BNP Suffers Election Meltdown

Matthew Taylor, Guardian (London), May 6, 2011

The British National party appears to be heading for meltdown at the polls after being wiped out in its key target city of Stoke-on-Trent and securing only one seat on councils to have declared so far.

The extreme rightwing party has been hit by internecine strife over the last year, with a string of senior figures defecting amid growing concern over the state of its finances.

It only managed to field around 250 candidates in Thursday’s local elections–compared with approximately 700 in the equivalent polls in 2007–and its only victory so far has come in Queensbury, West Yorkshire.

The BNP has so far lost seven of the 11 council seats it was defending, with three still to declare.

In Stoke-on-Trent, it lost all five of its sitting councillors. It also appeared to have failed in Wales, where it had predicted a breakthrough in the runup to the vote.

The BNP spokesman, Simon Darby, refused to comment on the results, saying “there was no point”. Anti-racist campaigners said the results were disastrous for the party.

“[BNP leader] Nick Griffin is now in a really parlous position,” said Nick Lowles from Hope not Hate, which has mobilised thousands of anti-racist campaigners in the past few weeks.

“The British National party as a political force now appears to be finished . . . it has such huge debts that even the rebels who are openly opposed to Griffin have realised it is not worth taking over.”

The BNP reached a high water mark in 2009 when Griffin and Andrew Brons were elected to the European parliament but, in the past 18 months, its support has imploded.

Dozens of prominent figures have either been suspended or have resigned, and in recent weeks it emerged that around 15 former members had defected and were planning to stand for the rival English Democrats.

Insiders say they predict further walkouts and defections in the coming days.


The British National Party looks set to lose many of the seats it holds on local councils in England.

After 251 council election results, the anti-immigration party won two seats but with a net loss of 11 councillors.

The BNP lost all five of its seats in Stoke-on-Trent, where it launched its election campaign in England, and one of its two councillors in Burnley.

BNP candidates finished ahead of Liberal Democrats in four seats in the Welsh Assembly, but failed to win any.

Before the vote, party leader Nick Griffin said he was confident a candidate would reach the 7% needed to gain a seat, but none reached the threshold.

In Stoke-on-Trent the wards previously held by the BNP were all subject to boundary changes, and due to those changes there were 16 fewer seats available.

The party, which had two MEPs elected in 2009, lost almost half its council seats in last year’s local elections, losing all 12 of its seats on east London’s Barking and Dagenham Council.

Campaign spending

As well as elections in England, the BNP also fielded 32 candidates for the Scottish parliament and candidates for the assemblies in Wales and Northern Ireland.

However, the party had to rein back on its campaign spending with debts of more than £500,000, which it has said it expects to pay off by the end of the year.

The BNP has been hit by internal divisions and was facing doubts over its future after costly court cases brought against it including one by the Equality and Human Rights Commission.

The party has said it will not be incurring any more debts as a result of Thursday’s elections.

The BNP contested 338 seats in the 2010 general election and lost its deposit in 266 of them.

Topics:

Share This

We welcome comments that add information or perspective, and we encourage polite debate. If you log in with a social media account, your comment should appear immediately. If you prefer to remain anonymous, you may comment as a guest, using a name and an e-mail address of convenience. Your comment will be moderated.
  • Gerald Martin

    I hope some of our British friends will post here and give us their analysis. Sounds like the government persecution over the past two years has played a role in this.

  • Duran Dahl

    The ruthless, self-serving (i.e., nefarious) powers that have kept England in the pink at the expense of Europe have turned against Nick Griffin and their own folk. Britain has been an expensive and treacherous “ally” for the United States, but I hate to see what is happening to my kin there. Where is Wat Tyler? The class that allowed England to prosper at any cost is now equally dedicated to the destruction of white England at any cost…and they will get their way. Drool Britania!

  • Anonymous

    The irony of ‘wins no seats in Wales’ is that Wales will likely be the final refuge, perhaps a reservation of sorts, for remaining whites in the UK. . . Can’t say nothing is being done or that there are no options available. The people of Wales are too upstanding to vote BNP, though. White people show time and time again, they’re really not so smart.

  • Blaak Obongo

    Hmmm… Couldn’t have anything to do with the British media painting the BNP as a pack of violent, jackbooted, brass-knuckled fanatics for the past few years, could it?

    In Once-great Britain, as in amerika, it’s the media who give the masses their voting orders.

  • Anonymous

    The BNP has been hit by internal divisions and was facing doubts over its future after costly court cases brought against it including one by the Equality and Human Rights Commission.

    —————————————————————

    This is our future here in the USA and all over the world. The BNP (Nick Griffin) brought in NONwhites to show they weren’t “racist” and what did it get them? THAT was their FIRST mistake. They had no big cash donors, of course, to help them. In fact NO White party will ever get one, it seems. Big business and Corporations will NEVER help us. They are all pro-minority/anti-White now.

    “Equality and Human Rights Commission.” Yes, there is your answer. We were all fools to allow “commissions” such as this and to even be a part of the U.N, we were fools to advocate for the “Civil Rights Act” in our own country. We did nothing to stop the hate Crime Bill. NOTHING we do will EVER satisfy or mollify the nonwhite populations of the world and especially those in our own countries.

  • ice

    “BNP Suffers Election Meltdown”

    Today’s news was about Muslims in London declaring their hatred and hostility toward Britain and the West, which indicates to me that Britain has worse fools over there than we do here for voting out a party that is there to bring them true representation.

    They were opposed by a white group that held a counter protest, and, of course, the spineless liberal press declared the Muslims who wanted to take over Britain as protesters and the white group extremists.

  • Question Diversity

    All I can gather from this side of the pond is that the BNP and most all other parties got drowned out by the mass movement of public sympathy back to Labour. The silver lining from yesterday is that AV failed — AV was phony electoral reform because it would have filtered BNP voters through the major parties.

  • HH

    It seems to me that ever since the BNP began taking on a tone more reminiscent of American talkradio type “conservatism” than anything I would characterize as Nationalistic, this slide began in earnest. Obviously, internal stife has played a part – but I wonder how many just lost faith in them with the perpetual “softening” of the message.

  • Anonymous

    What, short of election fraud could cause the BNP to implode? Such movements are gaining steam everywhere in europe?

    Hasn’t the average white person in Britain seen the light?

    Shouldn’t the BNP be gaining power.

    I don’t get it.

  • Kenelm Digby

    My own personal take is that mass third world immigration (although it continues unabated), has ceased to be a ‘live’ issue and other topics have captured the public’s goldfish-like span of attention.

