Social Mobility and Integration

Nice sounding concepts, which conceal the liberal-fascist/statist ideology beneath.

I have been giving some thought to these two concepts, which our politicians are so keen on promoting, and what they really mean.

Social mobility boils down to individuals moving UP the social hierarchy, which, of course, everyone likes the idea of in respect to themselves and their own. Only, social status is relative, and as some go UP, others, necessarily, go DOWN. It embodies the idea that life is a competition, or a “rat race”.

It’s important to note that those advocating social mobility have all done very well for THEMSELVES in this respect, so its a kind of self-praise: look how well I’ve done! And because I’m such a wonderful, fair-minded individual, I think EVERYONE one should have the opportunity to do the same. Everyone should be able to “come first”. It sounds good, but is, of course, complete nonsense.

Integration, according to the OED, is

The process of bringing about or achieving equal membership of a population or social group; removal or absence of discrimination against groups or people on racial or cultural grounds; desegregation,

which, it seems to me, is a formula for “assimilation” and “miscegenation”.

“Miscegenation” is now a taboo word, but has to be used to recognise the implications and ideological intentions of “integration” in a historical context, as an overreaction to the unjust and inhumane anti-miscegenation laws of Jim Crow and Apartheid (not to mention the horrors of Nazi racial ideology), which was then consolidated and exploited by those seeking a spurious moral high ground for themselves (mainly on the Left), and the power-political advantages that go with it: anyone not for mass immigration, multi-ethnic society, integration of ethnic minorities and miscegenation is condemned and dismissed as a “racist”, thereby demonising and suppressing the natural ethnic basis of national identity and representing the triumph of the liberal-left’s fascist ideology of “colourblindness” (denial of the importance of race and ethnicity for a deep and meaningful sense of personal and group, e.g. national, identity), which, not coincidentally, is the exact but equally extreme opposite of Nazi fascist ideology.

What Ails the Family?

Evolution never intended the nuclear family to exist on its own, but within the context and with the support of an extended family and community, both of which the modern STATE and a money economy have made redundant and thus caused to wither and virtually disappear.

It is as if we had cut the arms and legs off a person’s torso and attached artificial limbs (provided by the state or bought with one’s own money), in their place, and now wonder why they can’t dance as well as we would like.

If you’re rich and can afford the very best artificial limbs, that helps a lot, but even that is no substitute for extended family and community (genuine community, not the meaningless abstractions politicians harp on about).

The fundamental problem, which is it high time we recognised and developed an understanding of, is that social structures (material, such as housing, and organisational), having been shaped by man’s perverted Darwinian and thoroughly corrupting drive for POWER, are adapted to managing and servicing “human resources” and “consumers“, rather than to providing for the needs of human beings.

What’s needed is a fundamental reorientation and reorganisation of society as a whole – not from the top down, as left-wing statists and fascists would impose on us (with the catastrophic consequences we are familiar with from the 20th Century), but grass-roots-democractically, from the bottom up.

Instead of continuing to allow ourselves, like “sheeple, to be organised by state and capital, whose perverted Darwinian nature seeks to facilitate “society’s” self-exploitation as a human resource and environment, we need to organise OURSELVES, as “people”, peacefully and grass-roots-democratically, into rational TRIBES and NATIONS.

Where to start? First, by recognising and developing an understanding of our own Darwinian nature and how, misplaced and perverted in the artificial environment of human civilisation, it has given rise to the social, political, religious economic and financial power structures which provide its framework and shape society.

From "White Supremacy” to “White Inferiority”

If an extraterrestrial biologist were observing human population dynamics, i.e. demographics, on planet Earth, it would be puzzled by the strong population growth in Europe, beginning in about the 15th Century, accompanied by the spread of these fair-skinned (white) humans around the globe, but then followed by their increasing replacement through non-whites, even in their original European habitat.

In terms of being better adapted to their environment, there must have been something “superior” about this white population, otherwise it wouldn’t have expanded the way it did. But what happened, this extraterrestrial biologist would wonder, to halt and reverse this expansion? Why is the white race now being replaced by other races? What is it that now makes other races “superior”, i.e. better adapted to their environment, even in the white race’s original habitat?

