Sunday, 28 October 2012

'Staying on a clear, direct message' - by Michael Kennedy

This is an interesting article from Australia, which I have copied and pasted here. I hope the author does not mind, but I thought it deserved a wider readership as food for thought.

Whilst I still tend to think it is hard to fight this battle on explicit terms, I think it will resonate with those of us who are true racial nationalists and appeal to our own beliefs and desires for what needs to come along.

How feasible and wise it would be to undertake such a direct line (given our largely brainwashed society) is open for debate, but I thought it was a good read regardless of this and that it makes some good points which are worthy of consideration.

Saturday, 15 September 2012

Alex Kurtagic's speech at Identitär Idé 4 (Identitarian Ideas)

Alex Kurtagic speaking at Identitär Idé 4 (Identitarian Ideas) Stockholm, 28 July 2012:

Collapse Scenarios in the West and their Implications.

Thursday, 19 July 2012

Leo Mckinstry - Tories fail to solve immigration crisis that blights Britain

This is a republication of an opinion piece by Leo McKinstry in the Daily Express this week. Some of you will have already seen it, but I am adding it here all the same, because I think it is worthy of being pulled out from the daily "churnalism" and copied elsewhere before it gets washed away with all the rest.

I do not make a habit of republishing articles from newspapers on this site, but in this case I will make an exception. I have always tended to like Leo's opinion pieces on the matters of our national identity and on matters such as the creeping state interference in all our lives, and this one is rather good - and probably as close as you could expect a 'mainstream' newspaper to get away with publishing in these shrieking times we live in. 

Some may well say that it is just another case of media manipulation and that it is all designed this way - but even if all that is the case and it is some kind of safety valve, I still think it is quite good and would have been generally useful for regular Express readers to mull over. 

If it is taken on face value as a genuine and honest piece, I think Leo is quite brave and worthy of some thanks and respect for sticking to his viewpoints and telling it like it is. Although it could always go further, we have to remember that it is a journalist in all the modern trappings of the mainstream media. 

It makes a point, is in the public domain on newspaper stands, and is generally well written. So without further ado, here it is:

Friday, 29 June 2012

Dr Frank Ellis - Liberal Totalitarianism - Re-mastered

The Rise of New-Variant Liberal Totalitarianism and the War against England

This is a re-worked version of the recent talk given by Dr Ellis at the Traditional Britain Group's Enoch Powell Centenary dinner. 

Whilst many people will already have come across this work, I offer out this improved copy of the footage for general consumption in the public domain. 

I have (painstakingly) spent numerous hours in attempts to clean up the flaws in the original video, through various time consuming methods of technical tinkering with both the audio and visual aspects.

Whilst it is not possible to make a silk purse out of a sows ear - and nor am I a sound or video engineer - I think it is a great improvement on the original copy, especially for the second half, which looked and sounded to have been captured on an i-phone rather than a camcorder!

Whilst I am thankful for the original footage (and I can appreciate that 'things happen' when out at live events) I still hope that more care is taken in the future to provide not only more spacious speaking corners where the speaker is not at risk of clanging into the surroundings, but applying better scene settings and back ups for completing a higher quality video recording. 

Audience retention is hard to keep at the best of times, let alone when it is hardly viewable or able to be heard. The first half was quite good quality, but the second was a bit of a disaster and likely to lose a lot of viewers. 

Seeing as these kinds of videos are potentially very important for getting a premise over to a wider audience, I thought it was worth the time to see if I could help make it more watch-able.

The speech given on the original video does not go into the same lengths of detail as the written script which was being delivered on the night, although most of the essentials are present.

For the full speech contents and more, see . 

Tuesday, 8 May 2012

After the latest election collapse - A fresh start or reverse gear?

Oi! You!!!, Traitor! Marxist Scum! Genocidist! Zionist! Homo! Paedo!

I am just as disheartened and pessimistic as any other nationalist when it comes to the state of nationalism, the recent election results, the attitudes of the greater public and the ever pressing feat we have to accomplish if things are ever going to even slow down, never mind be reversed.

With this demoralisation we all have, often comes despair. With despair often comes anger and frustration. With anger and frustration often comes a retreat to old ways and old methods. 

Like a designer who has reluctantly been forced to learn how to use a computer to design things (instead of a pad and pencil), when he is placed under pressure, when he is frustrated at a lack of progress because he cannot do it as quickly yet (but in the future would be ten times as productive), when things are going wrong and mistakes are made, the tendency is there to say "balls to this computer stuff!" and start scribbling on the pad of paper again in order to get things moving.

