and pundit Ron Atkinson or even highly successful entertainers like Benny Hill. You say the right things to get on in life!

Ideology is often written down in a book like "Das Kapital" or "Mein Kampf" and treated like a bible. The same explanation is applied to every situation when the progress to utopia fails one group is blamed for everything by connotive terms like "racism" which is only applied to Whites, never are the other racial groups dehumanised in this way! It always needs an enemy like the devil in religion to oppose and measure yourself against. Nazism was based on opposition to Jews, multi-racialism to "Whites" who are the scapegoats if anything goes wrong.

But traditional nationalism is different and grows from emotional bonding with kith and kin who belong to communities of similar people. We need an articulation of that. Its not that everyone should hold identical views but they need some central tenets to unite them which allows differences of opinion to be discussed within nationalist parameters.

We are heirs to a traditional thread of nationalism which was expressed through the Conservative party and until the Second World War most Socialists were patriotic when nationalism was deliberately slurred bt labelling it Nazism!. Most parties are now vehicles for utopianism or progressivism that grew from the Enlightenment. We need to link with our patriotic traditions but adapt them to contemporary circumstances. This would link us to our history and patriotic traditions and provide role models and quotations in abundance instead of constantly having to dissemble when asked about Hitler and the Holocaust as the BNP leaders do. (1)

The activists were the main reason the party got where it did because of their tireless devotion to the cause. But because there was no coherent point of view, people would join with different ideas of the party's political standpoint. We have a definite set of values inherited from our ancestors that would reduce tension and future schisms. I do not mean an Ideology written in a book that everyone has to conform as under Pol Pot or Chairman Mao; I mean organise our values and beliefs coherently.

The way to develop a new world view is to gather examples from the world around us, of what is really happening as a result of, say, immigration, then collate it and our version of reality begins to form. The first thing is to understand human nature and what people are capable of doing to one another. We also need to consider what gives life meaning and this leads to the idea that nationalism is about our nation and a nation means a group of racially linked people with whom we belong by emotional attachments. It gives its people a sense of belonging rather than the dissociation under the progressive elites. Hence an elderly white British woman in Newcastle is a distant relative and should have priority for help and welfare; or the unemployed 18 year old white British lad in Liverpool who should have priority in employment as a white British drug addict in Bristol should in treatment. They our our people and we have a duty to them before foreigners. I have previously cited many British national figures on our racial identity. (2)

There are two basic views of a nation: The progressive or ideological view is that a nation is not held together by bonds of history and memory, tradition and custom, language and literature, birth and faith, kin and territory, but by abstract ideas. This is supposed to be united by a set of ideals or an economy! They think that a profession of fondness for Democracy, the Rule of Law and Free Speech binds immigrants into a nation. But without an ethnic-cultural core a nation dissolves. (3)

The root of the concept is the Latin natus, to be born, and its carriage into politics qualifies this to natalis, of one's birth. Nationalism is the interests of a people united by birth and descent, and by shared distinctive genes.

1250 - 1300; ME <>

Racial nationalism hails from the time when people commonly spoke of "the English race", "the Jewish race", "the German race" and so on. After the Second War Racial nationalism was demonised - all but internationalism(Globalism), was demonised. The demonisation was that nationalism is inevitably a cause of conflict when it actually offers the possibility of a natural and satisfying life for peoples. Nationalism is universal and all peoples are entitled to feel the same way in their own countries.

The Conservative party was a "National" Conservative party which put the national interest first, not the Global economy. We are their natural successors and must position ourselves as such. This would give supporters a secure base to argue from with abundant role models and quotes from our history and that would strengthen their conviction which would impress their hearers more. People follow the dominant elites. Even those who agree with us vote for one of the dominant elites' parties and a conviction based on the knowledge that we follow great national figures would counter that disadvantage. This is why the mainstream parties fight mainly over floating voters. It is a mistake to lament they have not woken up when we are not putting our case with enough confidence.

