Civic Nationalism is predicated on liberalism, multi-culturalism, political correctness, liberal values and cultural relativism. In this system immigrants are not made to assimilate into British culture, they are allowed to become Colonists and British society adopt a form of Liberal Apartheid based on separate development. This is the primary driver of racism and anti-white racism and Islamic extremism in our society.
Racial Nationalism states that only Whites can be British and that therefore anyone of immigrant stock cannot be allowed to become British by culture as to do would somehow 'dilute' British culture. In fact multi-culturalism and racial nationalism both end up in apartheid states.
The Third Way is British Nationalism.
In a British Nationalist State all those that refuse to assimilate into British culture or whose aims and agenda are to impose their religion, values and way of life on the British people are defined as colonists and deported. Religion would be a matter of individual choice, and Sharia Law courts banned and closed down as would all other religious 'courts' and 'parliaments'. Those that sought to use their religion for political ends would be arrested and prosecuted.
In a British Nationalist state there is no multi-culturalism - there is simply British Culture.
In a British Nationalist state all immigration would be stopped so that we could first assimilate the indigenous white British who have been socially alienated by multi-culturalism and then assimilate the immigrants who are here.
In a British Nationalist system schools and public authorities would end the kowtowing to the demands of minorities and insist they assimilate into our British society. No more prayer rooms and days off school for religious festivals.
There would be no government translation services or translators, no political correctness and no race relations industry in a British Nationalist state, as society would be a meritocracy as opposed to a racist and liberal fascist state based on anti-White Affirmative Action Plans and Positive Discrimination.
Immigrants would be forced to learn English or be deported.
In a British Nationalist state the numbers of religious buildings would be cut and local referendums held to decide if an planning application goes ahead in an area - if the people vote no, then no buildings go up.
In a British Nationalist state, no schoolkids would be allowed to wear the Burkha or Hijab in schools.
In a British Nationalist State the burkha and Hijab would be banned for all public sector workers and members of all religions forced to wear a uniform that would not signify an adherence to a particular creed or belief in the workplace.
In a British Nationalist state all trades unions that were internationalist as opposed to British Nationalist would be de-registered. No more campaigns for Cuba when British workers are being thrown on the dole.
In a British Nationalist state all those naturalised citizens that break the law, regardless of whether they are white Australians or Blacks from Zaire will be deported.
In a British Nationalist state all illegal immigrants, bogus asylum seekers, foreign criminals and visa over stayers would be arrested and deported with no right of appeal.
In a British Nationalist state all young people would be forced to do two years National service either in hospitals learning first aid and helping the nursing staff take care of the sick, the old and the disabled both in hospitals and in the community, in the British Army (but not sent abroad) working to act as logistics support and learning a trade or working on the land with farmers and learning farming so they learn to become part of a National Community.
In a British Nationalist State there would be no more foreign wars for oil, as we would create energy national self sufficiency as a primary goal. In a British Nationalist state national self sufficiency would become a primary goal of government.
In a British Nationalist state, the environment would be protected in order to ensure that future generations of British people have access to resources and a sustainable environment that sustains them and their society. The environment would not be just a resource base, but recognised as of primary importance. No building on the green belt. No immigration that requires millions of new houses would be allowed.
In a British Nationalist state the Christian Church would be told to keep out of politics and take care of its own followers, not involve itself in liberal politics and act as the promoters of liberalism, multi-culturalism and political correctness. No more Marxists in frocks would be able to pontificate to the British people.
In a British Nationalist State the role of the State would be to serve the interests of the British people, as opposed to the people serving the state.
In a British Nationalist system the National economy would replace the globalist economy, and industry, economics and finance serve the interests of the nation and the people not just the banks and the bankers.
In a British Nationalist system no British soldiers would be sent to die for US oil demands. We would keep Britain out of foreign wars and foreign wars out of Britain.
In a British Nationalist state the terrorists and hard drug importers would be hung, not put into holidays camps that masquerade as prisons.