    This is always the way in British politics, organised political anti-immigrationism is cyclical.The natural tendency for all British governments is to allow mass immigration.In time this always provokes a backlash, when the indigenous population actually feels threatened (this is usually after the damage has been done)and popular anger and resentment coupled with a rise in support for the NF, BNP etc forces the government of the day to take action.Usually this is in the form of a ‘restrictive’ Immigration Act, that promises ‘to essentially halt wide scale immigration’.This sop works for a few years, there is a temporary lull, and the issue is put to bed.However, inevtably immigration rises again just a few years later, reaching unforseen peaks.

    Sadly, despite the valiant and manly struggles of the BNP, I very much doubt if anti-immigrationist politics in Britain has any future, White Minority britain will be a fact.This is not down to the failings of the BNP, as many suggest.It is due to the fact that Britain (unlike the European continent), does not have a proportional resprentative electoral system, and likely will never have one.The present system is designed to keep the Tories in near permanent power.The Tories are supposed to be the ‘right-wing’ and ‘nationalist’ party in Britain.Despite many, many opportunities they have signally failed at every occasion to deal with immigration effectively.This will cotinue into the future.

    Sadly, anti-immigration politics in Britain has no future – it is stitched-up and checkmated by an establishment that fears it.

  • Kingoldby

    The BNP is in trouble because it spends more time fighting itself than its enemies.

    As such, the British people are turning to other ways of expressing their resentment with the Status Quo, UKIP in particular, as well as the English Democrats and as a non Party organisation, the English Defence League, are all growing and showing an increasing political influence. This is all inspite of quite open hostility from the Media and acts of repression from the legal system.

    The immigrant loving Labour party has totally lost the South of England and Scotland. Leaving it with some strongholds in the North of England and Wales.

    The, relentlessly liberal, Liberal Democrats have been wiped out pretty much everywhere.

    The Conservatives have recently been making some vague noises about restricting immigration and have seen their support hold up. I hope they see the connection.

    The electorate has left egg on the face of the commentators who all predicted a huge swing to the Left. It simply didn’t happen. This is not a bad day for those of us who care about their people.

  • Anonymous

    None of you are thinking of the most obvious reason for these results: voting fraud.

    The current system was designed to allow fraud. Nobody knows or has any proof that their vote was counted correctly, nor do we have any control over what happens to the ballot boxes once the voting is over – so they can be stuffed with fraudulent votes, for all we know, up and down the country.

    The Robinson Method of voting is the only safe, non-fraudulent, cheap method available, yet nobody is advocating it. I wonder why?

  • BritishActivism

    I can guess it is hard for Americans here to understand what bedevils the British and the British National Party. For all of us, the way things are going, the situation just does not make any sense at all.

    I wish I had good news, but it is getting obvious that my fellow Britons are either oppositional to their own survival, or are lobotomised drones who simply do not believe in, nor subscribe to any sort of identity politics for whites.

    It is fair to say that the “liberals” have worked very hard in this country to bring forward a discourse and society by which any talk of race or identity is frowned upon as both ignorant and nasty. We really have lost all sense of self.

    The party has struggled to move on and progress – only in recent years had it “stepped up” to the plate and improved its image, conferences, and internet presence. Otherwise, we were still very much the “little league” trying to win the championship.

    Underfunded, understaffed, discriminated at every turn, banned from venues, smeared endlessly in the media – then we have internal disputes and quite frankly, we have some serious idiots both within the organisation who are biting off more than they can chew (people with no skills in an area taking on rolls they are not suited for because nobody else is there to do them).

    Then we have had the candidates who are even bigger idiots for giving the media and opposition “gifts” – such as making drowning “Paki” jokes, jokes talking of blowing up Muslims, spraying Gays with acid, praising Hitler, and pictures of candidates running around with replica fire-arms and showing their bare arses in public.

    There are splits inside over Nick Griffin – and those who surround him, especially a certain few individuals who should be let nowhere near the party never mind the upper chambers and pulling strings.

    We are being attacked both from within, and without, all at the same time. Add in rumours, speculations, mistrust of where members funds are going, needless court actions, debts and lack of payment to printers, key organisers leaving in disgust over the “smoothing over” of serious problems and pornographers in the party……and well, it has been a recipe for disaster.

    One of the biggest problems of where we go from here – and this is seriously dividing the nationalists – is those who want to move away from racial principles of self survival in order to garner the “vote” from the wider public – and those who state we need to draw a line in the sand, keep the racial aspect of the party ethos, and win the argument with the public.

    Already, we have two split off parties – both of which will not argue a case for (openly) about ethnicity. One terms their method “cultural nationalism” – the other is essentially “civic nationalism” – but they are both identical twins where it matters.

    The idea, according to them, is that we should hide what we stand for in the hope that we can tap into the market that lay between BNP and the Conservative party. A bit like the True Finns. They seem to believe that when they are “in power” they can then implement policies which by default will save the white folk from themselves without them really needing to know.

    I am from the ethno-nationalist camp and do not subscribe to this view.

    However, as can be seen in Britain, the public are apathetic to our message when it comes to voting time. Although a recent investigation held that a large proportion would vote for an anti-immigration party “if it removed itself from violence” was quite promising – the BNP have not ever advocated violence, and the media will destroy any party that takes our sort of views.

    It is understandable that we cannot remain a little league player in this game, when the public are so brainwashed they do not understand the need or existence of the British National Party core message on ethnicity. This is why there is the same old division in the ranks of using any means necessary to work towards our aims.

    In the process, all manner of people are coming along and undermining what Nationalism actually is. They seek to turn the ideology into something else, and abandon core British National Party traits other than race too, such as policies on the National Health Service and re-Nationalisation of public transport. It is getting so that I am no longer going to be recognising everything that first drove me to the party and the ideology it stood for.

    However, others suggest we need to “move on” and be much more populist. Perhaps they have a point, but with myself being a man of principle, the whole idea of flexing all over the place for political expediency grates on me. Yet, as they say, too purist a view and we sill not get anywhere because society is so opposed to the rest of it.

    Our national narrative is different to some of our continental cousins. The situation is similar to theirs, but our history is different and so are the attitudes of the public. The True Finns, for example, are more like UKIP and not really “nationalistic” in the same way as the BNP which still, deep down, underpins an ethno-state model at its foundation.

    This is where the BFP and English Democrats wish to come in, to replace the BNP ground.

    We know that voter fraud is endemic in this country,once classed as “being enough to shame a Banana republic” – but I cannot and would not ever suggest that it was some kind of “conspiracy” and that we were being deliberately kept out.

