Mark Collett

The Town That Chose

to Commit Suicide

Fri, Jul 26, 2024

[In this video Mark Collett, leader of the pro-White British nationalist movement, Patriotic Alternative, says:

“This is the story of a small Welsh town named Llantwit Major. The town hit the headlines last year for ‘fighting off the fascists’ and embracing plans for a migrant centre that was set to be built in the heart of their community. Now, a year on, we return to Llantwit to find out how things are working out…”

– KATANA]

https://odysee.com/@MarkCollett:6/20240726—The-Town-that-Chose-to-Commit-Suicide:5

https://www.bitchute.com/video/udKAqrlnanWz

https://rumble.com/v58iic5-the-town-that-chose-to-commit-suicide.html

https://gab.com/MarkCollett

https://t.me/s/markacollett

Published on Fri, Jul 26, 2024

Description

The Town that Chose to Commit Suicide
July 26, 2024
4,650 views
410 Likes
Support
Save
5 Reposts
Share
Mark Collett
@MarkCollett
15K followers
Join
Following
This is the story of a small Welsh town named Llantwit Major. The town hit the headlines last year for ‘fighting off the fascists’ and embracing plans for a migrant centre that was set to be built in the heart of their community. Now, a year on, we return to Llantwit to find out how things are working out…
Ways you can help contribute to my work:
BitCoin: bc1qzgjz953f4gznway0hvz6lx360yd2autdkwf6nu
Etherium: 0xb44739a8f2c57Cad38F96Aab8F2a0cA18258A7bA
BitCoin Cash: qpaaukrttfvq0j99gfl43hhs5q0tmhzfevkhp3r2c9
Monero: 42qypZQGMzNfFa5yXBxkqxL4iDw5cmzbtCC81dKcQbMrhLrs
JUYAFSsLs9Um4hG32R5GfaqfgGj7oR6ZJ7pGyaY3FFu9HKD
You can also donate to my work via Entropy:
https://entropystream.live/app/markcollett
My book, The Fall of Western Man is now available. It is available as a FREE eBook and also in hardback and paperback editions.
The Official Website:
http://www.thefallofwesternman.com/
FREE eBook download:
http://www.thefallofwesternman.com/downloads/TheFallofWesternMan.pdf
Hardback Edition:
https://www.lulu.com/shop/mark-collett/the-fall-of-western-man/hardcover/product-23388841.html
Paperback Edition:
http://amzn.eu/9LaS7HN
PLEASE NOTE: If you wish to debate with me in the comments about anything I have said, I welcome that. However please listen to the complete podcast and ensure you argue with the points I have made. Arguments that simply consist of nonsense such as “what gives you the right to judge” or “I’m a [insert religious affiliation] and you should be ashamed of yourself” or other such vacuous non-arguments will simply be ridiculed.
File size
200.84 MB
Less
11.36
116 comments

_____________

Following Transcript Quality = 5 Stars

1 Star — Poor quality with many errors, contains nonsense text 2 Stars — Low quality with many errors, some nonsense text. 3 Stars — Medium quality with some errors. 4 Stars — Good quality with only a few errors. 5 Stars — High quality with few to no errors.

NOTE: Readers can help improve the quality of this transcript by putting corrections in the Comment/Leave a Reply section. Don’t be just a consumer, contribute to the cause, however small. Thanks.

TRANSCRIPT

(Words: 1,682 – 11:22 mins)

“Those whom the gods would destroy, they first make mad.”

I can’t tell you who coined this phrase, but it is believed to have originated in ancient Greece. And it’s a pretty accurate observation, that before the fall of any civilisation or empire, it appears that there is a period of social madness – a time of liberal hedonism in which a portion of the population, especially the ruling elite, engage in behaviour that at one time would have been classed as either insane, immoral or degenerate. And this behaviour paves the way for the collapse which follows.

And on the South Coast of Wales, in a small seaside town named Llantwit Major, it could be said that a number of the residents have gone mad! Whether that is the doing of the gods, or it is driven by some other (((force))), is another matter. But the people of Llantwit definitely seem to be embracing a kind of liberal mind virus, one that may well lead to their destruction.

So, pull up a seat, and let me tell you a tale – of the town that chose to commit suicide!