In a British Nationalist state the anti-social criminals in our communities would not be patted on the heads by social workers, they would be flogged in public until they stopped committing crimes and serious criminals forced to work in prisons or in public work schemes and their wages given to their victims or their own families to support them.
In a British Nationalist system political correctness would be eradicated and free speech restored.
In a British Nationalist system the British Constitution would be restored and all powers given away to supra-national institutions like the EU repatriated. Britain would withdraw from the EU and limit the powers of foreign corporations to throw British workers on the dole when they make a decision to do so in a boardroom in Berlin, Tokyo, New York, Tel Aviv or Paris.
In a British Nationalist state those colonists would not be allowed to play the race card anymore. The people who would be the primary recipients of state assistance would be the poor, the disabled, the elderly and the working class.
Drug addicts and alcoholics and the self inflicted, would not be able to claim dole.
If they are heroin addicts they would be banned from driving, electronically tagged, fitted with a contraceptive implant and not allowed to get pregnant until they are clean and then made to live in special housing blocks where they work and get their drugs given to them by doctors - then when they get fed up with this lifestyle they would then be able to go to rehab and would have the will to keep off the drugs.
Those found guilty of three times selling hard drugs would be hung.
In a British Nationalist state there would be no homeless British people, as the homes of the colonists would be given to them. There would no homeless british ex-soldiers as they would be living in the homes of the Al Qaeda supporters and the Sharia law extremists who would be deported as soon as get into power.
In a British Nationalist State the media would be allowed to print only the truth, not propaganda for or against political parties. Those foreign news corporations like the Murdoch Empire would be forced to hand over control of the company to a board of British directors who would run the company for Murdoch. No more would foreign media barons be allowed to elect political parties to power. The will of the British people alone will decide elections, not media barons.
In a British Nationalist state a British National Bank would fund massive public work schemes that are designed to increase efficiency, productivity and energy efficiency. These schemes would award contracts to British firms who employ British workers. There would be massive state investment in re-opening coal mines and creating liquified gas electric generation plants next to the coal mines for the coal that is dug up to produce electricity that is sold to the National Grid. North Sea oil platforms would become Carbon sequestration plants to store harmful greenhouses gases. Massive Renewable and Green Energy projects would replace our dependence on Middle East oil and Russian gas.
In a British Nationalist state billions would be spent on creating technical colleges with apprenticeships to allow our young people to get jobs in the new heavy industry jobs and new public work schemes. Millions would be re-employed and given decent jobs and wages.
In a British Nationalist system the British people would once again be employed making things to sell to the rest of the world, instead of being dependent on service industries and financial services.
The time has come to create a society that removes all the sick liberal values of our sick and broken society - and create a Better Britain in its place.
This is why the Third Way, British Nationalism, is the answer to all our problems.
25 comments:
What you're describing as civic nationalism is actually not civic nationalism, but rather multiculturalism that rejects the idea of nationalism all-together.
Civic nationalism is the belief that national identity is based on shared values and culture, rather than blood and heritage. Right wing civic nationalism is predominant in America and adheres to what you describe as "British" nationalism. Just replace British with American.
It doesn't work. Not in America. Maybe you can find a way to make it happen in Britain, and if you do, I'll be impressed. But from my experience, people generally do not give up their heritage and culture. Why would we? We are animals that are tribal in nature.
The whole idea of a national identity being based on shared values rather than blood is based on an Enlightenment attempt at mankind overcoming irrational beliefs like blood ties and embracing "reason". It's why the French Constitution defines citizenship by soil rather than blood. And yet mankind's reason never seems able to overcome nature - the natural desire of a species to spread apart and evolve in different directions, thus granting the species a greater chance of survival. It's why evolution on a micro scale happens, it's in the interest of nature to take different shapes and forms, and that includes humanity evolving into races and races evolving into different ethnic groups. That's why I favor ethnic nationalism over racial nationalism.
Ethnic nationalism is the third way between civic and race nationalism.