Unfortunately, this fall back to old ways cannot go on forever. Unless new ways are devised, learnt and practised, our competitors will end up working faster, smarter, more efficiently, more cost effectively and our business or organisation gets to the point where it just cannot compete as a going concern and has to close down. 

Nationalism is a company of ideas and standpoints rather than material goods or services. We cannot afford to let our ideas and concepts become bankrupt. We need to improve, expand, take on staff, invest our time and money - but if we keep undercutting ourselves to scrape by and make do and mend, the steeper the curve of losses we will see in the long run. Like the old saying "penny wise, pound foolish".

We were perhaps at the moment of nearly breaking through with the training, but we have since been put under huge pressure internally and externally, and, in the process of things going badly wrong, people are now scrambling to return to the 'old days' and 'old ways' to try and get the job done again.

In nationalism there is no doubt a rather justified attitude just lately that all is lost - so "why care what we say or how we say it?", or a general suggestion of a return to styles and approaches that have historically got us nowhere - such as 'street marches', "extreme right" uniforms and venomous (read: alienating) discourse that is far removed from those we need to win over. 

I agree that we should not - ever - water down too much of what we stand for. I hope this website is a testament to that, as I have tirelessly maintained that we should keep all our targets intact, never wash ourselves away, stand up for our ethnic rights, stand up for our interests and never allow our traditional nationalism to be subverted by self styled 'modernisers' who appeal to 'real politicking'. 

I still believe that. We need to be quite radical, unique, different, rebellious, notable - not follow the rest blindly in the false hope we can be the same as the rest and then sweep to victory. Do we believe in what we stand for or not? If we do, then we need to sell it - not hide from it or help undermine it for short term expediency.

However, what I still differ upon with regard the approach models of some nationalists, is that one does not need to be blunt, or angry, or venomous, crude, confrontational, etc to keep to those principles and values and fight for our causes.

The focus for me is therefore much more upon 'selling it' if we are going to 'keep it true' to course.

How do we do that? That is what I think we have to ask ourselves and try to improve upon.

Sunday, 29 April 2012

Some Refutations 2

I recently thought I would test the water by throwing my hat into the 'mainstream' newspaper debating ring once again. 

I have not bothered for quite a long time, especially on some particular papers where there is heavy moderation and a near 'mission impossible' situation to ever get it through the moderator filters. (Some have not - as of yet  - made it).

Just for the sake of it, I thought I would share them here in case anybody would ever find them useful or a starting point for their own battles. 

The site had a reply limit of 500 words......which, of course, I struggled to squeeze my replies into! In fact, whilst it only took me 15 to 20 minutes to construct the contents of what I wanted to say as a reply, it then took me about an hour and a quarter to squash them down to the 500 limit!

I deeply suspect that nobody tends to read this site because their jaw drops in fear at the pile of text scrolled before their eyes. (Eg, the recent five-parter has had virtually no views at all - so I might have to re-package it to something smaller).

Anyway, without further waffle, here's how it went so far:
(Some names have been removed to protect the innocent!)

Friday, 27 April 2012

Jonathan Bowden

I am sure we have all heard the sad news by now - and I have certainly expressed my praise for the man on various sites and comment sections, so I will not do yet another one here.

However, I did see a pretty good and often humorous article by Alex Kurtagic today, recalling his encounters with Jonathan. It is on the steadily excellent altright website, and can be found via the following link:

Regards, B.A.

Monday, 16 April 2012

Something 'down to Earth' which I think nationalist parties should be talking about

By pure chance, I stumbled over a series of articles in the Daily Mail regarding the sell off of British companies and sectors. They are there to inform and to promote a new book by the author of the articles.

I think they are worth reading because - unless I am going completely bonkers - this is the kind of thing which once used to be nationalist territory and something we used to stand for as part of our whole message and political standpoint. 

I have not seen any mention of these articles on my regular (albeit) small network of Nationalist sites, and I do wonder why not. 

Sunday, 15 April 2012

Mind your language?! - The problem of Nationalist discourse.

Hey, this looks a good book!: "How to Win our Country Back" - By 'Alexandre Dumb-Ass'

Earlier this year I wrote an article about the culture of nationalism and how it is often (unnecessarily) detrimental to advancing our cause. 

