Nationalism & Nick Griffin
My friend Liam has an excellent new blog called the Roe Valley Socialist. A common topic for the moment is nationalism, which he tackles again here. His point on nationalist exploitation on history is well supported, with an example which I think is worthy of further consideration being this. This matter has been on my mind quite a bit lately.
As an admirer of the Anglo-Saxons it was with some disgust that I came to discover that Nick Griffin has Alfred the Great to be his “favourite historical person”, despite him being a character who spent most of his life battling his fellow Northern Europeans. I suppose you could argue that Alfred was a fine Christian king fending off foul pagans, but given that Griffin’s favourite book was Atlas Shrugged (a text that ends in a “Speech” by the enigmatic protagonist John Galt that lasts for multiple hours and lambasts religion fiercely for encouraging the dreaded Objectivist vice of altruism) that would be rather curious. (Indeed, there’s nothing much about Griffin being a Rand fan that isn’t curious, seeing as she was an anti-racist, anti-theist immigrant who would be deemed a Jew by the Nuremburg laws. I suppose that they share absolutism & virulent anti-socialism, but the former would surely convince each to despise the other despite the latter. There is black & there is white, there is dark & there is light & and there is nothing, nothing in between, after all…)
That aside, the perversion of the past gets worse: you can read the BNP version of early pre-British history here. I especially like the part where they claim that England was founded as a “Nation”, instead of a kingdom. Additionally, they mistake a gafol for a geld, but I suppose that they can be forgiven since near enough everyone does.
But what galls me most about this account is that this flawed version of history being wielded by racist nationalists is most likely the first that the average reader of the website will have encountered. Ignorance of the early history of England is endemic throughout the land: most in this country can not name its first king. I’m no chauvinist, I’m not even any kind of patriot, but I don’t find the argument that this doesn’t matter persuasive. The thought of this account of our history being the first and most likely only one that people encounter is deeply worrying, and that this a twisted education advances the nationalist cause troubles me deeply. This is the most popular political party’s website in the country, according to Alexa. There is a distinct possibility that it is the most common source for information on this era. Which means that this page will both misinform the public & further their agenda.
As Liam puts it:
History, or more precisely a selective reading of history, is thus used by nationalists in all parts of the world to give justification for their desire for states that are congruent with their own conception of the ‘nation’. The ‘nation’ is viewed, almost always genuinely although I would argue wrongly, as perennial and ever-existing. The struggle for a nation-state is seen as the ‘rebirth’ or ‘reawakening’ of the sleeping consciousness of historic nations that have been denied their natural place by the usurpation of foreign and malign influences.
But a proper grounding in history demonstrates the absurdity of this: Alfred was one king amongst many in England. The Vikings did not introduce a threat to unity, they were simply a novel example of it: the English kingdoms were perfectly content warring amongst themselves for centuries before their arrival. It was because they were weakened from persistent conflict in which they were the losers that the East Anglians were so easily conquered by the Vikings. The notion that it was a “tradition for these major Anglo-Saxon kingdoms to take turns in designating a supreme king, or Bretwalda (Britain Wielder), to serve for a while as overlord of Anglo-Saxon Britain” rather than supremacy being a matter of overpowering the local kingdoms via force, upon the battlefield is a nonsense. The closest Nick Griffin has ever come to acting in the traditional manner of the Anglo Saxons was during his nasty spat with the Yorkshire column of his own party, during which that region of the country was apparently one it would have been unsafe for him to step foot in. If he wanted to really get in touch with the Old English he should have donned armour, taken up a sword and claimed Northumbria for the West Saxons.
Even someone as lightly educated (A level standard) in early (pre-)English history as myself can see through the unconvincing sham artifice of the BNP’s edifice of history. But most have far less. Indeed, the OCR exam board is doing its best to ensure that when it comes to pre-1066 history nobody gets anything at all. And as ever, ignorance is something which nationalists are both capable of and all too willing to exploit. Education is vital to salting the ground which such ideologies can flourish. And we should not imagine that there is any era which they are incapable of harnessing for their malign purposes.
no no - i’m not in the BNP - i don’t agree with some of their policies, particularly the death penalty, and (whether their intentions are mostly good or mostly bad) they represent an intrusive Statist mindset. they are more appealing than New Labour to many people and got votes in a legal election. as such don’t deserve to be pelted with eggs, or to have their meetings shouted down. free speech? if they are rubbish, their own words will expose them. we should be able to listen to what they have to say, and see where they are right and where they are wrong.
disappointed - have been given a label - do socialists just prefer their own thoughts to be echoed? is anyone outside the club not welcome to comment?