Ethnic Nationalism will only work within a British Nationalist context.
Once all British citizens of all races and religions are Nationalised, then they can organise into ethnic communities if they wish - but at all times they must be culturally British and ow their primary loyalty to the Britain and the British people.
Ethnic Nationalism for non-whites and whites in a British society that refuses to demand each citizen adopt British culture and loyalty to Britain and the the British people is merely another path to apartheid or multi-culturalism.
Without it being forced to undergo a British Nationalist indoctrination process, it becomes what we have now.
Once each member of our society has been nationalised, then they can of course if they wish live and marry amongst their own kind.
The choice to do so is a personal choice, it should not be forced via politics.
Please use technology to spread this letter, blog it, post it, tect it, e mail it, send it to someone important.
Save the United Kingdom of Great Britain
and the indigenous population without bloodshed or violence.
I wish to report to you a case of the most serious crime in the world.
Against the Geneva Convention Ethnocide and United Nations Indigenous Peoples Rights to Identity and Culture.
This is a case of Ethnocide and it is happening here and now in the United Kingdom.
Labours plan of uncontrolled immigration policy has come to light and this can be proven in the statistics.
Wikipedia lists and explains exactly the Crime of Ethnocide.
Attacks On Culture and Displacement.
Put simply it is the cleansing or minoritising of an indigenous population by methods other than mass extermination.
It is a fact that by 2070 the immigrant population will be ahead of the indigenous peoples of England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland.
This is a Crime against humanity according to the Geneva Convention it is an equivalent crime to Genocide and is a form of ethnic Cleansing.
I am reporting this crime to every agency in the UK to expose this crime to the British People.
Take action Now! Reveal this Labour Plot because the hunt is on for the conspiracy that exists between labour and conservative politicians who have plotted this treason.
Regards
Stephen Harrison
I have emailed this matter to hundreds of important people, If they ignore it and take no action then surely they by default become an accomplice to the crime.
Organisations, QC’s, Barristers, Solicitors, Members Of Parliament, The Hague, The United Nations.
As an Englishman, along with thousands of others we have been displaced and made to feel inferior in our own land we will have a website shortly so that the whole world can see what is being done to us. THE FIGHT BACK HAS BEGUN.
Open Your Eyes And See Before it Is Too Late!
IPCC Complaint Made.
Crimes Reported to West Midlands Police and Metropolitan Police.
I understand where you are coming from, Defender of Liberty, but understand that this is what we try to do in America. We try to make non-white foreigners like Hispanics learn English and study our history, and yet for the most part they continue hoisting Mexican flags over our schools and proclaiming the continent to be theirs. We try to atone for slavery and Jim Crow by including blacks in our society, yet even after 40 years of "progress", blacks still don't identify with white Americans.
Humans don't give up identities, especially when we're dealing with numbers as large as the foreign population in Britain. They are always going to identify as being Bangladeshi or Pakistani, rather than British.
These foreigners are breeding at rate faster than the native population, and they know that time will be on their side. Even if they are "nationalized" and then allowed to associate with their own kind, they will continue breeding more and more until they are the majority of the islands. Then they can say to hell with British nationalism and set up New Bangladesh and New Nigeria.
I'm not arguing that every single non-indigenous person should be rounded up and deported, that would be immoral and would forever haunt the British people, much like how the Germans feel ashamed of their heritage because of the 12-year reign of a madman.
Instead by following BNP policy of rounding up illegals, bogus asylum seekers, and foreign criminals, and then setting up a voluntary repatriation program with financial incentives, then you can get the majority of the immigrants to leave.
There will no doubt be remnants that can be more easily absorbed into the native population since they may be true adherents of British culture that don't have any family or ties to their ancestral homeland. And that's fine, there's always exceptions to the rule. And that would be more favorable to the survival of the indigenous rather than having ethnic minorities that outbreed the natives and inevitably take the country over.
I agree we must avoid the American model - simply as it is just another insipid variant of multi-culturalism.