Only able to observe superficial human characteristics, such as skin pigmentation, this extraterrestrial biologist is puzzled, and curious to know the explanation for what is going on: why this reversal from being a particularly successful (“superior”) and expanding race, to a relatively unsuccessful (contracting, “inferior”) race?

To understand this, our extraterrestrial would have to come to Earth and study human evolutionary psychology, along with its social and power-political implications.

Human populations are organised by their power elites, not as genuine societies, serving the general good of their members (as they are led to believe by the power elites, who deceive themselves into believing it as well), but as an exploitable environment and human resource (now also as a market), for the benefit of these power elites.

Originally, these power elites comprised just an aristocracy (ruling by the power of the sword) and a priesthood (ruling by the power of the word), who cooperated (competed and sometimes fought) in creating and exploiting to their own advantage the power structures of the STATE, which they shaped to facilitate “society’s” self-exploitation as a human environment.

Over the centuries, others (e.g. certain professions) managed to gain advantages for themselves, culminating finally in western democracy, in which, in theory at least, EVERYONE is free to advance themselves and exploit both their natural and human environments to maximum advantage for themselves and immediate family – provided they keep to rules (law), of course; although, these are often bent or even broken by those hopeful of getting away with it.

From an evolutionary perspective it is clear that human civilisation and the states that comprise it represent something of a perversion of evolutionary purpose, which humans themselves, despite their knowledge of Darwinian evolution, are loath to continence, having created taboos which prevent them from developing a Darwinian understanding of themselves and their civilisation. There is an understandable reluctance, hard-wired into the human brain, to undermine the very environment (the socio-economic status quo) they depend upon, especially if they have been particularly “successful” or occupy a privileged position within it.

Man evolved as a tribal animal, and although his original tribe is long gone, destroyed and replaced by the STATE, he is still dominated by deeply rooted tribal needs, emotions and behaviour patterns, which the state (and capital), while denying, ridiculing or condemning the existence of, manipulates and exploits to its own advantage. The very legitimacy of the state is based on its claim to representing a NATION, as the equivalent and extension of its subjects’ (citizens’) original tribe.

For a tribal animal, like Homo sapiens, there are effectively two very distinct, but often interdigitating, environments, in response to which he has evolved very different behavioural response patterns: one intra-tribal, the other extra-tribal. What the state, and state-like institutions such as the Catholic Church, do, is conflate and confound these two environments, which they then facilitate the self-exploitation of to the advantage of their particular elites.

Europeans were organised by their power elites into pseudo-nation states, i.e. “super tribes” which proved to be very powerful and successful in extending their influence around the globe. However, not having the interest of a genuine tribe or nation for its people as a whole, but being primarily concerned with personal advantage (often associated with the interests of particular groups) within the pseudo-nation, and with rivalries, leading to war, between European pseudo-nation states, the European race was soon in decline. A decline which its power elites make not just a moral virtue of, but a moral imperative, any interest in themselves as a genuine (super) nation of closely related peoples being demonised and condemned as an evil they call “racism”.

Thus, our extraterrestrial observer might begin to understand his puzzling observations.

Britain's Hereditary "Honky" Head of State

In response to the many articles relating to the up-coming royal wedding of Prince William and Kate Middleton, who are expected to produce heirs to the British throne:

For the predominantly non-white country Britain is predicted to become by 2066 (Link) a hereditary white head of state will be politically unacceptable.

By the time ANY child, regardless of sex, of Prince William and his bride, Kate, might be expected to take the throne, Britain’s population will be predominantly non-white, with no place for a hereditary white head of state, which the Equality and Human Rights Commission would, understandably, strongly object to.

I point this out, not to irritate or offend, but in the hope that the implications of mass immigration and the liberal-fascist ideology we are having imposed on us might finally sink in.

It’s not “racist” to want to preserve your race (the ethnic identity of your people and nation). It’s madness not to want to. And this madness has a name: liberal fascism. Not coincidentally, the exact but equally extreme opposite of Nazi fascism. See post.