    The simple fact is that the average Briton only cares for material wealth, their daughters school, what they can “get” from the state……. They are brainwashed endlessly to be “inclusive” and “not racist” and due to demographic trends, more and more people are in the “contact theory” experiment and have “nice Muslim” work colleagues, black managers, and would be “horrified” at the idea of labelling them or deporting them.

    They do not see or understand the message. Only those who are “switched on” to the bigger picture seem to find our way and come to support us for the long haul. This ironically makes “whites” our biggest enemy to overcome.

    There is talk of a BNP reform group, to salvage and rebuild the party…. but once again, we are all fighting like cats in a sack over whether to stick with a spine of ethno-nationalism or abandon it whilst working for other wider policies that work towards rectifying the problems we face in the long term.

    Also, what has not helped, is a new Conservative government – where a drop in the nationalist vote always happens.

    After 13 years or so of New Labour ruling over us all, the liberal voters left of Labour and the Conservative voters allegedly to the right of them, and those who are not really politically inclined either way, tend to think a “corner has turned” since labour has gone and that things will be different – thus making them trust the current parties again and feeling less need to vote for a party to shock the nation’s elite into action.

    That is my view of the state of the movement in general, others may have a different one.

    I wish I knew what the solution was. Things are getting way beyond the point of no return.

  • SKIP

    I don’t know all about BNP but I do know that they “compromised” a year or so ago amidst criticism of being “racisssssss” which was also the time they picked up a lot of seats and supporters. I see that crumbling to multiculturalism and appointing blacks and muslims to some of their seats didn’t sit to well with their supporters, in fact, those acts betrayed them and the BNP paid for it.

  • Ted of North East England

    There are a lot of people whose jobs depend on Government funding including myself. There are a lot more whose welfare payouts have been threatened by the Conservative cuts .These people just don’t want a job. Some have kids and live in rented housing. Then there are the foreigners who are themselves New Labour councillors. Also in the North of England working class people have been socialised to such a deep extent to be Labour supporters and if they are not very intelligent then they will continue to do so and they fall for all of the propaganda given by the Media.

    Ordinary people don’t see the wider picture they just care about the immediate, supporting their families. They voted Lib Dems onto Councils and to Westminster at the previous elections as they were angry at Labour. They couldn’t even see that the Lib Dems were started by three disaffected Labour politicians so they vacillate between one kind of Socialism and Communism.

    However, the Scots have given me hope. Labour had a large electorate in Scotland but the latest Council elections have seen them decimated in Scotland .If Scotland becomes independent then it could be the deserved end on the Communists.

  • Ted of England

    I also think that the people who would vote for the B.N.P. have more brains than most Labour supporters but they don’t automatically vote for the B.N.P. One has to vote wisely and when a B.N.P. candidate is ‘on offer’ in a constituency where one perceives the B.N.P. have no chance then there is no point in voting for them. In such an instance it would be better to vote for UKIP or the Conservatives. This is especially true because of the existing ‘first past the post’ election system.

  • John Bell

    I doubt if British people are any more or less opposed to mass foreign immigration than was the case only a couple of years ago when the BNP was soaring. What has changed is that the electoral cycle has turned, the Labour government which opened the flood gates is now out of office and in its place is a coalition government pledged – however feebly – to more effective control so people think that something will be done. Moreover, the BNP got most of its support as a protest vote from ex-Labour supporters who, now that Labour is out of office, no longer feel the need to protest against it.

    Having said which, it is undoubtedly the case that a hostile media and interference from “anti-racist” third parties has had a baleful effect.

    There are those who believe that nationalists should try to accommodate themselves to the spirit of the times by dumping references to the preservation of the traditional identity of the British people. This, in my opinion, would be throwing out the baby with the bath water. I believe that three things are needed:-

    1/ a non-party group which will argue the intellectual case for race preservation, for race seperation and for a traditional definition of national identity. This is something which has been sorely lacking for a long time and even ethnic nationalists try to avoid such issues because they don’t know how to argue them.

    2/ a non-party, non-racially based mass movement to do what has to be done most urgently – forcefully press the case for immigration to be halted and reversed.

    3/ an ethno nationalist political party which will continue to fight the cause in elections i.e. the BNP because, with all its faults, it is all there is.

    I remain optimistic – although I’m not sure why!

  • Dario

    Mine is a personal reply to what BritishActivism has said, because his post is very important and needs to be read by everyone.

    I must commend the BNP activists, because I can understand the extremely difficult the party is in. Already the mere act of espousing racial politics is blasphemy in this new order, and the party gets attacked enough for it. That’s difficult enough in any Western nation nowadays. And more, you have to deal with the Orwellian “Equality” Commission that seeks to destroy you as a party. I’m sure they couldn’t care less whether or not they legally seek to extinguish you, just as long as they can force you to spend huge quantities of money that you could otherwise use to conduct a decent electoral campaign.

    And if the outside media attacks and government pressure weren’t enough, then people are criticizing you for revising your statute to let in non-Whites, even though you’re legally forced to do so.

    I’m not personally sure, though I hope I’m wrong, that Europe and the United States will simply resolve this issue via electoral politics. I just don’t see it happening that a nationalist party will assume power and end the issue by restricting immigration, repatriating immigrants, and other things. I don’t see anything substantive really happening until we have our backs against the wall.

    People today are not going to be motivated by calls to save the fatherland. The brainwashing has been far too successful for that to have any meaningful relevance anymore. Unless some major events convinces Whites to finally see themselves as a collective.

  • Question Diversity

    The Telegraph has this interactive map to play around with “What If” scenarios related to AV:

    http://goo.gl/xlziP

    No wonder Nick Clegg was all for it. What amazes me is that half of the Labour Party was against it, even though it would benefit them. Tory opposition is understandable. And NickG was right to oppose it, because as you can see, “Other” parties gain nothing for it.

    As it is, it’s a moot point anyway, AV lost by about a 2-to-1 margin.

  • Anonymous

    14 — SKIP wrote at 10:31 PM on May 7:

    I don’t know all about BNP but I do know that they “compromised” a year or so ago amidst criticism of being “racisssssss” which was also the time they picked up a lot of seats and supporters. I see that crumbling to multiculturalism and appointing blacks and muslims to some of their seats didn’t sit to well with their supporters, in fact, those acts betrayed them and the BNP paid for it.

    —————————————————————-

    EXACTLY! I remember when that all happened and I thought to myself, this will be the end of the BNP. I also wondered WHO got to Nick Griffin? It seems he really sold out, big time. Or was this one of those fake opposition parties to begin with.