The problem with the American Model is that it has never been Nationalist, more like multi-culturalism with plastic patriotism attached. They dont even force immigrants to learn and speak English in America !
The point is that British Nationalism must demand that the British people remain a majority in their homeland in perpetuity and that British culture is the only PUBLIC culture.
If they agree to that they can stay, if they dont then they are colonists and must leave regardless of their race, religion or culture or racial ancestry.
Naturalised British citizens will be culturally British but able to still retain their ethnic identity by choosing to marry within their own ethnic and racial and religious groups if they wish - and so will the indigenous British people.
The deportation plans for the criminals etc will remove I estimate about 2 - 3 million. Another million or will leave voluntarily and thereby leave about 3 million in the country.
Plus no more will enter the country - and therefore we will remain forever the demographic majority.
The rest I agree with you on.
AgentChameleon87 got there first. France also tries to do this - and also fails dismally.
Two additional points:
British culture of 100 years ago is very different to British culture now. Culture changes in different areas and in different ways. The heavy ethnic element in our society has largely leeched into the space that was left. How are you going to nationalise this culture? No ethnic faces on television in your Hegelian British Nationalism.
Secondly and more importantly, birth rates and ethnic mixing.
On the one hand we are being overtaken by other ethnicities birth rates. On the other those who are most integrated (blacks) are breeding with the more loose moralled of our womenfolk. Both these issues will only get worse under your system and eventually replace us as Britons in our own homeland. Kosovo here we come..
Many Africans here are concerned about their own families in our rudderless society. They send their children back to their native states for schooling purposes etc.
How about a policy of working with Caribbean states / the Commonwealth. Creating a form of the EU for trade and intellectual aid under the proviso that they allow the repatriation of the educated from here to help them achieve stable societies. With a lot of planning and not a little luck we may not create another Liberia.
While we don't deport people who don't speak English, we're not exactly multi-cultural, at least not the conservative side of the country. We try to get them to celebrate the Fourth of July and sing the Star Spangled Banner, where they come up with a Spanish version that is pro-amnesty. And and as far as blacks go, they speak English as well, and yet that doesn't unify the country in the slightest. We're still different peoples, and no amount of patriotic indoctrination is going to change that, which is why the United States needs to split apart.
The problem with having ethnic minorities like what you suggest is that they will always feel marginalized. That's the simple nature of being a minority. It implies inferiority due to numerical disadvantage. Look at many countries throughout the globe and read about how minorities feel slighted and persecuted and want more right, more sovereignty. When they reach a large enough number they will demand independence, ie. Kosovo, Palestine (or Israel depending on you point of view), Tibet, Inner Mongolia, Kurdistan, Chechnya, Bosnia, Montenegro, Russian Crimea, the Kalahari Bushman, Afrikaners, Zulus, the Lakota Republic, Atzlan, etc.
And let's take a look at the ethnic conflicts in Russia. The Russians were big on Russianizing subjects of their Empire, and even the USSR continued Russianization programs, like forcing people to speak Russian because they knew that they needed a monolithic culture to hold together a vast empire. And they were much more strict in their nationalism then us Americans are. And yet even after all that, people still clung on to their original belief and heritage and fought for independence, and why people like the Chechens fight for independence today.
Same thing with Iraq. No amount of nationalism will bring the Kurds, Shiites, and Sunnis living happily under an Iraqi banner, it cannot be done. Saddam couldn't do it, Bush couldn't do it, Obama won't be able to do it.
That's why British nationalism should be within the context of ethnic nationalism. Each ethnic group deserves its own country, its own protected space. I believe that model is the best path for global peace.
France has never tried what I have suggested - they also have a version of multi-culturalism.
France has never deported the ones that do not assimilate, and that is the primary difference.
My nationalism is backed up with the power of the state - from the police to the military and each would facilitate the transition from the present social model to the British nationalist model.
We must begin the deportations, not say we will and not do it.
