Friday, 1 April 2011

Plan B

By Mister Fox

What see around us is a changed world and countries like China and India forging ahead while we languish, dispirited and led by corrupt and inadequate people who are prejudiced in favour of “other” ethnic groups and against their own people. This is an inversion of nature as it is natural to put your own first.

Classic Liberalism was replaced by the ideas of the New Left in the 1960s who took over the title Liberalism but changed the content. For example, and this is profoundly important, the individual rights advocated by Classic Liberals became group rights. This shifted everything into totalitarian thinking because individual rights applied to individuals per se but group rights gave minority groups (victims) preferential treatment over the host population (oppressors). This is parallel with the Nazis advocacy of superior groups over inferior groups and is no more moral as it gives preference to outsiders over the indigenous people. (1)

There was a shift to developing the correct attitudes instead of educating which is why education was changed so much until many at state schools don't get a proper education - little history, no grammar. It leaves them largely dysfunctional but with the right opinions. Classical Liberals believed in education and pupils expressing themselves. (2)

It is eye-opening to analyse the worldview of the opinion formers. I looked at the BBC reports of the inquiry into the London bombings. The criticisms were directed at the security services for not having foreknowledge and the emergency services, particularly the ambulance service, for being incompetent. Everyone is to blame apart from those who planted the bombs! In reality this was a terrorist plot, not a natural disaster that has no human agency. This saves them having to confront 3 million Muslims and facing that there is much more than a tiny minority against us.

We saw this with the Brazilian who was shot by the police. He was a legitimate cause of concert to them as he lived with a bomber. The opinion formers left that bit out and concentrated on blaming the police.

They believe in their own fantasies and become very angry if one from the EDL or BNP points out reality to them because they are trying to avoid facing reality and a contradiction of their vision of the world throws them into fear and panic. Those who live in fantasy fear contradiction. They have constructed their own world which is out of touch.

It is easy for them to live a fantasy because it is remote from their own lives as they themselves live in delightful villages or smart London areas. If the multi-racial experiment was actually working or if they set an example and lived in it themselves they might command respect. They are cruel, vicious, hypocrites who denounce people who have to suffer from far away in their privileged worlds. They have no compassion and no conscience and never ask themselves: "What have we done to the poor people?” They don't have to care because they dehumanise the poor: "Don't worry about them they are just racists”.

They are educated and know about history and culture and are aware that a hundred years ago Europe was at its height of power and prestige. The whole world was enthralled to White man: America in the west, us in Africa and Russia in the east. The Tzar, the Kaiser and King George were cousins and looked alike. The Tzar looked like King George V. There was no rival power so they fell out amongst themselves. A hundred years on and the new elites who have inherited can see this great fall. They are trying to make amends and to ingratiate themselves with other ethnic groups.

At he same time the descendants of the formerly oppressed peoples remember how the humiliation of their ancestors. The educated ones bear a grudge and see the largess of our rulers not as penitence but weakness because our rulers use taxpayers money to bribe them not their own. It is an empty gesture; while our rulers try to show how they have changed.

In the past we could take what they wanted like palm oil, sugar. The ruling class had the ancestors of those who bear grudges working for us. We introduced tea into India from China. The Assam province was perfect for it as it catches the rain. The cliffs of Cherrapunji receive heavy rainfall because of Monsoon winds blowing from the Bay of Bengal and is the wettest place on earth.

The rulers were in control and directed affairs. They no longer do and if they refused to trade with us there is nothing we could do. Our only superiority now is technology and China has been stealing our intellectual property. They are sending students here who take our ideas back with them. Our advantage is being exported. They also bought Rover and Indian companies own Rolls Royce and Jaguar and have all that technology.