It all starts at the beginning of last year [2023], when it was announced that Llantwit would be hosting what amounts to a migrant camp. This may at first seem strange, as the population of the whole area is less than 10,000, so a migrant camp with just a few hundred migrants would represent a significant change to the demographics of the town – and it wouldn’t be unfair to call this kind of shift; “swamping!”.

When this announcement was made, nationalists were eager to help the town’s residents, and Patriotic Alternative sprang into action in order to arrange a demonstration and assist the locals in pushing back against the proposals. However, what may shock you, is that this offer of help was met with resistance. And in fact, in March of last year, the BBC ran a glowing article titled, and I quote:

“Patriotic Alternative: The town fighting the far-Right with Welsh cakes.”

End quote. This nauseating article, gushed about the “community” response and enthusiastically chronicled how a rag tag group of locals, including the usual busy bodies, liberal do-gooders and even the priest of the local church, all came together to stop the nationalists from spreading a message of “hate and division” in the small town.

The BBC article had the following to say, and I quote:

“‘In the end, they felt the best way to challenge the group was with non-violent resistance-the spirit of welcome’, Father Counsell told BBC News.”

“‘The day will kick off with an overnight vigil at the Church the night before’, he said, followed by a Welsh cake giveaway during the day. Another church will also open a space during the day for anyone feeling anxious about Patriotic Alternative.”

“‘Welsh cakes are a symbol of hospitality,’ Father Counsell said. ‘So if you meet a far-Right, neo-fascist bonehead who looks out of place here, the critical question you must ask that person is: ‘Would you like a Welsh cake?’ It has been branded a ‘day of kindness.’.”

End quote. Yes, many Llantwit residents had truly gone mad! But those whom the gods make mad, are, according to the well-known saying, soon to be destroyed.

But for the time being spirits were high, and it wasn’t long after this day of “kindness” that the local busy bodies declared victory! The fascists had been dispatched! Love and tolerance had won the day and Llantwit was ready to roll out the red carpet for the small number of “refugees” that would be coming to the area.

And after all, locals were assured, it was only going to be 90 Ukrainian refugees who would be staying on a temporary basis; surely fewer than 100 people couldn’t be that much of a problem, it was obvious? The small but welcoming community of Llantwit would absorb these few needy folk and would live in harmony with their new neighbours!

And besides, there was a large unused site the heart of the community where an old school used to stand, why not house them there? The site wasn’t in use any more, and as all the eager liberal minded activists stated:

“What better way for Llantwit to prove its progressive credentials than for the town to open its Gates to those most in need?”

And what could go wrong – I mean really, would a few young and beautiful Ukrainian women really darken the Llantwit landscape? After all, who wouldn’t want to open their door to a bevy of Eastern European beauties?

So now, over a year on from Llantwit’s victory against the fascists, let’s return to the small seaside town to see how things are working out, …

OH.

DEAR.

ME!

What’s this? They’ve only gone and turned the site of the old school into what looks like a prison camp! And those “90 people”, well it turns out they meant “90 housing units”, and I think it looks like far more than 90 units. And each one is clearly going to house what could be whole families. And there is another small issue, remember the whole Ukrainian thing, well that has died down now, that’s been and gone –k the boat has sailed on that one.

So, I’m pretty sure that this migrant camp isn’t going to result in 90 beautiful Ukrainian women wandering around Llantwit eating Welsh cakes and Sunning themselves on the beach!

And remember that smug article the BBC published back in March of 2023? Well, according to the BBC, local residents have now changed their tune, it’s no longer all hugs and celebrations, because those nasty fascists from out of town, the same ones that the local busy bodies claimed were spreading lies and misinformation in order to stir up unfounded fears, well, it appears that the fascists were telling the truth!

In fact, if us fascists got anything wrong, it was that we understated the size and scale of the nightmare facing Llantwit residents! Even we didn’t think it would be this bad, …

Anyway, let’s have a read from this more recent BBC article, and I quote:

“A new housing development in a seaside town has been compared to a prison by locals who say it has also been built too close to their homes. A total of 90 temporary homes have been constructed on the site of a former school in Llantwit Major, Vale of Glamorgan.”

“The Vale council says it is for Ukrainian refugees. And the site was allocated for housing in the Local Development Plan (LDP), but residents with gardens backing on to it call it ‘overbearing’.”