It easy to nationalise a culture - you take control of the media away from the liberals and take control of the education systems and then impose national service.
Job done in a generation.
There will be plenty of ethnic faces on TV in a British Nationalist society, but they will promote British culture and work for the aims of British culture.
If immigrants are not here they cannot breed - either with us or amongst themselves, that is why deportation is an essential element to the process of nationalising Britain.
I agree 100 % on the commonwealth idea and that is where I would expect many people to return home too, especially if they are incentivised financially to do so.
Mass immigration is primarily mass emigration, and we have to stop both - from coming here and leaving there own countries.
We must end the asset stripping of the commonwealth and third world and the theft of their doctors and nurses and work with them to create stable societies that do not break down and cause mass emigration.
That's a very good idea Ben. In order to help the goal of repatriating the majority of non-natives back to their country of origin, it would help to promote stability within their nations, which are afflicted with poverty and war. Trade and intellectual aid, as you put it, may be just as enticing, if not more so, than strictly financial aid.
The issue is simply that in order to impose an ethno-nationalist model we must be voted into power, and ethno-nationalism is not a vote winner.
CULTURE IS.
Culture is more populist than race or ethnicity - and remember that even if we had a 100 % white nation if we did not change the present degenerate liberal culture we would still be screwed.
A DEGENERATE CULTURE SPAWNS A DEGENERATE PEOPLE.
Culture is a vote winner - and allows us to create a British nationalist society and then devolve power down to people to set up their own ethno-nationalist organisations, charities and communities - all of which they cannot do under the present 'liberal' system.
My plan is populist in that it will win elections and votes.
Once in power we can then devolve power to people who wish to live in accord with ethno-nationalist principles.
No party that advocates compulsory repatriation will ever be elected into power.
Once you understand that then you realise that by emphasising British culture you unlock populist support.
Communist Russianisation didnt work as it was communist.
The people resisted the insanity of the ideology that sought to eradicate their culture and identity and the theft of their lands - what I propose is simply that the British people remain in a British culture in their own homelands.
That is a hell of a lot different to communist russianification which sought to steal their lands, dump russian settlers in their lands, impose communism, impose an alien culture and destroy their cultural identity.
Thats why communist russianification failed - as it was an alien ideology in alien lands.
This is a british ideology in Britain, and thats why it will work.
Well Defender of Liberty, we seemed to have reached an impasse.
Nevertheless, I wish you the best of luck in fighting for British Nationalism. May your ideas come true and prove my jaded predictions wrong. ;)
I agree with you about Iraq as that nation was a false construct predicated on the demands of the occupying powers after WW1 - not what would have worked in relation to the wishes of the people of those lands - T.H. Lawrence drew a map that he wanted to use as the basis of his plan for the area that was based on splitting the area up into sunni, shiite and kurdish areas and it was rejected - if he had been listened too then all the sectarian strife could have been avioded.
I think the issue for us is simply what gets us elected.
That is the primary goal - once in power we can then change the country for the better.
Best regards,
Lee
Ah you've made a new comment, so I shall respond more, lol.
I strongly disagree that ethnonationalism is not a vote-winner. Ethnonationalism is the driving force behind many freedom fighters of the world today. It's natural and speaks to much of the world, and I do not believe that Western White people are any different. Note how only recently calling native white British people indigenous was considered taboo, yet now polls show many people agree with Nick Griffin's belief that someone needs to stand up for the indigenous British. Nick Griffin struck a chord into the hearts of many native British, the same heart that drives Chechens, Mayans, and Uighurs to stand up for their freedom. Hopefully the natives of Britain will resort to something more peaceful, but regardless, I disagree with your notion that ethnonationalism is unacceptable to the voter. It's only unacceptable because the Left says it is. You cannot allow the Left to set the rules. Notice how Nick changed the rules by presenting the idea of an indigenous British population as something legitimate. Fight the Left's rules, rather than fear what's unacceptable to the average voter.
