National Revolution and the Future of Socialism

National Revolution and the Future of Socialism

   God bless the wise, the noble and the truly beautiful.

    In the lifeblood of every Briton, there is a secret yearning to throw off any form of tyranny that inhibits him or her in three key categories: firstly - the service to one's home soil and community, and the oceans and their preservation; second - a sustainable liberation and invigoration of the sex-function and reproductive life, which to this day remains subject to arbitrary constraints or fiscal punishments, and finally - the exploration of dialogues through fair and open discussion, both in the written and pictorial form, which was ever the right of anyone, but which today is booted around with contempt.

  In practice, there are few idealistic and visionary nationalists, because they regard thinking and its relationship to actual practice as an embarrassing problem that they would much rather went away. Following the reckless tactics of Hitler, they hope that a contemptuous view of every portion of the masses and a willingness to tell big enough lies will get them through. That may be their way, but it is not my way. Eventually, cheats get found out, and in the age of the internet, if cheats get found out, the entire world often knows about it. Such people are like embarrassing adolescents who refuse to move on, to modernise and to re-appraise in the light of present circumstances. Furthermore, when cornered, they turn out to be pragmatists who say that something is "unworkable" because it is difficult to explain. It is one thing to seek to simplify a little, but it is quite another to descend into the language of ignorance.

   The masses cannot be explained to as a whole. They require the call to instinct and at least two rational reasons to heed and improve upon it, both of which should re-enfoce each other. Only the intelligent "vanguard" elements listen anymore, and often the workers outside of universities grasp the problem long before the students.

   In the long run, starting from the view of the lowest common denominator has a number of disadvantages. First of all, it involves vast amounts of dishonesty. Secondly, in our multimedia age, it carves out nothing much in the way of originality. One cannot possibly expect to please the majority today. That hope is dead. There are too many equally "simple" distractions at work. One can only build a tight and loyal cult of followers and work outwards from there. Thirdly, amongst the intelligent sceptics and opinion-formers, one can chip away at the notion that one is a reactionary fool - that there is no evidence, that there are no sound arguments. Last of all, by dispensing with absurd racial theories, one has the ear of dissident black intellectuals (most notably in America), who have persistently attacked Zionism, yet been given little credit for it. And this in turn creates a ripple effect that feeds back into white middle class circles who have been so infected with liberalism that a black critic has to make the attack for them before it is palatable.

   If we were looking for a Past Master who might truly explain the European spirit as it ought to be lived from day-to-day, there is only one man fit for the job, and that would be D.H Lawrence. Today, we can see all of the themes that I began my essay with in his work. But even Lawrence could be reactionary when it came to the notion of progress - of civilisation. He would doubtless have been little-impressed by computers, by most machines of any kind. By contrast, I think that the entire nature of our networked world presents us with the best opportunity for revolution if we do away with the witless stupidity as regards our environment, our human passions and good diplomatic relations with anyone - be they British or foreign - who is progressive enough to share in a new vision for our planet.

   The illusion of materialism - whether in the free-market or Marxist form - masks the nature of Jewish power behind it, which, contrary to the bizarre and outdated proclamations of certain Nazis, has little interest in material life except as a means to guilt. In Chapter 13 of "Integrity", I explain the true methods of Jewry - especially today - and how reasonable they seem to the uninitiated. What could be more Christian than to wound oneself for power, to make a virtue of weak worm-like twisting and turning, pitying and shuffling for influence? All of this could not have been concluded were it not for the Jewish nature of Christianity, which the polite Anglican has concealed under centuries of pagan Englishness.

   Why on earth any supposed nationalists remain wedded to the Jewish Christ is beyond comprehension, except as a means of racial expediency - and even that is to cloak the whole pink glow of Nordic whiteness under a Semitic shadow. If one stated aim of nationalism within Europe today is to retain Nordic freshness and vitality, then why has almost every professed Christian begged on their knees to be allowed to shake hands with the grubbiest of Jew, other than they are one and the same in essence? Why is there a willingness to compromise with dirty mass prejudices and habits instead of seeking to smash and then reform them?

   What sort of struggle is it that squirms on its belly, never seeking to stand tall and risk death? What sort of national pride is it that sees filth within its own race and prefers this over purity and virility in those belonging to another? Such attitudes are the last choking gasp of burning empires, not the cries of a people wedded to set principles, nor to destiny's forge and the reawakening of nations.

  Can we really say that after decades of grooming into the environ of British life that not one single person of dark skin has grasped the essence of Britishness with intelligence and insight? White racism is only "useful" (if that word can be ever applied) if one assumes that the traitor tends to originate from outside of the white hemisphere. Yet what has really happened? Who among the Britons has truly become degenerate?