I suppose I should re-read the thing to make sure I am not covering the same ground, but I have seen a spate of things both past and present (some very present, hence the article) which provide good examples of what irritates me and goes against what I find to be good discourse and behaviour - if we are to be taken seriously.

This time I will primarily focus on the language and nature of nationalist commentary.

What I will attempt to do is write an article scattered with typical terms and phrases in the hope it will reinforce the point of how it looks and sounds to the outsider, and even to nationalists like myself who wince at the substandard level of debate some people engage in. 

I will even try and write it in the same style, although for me that is going to be quite difficult.

It is getting like a contagious disease where people who catch it forget there is a filter and where the culture and bacteria of it spreads within a closed circuit of nationalist orientated sites. I sometimes wonder if they are even aware of what they are writing and if they could defend it - if what they were saying was ever put under serious scrutiny!

On occasions, the bluster and rhetoric is getting ridiculous and (in my opinion) making us increasingly distant from being able to attract the masses we need and to be able to sell our points and virtues.

Friday, 6 April 2012

Back to Basics? - Part Five

Back to Basics? - Part Five

If the current system ever collapses, it is no use us scrambling like crazy to carve something out for ourselves - I think that we have to make our alternative seamless and surpass the failed models immediately. No sudden jolts, but a smooth change on the train track to take the carriage of this country to a different destination.

Other groups, ranging from Communists, Anarchists to Islamists, will be wanting to carve their slice, should the worst happen. Ours has to already be established and be the natural benefactor. That means working away at it before something happens, whether it ever actually happens or not.

When it comes to establishing this, what can we do? How can we best attack the system and how can we best frame our arguments and positions?

It is a David and Goliath struggle - but it seems as though we are often just slinging mud and having mud slung back at us rather than devising a slingshot and catapulting ourselves out of our troubles by pinpointing the weak spots of our opponents and proverbially hitting them in the eye. 

I think that this lack of pinpointing goes right through - from political parties to non-political campaigning groups.

Friday, 30 March 2012

Back to Basics? - Part Four

Back to Basics? - Part Four

In the second and third part of this series, I was suggesting how we might need to return to some 'normalcy' through promoting our wider values and our policy positions a little bit more often than we currently tend to do. 

They may not always be viable or immediately workable, but when I read the last British National Party manifesto (soon after its launch), I remember thinking it was really quite good and that it suited my tendencies. It had me sold to most of the positions anyway, or the notions behind them.

They may not be perfect in some peoples eyes, but I did not think they were all that bad myself. In fact, numerous policy ideas and positions have actually been stolen by all three main parties over the years. Some of them quite blatantly. 

Thursday, 29 March 2012

Back to Basics? - Part Three

Back to Basics? - Part Three

We all know that the cultural agenda has to be transformed somehow, but is it possible?

We all should also know the sheer power and might of the "influence" that pushes away from our desires and wishes, so we should therefore know that it is a tall order to achieve.

We may not be able to beat the 'left-wing' nature of society that has been bred (or which has become so malleable and omnipresent throughout society)......but maybe we are looking at it wrongly, maybe it is time to use it to our advantage rather than pit ourselves as automatically opposing it all just because something or other is deemed 'left-wing' or 'liberal'?

The ruling class keeps control by setting the cultural agenda of the country, top down through the political and legal administration, through the schools and universities and churches, through the media, through the family, and through the underlying assumptions of popular culture.

There is also some reliance on the use (or threat) of force to silence criticism (as recently seen at Gatwick airport where David Jones was intimidated) but the main instrument of control is the systematic manufacture of consent from people who know of nothing else or do not know of any other ways things could be arranged.

Wednesday, 28 March 2012

Back to Basics? - Part Two

Back to Basics? - Part Two

Although I would have liked to kick start this article on a positive note (especially considering what I had said in part one) I do think we have to come to accept that much of country we thought we knew has already gone. There is no escaping this reality. No amount of clever words or wishful thinking will make it any different.

We have to come to terms with the idea that we have currently lost the battle for this country and therefore the battle for our traditional views of how it should be both comprised and organised, whether that be demographically, culturally, educationally, financially, or in terms of manufacture, legislature, religiously, morally, structurally.

Rather than resign ourselves to defeat though, we then need to ask ourselves what we can possibly do about launching a new counter attack on the victors - in order to reinstate ourselves and our legitimacy.

'They' may have won the immediate battle, but the complete war is not over yet. The tectonic plates are shifting under their feet as they flit from one self made crisis to another. The wheels are coming off their cart as things are having to accelerate faster and faster.