You speak of degenerate white liberals as being a problem, I agree. I can't stand how so many of my race in America have become so fallen. And yet I do not give up on them and say that conservative Hispanics (which they are when it comes to social issues. The only reason California banned gay marriage was because of the Hispanics) need to bail my country out. Instead I seek to educate and redeem those of my heritage, my blood.
And as I said before, I never called for compulsory repatriation. I agree with the BNP policy of voluntary repatriation with strong financial incentives for both the immigrants and their country of origin. And Ben had a very good idea of promoting intellect aid for struggling Third World nations.
And you label the Russian nationalism imposed on non-Russians as communist when in fact it wasn't. It was already in place long ago by the Russian Tsars, who wanted a monolithic Russia. And the communists originally considered granting autonomy to national groups, but then realized how the USSR would splinter should they do so, which is why Stalin cynically used Russian nationalism as a weapon. And it was actual Russian nationalism. The Russian language was exalted and Russian history and culture was imposed upon non-Russians who had to learn about Ivan the Terrible and Alexander Nevsky. It was Russian nationalism pushed by a communist regime that realized that communist ideology is bullcrap and won't hold people together. It's also why Stalin had the national anthem changed during WWII to something much more nationalistic, praised ancient Rus the Motherland.
Same thing in China. China understands the danger of ethnic minorities which is why they heavily discriminate against them and try to make them insignificant because they realize that should they ever become significant in size they will seek independence. Hence China pushes Han Chinese nationalism and often punishes expressions of Tibetan or Uighur pride. They know that a multi-ethnic China cannot survive.
While I think you would be much more sincere person than Stalin or Hu Jintao, I think ultimately you will see the same result. Foreigners will pretend to be British, and when things favor them they will take off the mask and hoist the flag of their new nation upon whatever they perceive as their land. And low-breed native British will not be able to stop it, and their will be civil war and strife as people cannot agree to live together and want their own space.
Again, these are my predictions, based on my observations of history and human nature. We'll see if your ideas can come true.
I can understand the desire to get elected, but as I said before, the only reason why ethnic nationalism in the West is unacceptable is because the Left is allowed to set the rules. The Left deems ethnic nationalism racist, and it's time to fight back. Point out how genocide of white ethnic groups is unacceptable. Make them look like the extremists. I think Nick Griffin succeeded in doing that for a good number of Britons.
Watch the coming fireworks, things may get rather interesting. The Berlin Wall of Political Correctness may come crashing down.
looks like the multicult is steam rolling everything in its path, the bnp included.
ok a few questions ;
1) what does ethno-nationalism have to offer the British people and why would they vote for it
2) what would an ethno-nationalist regime do as regards British naturalised citizens
3) what identity would they have ?
4) The Tsarist regime also sought to impose its own monarchist ideology, a fake Russian identity and extirpate and destroy the indigenous cultures of the indigenous people of the lands that the Tsar ruled - yet again as under communism it was imperialist and expansionist, whilst all we want is a British culture in our own homeland.
5) One mans Freedom fighter is anothers terrorist - we are politicians not terrorists and nor do we need a terrorist movement to take power - we need a populist political movement to do that
6) The American situation for whites requires a mass White Nationalist movement, not an ethno-nationalist movement, for it to consolidate around the issue of race and not culture, nationality or religion.
Ethno-nationalism is based on each national ethnic group preserving their own national, ethnic and cultural identity in their own lands - but that would be disaster for American whites who share only one unifying characteristic - the fact they are white.
Thats why America must form a white nationalist movement, whilst the rest of Europe and Britain must adopt Nationalist ideologies that promote national cultures and that also allow people to form and join their ethno-nationalist communal movements if they wish.
White nationalism would be a disaster for Britain, but it is a neccesity for the survival of whites in America.
With my plan once we have trimmed the numbers and nationalised the rest then we would have no problems - and remember that a nationalist government knows how to deal with terrorists - we would execute them all.
China also is a state that seeks to impose its culture on minorities in their own lands - and thats why it will fall eventually.