Liberal-Statist Self-Delusion

An example, taken from today’s Guardian, “Living with diversity”, of more liberal-statist self-delusion:

“. . . neither immigration nor ethnicity is the primary predictor of a lack of social cohesion. Instead, as the most recent research has shown, it is the level of economic deprivation.”

Thus, there is no need to restrict immigration or criticise multi-ethnic society, i.e. to challenge the ideology of the liberal-fascist Left, which is devastating our country and subcontinent.

England: A Good Idea While it Lasted

The title is quoted from an article by Charles Moore, to which I produced the following response:

A good idea?

When William the Bastard in 1066 conquered England, he took procession of the land and the people, which he proceeded to ruthlessly exploit to his own advantage and that of the Norman nobles who had supported him. With the help of the Church (which added the power of the word to the power of the sword), they created the power structures a STATE which developed over the centuries to what we have today.

A huge amount has changed, of course, but not the fundamental purpose of the STATE, which is to facilitate exploitation of the country and people it claims procession of. Only the dividing line between exploiters and exploited has become blurred, thanks largely to the myth of nationhood, which arose as Europe emerged from the Middle Ages, giving rise to powerful “nation states” and European global dominance.

The state was never a genuine nation – only posing as such -, but the people comprising it were all closely related (through shared ancestors, culture, religion and history) and thus had the potential to become one – until it was destroyed by the recent advent of mass immigration of peoples of quite different ethnic origins, cultures and histories.

Because the power-political structures of the STATE demand it, we continue pretending to be a NATION, but without the natural and deep-rooted (because ethnically based) sense of national identity which made us such a potent force in the past. All that holds us together now is our dependency on what, beneath the threadbare façade of feigned nationhood, is the proprietary and mercenary STATE created by William and his vassals (temporal and divine) a thousand years ago.

Burkas and Billionaires

Have more in common than one might think.

Both, in their different ways, enjoy the benefits afforded by the British STATE, while at the same time being contemptuous of (or perhaps just indifferent to) the NATION it is supposed to, but doesn’t, represent.

We need to recognise this mercenary STATE of ours for what it is, and start or organise OURSELVES, peacefully and grass-roots-democratically, into genuine NATIONS.

Yes, “nations”, because to go on pretending that we are a single nation, is to continue playing into the power-political hands of the very STATE that is betraying us – because that, given their perverted Darwinian nature, is what states do.

Preparing for WW3

The next world war will not be between STATES (posing as nations), but between an allegiance of genuine NATIONS and the STATES which currently monopolise virtually all political and military POWER.

This war, and the preparations for it, will not be fought on the streets or on battle fields, but in the hearts and minds of every individual on the planet. And if we prepare ourselves well, there need be little – ideally, no – bloodshed.

The state is a product not of “rational man”, but of retarded and perverted Darwinian man, created originally and developed over the centuries to facilitate “society’s” self-exploitation to the advantage of power, wealth, privilege and now, of course, “talent” and the “disadvantaged”. It has given all the fruits of civilisation, but is now on course, as it approaches the limits of our finite and vulnerable planet to support it, to bring about its own destruction.

We can continue as we are, leaving it to a ruthless Mother Nature to deal with us and our situation, which will mean decimation of human populations through disease, famine, war and natural disasters, or we can develop a Darwinian understanding of ourselves and our situation and attempt to deal with it a more rational and humane fashion.

We have to create an alternative to the STATE, which only poses as our TRIBE or NATION, in order to facilitate our self-exploitation. And the only way to do this, that I can conceive of, is by organising OURSELVES, peacefully and grass-roots-democratically, into genuine TRIBES and NATIONS.

In western democracies, we have the invaluable freedom to do this. Now, with the Internet, we also have the means. All that’s lacking is the WILL.

It is my hope that by recognising and developing an understanding of our own Darwinian nature, and of the civilisation (its political and economic power structures) it has given rise to, the will to save ourselves will grow and grow and grow, and with it, a just, humane and sustainable alternative to the political and socio-economic status quo, with us gradually transferring our loyalties, activities and dependences (material and emotional) from one to the other.