In our invidious position, on the edge of final destruction, we need to form links of expediency with Jewish communities and other groups who are likewise in invidious positions like Hindus and Sikhs, but we must make it clear that this is our country and our people take priority. We are being invaded by a common enemy. Jewish people tend to regard "White Christians as the threat to them but must transcend the Ghetto Mentality which inclines them to join other ethnic groups against us and understand that the Muslims hate them first. They must realist that their people are under attack in France and Malmo, Sweden and when Cameron and Milliband get Turkey in the EU they will be openly persecuted! Mass immigration has changed everything and old enmities are no longer feasible. (4) About 1 in 8 of the population of Southern Ireland are asylum seekers so the internecine wars in the North are inappropriate during an invasion.

Not everyone in the media or the other parties is against us. Many agree with us and have useful information about what the elites in politics and the media have planned but they stay away because of the Holocaust denying leaders.

The elites use the media and Equalities Commission to makes us like the mainstream parties or destroy us and we have to allow ethnics in but not adopt civic nationalism. There is a tendency for those who lament our lack of progress to think the situation hopeless and think conforming to the ideology of the elites but you do not win by capitulation. This shows they misunderstand the aims of the elites which is to replace Whites with immigrants. (5)

Simple or self-loathing people say "So what?". "It doesn't matter if different people take over!" This shows a failure to understand how people behave. They think it will be painless like handing the baton on in a relay race but examples from history like the Norman invasion show the oppression the conquered have to endure, and other countries like South Africa and Zimbabwe show what our children are having brought on them by the evil elites.

It used to be common to hear liberals say:" We did it to them, now they can do it to us" though they did not themselves live in it. That submissive attitude still dominates the elites."(6)
It is our children we fight for.

The surrender to Islam and the new anti-Semitism is taught in schools. A Government funded study in April 2007 found that Schools are stopping teaching the Holocaust to avoid offending Muslim pupils whose are Holocaust deniers and are frightened to teach the 11th century Crusades when Christians armies fought Muslim armies for Jerusalem because a different version is taught in mosques. They also teach a version of the development of slavery, which omits the much longer and harsher Muslim slave trade.

MPs also want children taught how to have relationships and who with 'in context' to make informed decisions about when to have sex. Many Muslims will opt out of this as it will be teaching homosexuality as equal to heterosexual relations. Propagandising homosexuality is a threat to our demographics.

We must convey the urgency of this situation not try to be nice. We must respond in kind to the anti British propagandists in the media and be more urgent in our defending our children. We must stress the religious apartheids in Sharia law and what would happen to British women if decadent elites like Dame Butler-Sloss and Prince Charles succeed in introducing it and, especially, the legalised sexual abuse of children; the cruelty to animals.

It is instructive to see the Power company advert showing clips of the Olympics in London all those years ago with so many white faces which shows how much we have been pushed out and colonised by immigrants brought here by our evil elites; I am affronted when I see constant, ubiquitous adverts showing White women with Black partners because I know Western elites are trying to wipe us out in a slow genocide.

Government from Brussels, economic control by global corporations and Afro-Asian colonization is part of the progressives' new dream for an ideal future, but in practice it disinherits our children of community and association with their own kind which we are duty bound to preserve for them.

Throughout history wars have been fought for territory and by allowing newcomers to stake claims, our emasculated 'elite' are encouraging them to fight for yet more. Our rulers are handing our ancestral homeland to invaders and protecting their welfare over and above that of their own people.

Unlike the rational ideologies that are manifold since the Enlightenment our views derive from an emotional and instinctive relationship with our people and our territory. It is more profound than rationalising an ideology to be learnt from a book because it grows from natural, human instinct and emotion.

To give favourable treatment to aliens over our own people is morally evil. A nation's manners, morals, religions, political institutions and social structure, are inherited from ancestors and our loyalties begin with affection within families and this emanates outward to neighbourhood and nation. We belong to our kin, above strangers, and this affects the type of community we create.