    —————————————————————

    British Activism, poster #13, you are right on target! This is the same in America for any WN party to raise their head.

    Underfunded, understaffed, discriminated at every turn, banned from venues, smeared endlessly in the media – then we have internal disputes and quite frankly, we have some serious idiots both within the organisation who are biting off more than they can chew (people with no skills in an area taking on rolls they are not suited for because nobody else is there to do them).

    Then we have had the candidates who are even bigger idiots for giving the media and opposition “gifts” – such as making drowning “Paki” jokes, jokes talking of blowing up Muslims, spraying Gays with acid, praising Hitler, and pictures of candidates running around with replica fire-arms and showing their bare arses in public.

    There are splits inside over Nick Griffin – and those who surround him, especially a certain few individuals who should be let nowhere near the party never mind the upper chambers and pulling strings.

  • Bon, From the Land of Babble

    #13 British Activism:

    the situation just does not make any sense at all.

    I hear and read these exact words constantly in the US.

    Maybe the situation does not make sense to you, but to your enemies all of it makes perfect sense. They are neither crazy nor insane as they carry out their master plan against you: To replace Native Born Britons from the homeland they’ve occupied for ~ 11,000 years with hostile non-White/non-Native Britons.

    And it’s working, exactly as planned.

    As a very wise individual once cautioned me: Your enemies understand your psychology better than you do and have used it against you to great effect.

    Your enemies have studied you well and know your weaknesses — exactly as is being done to us whites in the US:

    The BNP, as you state has been discriminated [against] at every turn, banned from venues, smeared endlessly in the media., associated with extremists and violence.

    then we have internal disputes and quite frankly, we have some serious idiots…Then we have had the candidates who are even bigger idiots for giving the media and opposition “gifts”

    This appears to be internal subversion, a fifth column, one of your enemy’s more clever tactics, to create internal warfare, chaos and turmoil, even split the party in two to weaken it — while they sit back and laugh as the BNP implodes. Seems to be working well.

    The simple fact is that the average Briton only cares for material wealth, their daughters school, what they can “get” from the state……. They are brainwashed

    They have come to love Big Brother!!

    This will very hard to overcome — relentless brainwashing from both the educational system and the media, lulling Native Born Britons to believe that it is in their best interests to hand over their homeland to “others” in the name of: inclusiveness, multiculturalism, restitution for past colonial sins, guilt.

    Anyone who disagrees will be dealt with harshly, hauled into court and sued, fired from his job, and his reputation smeared.

    Yes. Sounds very similar to the situation we Whites find ourselves in in the US!

    –a dwindling minority as our country is flooded with high-fertility non-Whites, calls to disarm us, Hate Laws used ONLY against us, rampant black crime ignored or covered up, creation of a massive non-White seething underclass and the continual vilification of Native Born White Americans by the media.

    Will our people wake up to what is being done to us? What our enemies plan for us?

    Yes, but not until it’s far too late. One need only look at South Africa to see what is in store for us once we become minorities lorded over by non-Whites with historical grievances against us: Genocide.

    Good Luck, Friend. You are further down the “Paved Road” than we are, but not by much, and we are following you straight there, led also by those who cheer our demise.

    Oh, one final thing: I would suggest studying Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals to get a clearer idea of some of the tactics your enemies are using against you: http://goo.gl/hQXvr

    Bon

  • Sardonicus

    “Sadly, despite the valiant and manly struggles of the BNP, I very much doubt if anti-immigrationist politics in Britain has any future, White Minority britain will be a fact.This is not down to the failings of the BNP, as many suggest” Kenelm Digby

    I must agree with you. Now the only hope for formerly Great Britain seems to lie with the devolution of the country into separate countries. For this reason, I would support the Scottish and Welch Independence movements. Perhaps, they can become movements for the revitalization of regional cultures. Unfortunately, I don’t think they are equivalent to the BNP.

    The English people are overly concerned with being respectable, even to the point of voting themselves out of existence. It seems like every Third World person I meet here in the United States has relatives in London. Absurd guilt over colonialism has ruined the country and the gruesome cult of political correctness has become the new national religion.

    It makes me sad to see the country of Elgar, Vaughn-Williams, Benjamin Britten, Frederick Delius, Shakespeare, Marlowe, Kipling, Shelley, Butler, Hardy, Turner, Constable, and other great artists become a decadent totalitarian, multi-racial plutocracy.

  • Anonymous

    I don’t understand Europeans. Why is only 1% of the UK population voting for the BNP, or only 5% of Swedes voting for the Sweden Democrats, etc. Why isn’t the majority voting for the nationalist parties? Doesn’t anyone want to save their countries? Do most Europeans have a penchant for their own genocide?

    I would like to hear reactions from Europeans.

  • Anonymous

    Whom does the BNP serve?

    Winston Churchill was a washed up has been, on the verge of embarrassing bankruptcy when Certain Interests stepped in from The City to make him their man in the fight to organize Europe for a major war which would yield BILLIONS in profits.

    Hitler, same deal. Pre-industrialists, he was just another street leader of a semi-independent political group. AFTER he agreed to ‘certain concessions’, Hindenberg backed him over the Social Democrats and Communists, despite his having less than 375 of the popular vote.

    Whoever it serves to have mass immigration into the UK, the BNP did not make their enemies it’s friends. And without official endorsement, alls you have to do is allow the token victory, humiliate those whose desperation ‘led to racism’. And then make sure that the BNP electees don’t accomplish anything of note.

    Which is easy in a political system dedicated to stifling of individual achievement in altering policy.

    Get this through your heads people: The only reason we have democracy is because it allows the wealthy classes to control policy making by grooming candidates to their group agendas. As long as the candidate selections are controlled (by what they are allowed to talk about and endorse as _party_ platforms), it doesn’t matter who you vote for.

    It never will.

  • AvgDude

    The fact that the BNP is described in the story as “extreme right wing” says it all. Is there any right wing anywhere that is not called “extreme” in the press?

  • Anonymous

    “1/ a non-party group which will argue the intellectual case for race preservation, for race seperation and for a traditional definition of national identity. This is something which has been sorely lacking for a long time and even ethnic nationalists try to avoid such issues because they don’t know how to argue them.”

    The ethnonationalists avoid such issues because it is an argument which simply can’t be won in Britain. Anyone with moderate knowledge of the history of the British Empire can point out the hypocrisy of British ethnonationalists in refusing to condemn British colonialism while at the same time demanding for Britain what Britain denied for its colonies. George Galloway on his radio show has singlehandedly destroyed everyone who attempts what you suggest.