We are in Britain in our own homeland and all we demand is our own culture is restored and our people allowed the liberty to define themselves as British - we are freeing our poeople from liberal totalitarianism, not imposing an totalitarian ideology upon them all.
Yeah thats right - we are all multi-culturalists - you fucking idiot.
In order to transition from a liberal society into an ethno-nationalist society there must be British Nationalist stage in order to re-nationalise the people and culture and force the media, institutions and allow people to feel that it okay to be ethno-nationalist.
There can be no jump from a liberal society to an ethno-nationalist society, simply as the people have to be de-conditioned from liberal values and also to be re-nationalised and most importantly taught to think, feel and vote as an ethnic group.
Thats why the British Nationalism stage must precede the formation of ethno-nationalist movements.
Question Time for Agent Chameleon!
1.)Ethnonationalism offers a lot for the British people, for it recognizes the English, Scottish, Welsh, and Irish identities as being real identities that are based on thousands of years of shared history and heritage. The indigenous people of the British Isles can take pride in the fact that their blood carries the legacy of those who built Stonehenge, fought the Romans for independence, developed the rich medieval Anglo-Celtic civilization that is so idealized in modern fantasy, performed Shakespeare's plays, developed capitalism and parliamentary democracy as know it today, ended most of the world's slavery, and so on. They can take pride in the fact they are part of ancient family that goes back to the end of the Ice Age. And they can feel security in ethno-nationalism in that it calls for a homeland for them and their descendants and that their identity is not for sale. This is very enticing for people who have heard nothing but denunciations of their ancestors and told that they are a mongrel race, a violent race, etc.
2.) An ethno-nationalist regime has different courses it could take. Among the more hardline is removing everyone not ethnically British. But that would be cruel and create a lot of resentment towards the British for centuries to come. It would be best to take a realist approach in getting rid of the illegals, bogus asylum seekers, and foreign criminals. And then provide financial aid for those who wish to return to their countries of origins. Since many immigrants came to Britain for financial reasons anyway, this may help encourage a good number to leave. Then when British culture is heavily promoted and not demonized, that may nauseate even more foreigners who don't give a flying crap about British identity, and will leave. There will no doubt be remnants of non-indigenous people. But like I've said before, those will have to be accepted and absorbed into the native population. Hopefully the remnants will be individuals with no large families they feel connected to, those will be easier to absorb. And hopefully the physical characteristics of ethnic British (white skin for example) will not change due to mild mixing. Higher ethnic British birth rates will help.
3.)I'm not clear as to this question. If you mean the non-indigenous British citizens, they would be adopted into the British family, those remnants who won't leave after years of British rejuvenation. Those who seek to conquer will have a difficult time when the bulk of foreigners are gone, and if the natives have enough children then they will be further discouraged.
4.) I understand the difference between Tsarist imperialism and British nationalism, but I what I'm trying to say is that even though the motives are different, the mechanics of the process is the same. You're taking an actual culture (British or Russian) and trying to get large multitudes of ethnic minorities accept it when they have their own distinct heritage and do not want to relinquish it but feel forced to due to superior power of the nationalist government. But all it takes is a few generations to turn the table. That's the point I'm trying to illustrate, and I think Russian history provides a good lesson for those seeking to understand human nature and assimilation.
5.)I wasn't advocating terrorism, just pointing out that ethnonationalism is what drives many of these freedom fighters/terrorists. I think the British will be able to find a non-violent variety of ethno-nationalism and hopefully they can set a role model for ethno-nationalists throughout the world.
6.) The American situation is complex, but I don't think that American whites need to embrace strict racial nationalism, because if we did, it would mean we favor unification with Europeans and other Caucasoid peoples, which I certainly do not want. My American white nationalism is very different from Stormfront's variety, besides the obvious differences of no racial hatred or antisemitism allowed.