Immigration & Parliamentary Betrayal

My response to David Cameron’s latest speech on immigration, in which he is reported as saying:

“. . mass immigration has led to ‘discomfort and disjointedness’ in neighbourhoods because some migrants have been unwilling to integrate or learn English.”

And so the LIE is perpetuated: if only immigrants would “integrate” and learn English, everything would be honky dory. No mention of the fact that mass immigration has destroyed the natural ethnic basis of our national identity, or that Britain’s indigenous population is predicted to become an “ethnic minority” in its ancestral homeland within the next 50 years!

Not that I’m surprised. To admit that would be to admit that the STATE and Parliament themselves have betrayed the very people they were supposed to serve.

How could they – how do they still – get away with such a betrayal? Because it’s a form of self-betrayal, in which we are ALL implicated, and thus rationalise and hide from ourselves, subconsciously, as a form of collective, self-induced, posthypnotic suggestion.

Thus, there is no point in pointing the finger of blame – least of all, at immigrants. Instead, we need to wake up from the trance we are under, recognise what has happened and develop an understanding of it.

In the meantime, there’s very little any mainstream politician can do. Like the economy – whether socialist or capitalist – mass immigration is based on an ideology, which currently we don’t even recognise as such.

Nothing will change until we change the ideology, which, not coincidentally, is the exact, but equally extreme, opposite of Nazi racial ideology, which initially it was an understandable overreaction to (as well as to the injustice and inhumanity of Jim Crow and Apartheid) - and would have us believe, it is the ONLY alternative to -, before being consolidated in its present extreme form by economic and political opportunism, especially by the Left, who used it to claim a spurious “moral high ground” for themselves, along with the massive power-political advantages that go with it (much as, in its own way, the medieval Church did).

Xenophobe or Familiaphile?

Xenophobia (antipathy towards what is foreign) is just one side of a single coin, on the other side of which is “familiaphilia” (love of the familiar). You cannot have one without the other, although, insanely, this is what is demanded of us by “moral supremacists” in defence of the liberal-fascist/statist ideology, and the MADNESS of mass immigration and multi-ethnic society, currently being imposed on western democracies.

Liberal-fascist/statist ideology, not coincidentally, is the exact, but equally extreme, opposite of Nazi fascist ideology, the horrors of which it was initially an understandable overreaction to (as well as to the injustice and inhumanity of Jim Crow and Apartheid), but was consolidated in this extreme form through power-political opportunism, mainly by the Left, like the medieval church, seeking the POWER and advantage of the “moral high ground” for itself, but reinforced by the economic opportunism (cheap foreign labour) of capital and the statist (as opposed to nationalist) Right.

The Nazis took xenophobia and familiaphilia to insane and criminal extremes, seeing (“loving”) themselves as objectively superior to others (foreigners), whom they hated or held in contempt, using the basis of Darwin’s evolutionary theory, “survival of the fittest”, to rationalise and justify their inhumanity to their fellow, but non-Germanic, humans.

In response to the horrors that Nazi ideology resulted in, we went to the opposite extreme of demonising xenophobia, “familiaphilia” (love of one’s own, beyond the confines of immediate family) and any application of Darwin’s theory to human society. This overreaction was then set in the concrete of liberal-statist ideology (derived from the internationalism of the Left and from Christian universalism – the Catholic church, not calling itself “catholic” for nothing), at the core of which is the denial that race or ethnic origins are of any social or political importance (especially in respect to national identity), except to evil “racists” like the Nazis.

The problem with this ideology – quite apart from its power-political purpose – is that race and ethnic origins DO matter, being of profound importance for a deep and meaningful sense of personal and group, i.e. national, identity.

STATE and capital, however, are not interested in human beings’ need for a deep and meaningful sense of personal and group identity, which they might make the basis of organising THEMSELVES into genuine tribes and nations, instead of the pseudo tribes and nations which state, religion and capital currently organise us into, in order to facilitate our manipulation and exploitation as a “human resource” and market.