    Only countries with no history of colonialism and/or slavery have any chance of making a case for ethnonationalism, and allowing former colonial powers share their arguments only discredits them as well. In other words, the BNP was correct to drop the dead-end platform of ethnonationalism for Britain. Its poor performance is not a consequence of this decision, as some seem to suggest.

  • Dario

    @QuestionDiversity

    I’m not surprised half of Labour opposed the referendum. After all, the Conservatives are generally locked into the same constituencies, and their core ones are gradually shrinking while Labour is increasingly “invading” Conservative territory.

    The way the system is, as we’ve seen in 2005, allows Labour to gain an absolute majority with a measley 35% of the vote.

  • Istvan

    26 — Anonymous wrote at 11:06 PM on May 8:

    The FORMER colonial powers do have a right to ethnonationalism. If colobialism was a sin (and mind you it wasn’t only Europeans who colonized foreign territories) the penalty should not be paid by the baby born today. Your basic tenet is that an English baby must suffer because of something that happened one or two hundred years ago and that is just sick. The past is past or would you agree that the Spanish have a right to conquer the muslim world for the centuries of occupation they suffered?

  • Anonymous

    “I don’t understand Europeans. Why isn’t the majority voting for the nationalist parties? Doesn’t anyone want to save their countries? Do most Europeans have a penchant for their own genocide?”

    It’s called brainwashing.

  • Anonymous

    To Anonymous at 11.06pm. I beg to differ on your summation.

    British Nationalists I know do not long for empire, nor do they advocate colonialism. The British National Party and nationalists here are not trying to re-establish the British Empire by rule – or going off to turf other people off their territory.

    It should be relatively easy to argue the case for simple self preservation in our own ancestral homeland – and in fact, it could be argued that we have much more of a case for doing so than places like America, because Briton is the only place the British people have and it is our homeland. America and Australia were founded – this is our only natural place.

    The ethnonationalists amongst us may indeed champion the causes of other nations which we formulated and established from our stock – in regards to saving themselves too – and we may very well therefore help those nations defend their history and show what colonialism of Whites did to benefit wherever they touched down in the third world – because it was not all bad news as the likes of George Galloway would no doubt suggest. All the former places where Europeans colonised, even a century after we left them, fair better than their non colonised neighbours.

    Ethnonationalists/White nationalists do tend to care for our European counterparts on the continent. We in Britain who are nationalists often tend to support the Danes and the Germans and whoever else is facing the same problems ourselves. We do not really like the idea of European continent nations being overrun and overawed with the third world and Muslims.

    When it comes to British Nationalism, and nationalism in general, we support our right to exist and maintain Britain for the indigenous British people – and support the right of every other nation to do likewise, whether it be Japan, Tibet, Indonesia, African nations…..

    Therefore the likes of Galloway, should he have suggested we are “hypocrites”, are wrong, and not only wrong, but willingly continuing what they sees as a past crime – as long as it is against White people. Two “wrongs” do not make a right – and any decent nationalist should be able to argue this case.

    Those who cannot make such a case, are perhaps weak in their insight and probably tend to avoid the racial and ethnic issues because they cannot play such verbal chess. They run away and hide from it instead. I am not always all that good at it myself, but I do understand that we need to do this and get better at it than we have been.

    I would rather people learnt how to counter the likes of George Galloway, rather than let him get away with claiming the “righteous high ground” and running right over the interests of the indigenous people and the survival of the White race.

    This is where I perhaps wish we had our own version Jared Taylor in Britain, rather than people who wimp out and mutter and mumble about “culture” and “when in Rome doing what the Romans do” whilst we clap on our ethnic death, cross our fingers, and “hope” that if we don’t identify a problem it will sort itself out by other means.

  • John Engelman

    Democracy is the way the electorate says “No” to the decisions of powerful elites. Those elites only have power on issues where the majority is divided, uncertain, or indifferent. The British electorate has not said, “No,” to continued immigration.

    This is difficult for most who post on American Renaissance to understand. When one feels something strongly, it is easy to overestimate the number of people who feel the same way, and easy to underestimate the difficulty of converting others to the same persuasion.

  • Anonymous

    BRITISH ACTIVIST

    Could the BNP have been infiltrated by liberals seeking to discredit the party? All the problems and scandals you described sould exactly like infiltrator subversion, similiar to the “neo-nazi White supremacists” of Idaho who always turn out to be SPLC/ADL/AJC front groups.

    Britian has a lot more active marxists than we do. Sounds very much like a successful marxist “infiltrate and destroy” operation, like the neo-conservative take over of our Republican party.

  • white advocate – Canada

    No. 26, I hope you bragged for George Galloway with all due respect to the place you are visiting here. I’ll look him up on the net, but if he is a typical liberal blow-hard, then I’ll say you owe us an apology

  • Anonymous

    Istvan:

    “Your basic tenet is that an English baby must suffer because of something that happened one or two hundred years ago and that is just sick.”

    If the baby’s father was a thief, and the baby inherited the stolen money from his father, does the baby get to keep the money or should the money be returned to the victim of the theft? That’s what we’re talking about. Almost everyone, left or right or centre, would agree that the money rightfully belongs to the victim of theft, not to the baby. The baby is not guilty of theft, but the money still doesn’t belong to him! An English baby is not to be held responsible for British colonialism, but the people from the former colonies do indeed have an irrefutable claim. Nick Griffin himself admitted this, saying: “They’re here because we were there.”

    “would you agree that the Spanish have a right to conquer the muslim world for the centuries of occupation they suffered?”

    They did:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_Morocco

    Anonymous:

    “British Nationalists I know do not long for empire, nor do they advocate colonialism.”

    But they are generally unwilling to admit that the British Empire was wrong. That makes them fodder for anyone to rip their arguments apart.

    “Briton is the only place the British people have and it is our homeland. America and Australia were founded – this is our only natural place.”

    This is where you get chewed up by any debater who knows what he’s doing. The aboriginal Australians also have a right to their homeland, but the British took it. Why should Britain have something that it does not allow others to have?

    “We in Britain who are nationalists often tend to support the Danes and the Germans and whoever else is facing the same problems ourselves.”

    But do you not understand that, with your attitude, you are actually hurting the anti-immigration groups in European countries that never engaged in colonialism? Their only effective argument against mass immigration is: YES, the former colonial powers have to take in immigrants, BUT WE DON’T, because we never colonised anybody! You are ruining this for them by downplaying colonialism and downplaying the vast difference in moral position between ex-colonisers and non-colonisers.

  • Kenelm Digby

    Anonymous 6:42.