When the immigrants started coming they had to let them in because they were frightened of offending them. They also thought that as they had dominated them for so long they were culturally superior. But the ordinary people are being made to pay through taxes already mentioned and by having whole areas of their towns taken off them. The elites perception of the newcomers is not only unrealistic but immoral because their duty is to there own. They neglect this for helping Africa by using other people's money. (3)

They are lying and they know they are. They do so because what they fantasised, a coffee-coloured utopia with everyone coming together, is demonstrably coming apart and to salve their consciences they present us as the problem: they scapegoat Whites for the failure of their unrealistic dreams of racial harmony.

Most people did not realise what was happening as it was done by deceit: publicising false figures of immigration and covering up racial attacks on Whites. It was the former that prompted Sir Andrew Green to form Migration Watch to offer the public the real figures. A democracy can not work unless the public are given accurate information to base their views on.

The public took it on trust and voted for political parties who said they would look after their interests. They could not conceive that the politicians would use them for votes but actively work against their interests apart from bribing them with welfare benefits or tax cuts to keep them passive and loyal. Even in the decline of the Roman Empire the Roman elites did not actively encourage the invasions of their own country or work to have their own people replaced while boasting that they live in a democracy where the will of the people counts, but our elites have.

This is one of the most evil acts in human history – ruling elites destroying their own countries and allowing their own people to be mugged, raped and children gang-raped but take the side of the perpetrators. Enoch once said that this country is like France on the eve of the revolution because the rulers do not care how their people live.

But people are now realising what is happening as we see from comments in the online versions of major newspapers. If the topic is a central issue like some aspects of immigration the editors “disable” the comments facility to avoid facing the “hollow murmuring under ground” that is the yawning gap opening between rulers, opinion formers and the public.(4) However, People are confused about what to do: some are waiting for a leader but most go out and vote for not only their usual tribal party which means the whole vote for different tribal parties which means no concerted action can follow but it is beginning to find a focus. They can not understand why elected officials don't stop it – because this what they want!

The growing realisation of what is happening needs more co-ordination. At the moment the intellectual front line, bloggers and writers are operating in isolation. There is common ground in love for our country and local areas to build on, but economics would need to be less partisan – Labour bribing the working-classes, and Tories the middle-classes.

The trick to suppress us was to use images of Nazi camps to tell people if you don't follow multi-racialism you know where that leads. The implication was that we would all turn into Nazis ready to operate gas chambers. But this wicked insinuation insults overlooks that we fought Nazism and many lost family in the effort.

One of the great ironies of mass immigration and Europe falling to Islam is that Israel will be surrounded by hostile Muslim states; if America continues to implode, as it is under mass immigration, then Israel will be starved of money. Influential Jewish people and apostate Jews, who promote mass immigration are bringing this about. George Sorros with his open borders, David Milliband and Sarkozy with their suicidal European-Mediterranean Partnership are also bringing persecution on European Jewish communities with their myopic anti White schemes.

If Jews have to flee to Israel but are surrounded by hostile Muslim states along with the problems of providing basic supplies like water and with America bankrupt, they are screwed as they aren't viable on their own. It was said that the Zionists wanted non white immigration into the US so has to make the overall population less anti Semetic but this was a great error and puts Israel in great danger.

We are being decultured - it is for us to maintain our culture and pass it on from our ancestors to our descendants not let foreigners take it over because they start to reform it through their own prejudices and cultural needs. The opinion formers talk about the world in a universal way and think if we behave like ethnics we are showing respect yet the ethnics recognise the superiority of European culture - electricity, motor vehicles, welfare provisions, hot and cold running water, computers and the internet. At the same time our ways are downgraded – bad manners, foul-mouthed vulgarity presented as working-class norm, untidiness. This is a decline from when we had pride in the country and ourselves as worthwhile and valuable things. They appreciated learning, standards of honour, manners, decorum. It was part of the fabric of our lives. Now our culture is said to be no better than anyone else's so they promote foreign things – Indian cuisine, imported music styles. They want us to have as much respect for their ways as our own traditions; this undermines us as we cease to be sustained by our cultural infrastructure like the aforementioned manners and laws.