  To understand this question, first, we need to make a serious attempt to understand what a racial group does when it panics and stops thinking. When a racial group stops thinking and panics it invariably attacks another race or becomes parasitical on it because, like the animal, that is how is survives. One even sees this at work amongst black Americans who have come to regard the racist police as part of a wider "white problem". If one paused to think a little longer and ask "Who is really friend?" or "Who is really enemy?", then the scene is set to win - instead of lose, as is the case today. Partly out a lazy cheerfulness, and partly due to my capacity to look at my neighbours with a sense of optimism, I have little taste for a "whites only" Britain and find it vulgar. Even if it were possible, it would take a Herculean feat of cultural restructuring to make that prospect anything other than a clock gradually winding backwards - either that or an obnoxious killing spree that we would not even savour when faced with a herd of mad cows. It is highly likely that such an all-white Britain would favour the old, the conservative, and people who enjoy slowing knitting themselves to death in front of coal fires.

  The absolute epitomisation of what is possible with race relations - even in the grimmest of conditions -  in Britain can be found in its black (African origin) communities. In some parts of Wales, they are so embued with local characteristics as to be practically indistiguishable from the other locals, save for the obvious difference of colour. Unlike in vast swathes of London, where the whole matter of settlement has been, an altogether grittier and more unpleasant affair, if anything, the "problem" with many blacks in small pocketed communities has been one of quiescence - of niceness - even though on a personal level, I have benefited from that warmth and willingness to tolerate me, often when whites regarded me with disdain. In London, there has been a great deal of Zionist manipulation of London's black gangs, by police and by the churches. Indeed, in Chapter 11 of "Integrity", I suggest that it is certainly convenient for certain powerful whites that such gangs are allowed to grow and to corrupt others in their wake.

   The idea that anyone would wish to disrupt genuinely advantageous inter-racial pleasantries and handshakes because of the actions of manipulated black urban gangs (and indeed Asian groomers) and their Zionist puppet-masters is not only distasteful, it is also unwise. One only has to survey the retarded white zombies wandering around Britain's cities and towns to realise that these people are not the "great white hope" that nationalists dream of. Contrast that - and we must - with nations of people who decades ago could not speak a word of English and now speak with an ironic eloquence; people with clean dark skin who dress in suits rather than sport tattoos and T-shirts and who possess a lively sensual vitalism that is now so rare in white Britain as to be barely observable.

   Many Buddhists in the Far East, and many Indians - have sought to resist Islam and Christianity, and yet the response of nationalists in the white world to this has been painfully slow, because they are unclear about the proper response when trying to resist Jewish influence, and are still wedded in their hearts to Christ the Jew. American evangelists - linked to Zionism - gloat at how many Hindus they have converted to Christ The Jew - much to the chagrin of Indian gurus about whom they neither know nor care. Worse still, the stupidity of these Bible-bashing missionaries has - by default - had the effect of bolstering Islam in India. Ah - but they say - these are not our white patriots, but coloured folk - so-called "inferiors". I would dread to think what sort of strategy it is that excludes a good tenth or more of the world's surface on the grounds that the hand one is shaking is darker than one's own! When one senses worthy vitalism in a culture, one ought not to beat it into a white-shaped hole, but harness its power.

   I can say with absolute conviction that my new faith of Omeganism is a blueprint for a new national and global struggle, even for those that do not adhere solidly to it - and indeed I never make any such compulsion that they should. Its methodology is carefully designed in such a way as to give soil and water to the vital pagan instincts, without in any way eschewing the new potential offered by developments in technology and the new science of knowledge management. I have little time for rampant traditionalists who want their beads and rosaries and ancient banners as a means of appealing to the old at heart, or cheap drunken rabble rousing to excite young men to break windows and call out vulgar epithets.

  The second example of where white nationalists do not think things through is in relation to sexuality - of which they are thoroughly confused, largely adopting the Jewish duplicities of "for" or "against" that they often claim to be beyond. In the matter of pregnant teenage girls, Britain is cruel and reactionary, blaming the girls for what is a perfectly understandable instinct, particularly given the pressures of modern life - and in any case, one ought to think very sternly about those who have a penchant for hammering the law into people's private bedroom habits (especially when they are often the sort that conceal troubling secrets of their own). The whole matter of sexual spanking (which is now considered even more taboo than it was a decade ago) shows how over-protected we are from the heartiness of sexual resilience. Similarly, I worry that barrier contraception - whilst an ugly necessity on occasion - has sapped the virility of youth by making pregnancy the ultimate source of shame, when it ought to be a somewhat delicious prospect.

   In the homosexual sphere of my life, I am connected to a sense of feminine male purity, and to a strong dislike of the dirtier homosexual aspects that have become mainstream within gay communities. The "Gay Pride" Zionists are everywhere. Let me be clear. They do not represent me, nor have I much love for them - nor are they of much help to me when crude prejudice presents itself. The idea that I ought to publicly display "pride" about having my intimate parts prodded by some young buck is a mystery only explained by hyperactive Jewish Americans, who largely kickstarted the entire squalid affair.

   It is a constant source of irritation that I am tarred with the same brush as this out-of-date and thoroughly timewarped "scene", a "scene" which has little attraction for me, and which, in my corner of England, does not understand the merit of a well-ironed shirt, a decent aftershave, or of polishing one's shoes. Older women have been the most understanding of what drives my particular urges because it has something parental in it - something generous and heartfelt that they identify with completely. This, I suspect, is the best role for male homosexual activity - as a means of demonstrating virility and purity to women and ensuring the love and loyalty of other male comrades. It is rarely so today.