Edmund Burke's famous definition of society is that it is a continuous community of the living, the dead and those who are yet to be born. Each man and woman is part of a larger body. The individual dies, but their descendants live on.

Look at data from the Office of National Statistics (which doesn't take into account the births to mothers born here) then look at your sons and daughters and ask, "Am I betraying my own children? Where will they live and work?"

We need to develop our own political vocabulary as the contemporary liberal-left vocabulary is not suited to our situation of oppression and persecution under the elites. In fact we have to change the arrangement and become dominant not passively putting up with things. I suggest a more practical, definite not vague language like “English, Welsh, Scots or Irish man” , “woman, “boy” and “girl” instead of “person.” This would make it clear we are talking about our own people not “humanity” The great Welsh anthem “Land of My Fathers” is a clear statement of our debt to our forebears and also suggests the piety necessary to honour what they have left us and our obligation o hand it on not have it dissipsated amongst foreigners as the Global elites are doing. This is embodied in the Fifth Commandmen to honour thy mother and father. Unless they are very cruel.

The elites promote a version of progress and see the past as obsolete. But the present grows from the past as the future grows from the present which is why we have to get things right now, in the beginning of our revival.

The attitude of the current batch of moral and intellectual inferiors who control public life is to transfer power away from their own people and disinherit their descendants for the benefit of rival communities. We are morally obliged to put our people first, as we do with our families, even when foreigners are more in need of our help. Supporting outsiders against our own people is morally wrong.

We have natural bonds with our families, a responsibility for them and a duty to them as we have a duty to pass on what we have inherited to our children, as they, in turn, will have a duty to their children. This extends to our fellow nationals who share the same ancestral descent. We owe a debt to our ancestors who bequeathed to us our nation and culture, and we must honour that. We have to rescue young people from being coerced into submission by the state. (7)

We must stress the positive benefits we have to offer our people: preferential treatment in their own country, better education, priority in housing and employment for our children and protection from child-rape by older members of a rival community. You only need look at the names of graduates from medical and law schools when they are reported in the papers to see how our young are being deprived of opportunities that are their birthright. We would offer English, Northern Irish, Scottish and Welsh children more opportunities and a better future without unfair competition from outsiders brought in as cheap labour. This is the natural way and we are finding words to express this and also to make our thoughts clear to ourselves.


Reference Notes for Finding the Right Standpoint by Mister Fox









Dr.D said...

I have to take issue with most of what Mr. Fox has written here. I think he is headed in exactly the wrong direction. He says, "Formal ideology grew out of the Enlightenment to replace religion ..." Right there is where I think things run off the rails.

What is needed is a return to the Christian faith. This is the basis of everything that has ever been good in the UK and in Europe. Without Christianity, both would be no more developed than north Africa, the middle East, or the Gobi desert. This is what under girds the nations of Europe and the UK.

It was the ideals of Christian culture that defended the UK and Europe for over 1000 years. This is what stopped the Turks at Vienna, what drove the Moors out of Spain, won the battle of Tours, etc. The reason that Europe and the UK are being overrun today by muzlims and thirdworlders is your miserable secular defenses that are crumbling around you. Secularism is powerless against faith, any faith, even a defective faith like izlam.

Anonymous said...

Mr Fox,
A nice essay, but a little unrealistic. The elites in the British govt., in Whitehall, are the ones pushing the globalist agenda, really election results are meaningless. You must see this, I certainly did when I made my decision to leave in 1979. I had no political home in the British political scene and it didn't matter anyway, it was clear that the most fundamental decisions about the British state were being made without any input from, or notice taken, of the British people. This is what has to change, unfortunately there is no precedent for this change to be made peacefully and the British people have been disarmed, deliberately to remove this option. I do not see any grassroots political movement in Britain that can do anything about the course the state is taking.
Here in the US we have the Tea Party movement, in which I am involved. The TP seeks to get control back from the imperial bureaucracy in Washington, for the moment the avenue through which this is being tried is the Republican party, we will see how that pans out, but the initial signs are not good.
Dr D: The last thing western society needs is to sink back into the mumbo jumbo worship of Gods and idols. Liberty is our goal, law is our protection and the representative chamber and the courthouse are our cathredals.
roger in florida

alanorei said...