“Troll” today what next - “fascist!” ??
bah!
“Why do nationalists [i.e. fascists], and nationalists alone, insist on spelling out in words of one syllable where they come from and where they want to go? Is it really honesty, or is it just plain stupidity? This is a life and death struggle for white survival, not a fancy dress party. A little less banner waving and a little more guile wouldn’t go amiss….
“As long as our own cadres understand the full implications of our struggle, then there is no need for us to do anything to give the public cause for concern … we must at all times present them with an image of moderate reasonableness….
“Of course, we must teach the truth to the hardcore, for, like you, I do not intend this movement to lose its way. But when it comes to influencing the public, forget about racial differences, genetics, Zionism, historical revisionism [i.e. Holocaust denial] and so on – all ordinary people want to know is what we can do for them that the other parties can’t or won’t…
“Politics is always the art of the possible, so we must judge every policy by one simple criterion: Is it realistically possible that a decisive proportion of the British people will support it? If not, then to scale down our short-term ambitions to a point at which the answer becomes ‘yes’ is not a sell-out, but the only possible step closer to our eventual goal.”
Nick Griffin, Patriot, 1999
this quote proves my point.
a)freedom of speech allows NG or other politicians to say what they like, and thus they are more easily judged.
b) if Griffin has been quoted accurately (and i don’t doubt it) then he is not being dishonest. he may well be wrong in his assessment of a perceived threat, but that’s a different thing entirely. but he went on record.
c) the strategy of “guile” is only possible because there are opportunities which our current system seems to have designed to enrage the english populace, either by malice or stupidity. if BNP people cut pensioners’ lawns, for instance, because the council won’t, even though they cut the lawns of asylum seekers (whom they have housed in preference to English people waiting for housing) then you can’t blame the BNP for exploiting the fact. nor can you be surprised if people who have been on the receiving end of discrimination will listen to the BNP.
d) the UAF strategy of disrupting meetings or attacking Nick Griffin has an irony which isn’t lost on would-be voters. the cry of “fascist” by people who are employing fascist tactics plays into the hands of the BNP.
NOTE: as an example of anti-white, anti-English discrimination, of the sort pounced upon by the BNP, have a look at this: Gypsies jump the queue for health care! i added a few observations in parenthesis.
A spokesman for the Department of Health said: “We are aware that gypsies and travellers have experienced tremendous difficulties in accessing primary care. (have they contibuted towards it?? do they have health service numbers?? R)
“Partly as a result, community members experience the worst health inequalities of any disadvantaged group. (whose fault is that? R)
“The framework suggests fast-tracking for two reasons. First, as a matter of urgency, inroads need to be made into the health problems of gypsies and travellers. (why them in particular? or indeed at all? R)
“Second, if mobile community members are not seen quickly, the opportunity could be lost as they move on or are moved on. This should not be to the detriment of service provision to the settled community.”
(well they’ve chosen the wandering lifestyle, and if they can jump the queue then it IS to the detriment of the “settled community” ie the poor bastards who pay for it all - R)
this doesn’t sit too well with me, who has my wage packet plundered for NHS contributions, and who received a two-month wait for treatment for an abcess. if i was a Gypsy, who hadn’t paid a brass farthing in taxes, i would have been seen then and there. this is the kind of thing that Griffin highlights; hidden agenda or not, who can blame people for listening?
finally, i believe (as i may have mentioned) that anyone in a free country should be able to hold an opinion, good bad or indifferent, and state it in public. i do not believe that the State should discriminate against anyone based on any factor, and this includes so-called “positive discrimination” for minority groups. I pay for a service which has let me down - Gypsies don’t pay, and get preferential treatment. why? the horrible misplaced power of the State and socialised health-care. tick the right PC boxes, doctors, and fuck the tax-payer.