We no longer know instinctively what the right thing to do is as we are told the only value is tolerance. If tolerance is the main virtue where does it end? It is not real tolerance anyway as it is one-sided. You are supposed to tolerate what thy tell us to tolerate and be intolerant of what they don't tolerate. For example, I am tolerant of the EDL, BNP and other patriotic movements but the elites are intolerant of them.

The institution as it were, sits on the top of the people, but we are being dehumanised and made a non people. We must abandon this inculcated niceness, this apologetic approach and assert our selves. We need to give our people a sense of their collective worth for the common good. He treats them with respect by asking questions. The next generation need to be built up to inherit the responsibility for our life and culture. At the moment the media are occupying them with what to wear, how to get their hair done and where to have a tat! It is done to get their money and is morally evil. They are being debauched by temptations and enticements.

It is Global Capitalism that is doing this and weakening ideologies like those from The Frankfurt School are being used to proceed in weakening national and tribal wills and identity.

The Catholic Church is a buffer against the Culture Wars but Anglican leaders here are batting for the other side. Catholicism provides a huge spiritual comfort whereas Marxist Global Capitalism is destroying people.

We had a long tradition of Conserving homogeneity until Hitler and must regenerate that positive approach. Churchill had tried to have a Bill introduced to control immigration in 1955 and there is a wealth of important quotes from Disraeli, Baldwin et al. In 1601 Queen Elizabeth1 Had “Blackamores” “voided from the realm.

Another thing that has held us back are the timid Tories of the Conservative Patriotic wing. I know they have a lot to lose and their children get ostracised at posh schools but The Salisbiury Review and The Quarterly Review could have done more to oppose the colonisation of Britain instead of criticising it in private but capitulating to it in public. The Monday Club meekly submitted to Conservative Central Office and allowed itself to be purged. The Traditional Britain Group have more fire but their duest speakers are tame. There are very clever and aware members of these groups who have much to offer when they realise what the real situation is.

The State outwitted everyone by infiltrating the opposition parties like UKIP and the BNP which is now being destroyed from within to prevent opposition to immigration and the EU in what is effectively a one-party state. The political front line needs rebuilding but there are other things to do

We need to take meaning from life, not just ideas. They do this in religion and constantly repeat the same thing and conserve the behaviour of the ritual. The religion is kept alive in attendance and in the acting out and this is not something to analyse or question but to do.

We appeal to continuity as tradition embodies our collective continuity. Morality and value run down from our ancestors like threads binding us together. The Progressives are always changing, overturning preconceived ideas. Their problem is they are now the purveyors of preconceived ideas. To them the present and the future means atoning for the past in an eternal masochistic confessional.

We must not allow our children to be taught about homosexuality in primary schools? Why don't parents take them out of school and form Home Schooling networks? Part of our answer is to educate children into the history of the country. It is like growing plants and food, one gets satisfaction from having grown it oneself: its a smaller version of producing children that look like oneself. By association you take a pride in it as the new rich of China are buying old Chinese vases as Russians have been buying old art works. This is nationalism being expressed by rich ones buying their nations traditional art. It is their national spirit expressing itself and there are many ways of conserving things.

Why conserve these artifacts? We need to relegate the alien forms we are being inducted into like rap or jazz for our own forms of music. This could be developed organically by like-minded people renting rooms above pubs to play and, with an enthusiastic audience, they would have a community of interest to play and listen to our traditional forms. They could have Arts Labs for traditional music and poetry and add new stuff to this thread to continue traditions. The increased revenue might also save some of our community pubs that are closing.

We should be forming social clubs. Having communal meals is an efficacious way of bringing people together. It paces your life and brings meaning in.

We need our own commemorative days like one on the anniversary of Enoch's great “Rivers of Blood” speech. That was a very significant event because support for it was like war time support for a national leader with dockers and meat porters marching and masses of letters of support. A statue of the original campaigner against mass immigration Cyril Osborne should go on the Fourth plinth in Trafalgar square.(5)

We have to manage our own affairs and form our own institutions. Become pioneers in our own country.