In America there is a distinct identity of being white and yet also American - we are in fact a recent ethnic group that arose from the mixing of different European peoples into one. Myself, I'm Irish, Polish, Italian, French-Canadian, and Russian. Many of my white friends are also mixed. We have developed subtle physical appearances that allows Europeans to tell us apart from them, along with cultural mannerisms. We don't ever really call ourselves Irish-American or Russian-American or English American, we're just white. And American. Which identifies us as something distinct from indigenous Europeans.
British ethnonationalism is not the same as white nationalism because white nationalism in the broadest sense (ie, Stormfront) places identity strictly on biological features like skin color, skull shape, etc. Ethno-nationalism recognizes that racial characteristics define an ethnic group. For instance, Han Chinese of yellowish skin and round, Mongoloid faces with large eyes, and black hair and brown eyes. But that's not all that defines them. Culture, language, history, etc provide more depth to the identity of Han Chinese which makes them different from Japanese or Koreans. This is why British ethno-nationalists would not support the importation of Poles into Britain, much to the chagrin of Stormfront's "Pan-Aryans".
Ethno-nationalism recognizes both the racial and cultural aspects that defines a people, something that both racial and civic nationalists fail to grasp.
I'm glad to read that you support ethno-nationalism as the final stage of a British revolution... indeed a World revolution. It needs to happen in the US really badly.
My concern with your plan though goes to the beginning of our debate. You believe that the British should seek to nationalize as many of these non-indigenous people as possible. As I said before, I don't think its possible for the majority of them when they form their own communities and breed at rates faster than the natives. But, again, these are my predictions, and I really hope that if you come to power, that your ideas will bear fruit.
I think it would do well for the BNP to hold some sort of party dialogue on ideas such as yours, vs. say Arthur Kemp. It would be most interesting and help provide a more unified front for the BNP.
White Australians
Oi !!!!! Ya Pommie Plonker....We is derived of genetically similar stock.
British culture will die as a simple and direct function function of the Genetics through which it is transferred and identified.
Just as a bird of a particular breed builds a nest peculiar to its type, so do humans. The bird is not taught how to do it. The how to skills and its behaviour are a transferred via it genes.
There is an agenda to destroy all peoples. It needs to be opposed until the movtivations of the pushers are fully outed and understood by all.
The UK must remain predominantly Anglo-Saxon and Celtic.
Sorry cobber,
your immigration policy was changed a few years ago to stop white brits from getting oz citizenship as by right - only fair we reciprocate mate,
regards,
Lee
I wish to report to you a case of the most serious crime in the world.
Against the Geneva Convention Ethnocide and United Nations Indigenous Peoples Rights to Identity and Culture.
This is a case of Ethnocide and it is happening here and now in the United Kingdom.
Labours plan of uncontrolled immigration policy has come to light and this can be proven in the statistics.
Wikipedia lists and explains exactly the Crime of Ethnocide.
Attacks On Culture and Displacement.
Put simply it is the cleansing or minoritising of an indigenous population by methods other than mass extermination.
It is a fact that by 2070 the immigrant population will be ahead of the indigenous peoples of England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland.
This is a Crime against humanity according to the Geneva Convention it is an equivalent crime to Genocide and is a form of ethnic Cleansing.
I am reporting this crime to every agency in the UK to expose this crime to the British People.
Take action Now! Reveal this Labour Plot because the hunt is on for the conspiracy that exists between labour and conservative politicians who have plotted this treason.
Regards
[your name here]
I have emailed this matter to hundreds of important people, If they ignore it and take no action then surely they by default become an accomplice to the crime.
Organisations, QC’s, Barristers, Solicitors, Members Of Parliament, The Hague, The United Nations.
As an Englishman, along with thousands of others we have been displaced and made to feel inferior in our own land we will have a website shortly so that the whole world can see what is being done to us. THE FIGHT BACK HAS BEGUN.
Open Your Eyes And See Before it Is Too Late!
IPCC Complaint Made.
Crimes Reported to West Midlands Police and Metropolitan Police.
Post a Comment