    The only morality is our own racial survival. I could not care less about what happened or did not happen in the past, that is totally irrelevant to me right now in the here and now. I totally reject the ridiculous, cartoonish notion that nations or generations ‘owe’ other nations – any study of history will tell you that this ‘principle’ is pure garbage.

    Likewise the notion that I have to justify anti-immigration policies to you or anyone else for that matter, is just pure ridiculous garbage. For the people of a sovereign nation through their elected government to come out and say they don’t want a certain type of immigrant or person on their soil is justification enough – the immigrants in a sane world would have absolutely no say or wouldn’t even dare to speak out on that matter. It’s exactly the same as me seeing who I want or don’t want to invite into my house – it is my business and no one else’s.

  • BritishActivism

    To #34

    What you’re failing to register is that I said that British Nationalists do not advocate colonialism. We do not seek to build a new British Empire or go and take over people’s countries.

    There are arguments to support the good things that colonialism brought the world, it is not all bad news – and therefore we may defend those things when liberal fools try and lay on the whole “you stole our money” line like you have just done with the other commenter.

    Firstly, the ordinary people of Britain, the working man, the child workers, the miners, the mill workers were not responsible for colonialism and hardly did they benefit from any “wealth” which a select few elite mustered for themselves.

    Secondly, they are from generations long past – the sins of the father cannot be laid to pass on the child. By applying your anti-white guilt trip on people who are wholly innocent is abhorrent and vindictive, even racist.

    “We” in the present did not deny anybody anything – people hundreds of years ago did, and “we” are not culpable for their actions.

    Thirdly, Australia, Canada, etc were very sparsely populated. There was not any real advanced civilisation there at that point. That is just a statement of demographic fact at that point in history.

    In Africa there was not even a two story house, the wheel, a sea worthy boat, or common written language until Europeans arrived there.

    Although it was not right to go and commandeer Australia etc, it is NOT the same thing as colonising an already established, advanced and highly/densely populated landmass. We, for our sins, carved a high civilisation in Africa – which, having since handed to Blacks has gone down the toilet. Everywhere we build up, the non-whites seem to flock to and then demolish to a shadow of their former selves – such as Detroit.

    Fourthly, the United States, Britain, Ireland, France, and other white European countries have repaid any “debt” they owe upteen times over in terms of Aid and “redevelopment”. The British government in particular spent more money abolishing the slave trade at the time than it ever gained from it – and we are still sending billions of pounds around the world like confetti to places which quite frankly do not deserve it.

    That some of these places are so corrupt and backwards (like Africa) that they spent more fighting wars between THEMSELVES and pocketing the money to build mansions for despots than all the charity money given to them since the 1980’s combined is not our problem.

    Heaven knows Britain and America has paid an ultimate price of thise “white guilt” trip which you lay on – by having liberal fools import half the third world to this country to the point we are going to cease to exist in the future.

    You cannot pay a bigger price than that – and lets be quite clear, that when Europe is populated by Black people and Muslims from Arab nations, there will be no more “honey pot” and a lot less Aid money going to the bottomless pit of the Third World.

    In addition to those points, have no “guilt” on my shoulders whatsoever for perceived “stealing” of wealth – and seeing as I was not alive a few hundred years ago, neither do I feel “guilt” for anything else my race apparently did – especially when they are being compared against the morals and virtues of contemporary values!.

    Where are the apologies of the Muslims for Islamic Empire and expansionism? Why aren’t they being hammered into extinction and endlessly apologizing for their past? Or is that just a club you like to beat White “western” people of the Occidental world with?

    We British Nationalists do not deny the inhabitants of any nation to their own future – and also believe that it is up to them to determine it.

    We are not interested in meddling in other peoples affairs, especially when they are not in our interest. We would certainly not be hot-trotting around at the moment like the world’s policeman – or killing and maiming millions of Arab civilians in wars that have nothing to do with Britain.

    The white man, especially Britain which has produced approximately 80% of all the worlds innovations, has provided untold “wealth” to Africa and elsewhere around the world by the very existence of these things. Or should we take all our inventions, medicines, technology back?

    Australia’s aboriginals did not give the European people anything in human advancement (to my knowledge) – and Africa has given nothing innovative to the world but HIV/Aids and a huge headache – and all evidence points to the idea that they would never have done so, even today.

    By allowing the white race to perish, perhaps the killing of the goose that laid the golden eggs is taking place.

    Besides, if the ‘Aboriginal Australians’ and “Native Americans” were right to keep their own countries in the past and were right to fight off the European “invader” as you quite rightly imply – then so will it be our right to do so here in Britain and Europe.

    I say again, two wrongs do not make a right – and it is hypocritical on your and Galloways part to continue this process, not hypocritical of British Nationalists.

  • BritishActivism

    Again @ #34. I appear to have potentially misread your intentions.

    I had taken it that you are an opponent of British Nationalism (or Whites, Nationalism, etc in general). I do not know whether this is the case or not, but the reply I gave is obviously intended for somebody who is hostile to White survival.

    If you are friend and not foe, apologies. In that case, I would politely and simply suggest that the onus is on those nations (who have not been imperialist/colonialist in the past) to argue their own case and have it as a tool in the toolbox of their advantage.

    What British colonial past has to do with other White nation states with no colonial/Empire history escapes me at the minute. Why should those nations have to excuse what the British did? You simply need to cut off such idiocy at the root, should anyone in those nations try and apply guilt by association of race!

    It is for those nations to argue why they are different, and not up to me to tailor my argument to suit their purposes.

    I do not feel that my cause and positions adversely affect the ability of other countries to state their own cases, especially when taking into account of some of the points I make in my earlier posting.

  • Anonymous

    Kenelm Digby:

    “It’s exactly the same as me seeing who I want or don’t want to invite into my house – it is my business and no one else’s.”

    Unless you are keeping stolen property inside your house; then the victim of theft has every right to enter your house and take back his property. That’s what we’re talking about.

    It’s people like you who are making all the anti-immigration groups look incompetent by refusing to acknowledge where the debate really is. The first thing we need to do is to stop the pro-immigration groups from tarring all Europe with one brush. (Are you reading this too, BritishActivism?) All European countries are not equally responsible for taking immigrants. Non-colonisers have no moral responsibility for taking immigrants at all. But to get this point across, we have to admit that ex-colonisers have SOME moral responsibility for taking immigrants. This is what you are not doing, and this is why the pro-immigration groups are having an easy time.

    BritishActivism:

    I am playing devil’s advocate here so you don’t have to go out and get creamed by someone like Galloway, which is what will happen if you use most of the arguments you just posted.