(1) See for example Aidan Rankin (2000) The Politics of the Forked Tongue: authoritarian liberalism New European Publications

(2) Roger Scruton Angela Ellis-Jones Dennis O'Keefe(1985) Education and Indoctrination. Education Research Centre



(5) Diana Spearman(1968), 'Enoch Powell's Postbag' New Society, 9. May


John McNeill said...

This is absolutely brilliant misterfox. I'm glad that you see the importance of Plan B thinking. Your worldview helps in securing the possibility of native Britons surviving as a distinct people in the late 21st Century and beyond.

I encourage nationalists to think outside the political box and come up with strategies for British survival. Charities, cultural events, even developing tighter social ties with your ethnic kin, all of these will help in resisting extinction (of course, getting married and having kids is the best thing you can do, but it's the only ingredient).

I remember one commentator (sadly I can't remember his name) over at The Green Arrow's old forum said something that I found profound:

"Nationalism begins with a simple handshake."

Anonymous said...

You are right; but it's going to get much, much worse before it gets better.

I agree with the comments on Israel.

In this world, we reap what we sow.


yorkshirebob said...

This is more like it. The last four para's of your PLAN B blog give me encouragement. I was about to reply to Ellis blog on DO I CRY ALONE to tell him, no Frank you do not cry alone, but you cry. Just like all the other bloggers cry but dont do anything.
It's time for action and it's long overdue. 50/60 years. John Mcneil's comment reinforces my thinking. It's going to be uphill for decades to come but we've got to make a start.

Anonymous said...

"[Jean Charles De Menezes]was a legitimate cause of concert to them as he lived with a bomber."

That is untrue. He lived in the same building, but not in the same flat. The police had identified who was sharing a flat with the bomber, and it was not De Menezes.

Also, its "concern", not "concert".

misterfox said...

Anonymous if my facts were wrong I apologise. I do not however, apologise for the "t". Typos are common on blog posts.

Best Wishes,


James Mathurin said...

Fair enough on the typos. As for the facts, I just assumed you had researched the facts before you wrote your article. I remember at the time, far from attacking the police, the media were bolstering their story. The news reports at the time would have had you believing that De Menezes was holding a gun, carrying a backpack with wires sticking out of it, and shouted "Allah Akhbar" before he was shot (I'm not exaggerating, this was all reported). It was only when it became clear that the police's story was untrue that the media began reporting the truth.

"The State outwitted everyone by infiltrating the opposition parties like UKIP and the BNP which is now being destroyed from within to prevent opposition to immigration and the EU in what is effectively a one-party state."

Why not just admit that all of those parties are so filled with irrational extremists that they are unable to remain cohesive?

Anonymous said...

"The police had identified who was sharing a flat with the bomber, and it was not De Menezes."

The failed bomber, Hussain Osman, was not living in the Tulse Hill flat at all. He lived miles away with his wife (now serving 15 years) and three children in Stockwell.

It was found he had registered at the gym more than 19 months earlier. A single, out of date, uncorroborated piece of evidence leading police on a wild goose chase and the unforgivable slaughter of a totally innocent young man.

At Osman's trial Nigel Sweeny QC, for the prosecution, told Woolwich Crown Court ".. the address that Osman had registered in at the gym in 2003 was not where he had been living at the time before the bombings." "Osman lived in south London in a ground-floor flat at 40 Blair House, just off Stockwell Road, not far from Stockwell Tube station."

Sarah Maid of Albion said...

I am not sure I get the point of the argument about Jean Charles De Menezes, his death was a terrible tragedy, but only those who value political point scoring above the truth can blame it on the police.

The police made a mistake, but had it not been for the deliberate acts of the terrorists nobody would have been killed.

Anonymous said...

Sarah, Mister Fox brought up the De Menezes killing, complete with factual errors and political point-scoring.