“‘It looks like I’m living next door to a storage container yard,’ said Steve McGranaghan, a retired RAF engineer.”

“‘My biggest concern is they are too close to me. They should be 21 metres (69 of the) away under planning guidelines, and they’re less than 10 metres (33 of the) away. If they’d built 72 houses which is in the LDP, I’d have no issue. I’m not someone who says ‘not in my back yard’.”

“He claimed they would no longer be used for Ukrainian refugees.”

“‘Nobody has been able to challenge this,’ he said. ‘I volunteered to host a Ukrainian family, so we didn’t have an issue at first. Now our concern is this won’t be for housing Ukrainians, and it’ll become housing stock and it won’t be temporary. If there was a bad way to do something, the Vale of Glamorgan council have chosen the worst possible way to do it’.”

End quote. Oh, deary me! The massive site of the former school is now filled with container like homes, and they’re not temporary anymore, they’re permanent! And worse still, they’re not for Ukrainians either! Poor old Steve isn’t going to be doffing his cap to the beautiful Svetlana when he goes out to walk the dog and pick up the papers, he’s going to be clutching his mobile phone as he dodges gangs of what the BBC lovingly terms “youths”.

And just when you thought it couldn’t get worse, it does! The site of the former school was meant to be getting turned into a new health care centre for local people who are currently struggling to get an appointment with a GP. This situation reached an ironic peak when a local councillor by the name of Gwyn John, who VOTED FOR the migrant centre, went running to the national press whining that when he rang his local GP, he ended up at number 32 in a queue and eventually had to give up before ever speaking to a doctor!

However, you may be interesting in hearing what Councillor Gwyn had to say when the motion for the migrant centre was put before the local council, and I quote:

“Make no mistake about it, we are supporting this motion tonight and we will oppose any racist behaviour in our town. The group are very strong in opposing any Right-wing activity in our town in the future.”

End quote. And now the silly old fool can’t get a doctor’s appointment! Oh well – my heart bleeds!

Anyway, what is there left to say? Not much really, but I will share a picture with you – it’s on the screen now. It’s some local dickhead from who dressed up as a Welsh cake. Yes, this total retard wandered around Llantwit for a day dressed up like this in order to stick to the “fascists”! Well, as I said, those whom the gods wish to destroy, they first make mad.

My only lasting hope, is that when things do go wrong in this tiny town, it’s people like this smug moron in his silly outfit and pompous local councillors and busy bodies like Gwyn John who will bear the brunt of the problems, rather than the well-meaning folk who opposed the migrant centre but were beaten in into silence by the liberal morons who were screaming “racist” at anyone and everyone who wished for sanity to prevail!

[11:22]

END

top

Mark Collett

Is the Electoral Route a Dead End?

Fri, May 10, 2024

[In this video Mark Collett, leader of the pro-White British nationalist movement, Patriotic Alternative, says:

“An in-depth explanation of why UK electoral politics is so difficult for nationalists to conquer. From the system of voting to the media’s power – what is holding back change in the UK and how did successive nationalist parties fail?”

Contents:

1. Mark welcomes viewers to livestream to discuss if elections are a dead end for nationalists.

2. First-past-the-post system leads to two party domination and minority governments.

3. Tactical voting is common as voters fear their preferred party won’t win.

4. In 2015 UK election, Conservatives won majority with 36.9% while UKIP got 12.6% but only 1 seat.

5. Collett recalls campaigning and seeing promotion of tactical voting.

6. Two party system creates nearly identical “centrist” parties.

7. Voters flip between two main parties every 10-15 years.

8. Media only covers two main parties and controls debates.

9. Outsider candidates attacked, insiders given soft interviews.

10. System makes it very difficult for smaller parties like nationalists to win representation.

11. BNP initially succeeded in 2002 due to electoral quirk putting all seats up for election.

12. BNP went on to win by-elections with large activist efforts.

13. In 2004 BNP expected to do well in EU election but UKIP took many of its votes.

14. After this BNP went into decline.

15. Terrorist attacks and arrests of BNP leaders brought attention back to party in 2005-06.

16. BNP had peak success in 2006, becoming official opposition in Barking and Dagenham.

17. BNP started losing seats in 2007 as other parties focused on defeating it.

18. Richard Barnbrook elected to GLA in 2008 with 5.4% vote for BNP.

19. Nick Griffin and Andrew Brons elected as MEPs in 2009.

20. In 2010 general election, BNP councilors wiped out except Brian Parker.

21. Former BNP candidate Chris Beverley loses seat in 2010 despite tireless campaigning.

22. BNP goes into tailspin after 2010 election.

23. By 2014 only Nick Griffin and few councilors remain from BNP’s peak.

24. Reflections on BNP’s brief success of 57 councilors, 1 GLA member, 2 MEPs.

25. Tensions grew within BNP as it declined after peak.

26. Nick Griffin’s appearance on Question Time in 2009 was a turning point for the worse.

27. Collett believes Griffin was underprepared and ignored advice.

28. Griffin’s poor performance on Question Time scared away middle-class voters.

29. After Question Time and 2010 election, BNP rapidly disintegrated.

30. Collett doesn’t lament dedicating his youth to BNP despite only to see all progress lost.

– KATANA]

https://odysee.com/@MarkCollett:6/Is-the-Electoral-Route-a-Dead-End:5

https://www.bitchute.com/video/BhQAEFaMHHLo/

https://rumble.com/v4uax9b-is-the-electoral-route-a-dead-end.html

Published on Fri, May 10, 2024

Description

Is the Electoral Route a Dead End?
May 11, 2024
626 views
110 Likes
19 Dislikes
Support
Save
Repost
Share
Mark Collett

@MarkCollett
15K followers
Join
Following
An in-depth explanation of why UK electoral politics is so difficult for nationalists to conquer. From the system of voting to the media’s power – what is holding back change in the UK and how did successive nationalist parties fail?
Ways you can help contribute to my work:
BitCoin: bc1qzgjz953f4gznway0hvz6lx360yd2autdkwf6nu
Etherium: 0xb44739a8f2c57Cad38F96Aab8F2a0cA18258A7bA
BitCoin Cash: qpaaukrttfvq0j99gfl43hhs5q0tmhzfevkhp3r2c9
Monero: 42qypZQGMzNfFa5yXBxkqxL4iDw5cmzbtCC81dKcQbMrhLrs
JUYAFSsLs9Um4hG32R5GfaqfgGj7oR6ZJ7pGyaY3FFu9HKD
You can also donate to my work via Entropy:
https://entropystream.live/app/markcollett
My book, The Fall of Western Man is now available. It is available as a FREE eBook and also in hardback and paperback editions.
The Official Website:
http://www.thefallofwesternman.com/
FREE eBook download:
http://www.thefallofwesternman.com/downloads/TheFallofWesternMan.pdf
Hardback Edition:
https://www.lulu.com/shop/mark-collett/the-fall-of-western-man/hardcover/product-23388841.html
Paperback Edition:
http://amzn.eu/9LaS7HN
PLEASE NOTE: If you wish to debate with me in the comments about anything I have said, I welcome that. However please listen to the complete podcast and ensure you argue with the points I have made. Arguments that simply consist of nonsense such as “what gives you the right to judge” or “I’m a [insert religious affiliation] and you should be ashamed of yourself” or other such vacuous non-arguments will simply be ridiculed.
File size
2.87 GB
Less
2.6
459 comments

_____________

TRANSCRIPT QUALITY = 4.5 Stars

1 Star — Poor quality with many errors, contains nonsense text 2 Stars — Low quality with many errors, some nonsense text. 3 Stars — Medium quality with some errors. 4 Stars — Good quality with only a few errors. 5 Stars — High quality with few to no errors.

NOTE: Users can help improve the quality of this transcript by putting corrections in the Comment section. Thanks.

TRANSCRIPT

(Words: 21869 – 2:11:05 mins)

Hello everybody. Good evening and welcome to tonight’s stream. We are live in all the usual places. That means we’re live on Dlive. That means we are live on Odysee. That means we are live on Rumble. That means we are live on Entropy, and we should also be live tonight on BitChute. They just started a streaming service, but I’m not sure whether that’s going to work. I’ve put all the stuff in correctly, but they might be having a few teething problems and I have a couple of struggles setting up the stream.

So it’s not live there. I apologise to anyone who wanted to watch it live there. I’m sure I can work out teething problems in the future. I can’t really do that on tonight’s stream live, though, because it’s just me, obviously.