    “Firstly, the ordinary people of Britain, the working man, the child workers, the miners, the mill workers were not responsible for colonialism and hardly did they benefit from any “wealth” which a select few elite mustered for themselves.”

    Britain as a country definitely became much wealthier than it would have been without the Empire. This wealth facilitated economic growth and the building of infrastructure, which benefited the whole population. So the ordinary people of Britain did indeed benefit considerably from the Empire, just not as much as the elites.

    “Secondly, they are from generations long past – the sins of the father cannot be laid to pass on the child.”

    I addressed this last time. The child is not guilty of the father’s theft, but the stolen property still doesn’t belong to the child and must be returned to the victim of theft. This is incontrovertible, and ignoring it just makes you (and all of us) look bad.

    “Thirdly, Australia, Canada, etc were very sparsely populated. There was not any real advanced civilisation there at that point. That is just a statement of demographic fact at that point in history.”

    That is not really relevant. They were either denied their own homeland or they were not. The fact is they were, and again, trying to dodge this makes you (and all of us) look bad.

    “Fourthly, the United States, Britain, Ireland, France, and other white European countries have repaid any “debt” they owe upteen times over in terms of Aid and “redevelopment”.”

    If Britain and the ex-colony were to agree formally on a financial settlement of a quantity that both sides were happy with, and named explicitly as reparations for colonisation, then we could say what you said. But the aid packages weren’t like this, so cannot be added to the equation.

    “if the ‘Aboriginal Australians’ and “Native Americans” were right to keep their own countries in the past and were right to fight off the European “invader” as you quite rightly imply – then so will it be our right to do so here in Britain and Europe.”

    That’s like saying that if the victim of theft has a right to defend his property from being stolen, the thief also has a right to defend the stolen property from the victim who is attempting to get it back! Do you see what I mean about how arguments like these make all of us look incompetent?

    Enough of this “two wrongs don’t make a right” nonsense. Stealing is wrong. Taking back from the thief what the thief stole from you is not wrong. There are no “two wrongs” here. You have to use arguments that are solid, not fallacies that anyone can refute. In the case of anti-immigration, the only solid argument is that non-colonisers are not responsible for taking immigrants. That is it. Everything else must be based on this point and only this point, or else there is no case at all.

  • BritishActivism

    You are completely on the wrong track my friend. My land, my country, is NOT stolen property. Therefore it is yourself who looks the fool with your inane “theft” analogies. The last one does not make any coherant sense at all.

    The “two wrongs do not make a right” is a valid and legitimiate argument to make. If it was wrong for “us” to go over there and take it from their people, it is wrong for “others” to come and take it from mine. It really is that simple.

    We do not need to send “reparations” anywhere to anybody, and with this attitude you might as well be a non-white with a chip on their shoulder. Which I am coming to suspect you are.

    “We” do no owe anybody anything – just like the inane call from Blacks claim for “reparations” for slavery in the United States – and like I say, European people have sent billions and billions to former colonies and to failed states around the world – largely due to “guilt” of former empire days.

    We have done MORE than enough to advance the world, issue out our money, than was ever “stolen” (as you put it). The whole argument of financial “repayment” and “theft” is ridiculous. Like I say, we spent more to abolish slavery than we ever gained from it. We worked hard, fought hard, defended, strived and toiled for what we have in our country, and I resent your ridiculous notion that we simply arrived as a first world nation because we “stole” everything from others. You insult me, and my country.

    Nor did you answer why the British Empire has anything to do with other white nations with no empire history. Whether you agree with my points are neither here nor there for your own country and its destiny. Stop trying to attach some sort of “blame” on to the British for your lack of ability to defend your own arguments.

    Your argument that we should be demographically wiped out in our own country as some sort of “reparations” (or guilt or reciprocation) for commanding 1/3rd the globe centuries ago (even though in places like India and Malaysia we never even amassed 0.7% of the population and had no interest in taking it over) is thorougly evil.

    For the last time, British Nationalists do NOT advocate imperialism and colonialism. The more you claim to blame us for things we do not even advocate the more absurd it is to argue. I will not sit back and let you denigrate my nation, my history, apply white guilt to the living white people based on modern moral liberal virtues. This is why I defend and put things into context – it does not mean I advocate doing it all over again.

    With the argumements you make, such as those of Galloway and that of the Blacks seeking “reparations for theft” – I suspect that you are not a Nationalist at all.

  • Anonymous

    “I suspect that you are not a Nationalist at all.”

    I made clear at the beginning that I support CIVIC nationalism in Britain. Unlike you, I recognize that countries with different histories cannot have the the same policies. It is not an insult to bring up past British involvement in other regions around the world during a discussion about immigration primarily from those same regions. If anything is an insult, it is to suggest that countries such as Ireland, Finland, Norway and other non-colonisers have no moral high ground over Britain, France and other ex-colonisers in the discussion of who should take immigrants.

    “it is yourself who looks the fool with your inane “theft” analogies. The last one does not make any coherant sense at all.”

    Please tell me what is incoherent about it.

    1. Does the colonised country ask to be colonised?

    2. Is wealth transferred from the colonised country to the colonising country (which is what makes colonisation profitable in the first place)?

    If your answers are 1. No 2. Yes, then you must agree that colonisation is a form of theft, from which the analogy follows.

    “Nor did you answer why the British Empire has anything to do with other white nations with no empire history.”

    I did. At present, all of Europe is paying for the crimes of a few former colonial powers. This is what is unfair to me. Somehow, because Britain had colonies, Ireland must also take immigrants. That is like saying the man who lives next door to the thief must also repay the victim of theft. The neighbour should be allowed to say it is the business of the thief’s household, not his household! But because the thief’s son also refuses to take responsibility (even though he is the inheritor the stolen property), the discussion cannot advance.

  • BritishActivism

    At “Anonymous” once again:

    It is incoherent and nonsensical because you said this:

    “That’s like saying that if the victim of theft has a right to defend his property from being stolen, the thief also has a right to defend the stolen property from the victim who is attempting to get it back! Do you see what I mean about how arguments like these make all of us look incompetent?”

    You are thus implying that the country which I live in, the indigenous land of the British people is the product of THEFT. Therefore, by extension, the land mass is from THEFT and is STOLEN PROPERTY which others have the right to “take back”. By further extension it implies that we have NO right to our OWN homeland because we STOLE it and everything we now have is the product of THEFT.

    If you cannot see the incoherent nature of this “theft” analogy, then I cannot further help you.

    Your attitude is insulting to every hard working, and hard fighting British man and woman who strived and toiled to make this country great. They worked hard, often for pittance. They sacrificed their lives for this country and its well being. They invented things, made something of the place though blood sweat and tears. You insult me, and my people by suggesting we would have nothing at all to show for ourselves unless we had “stole” from others.

