In terms of public activism, nationalism went AWOL on a drab, drizzly morning sometime during the nineteen seventies. Forty years of intense and unfavourable propaganda later and nationalists still insist on availing themselves of the tired props, language, and slogans that have today become symbols of public derision and contempt. This is not a result of the baffling phenomena known as ‘public opinion’ (which is not by nature organic), it is ostensibly due to the mighty efforts of the opinion makers and their real-world policies. When viewed in the cold light of day, the public has no opinion, it merely does what it is told and has learned to jump when a flaming hoop is presented.
The public is swayed by both its herding instinct and by brightly coloured baubles, intriguing activity, and a prudent modicum of titillation. The mob has evolved into the supreme spectator on life and tedious factors, such as motives, facts, and consequences, are now largely irrelevant. The mob requires entertainment or, failing that, a few fleeting moments of distraction – as when a particularly nasty motorway accident has occurred and drivers on the opposite carriageway strain their necks to catch a glimpse of something interesting or, better still, gruesome. Minor details have contracted into minor inconveniences while the ‘bigger picture,’ which depended on the details in order achieve any real meaning, is now just a big red balloon by which to divert attention.
Other special interest groups (because we–the stewards of our race–are now such a caucus) have come to recognise that any appeal to the public sentiment must be accompanied by visual refreshment. This applies to the benign as well as the malignant. To highlight these things I will use three specific examples, namely ‘gay pride’ marches, the Notting Hill carnival, and the Fathers 4 Justice campaign group.
What has been achieved by this special interest group–of the malignant variety–is to endorse homosexuality and homosexual practices in the friendliest, most inclusive manner possible. Open air ‘celebrations’ of (gay) pride, etc., have become family events and are especially attractive to young people.
The gatherings are flamboyant, vivid, and energetic. Children stand hand-in-hand with their goggle-eyed parents as processions of outwardly happy ‘gay’ folk wave, parade, and cavort. The insidious message behind all this bravado is shrouded in a blur of polychromatic excitement.
The fact that such disturbing debauchery is tolerated by bystanders is a testament to the efficiency of the overall package: inclusion, fun, animation, scale. Of course it certainly helps that ‘gay pride’ events are not opposed by the establishment, but just because something is made legal it is not an inevitability that congenital morality is suspended or completely abolished. The excuse that our hostile occupation promotes and supports these spectacles does not provide full justification for heterosexual or family attendance. The reason is as much the slow-burning festival atmosphere as it is the lack of any consequences for those unashamedly appearing in the crowd.
Once again we are treated to another conspicuous display of power wrapped up in a pretty package. The Notting Hill carnival is as much a celebration of multiculturalism (read multi-racialism) as it is an exhibition of ethnic cleansing. Multiculturalism is not one long festival of fun, as crime statistics will convey, and so the occasional garish stunt–acting as a social defibrillator–must be arranged to placate the television addicts. Reality can be postponed during such frivolities.
In parallel with the gay pride marches, Notting Hill offers an all-embracing image; a truly multi-cultural event. This cannot happen in a real world situation and so stage-managed jamborees are necessary. Attempting to drag the average, middle class citizen down a side street in Tottenham or Moss Side would be a bit of a struggle, but the Notting Hill carnival represents the acceptable face of our modern nightmare. The noise, hues, smells, dancers, and general commotion conveniently drowns out the last vestiges of Britain and the British.
Public memory is epigrammatic and so it is that a new generation of suckers must discover the reality of multi-racialism for themselves, while most just enjoy a good time and head back home to their dreary lives and mortgage. Notting Hill is a success because it draws out what could be considered the ‘best’ from mass non-White immigration: the sense that one is on holiday and can revel, for a few awkward minutes, in the funny customs of the more uninhibited human races.
Fathers 4 Justice
These people mean business, but they have not forgotten that public opinion is fluid and easily manipulated. Fathers 4 Justice have effectively made rebellion against a perceived inequity both dangerous and fun in equal measure.
The F4J message could have been presented in a mundane, tedious, and orthodox manner; fliers being distributed, petitions signed, MPs lobbies, but their unique brand of humorous direct action is hard-hitting, pregnant with authenticity, while leaving a lasting impression on the public consciousness (and, indeed, conscience). As a method of communicating with the potentially disinterested public, F4J have opted for one of the only two approaches the mob will accept: entertainment (the second being intimidation).
Not only do Fathers 4 Justice employ colourful, eye-catching imagery, they have also shrewdly expanded their, what could be considered narrow, content and have recently embraced an inclusivity seen in both the gay pride marches and the Notting hill carnival. By associating fathers with children and family, F4J have broadened their appeal and side-stepped isolation.
And so we return to the often disorganised and uninspiring marches offered by British nationalists. Of course the underlying meaning of these episodes, and of the individuals involved, is far more profound than any of the above. Sexual appetite, street parties, and disgruntled Dads who more than likely simply selected the wrong mate, as causes compared to the survival of our race–and probably, as a consequence, the existence of all life on Earth and perhaps even the entire Cosmos–pale into insignificance. But the details bolstering open events are almost inconsequential, the presentation is really all that counts, at least in the beginning.
There is nothing unique, interesting, or clever in what nationalism is offering to the public. In fact, nationalism could not do a more abysmal job if it tried. If you cannot offer people what they want then they are just not going to be in a buying frame of mind. And what exactly do people want? Well, as we can see from the three instances above, they crave entertainment and distraction.
But let us not be overly critical of our fellow citizens. The fact remains that nearly four million Britons voted for a non-established marginally right-wing party at the most recent general election, and a full 33% of those registered to vote did not participate. It is therefore logical to infer that a substantial proportion of the public require change in order to invigorate them and once again compel them to engage with the most important question in the contemporary Occident: where are we going as a people: to the grave or to the stars? This is a serious question requiring serious minds – though the days of the majority assimilating serious debate is almost at an end.
Until there is an alternative to the present order, the public will remain disconnected from reality, caring only for their own immediate, material pleasure and fulfilment. At this moment in time, nationalism is just not capable of reversing the introversion; it does not have the vision, the power, the organisational skills, or the intellect. But with each new repressive measure passed by our hostile occupation and with each new generation of racialist, we will granted the opportunity to learn and adapt. If we cannot, and if we are unable to glean from the successes of other special interest groups, then we truly should be ignored and vilified by our peers – we deserve nothing less.
However, we are the stewards of the race and our ancestors triumphantly overcame far worse. If we can just scrape past this curious blip in history then the future is ours. And if we insist on making public demonstrations then let’s do it productively and with victory aforethought. Here is one suggestion from me: dress as significant folk from our glorious past, both recent and historic, and give the public what it wants: a pageant; the message can percolate gradually and is more likely to be adopted by employing this tactic.
The ‘old guard’ can disagree and even fulminate against this as utter nonsense, but please first read the following words of wisdom from our illustrious past and then ruminate on your own meagre successes.
“Like the generations of leaves, the lives of mortal men. Now the wind scatters the old leaves across the earth, now the living timber bursts with the new buds and spring comes round again. And so with men: as one generation comes to life, another dies away.”
It is good to be White and it is good to be alive.
[P.S. I do not advocate marching, et al, as a means of ensuring the survival, proliferation, and development of our kind. However, and as I’ve said many times, if it is going to happen try to get it right]