   Returning back to where we started this essay - white nationalists have repeatedly shown a contemptuous attitude to problems of pollution and nature, often allying themselves to the petrol engine rather than the plough. It is now possible to ride a horse at full gallop and arrive at a destination faster than if one caught a taxi. Eventually, their foolishness will catch up with them when future generations of patriots reap the poisoned whirlwind, when the air causes them to choke, and when rivers are barely fit for human use. Indeed, the same lack of sensuality that applies in the private sphere of relationships - and the same racist thoughtlessness towards people who are similar in every respect but colour - shows itself also in their anti-environmentalism.

  And finally, much can be said about the encroachments of the bourgeois-Zionist state on free speech. All that is vital and raises up national and global awareness has been stifled, and all that pertains to selling - even the selling of sex - is permitted, so long as it creates a sense of guilt and self-impairment.

   If you still think that you can defeat the problems of today with crudities of class or race, or by repressing rather than harness the libido, then not only do you underestimate the cunning of the enemy, but you underestimate the new social alliances that are both possible and desirable in order to win. If you persist in nostalgic boy-scout parades, then not only have you squandered any hope of a lasting victory, but any lasting sense of credible progression from the crudely-hewn torches of the past.

   I have reflected, and I have studied, and I have sketched out the future for others to fulfil. You owe it the world to seize this new dawn, and if it passes you by, you will be held to account for failing to rise up with it.


   LONG LIVE THE REPUBLIC!

In praise of ugly towns

   People of Britain's "ugly towns". You are so lucky. You live in a country that has not "cleaned up" every inch of its architecture. Something of the grime remains, and perhaps that grime is necessary for the time being rather than being replaced with yet another banal shopping centre. Try visiting towns such as Retford or Warrington or little Welsh places that are "almost" towns such as Flint or Shotton. There is often a quiet contemplative joy to be had walking around those streets after the shops have closed, sitting on a municipal park bench, staring at a peeling brick wall and eating chips next to an un-emptied litter bin. If nothing else, it's an exercise in resilience.

   In my experience, slick and well-presented towns such as Chester or Harrogate often attract a certain "surface" mentality, which may look good, but often loses as much as it gains. By contrast, these slightly grubby corners of our land attract the ne'er do wells, but also people who really don't care - people who like to go where there's a challenge to be met, and people who like to buy a house for £10,000 less than they might have paid elsewhere.

   And there's another reason to live in "muck". If you're a political activist, radical artist, sexual revolutionary or anything of that nature, the authorities might well be too busy focusing on REAL "anti-social behaviour" to bother about you. One of the safest places I ever stayed the night - or so I felt - was in a so-called "crime hotspot". And guess what. It had some of the most beautiful streets I have ever walked on. This, I suspect, is the lesson that residents of Soho or Harlem learned long ago, and indeed the lesson Berliners know more than anyone else. "Clean up" an area too much, and all of the bourgeois net-curtain twitchers start filming you on their digital cameras.

  I can honestly say, at the risk of sounding pretentious, that I used to say to my wealthier associates from the South, "Oh, you really must see this lovely little place I've found! It is an absolute delight! And the chip shop is worth the effort alone!".

  So yes, my views have changed. Like most people of my "aspiring" and "respectable" lower class, I suppose I was as guilty as anyone of making certain assumptions about Dirty Britain. But scratch the surface of Clean Britain and all of the nasty middle-class prejudices and conformities come tumbling out - and suddenly, it doesn't look quite so rosy. Best live in filth where ugly people get up to all sorts and reproduce carelessly than in the well-scrubbed corners of our islands where pampered girls in designer ripped jeans take offence at the slightest deviation from their pretend-punk conservatism, mock-Essex "student" accents and fake-punk hairdos. Yes, there may be ridiculous tattoos and burger-smells and a morbid fear of non-existent terrorists and molesters, but if you are prepared to hold your nose above that, you will find places to feel at peace and feel supported - and sometimes far more so than in a beautiful but downright sinister "tourist town". You will also find busy fat people with eleven children who say "They ain't doing any harm. Leave them alone.", rather than people who have the time or the inclination to compile dossiers on you (complete with photos) and dispatch them to the local authority.

   People make their choice of home for very unexpected reasons, and when we meet such people, who amongst us hasn't had a "Who've have thought it?" moment. There are, and always have been, middle-class neighbours in some of the most run-down working-class streets. We should welcome these "class asylum-seekers" who find petit-bourgeois Jewish values ridiculous, and not be suspicious of them, or think they are mocking every single proletarian in existence. Their "snobbery" - if it can be called that, is the type of snobbery that comes from bitter experience of middle-class hatred, and a rather dogged belief that their power and influence can help make a difference to workers' lives. Admittedly, their notion of workers is somewhat more aesthetically idealistic (in the D.H Lawrence mould), but then, that is perhaps something the working class as a whole has failed to grasp - the need to present itself better instead of assuming that the arguments alone would carry the day.