PM Brands ‘all white’ University a Disgrace

My response to an article in today’s Telegraph, “David Cameron brands ‘all white’ Oxford University a disgrace“:

It’s sad, but necessary, to be reminded of how the Tory leadership have so completely embraced the liberal-fascist ideology of the Left, which, not coincidentally, is the exact, but equally extreme, opposite of Nazi racial ideology, the horrors of which it was initially an understandable overreaction to (as well as to the injustice and inhumanity of Jim Crow and Apartheid), but which the Left managed to consolidate in this extreme form for power-political advantage.

So successful was the Left in claiming the “moral high ground” for its ideology of “race doesn’t matter”, i.e. is of no social or political importance, especially in respect to national identity, except to evil “racists”, like the Nazis, that it was embrace by the state itself (as it did Church ideology in the Middle Ages). Thus, the Tories have had no choice – notwithstanding all the grimaces – but to embrace it as well.

The Left have succeeded in destroying (by demonising and suppressing) the natural ethnic basis of our NATION, leaving us with just a mercenary, multi-ethnic STATE in its place, yet the entire political establishment is in denial of the fact (the truth and reality), not just in Britain, but in all western democracies.

When are we finally going to recognise and face up to this MADNESS?!

Anti-Racist Racism

If we define racism as an extreme lack of respect for, or contempt of, other races, one can easily adapt it to include one’s own race. This is what makes many “anti-racists”, and the institutions they have infiltrated, racist themselves. Some call it “reverse racism”, but really it’s just a particular form of racism.

And since you cannot really respect other races while failing to respect your own, any more than you can love others without loving yourself, it is interesting to consider what motivates such “anti-racists” to feign respect and concern for “other races”.

There are probably multiply motives, but most important amongst them is surely the desire to claim the “moral high ground” for oneself and to be a “goody”, as opposed to a “baddy”. That is personally very satisfying and can also be of huge social, political and even economic advantage.

Western democracies are currently dominated by “anti-racist racism”, because, following the defeat of Nazism, Jim Crow and Apartheid, which it is the exact, but equally extreme, opposite of, perversely it now represents an almost absolute “moral high ground”, such as the medieval Church once claimed for itself, which everyone (i.e. every white person) has to embrace, or become a social pariah.

The underlying (subconscious) motivation is, of course, power-political.

And just as the power of the medieval church, no matter how self-serving and corrupt, was considered vital for civilisation (to stop it descending into chaos), so too with the anti-racist racism of the liberal-fascist state – or so it would have us believe: it’s either the self-hating racism of liberal-fascism or the others-hating racism of Nazi fascism.

Or could there perhaps be an alternative to both forms of racism and fascism . . ?

A Better Breed of Briton?

No longer European, but mixed and multi-ethnic.

Is this what we ALL want?

The British STATE, led by the BBC and the liberal/fascist/statist Left is imposing the melting pot of internal globalisation on us, forcing us into becoming a multi-ethnic, mixed-race, post-racial, post-European society by condemning any opposition to it as “racist”.

The reason for this madness, which the state has embraced as a moral imperative, as it once did Roman Catholicism, is power-political. It is the expression of an ideology that is the exact, but equally extreme, opposite of Nazi racial ideology, which enables its adherents to claim something close to an absolute, though quite spurious, “moral high ground” for themselves, much as the Catholic Church did in the Middle Ages, which they then use for power-political advantage and domination.

The ideology is so dominant and all-pervasive that it is difficult even to recognise, and anyone who dares questions it – just as anyone who dared question Church ideology in the Middle Ages – is demonised and condemned, as a “non-believer”, “heretic” – or “racist”.

How do we face up to the liberal-fascist STATE and its ideology?

By being “good nationalists”. By ceasing to identity with the STATE, which wants to impose the oxymoronic absurdity of “multi-ethnic nationhood” on us, and organising OURSELVES, peacefully and grass-roots-democratically, into genuine nations of our own choosing.