So because of that, if you are hoping to watch live on BitChute for the first time ever, unfortunately that might not be able to be happening. And if it’s not, my apologies.

Anyway, we’re obviously live and tonight’s stream is about elections. Are elections a dead end for nationalists? Can we win via the electoral route?

Well, before we get into that, at the end of the stream, we are going to do a Q&A.

So if you want to ask questions, you can send Superchats. You can send Superchats via Entropy or Odysee. Anything that you donate is very, very gratefully received.

And remember, I don’t put any of my work behind a paywall. Nothing I do is paywalled.

So I don’t charge for these streams, I don’t charge for my book. Nothing is put behind the paywall. Everything is available for free. So three dollars five dollars, ten, whatever you think is fair or that you can afford or you want to contribute will be gratefully received.

And remember, this isn’t paywalled material, nothing is.

And if you want to keep it free, and if you value my work, please do consider a small contribution.

Now, you can also donate via crypto-currencies. All the crypto links are in the description below.

So if you want to donate via crypto, you can do that via the links in the description below.

Now, you can also use something I’ve said and if you want to write to me privately, you can write to me at mark@thefallofwesternman.com.

Now, before we get into it, I’ll ask one more small favour. If you can, if you’d like, please drop a like on the stream. Please give it a share. I think this is a very important topic, so I think it’s something that people will probably enjoy. Well, I hope they do because I’ve prepared this thoroughly.

[02:35]

Now, before we start the stream and we go into all the things I want to talk about tonight, I’m going to first talk about what the stream isn’t. This stream is not an opinion piece. It’s not my opinions on whether we can win via the ballot box or whether we can’t. That’s not what it’s about. I’m here to present facts or try to present facts and evidence that illustrate the way the system works and how the system is not conducive to smaller parties winning.

In fact, the system is not conducive to anything other than the two party sort of oligarchy that we see at the top. And I want to talk about that and present facts and evidence.

So I’m not here tonight to tell you what to do. This isn’t me firing up the stream and saying:

“I don’t want you guys doing this or you guys shouldn’t do this or you shouldn’t spend your time campaigning this way. You should spend your time campaigning this way!”

That’s up to you, really. I want to present facts and evidence and I want you guys to look at those facts and evidence and you can decide for yourself how you spend your time.

If you want to go out there pounding the streets, putting out leaflets, boom! That’s up to you and that is absolutely your prerogative.

If, however, you watch the stream and you say:

“Mark, that adequately explains exactly why we have this problem with the democracy and why it doesn’t work. And I want to do community building, I want to help purchasing land with a Woodlander. I want to go and maybe move to a village in Italy where we’re buying an entire village out and we’re going to live there as a group.”

Whatever you choose to do, that’s up to you. I’m just here to present the evidence. Obviously, I know what I’m going to do. People know what I’m in favour of, it’s not here to shill for what I’m in favour of, it’s here to help you make an informed decision.

Now, finally, something else.

This isn’t going to be. I don’t want to move into the sort of realm of conjecture.

Now, a lot of people, when we talk about the electoral system, they start immediately saying things like:

“Oh, you know, they steal the votes, they take the votes, they open the ballot papers, it’s all rigged! It’s all done behind, you know, closed doors when those ballot boxes leave the voting booth, it’s all tampered with and by the time they get to the count, everything’s changed, etc. Etc.”

Well, I actually can’t prove that now. I’m not saying that doesn’t happen, I’m not saying that that’s never happened. I’m not saying that voting isn’t rigged in that way. I’m certainly not saying there isn’t a criminal conspiracy against our people. But I can’t prove that. I can’t prove that. I have no real evidence for that.

And fundamentally, because I don’t have evidence for it, I’m not going to present that as something tonight.

[05:29]

So if you’re coming here hoping for me to tell you what to do or to tell you about some grand conspiracy where votes are being stolen or ballot boxes are being opened or votes are being poured out into a river or burnt or replaced, I’m not going to give you any of that I’m going to talk about things that we can all agree on or verify that are visually observable. This is about the visually observable reality around us.