This is the kind of leader that our country needs. It probably won't get him until the Second Advent, though.

The bit about the horse is particularly apposite, I think.

Oliver Cromwell Speech - Dissolution of the Long Parliament, given to the House of Commons, 20 April 1653

"It is high time for me to put an end to your sitting in this place, which you have dishonored by your contempt of all virtue, and defiled by your practice of every vice; ye are a factious crew, and enemies to all good government; ye are a pack of mercenary wretches, and would like Esau sell your country for a mess of pottage, and like Judas betray your God for a few pieces of money.

"Is there a single virtue now remaining amongst you? Is there one vice you do not possess? Ye have no more religion than my horse; gold is your God; which of you have not barter'd your conscience for bribes? Is there a man amongst you that has the least care for the good of the Commonwealth?

"Ye sordid prostitutes, have you not defil'd this sacred place, and turn'd the Lord's temple into a den of thieves, by your immoral principles and wicked practices? Ye are grown intolerably odious to the whole nation; you were deputed here by the people to get grievances redress'd, [but] are yourselves gone [into corruption]! So! Take away that shining bauble there, and lock up the doors.

In the name of God, go!"

Anonymous said...

hi dr d

if you look up a list of the best and worst places on the world to live, by the quality of index scale, you'll find the bottom of the list filled with theocracy's, and the top 20 filled with the most secular countries in the world

christianiy did play a role in our history (english history that is) and for a lot of places in the world, and england in turn has had a lot of influence on the world thoughout its history

"Without Christianity, (we) would be no more developed than...the middle East"

where do you think christianity originated? and it is precisly because of religion that the middle east is in such a state, in england we got rid of all nonsense like killing witches and excersing demons to become the great power we were. in the middle east they are still fighting over rubbish like that

by implying you want us to "return to the Christian faith" you are no better than the muslims who want an islamic world

and that is on top of the fact it makes no sense, is not needed, and we have better evidence for everything it claims

finally, i dont think jesus would be down with far right political views anyway


Dr.D said...

There is quite a difference between saying we need to return to Christianity and advocating a theocracy. There has never been, nor is it like there ever will be, a Christian theocracy. Christendom, the part of the world that developed under Christian culture, was not a theocracy in any sense at all, but was a collection of strong, individual nation states, each with a clear sense of national identity.

I said nothing about a "far right political views," but it is a given fact of Biblical history that it was God himself who separated the nations. Jesus does not contradict His Father.

Ben, are you aware that the Middle East was a peaceful Christian area until the rise of izlam? It was the rise of izlam and the ensuing conquest of the Middle East and North Africa that through these Christian areas into turmoil. It is not because of their previous Christian faith that they are disturbed.

Roger, as a secularist, you say that you are putting your trust in "law is our protection and the representative chamber and the courthouse are our cathredals." Have you noticed how well that is working? Have you seen any muzlims stopped by a restraining order? Have you seen how meekly Obama follows the court orders that go against his desires? I could cite more, but there is coming a time to fight. Will you fight for secular ideals?

Vanishing American said...

The comments here are sadly illustrative of the deep and possibly hopeless divisions that prevent us (so far) from accomplishing anything. Everybody wants to promote his own particular vision of what the future is to be, and in many cases, the desire seems to be to invent from scratch as the Jacobins did, throwing the past out completely. This is most particularly true with the anti-Christian crowd who seem to be ubiquitous on ethnonationalist blogs.
Misterfox's essay made the valid point that we have traditions on which we can fall back, if we so choose. I think he made some very useful points.
I also have to come down on the side of Dr. D as regards Christianity but now it seems that our societies have been thoroughly de-Christianized thanks to various alien influences, and in the stead of Christianity, we are offered neo-paganism, libertarianism, and other such newly-coined isms, which have never been shown to be capable of working in the real world.
I particularly object to the comment which makes Christianity morally equivalent to Islam. That is a particularly uninformed comparison. To say that theocracies in general are bad because Islamic theocracies are bad is just not logical. The fact is Christendom worked very well at its best, and no other system has produced its peer as far as civilizations go.