Government want's "Fairer Nation"

In an article published in today’s Telegraph, Nick Clegg and Iain Duncan Smith state:

“. . . our overriding ambition is to take real steps to build a fairer nation.”

Only you cannot “build a fairer nation” when there is no nation to start with.

A NATION, according to the Oxford English Dictionary, is

“a large aggregate of people so closely associated with each other by factors such as COMMON DESCENT, language, CULTURE, HISTORY, and occupation of the same territory as to be identified as a DISTINCT PEOPLE” [my capitals].

The concept of belonging to a NATION is vitally important for an animal so inherently and intensely tribal as ourselves, and contrary to received wisdom and centuries-long indoctrination, the STATE is no equivalent to or substitute for it.

Our politicians, like generations of “leaders” before them, are determined to equate state and nation, because it is from this that governments derive their legitimacy, authority and POWER, which is what politicians are primarily interested in, of course, notwithstanding their – I’m sure, quite sincere but self-deluded – assurances of wanting to SERVE society.

I’m not reproaching our politicians, or anyone else, for this, because the pursuit and exercise of power (not just political power, but also other forms, especially its most versatile form of MONEY), is what Homo sapiens’ Darwinian drive for survival, advantage and (reproductive) “success” has been perverted and reduced to in the artificial environment of human “society”. All alpha human males and females amongst us are at it.

Instead of ignoring, denying and rationalising this, which is necessary in order to continue with it, we need to face up to the truth, to the perverted Darwinian nature of our so-called “society” – especially those alpha males and females who profit most (in perverted Darwinian fashion) from it, because they have an essential role to play in helping to get us out of this self-destructive evolutionary cul-de-sac we are in.

This requires a paradigm shift, the likes of which no human population has ever been through before, which is bound to provoke massive resistance from those blindly determined to defend their narrow and short-sighted self-interests in the status quo of the current paradigm. Thus, it is vital that those spearheading this paradigm change do so as gently and non-confrontationally as possible, with understanding for the fears and motivations of those resisting it, and above all, peacefully. This has to be a non-violent, grass-roots-democratic revolution, which will be won, not on the streets (or battlefields), but in our own hearts and minds. And it’s going to take a while: a few years, at least.

But first, we have to make a start by recognising and developing an understanding of the perverted Darwinian nature of our society, embodied in the conflation of STATE and NATION.

The fundamental difference between STATE and NATION, is that the former facilitates “society’s” self-exploitation, now with everyone (not just the ruling elite as in the past) in a position to exploit is as best they can, whatever their social status (think banker’s bonuses and benefit cheats), while putting as little as possible back – doing everything they possible can to avoid taxes.

A genuine NATION, on the other hand, facilitates a sense of common identity, purpose and destiny, with individuals WANTING to share with the PEOPLE and NATION they belong to, and deriving great pleasure from it, rather than thinking only of their individual selves and families.

A NATION also organises ITSELF, grass-roots-democractically, from the bottom up, while a STATE is organised by state institutions and capital from the top down.

STATES are for SHEEPLE (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S…NATIONS for PEOPLE . . . !!

Racist or Nationalist?

According to liberal-fascist/statist ideology, any genuine nationalist, i.e. one who defines their own national identity, rather than having it defined for them and prescribed by the STATE, is a “racist”.

Thus, for liberal (and not so liberal)-fascists, because I don’t identify with multi-ethnic Britain as my nation, but in instead, with my own particular race, I’m an evil “racist”.

I’m not really a racist, in the sense that it is generally understood, but this is how the liberal-fascist left, and the STATE it identifies with, deal with opponents of their scheme of things.

Rationally, they don’t have a leg to stand on, any more than the medieval church did, so the only way they can deal with opponents who question their ideology, and the authority they derive from it, is by demonising us.

It’s not me who will defeat this liberal-fascist STATE, any more than it was Galileo who defeated the Catholic church, but the truth. The STATE will fall, and the truth will prevail – eventually.