    Your response to the other question is weak and does not even answer the question. But then again, civic nationalist advocates are generally weak. I should expect little more.

    You said:

    “All of Europe is paying for the crimes of a few colonial powers”

    – That is not my fault, not my problem, not my concern. I am sorry to have to repeat myself, but it is not up to me to argue the case for why your own country, wherever that may be, should be treated differently when it comes to “white guilt”.

    That is YOUR job, within the confines of your own country. Not my job, not anyone else’s job.

    If you are White, and if you are letting liberals and the pro-immigration lobby steamroller you into accepting mass immigration because of what OTHER white people did that had NOTHING to do with your own nations history – then I am afraid that is a flaw and a weakness on YOUR own head, not one on mine.

    By continuing to accept and perpetuate some kind of “universal” white guilt for things which are not even in living memory, you yourself do a great disservice to White people who suffer the same kind of inane rhetoric from our detractors who want to see us gone from this world.

    Then again, seeing as you are an advocate of “civic” nationalism, I suspect that you do not really care much for race replacement issues.

    Should Britain and other countries be claiming compensation for White Slavery by the Muslims/Barbary pirates, who were stealing white folk in the night from our shores?

    Should Spain claim recompense for their period of Islamic rule?

    Perhaps we should reach back into time even further and find some Romans to take to task for their expansionism?

    What about other empires, conquests, land grabs by non whites? Where are their apologies? Where is their “guilt”, why aren’t they busting open their gates to be replaced because of their “sins”?.

    When will the “White debt” for this alleged “theft” be repaid? When we are finally wiped from the face of the Earth?

    It really is absurd to continue this concept on.

    As for Ireland, they still get the same “guilt” applied there anyway, despite having no direct colonial past.

    Do you know why? Well, they get told that because they used to emigrate to Britain and to the USA (and other parts of the Occidental/White world) that they have NO RIGHT to stop other people from around the world flocking to Ireland and displacing their own people.

    Going by your arguments, therefore, the Irish helped “thieve” and get rich/generally prosper off the land of others by their very settlement there, so they should therefore not complain when others from around the world “take back” in the same way – and inadvertently come to take over Ireland in the process.

    Is this the kind of route you wish to go down? Apologetic, stumbling and fumbling through some liberal guilt trip until nation states of White people are ground into the dirt?

    If you are white, you need to stand up for yourself much more than you are doing now. Do not accept these absurdities as being a reason to destroy Europe and Europeans.

    I am getting very irritated at your constant assertion that I, and my fellow patriots are thieves. I have explained that we are not thieves, especially not in the present, and that those people who continue to claim they have been stolen from have received as much recompense for past “sins” as is required – and have, in many cases, benefited from our involvement and our benevolence as Whites (including towards those who have little to do with us).

    Perhaps you would care to estimate what re-numeration we are supposed to owe?

    Perhaps you might care to add up what it has cost this country to deal with former colonies, failed states, the third world, foreign aid to India, Pakistan, etc….?

    Perhaps you would like to answer the notion of how the Rothschild family banking elite really ran the British Empire in the 1800’s? Are you going to knock on their door and ask for stolen property back?

    (Ie Rothschild said: “The man who controls Britain’s money supply control the British Empire, and I control the British money supply”).

    Perhaps you would like to explain the child labour in Britain, the Hunger Marches of the 1920’s and 1930’s? If we had done so “well” as ordinary individuals from our colonialism, why were people starving and rioting with the authorities?

    By the way, for our “sins” of colonialism, in 1948, Britain had the INSANE policy of letting any “commonwealth” citizen settle here in the “mother land” if they wished.

    Have you any idea of just how ABSURD that notion is? We governed perhaps well over 300 Million people – and they were all granted the ability to live in Britain, a nation that can only handle about 70 Million people and can only feed itself as a nation at 30 Million people!

    Is this what you are suggesting we continue to do? Will this finally recompense the “theft”? Are you out of your mind?

    Due to such idiotic “shame” and “guilt” after the collapse of the British Empire (and after the “shame” and horrors of the Second World War when such immigration and settlement policies were formulated), we accepted thousands of non-whites into Britain.

    We are now going to be ethnic minorities within ALL our major cities within the next decade – with those such as Birmingham and Leicester already (unofficially) majority non-white, and with places like London, Slough, Blackburn, Bradford, hot on their heels.

    In 2005, over 1 in 3 babies born in England and Wales were to NON WHITE mothers who were THEMSELVES born over seas! This therefore does NOT include babies born to second, third, fourth generation immigrants already here.

    In 1958, there were only 200,000 “coloured” people in Britain as a whole, most of them temporarily based at busy international ports and docklands.

    By 2058, WE are due to be the ethnic minorities in Britain.

    Therefore, to say that we have not “recompensed” for our sins of “going elsewhere” is ridiculous. We are now demographically fighting for survival here in Britain – and people like yourself who imply we have little moral authority to save ourselves from this plight make me sick.

    On this basis, you really can take your white guilt trip and shove it where the sun doesn’t shine. I do not buy it, and I do not buy into it.

    To be pedantic about “stolen wealth”, White elites, for example, may indeed have gone to Africa, some parts of the middle east, or wherever, and mined for diamonds or oil, or gold.

    Yet if the white man had not discovered their worth and their use, then quite frankly those diamonds and oil and gold would still be sitting there in Africa and Africans would still be poor because they would not have invented anything which uses these materials, nor would they have made anything capable of their extraction. They would probably still be ignorant of what they were, and what use they had.

    Given that it is now the Chinese who are doing similar things on an industrial scale in Africa, I look forward to your condemnation of the Chinese people in the present day – and you telling them that they should face racial annihilation in China because of it, and that they should hand over everything they built for themselves in China up to this point for their ‘theft’ and exploitation.

    Whilst it is true Australia cannot be handed back to the Aborigines, or America back to the Native Americans, what do you expect me to do about that?

    Am I supposed to feel “shame” for actions which were not even mine, and actions, which at the time of general exploration and settlement of human beings, was not really considered to be crimes by today’s moral virtues – but valid conquest, expansionism and settlement like other people were also doing around the globe throughout history, long before the British and French joined in on the action?

    Am I supposed to feel so much shame as a white man that I accept my own perishing and that of all my fellow Britons? What utter nonsense.

    It is you who is the one doing a disservice to the ethnic and cultural survival of European people and the European nation states by continuing to pursue this “theft” and “we owe the world” nonsense, not me.