Anonymous said...

Vanishing American,
Please do not be so pessimistic, we are not as divided as you seem to think. When I go to TP meetings I stand for prayers, even though I am a secularist, I also recite the Pledge, although I am very suspicious of mindless patriotism. On my office wall I have the ten commandments and the 23rd Psalm posted, however I do not believe in the immaculate conception, neither do I believe anyone was ever raised from the dead. (I am not too hung up on skin color either). Our local TP group of nearly 600 has some lively discussions The US Constitution, as you must know, was developed and written through vehement argument.
I have posted at your site when you seemed to be calling for violent revolution, a re-run of the WI. This will not work; we are not now battling a remote foreign govt. It is our own govt. and power structure that we seek to restrain and regain control of, they will fight to our death to retain their power, the only option we have is through political action, so we need a platform; calls for everybody to re-affirm their belief in a load of mumbo jumbo will not work. The platform is already laid out for us in the US Constitution, we need to work from the grassroots level through our local, state and national legislatures to get people elected who will bring this imperial court under control, this will not be easy or quick, the problems did not arise overnight and they will not be corrected overnight either.
Dr D: We need to get represenatives in place who will respond through the existing laws to bring the emperor Obama to heel. The systems to do this are there but using them will require some courage and backbone. The lady you seem to admire; Michelle Bachman has threatened impeachment, but if Obama is impeached expect a race war, better to make sure he is retired in 2012.
Sarah, Dr D, Mr. Fox:
I fear Britain is lost, I felt this 35 years ago, there was no possibility of the people gaining control of the political process. How this happened is the subject of much study. Personally I believe the reason is fairly simple; British politicians and govt. policy makers wanted to feel relevant even as they represented a country clearly in decline, so they embraced the internationalist, globalist agenda. This allowed them to recite all the acceptable claptrap at the UN, the Commonwealth conferences and all the other gatherings at which small men felt big. The problems of Britain were felt petty, (also pretty much intractable) so were ignored; the result is the absolute screw up that Britain is today.
roger in florida

Anonymous said...

@ alanorei

Was it not Oliver Cromwell who created all of our current messes by disolving the legitimate Commonwealth Constitution of 1643 (Solemn League), and by illegally setting aside the Statute of Jewry (King Edward I) thus allowing the money men back into England? All against the advice of assemblyman John Ley? He was also responsible for creating a military dictatorship, and organising the judicial murders of King Charles I, and puritan preacher Christopher Love. It was these crimes that unduly prejudiced European royalty against the true Christian religion, and influenced the royals to accept the Roman and Neo-Roman counterfiets. True Christondom was abolished in the unhappy Restoration of Charles II, and never restored by the Pseudo-Protestant 'king' William of Orange in the unsatisfactory settlement of 1688. All due to the excesses of the Cromwell regime. There is a reason that Scots and Irish refer to him as the Late Usurper. We probably would not have all this trouble with equalitarianism/multiculturalism today if Cromwell had not disrupted the proceedings of parliament and prevented an agreement being formed between Remonstrants, Protestors, and King Charles I.

alanorei said...

Anon etc.

I didn't quote Cromwell for all the misdemeanours of which he is accused.

I quoted him for giving an accurate forecast of the parliamentary shower that exists in Westminster today.

If you can come up with a more accurate description and an effective means of removing it even temporarily, as Cromwell succeeded in doing, I'm sure readers would be interested to see it.

misterfox said...

In a recent radio interview on Voice of Reason I urged the Americans to develop the ideas of Pat Buchanan as a way to fight back. This speech is an example

Anonymous said...

I really liked the article, and the very cool blog