Paradigm Lost, Paradigm Gained

We are trapped in a paradigm which prevents us recognising and facing up to the two principal existential problems now threatening to put a premature end to our civilisation: 1) the inherent non-sustainability of rapacious, consumer-capitalism, and 2) the liberal-fascist/statist ideology (not coincidentally, the exact, but equally extreme, opposite of Nazi racial ideology) used to impose the madness of mass immigration and multi-ethnic society on us, by equating the natural ethnic basis of national identity with “racism”.

This paradigm (which we urgently need to “lose”, i.e. replace with a more realistic, rational, humane and sustainable paradigm) equates STATE and NATION, so that however the former chooses to define itself (whether racially “pure”, like the Nazi state, or “multi-ethnic” like the liberal-fascist state) it remains a NATION, with a legitimate claim to its citizens’ loyalty.

The truth, however, is that the STATE is not our NATION, and never was, but only poses as such, in order to fulfil its perverted Darwinian purpose of facilitating “society’s” self-exploitation as a human environment, to the advantage of power, wealth, privilege and now, of course, “talent”.

The STATE and consumer-capitalism are mutually dependent on each other, and on the madness of perpetual economic growth, to provide ever-increasing material wealth for individuals and revenue stream for the state, without which the mercenary democratic STATE cannot survive, because of its vassals (voters and party donors) insatiable demands. The obvious fact that such a system is inherently unsustainable (as well as unjust and inhumane), on our finite, vulnerable and overpopulated planet, is simply ignored, as if under some form of collective post-hypnotic suggestion, because trapped in the existing socio-economic paradigm.

The STATE, has always demonised and suppressed its subjects inherent tribal nature and its free and spontaneous expression, in order to co-opt, manipulate and exploit it for its own ends. This is what the Nazi state did in one particularly extreme and unpleasant form; it is also what our own liberal-fascist state is currently doing in an oppositely extreme and (not so obviously) unpleasant form. It brings different races and ethnicities together in the name of DIVERSITY, which it then destroys, i.e. homogenises, in the melting pot of the multi-ethnic state.

The alternative paradigm is a new, grass-roots-democratic, Nationalism of Good Nationalists, as opposed to the state nationalism we have only known up until now. A nationalism based on “love of ones own (nation) and respect for others”. It’s a paradigm in harmony with our healthy (as opposed to perverted) Darwinian and tribal nature.

Being grass-roots-democratic, it is up to US work out the details. So what are we waiting for?

It goes without saying, I hope, that this revolution, i.e. change of paradigm, must, if it is to succeed, proceed peacefully. It’s a revolution which will take place in our heads and hearts, rather than on the streets.

Response to Madeleine Bunting

Who, in an article, “Labour still haunted by Gillian Duffy”, in today’s Guardian (Cif) claims the following:

“Enoch Powell’s predictions [Rivers of Blood speech] have been proved wrong.”

Like the predictions made around the same time (in the late 60s and early 70s) relating to the “limits to growth”, i.e. the inherent non-sustainability of consumer-capitalism, on our finite, vulnerable and overpopulated planet . . !!

The course of the 21^st Century will reveal such claims to have been tragically premature.

She also writes:

“The debate of the 80s about whether it is possible to be black and British is now seen as absurd.”

Absurd? By whom? By the liberal-fascist/statist left who actually believe in the oxymoronic absurdity of “multi-ethnic nationhood” they have imposed on us since the end of WW2 . . !!

The fact is that ANYONE, without any regard whatsoever to race, ethnic origins or culture, is now considered BRITISH, thereby destroying any claim the British STATE may (or may not) have had to representing a PEOPLE and a NATION.

Sure, you can be “black and British”; you can be “absolutely anything and British” nowaday, thus removing all meaning from the word – except to liberal-statists, of course, who would embrace anyone and anything in their ideological, self-righteous and moral-high-ground-claiming obsession with “inclusiveness”.

Having completely undermined its claim to nationhood – and the legitimacy, authority and loyalty that went with it – all that our mercenary STATE is left with now is POWER, our dependency on it, and our reluctance to face up to reality and disillusionment.