Your idea that 'the police aren't to blame, because the terrorists made them kill a totally innocent man' is just as reprehensible as the people that say 'The fundamentalists weren't responsible for 7/7 because the West invaded Iraq'.

Aren't Right-wingers all meant to be about 'personal responsibility'?

Sarah Maid of Albion said...

@ Anon 22:55

I am shocked by the perversity of your logic.

The 77 bombers were fully responsible for what they did, they didn't carry bombs onto public transport and blow themselves up by mistake, they did it deliberately. (the 21/7 would be bombers acted with the same deliberate motivation)

The police, on the other hand, didn't deliberately kill an innocent man, the mistook an innocent man for a terrorist and thought he was about to set off a bomb potentially killing dozens of people.

There is no equivalence between the two, the bombers acted to destroy lives the police acted to save lives. If you can can't see the difference then you need help.

There is a vast difference between a deliberate act of murder and a mistake made by a man seeking to protect the public.

yorkshirebob said...

Don't be drawn Sarah,you were absolutely right. The comments are only a smokescreen anyway.

Sarah Maid of Albion said...

Thanks Yorkshirebob

You are right of course, I will not fall for that again


Anonymous said...

Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "Plan B":

Police who shot dead Jean Charles de Menezes were fully responsible for what they did, they didn't rush onto public transport guns drawn and blow the mans brains out by mistake, they did it deliberately.

Whatever they may or may not have believed they were doing, however you may feel about it and whatever you may or may not believe they believed, the cold hard fact is two policemen shot and killed an unarmed man posing no threat.

By leaving an open verdict the inquest jury found the killing not lawful.

misterfox said...

Anonymous, my point was how the media blame the various services like police, ambulance crews ans security services rather than terrorists themselves. they present these events like natural disasters without human agents.
It is interesting though, to note the ideological views expressed by the reactionaries as they try to stifle the patriotic rebellion. They follow the lead set by the media in their psychological and ideological conformity.

Anonymous said...

"Anonymous, my point was how the media blame the various services like police, ambulance crews ans security services rather than terrorists themselves."

I'm the other Anonymous. Just wondered when anyone has ever blamed ambulance crews for terrorist attacks or the like.

Also, no one has blamed the police in general for De Menezes. The officers who shot him had been given every reason to think that they were pursuing a terror suspect, but the officers who should have identified him as a bystander were responsible for them getting their bad intelligence, and terrorists or not, if they'd done their job right, he wouldn't have been killed.

Anonymous said...

Sarah, I did not at any point compare the police to the 7/7 bombers. If you can't criticise my points without resorting to outright lies, why bother?

I understand that the police were operating under a heightened state of emergency, but De Menezes' death came about because the officers with the responsibility for identifying suspects and innocents did not do their job properly.

The officers who had to pull the trigger should not have been put into that position, and did not do anything wrong.

The police were criticised for those mistakes, not scape-goated as part of the liberal-new-world-order-muslim conspiracy your blog is filled with.

misterfox said...

It interesting to see the rather ordinary point the PC Anonymous makes of Mendes. Is there no other point you can find fault with? They are a bit too non-conformist for reactionaries who are trying to preserve the status quo.

Anonymous said...

The two police who fired did not have to pull the trigger and were not "put into that position". The instruction was to stop and detain the man who at no point had been positively identified. The shooting was entirely of their own volition.

Their testimony is that they descended to the tunnel with no preconcieved idea of what they might do. The CPS say they cannot be prosecuted because it cannot be proved they did not "honestly believe" the man (carrying nothing) was about to explode some unspecified device.

Cut away the quasi-legal "honest belief" nonsense and the case that will never come to court becomes clear. Jean Charles de Menezes died as a result of the attempted unlawful killing of an unarmed terrorist.

Anonymous said...

Just to be clear, there's 2 Anonymouses, but that reply stands perfectly well for me, as well.