Have we got the solutions we need in order to tear down the current hegemony being waged against us (or take over from it should the juggernaut come to a halt)?

What do we need to sell and promote which counters their actions? What have we got to offer? Where are we going? We seem to have lost our way and our sense of direction.

Monday, 26 March 2012

Back to Basics? - Part One

 Back to Basics? - Part One

When it comes to figuring out where British nationalism (as a counter-culture) should head in the future, I always tend to struggle.

Although I try and recollect various concepts and ideas which have resonated with me, it seems that no matter how many times I try and make a start at compiling them together into a coherent mass, it becomes impossible grasp hold of.

Therefore, what I will try and do instead is create a compendium of things which may (or may not) be worthy of further consideration. They are not necessarily all my own insights or observations, but ones from a range of sources and a range of individuals too.

Saturday, 24 March 2012

CrossTalk - The Right Vote - From RT news

The Right Vote

Episode details: How will the shooting in Toulouse impact European political discourse? Will it unite different communities or will it strengthen the far-right agenda? Will Sarkozy continue to pander towards the far-right, and will the French find it acceptable? Will immigrants be stigmatized even more? And will Europe ever succeed in nurturing a multicultural society? CrossTalking with Roger Griffin, Mohammed Shafiq and Kent Ekeroth on March 23.

I thought it was quite an interesting discussion. Naturally, I think that Kent Ekeroth did a very good job of expressing himself and putting over a calm and cool response. Mohammed Shafiq only seems to want to repeat the emotional discourse of the "demonisation"of Muslims etc. He points his fingers, is belligerent, and has no true argument as far as I can see.

That he tells the people of Sweden that it is their fault for wanting to move out of their own cities (because of how they no longer feel at home in their own country) and that they should stay for the multicultural "understanding" and "cohesive societies" is astonishing. Not only is it absurd, but it ignores demographic (and mathamatic) realities of how that very aim for "cohesiveness" will never be balanced (equal), and is in fact a process which is a threat to the very survival of the host nation.

Kent Ekeroth made the point of Islamisation not being waged by violence or suicide bombings, but by the sheer fact of immigration levels and those communities wishing to live by their own faith and cultures.

Well said, Kent. He seemed a strong, educated, youthful and well balanced European who is able to debate on 'live TV' at these levels. I think it takes a skill, and requires a good memory for details. We need many more Kent Ekeroth types I think!

The host of the show seemed pretty 'liberal', Mohammed was obviously leaning to his side, Kent was leaning to his and Roger Griffin did his best to rationalise the two - although at the end he too slips into desiring/pushing the 'liberal' agenda.

However, it is still not the kind of discussion you would get on the BBC! At least Russia Today News knows how to try and host a show properly and let people have their say on these matters.

Friday, 16 March 2012

The new extreme right: A messenger of the future?

This article is copied from what appears to be an anti-nationalist themed website - or at least, a website which as part of its remit discusses various nuances of political developments. 

Whilst a few parts are a little off course, I think that the author is one of the few who actually understands the thrust of what the new nationalist movement is about. 

For that reason, I think it is worthy of being read by nationalists. There is almost a whiff of fear about it, because it recognises that many strategies of combating us are not going to work. 

Some of you may have read it recently via the Amren website, but for those of you who have not (especially those who have an interest in the analysis of nationalism from an opponents perspective) you may find it an interesting (and fairly reassuring) read.

About the site it is taken from: 

"Re-Public is an online journal focusing on innovative developments in contemporary political theory and practice."

Sunday, 11 March 2012

Jonathan Bowden’s “Western Civilization Bites Back”


As a filler piece to a planned series of articles I intend to publish, I would like to share what is in my view an excellent new speech by Jonathan Bowden. 

It is taken from the website of the 'Counter Currents' publishing house.

Jonathan is renowned for being very intellectual - and therefore, as is usual in these kinds of 'new right' surroundings, he tends to operate at a very high level of nationalistic discourse. 

In contrast to some of his more deeper works though, which can occasionally leave some of us a bit lost on the more obscure and classical academic references of history, he delivers a rather lucid and clear speech which I think is very important. It is not all that convoluted, making it a little bit easier for wider circulation.

I had intended to publish it here as an audio file, but seeing as google blogger is pathetic at uploading files I had to abandon that idea. Therefore, you will need to head to the Counter Currents website and the podcast area for this clip, as linked below.