Race, Ethnicity & National Identity

The following quote is taken from a piece in yesterday’s Telegraph, “Why the British political class is so snooty about Gibraltar“, by Brendan O’Neill:

“New Labour was redefining Britishness as something pluralistic and open-ended, . . . a ‘gathering of countless different races and communities’, in Robin Cook’s words”.

Did Robin Cook really say that? It’s in quotation marks, so presumably he did. But what an idiot! What a complete and utter idiot. Then again, it does describe the reality, the idiocy, the complete MADNESS of multi-ethnic Britain – which no one dares question for fear of being branded a “bigot” or “racist”.

When we argue about the pros and cons of “immigration” or “multiculturalism” we are always beating about the bush of “race and ethnic difference and their importance for national identity”.

Why? Because the liberal-fascist/statist ideology** (not coincidentally, the exact, but equally extreme, opposite of Nazi racial ideology) we have had imposed on us since the end of WW2 has succeeded in equating the natural ethnic basis of national identity with “racism”.

** Initially an understandable overreaction to the horrors of Nazism (also to the inhumanity of Jim Crow and Apartheid), but subsequently an extremely effective power-political tool for claiming a spurious “moral high ground” for oneself (or political party) and the massive advantages that went with it.

Alongside the inherent non-sustainability of rapacious consumer-capitalism on our finite, vulnerable and overpopulated planet, this is an issue of existential importance, on which the very survival of our civilisation depends. Yet both of these issues we either trivialise or ignore completely, because of their profound implications and the powerful taboos associated with them.

However, a ruthless Mother Nature will (is already beginning to) force these issue on us, whether we are prepared to face up to them or not. And if we remain unprepared, they will hit us (a combination of the two) like a giant tsunami.

The Good Nationalist

My, the Good Nationalist’s, response to an article in today’s Telegraph, “Miliband’s plan for power is putting his party back on course”, in which Peter Oborne says that

“Fundamentally, there is only one key dividing line in British politics today”

And what does it all revolve around? MONEY, of course. How much money the STATE raises in taxation and spends on services and “servicing” a great army of special interests.

The only difference between the two sides is that Labour has a much broader base of special interest groups and a greater commitment to them, which require higher taxes and a bigger state.

This doesn’t reflect a really fundamental difference, as Peter Oborne would have us believe, but is really quite trivial. What we have are two (or 3, if the LibDems still count) thoroughly STATIST parties interested primarily in POWER, both for its own sake (a highly addictive intoxicant for alpha human “prime apes”) and for all the personal advantages that go with it.

All the Parties equate STATE and NATION, which, in order to legitimise themselves, they claim to SERVE. Only they don’t. They serve the STATE, and with it themselves, creating one great mercenary mess. Which is why everything revolves entirely around MONEY, as the most versatile and important form of POWER – and the insane, because totally unsustainable, obsession with perpetual economic growth, which provides an ever increasing flow of it.

If the STATE really was our NATION and the political parties really were serving it, they would never have allowed the MADNESS of mass immigration into our already, natively and unsustainably, overpopulated country, thereby creating the oxymoronic absurdity of a “multi-ethnic nation”, which is not a genuine nation at all, but just a mercenary STATE posing as a nation.

Why? Because all the parties have embraced (have had to embrace) a liberal-fascist/statist ideology, not coincidentally the exact, but equally extreme, opposite of Nazi racial ideology, which denies, demonises and suppresses, as “racist”, the natural ethnic basis of national identity.

The fundamental dividing line, which has yet to be recognised and drawn (because most people sincerely continue to equate state and nation) is between STATISM and NATIONALISM – Genuine, good, nationalism, based on the moral maxim of “Love of one’s own; respect for others”.

The moral maxim of the liberal-faschism/statism we have had imposed on us by all the political parties since the end of WW2, in their need to claim a spurious “moral high ground” for themselves, is effectively, “Love of others; contempt for and denial of one’s own”. Ask any of the main political parties where they sand on Britain’s indigenous peoples and they’ll tell you, or insinuate, that the question itself is “bigoted” or “racist”. For them there is no NATION, just a mercenary STATE posing as a NATION.