So why am I doing this stream? Well, I’m doing this stream to explain to nationalists why nationalist parties perform badly. And this is a question that people keep asking. I get people asking me all the time, why? I’m going to talk about a guy now that I like. He emails me a bit and I remember last year he was emailing me saying:

“It’s the time. There’s a feeling in the air, this is the time. People are now going to vote. Things are going to change. Everyone’s going to go out there and vote. Things are different now. We need to get on the ballot papers. Nationalist candidates are going to be elected left, right and centre. The time is now!”

And I said to him, I think you’re overestimating what’s going to happen. I think you’re off the mark on it for a number of reasons. I’ve got my reasons for saying that. And this guy is a really great guy. He wrote back to me a few days ago saying:

“You know what? You were right. Nationalists weren’t elected left, right and centre.”

And people then ask, why. Why when everything is so bad? Why when there’s record numbers of migrants? Why when the economy’s, you know, at a low? Why when there’s record inflation? Why when the Tories are so unpopular? Why when the LGBT agenda is being pushed down everyone’s throat? Why when all these horrible things are happening, are people still voting for the parties that rubber stamp all of this? Why aren’t people voting in nationalists left, right and centre?

Well, I intend to answer that question in a way that you guys are going to understand, and that will maybe help you guys either point people towards this stream or maybe you could articulate these points that I’m about to make to your friends and family. So I’m hoping this will be educational, helpful, maybe fun as well. [chuckling] It’s going to go on maybe for an hour and a half, 2 hours. It’s just going to be me.

So I hope you’ve got your cup of tea, your can of Red Bull, whatever you like, your glass of water. I’ve got my Red Bull. It’s half done already, but I’ve got a nice cool drink at the side of me because it’s a warm evening.

[08:00]

So let’s get into this. Now if you saw my initial advert for this stream, I broke things down into a number of different categories, categories that hopefully will allow you to follow my train of thought and to explain things. And when I’ve explained everything, I want to put everything into a historical perspective as well.

So I’m not just going to give you my thoughts. I’m not just going to go through all this and present the evidence. After I’ve done all that, I’m hoping that we can put all of this into perspective.

So first I’m going to talk about the electoral system. I’m going to talk about the First Past the Post system, how it tends to produce a two party system. I’m going to talk about the media’s role, I’m going to talk about safety valve parties. I’m going to talk about turnout.

When we’ve discussed all those things, I’m going to do a breakdown of recent nationalist results. Then I’m going to talk about historical perspective, about the one party that did do well in elections and that was the British National Party. And when I’ve done that, I’m going to briefly touch on why things are different in Europe or why people suggest things are different in Europe and then we’ll do Q and A.

But first things first. Let’s talk about the electoral system itself.

And I’m going to start by talking about the First Past the Post electoral system and why the First Past the Post electoral system fundamentally is not a system of representative democracy. And I know what you’re saying:

“Well, Michael Gove said, if you say this, you’re an extremist!”

No, I’m a guy who’s giving you facts.

Now the First Past the Post system is what the vast majority of British elections have run on. First Past the Post applies to county councillors, city, district, borough councillors. They’re the vast majority of elected positions in this country.

And finally, it also applies to your general election candidates. They’re your big ones, they run Parliament. They ultimately have the say in how the country’s run. And First Past the Post is quite simple. Each area, whether it be a constituency, or a council ward, people go to vote and the candidate with the most votes wins. And immediately, that sounds fair. That sounds wonderful! And you might be thinking to yourself:

“What are you talking about here, Mark? How is this not fair? We go to the polls and people vote and the candidate who gets the most votes, he’s elected. That’s democracy!”

Well, let me explain why this is not a representative democracy. First and foremost, if you do not vote for the candidate who wins, your vote effectively becomes meaningless.

Now, let me illustrate with an example. Well, not an example. This is sort of an abstract of how this works.

[11:08]

So if you have ten candidates standing for election, and one of those candidates, just one of those candidates, gets 11% of the vote, and all other candidates get an equal share of the vote, an exactly equal share of the vote. The candidate with 11% is returned. He is the winner! Let’s say it’s a Parliamentary ward. He goes to Parliament, he is your Parliamentary representative. That means only 11% of the people who voted have representation in Parliament.

In fact, 89% of people who voted in that constituency are not represented, their views aren’t represented.

And in fact, they voted against. The vast majority voted against the guy who’s in power. That is a shocking indictment of this system!

But it gets worse. Let’s say the turnout was 50%. That means it wasn’t 11% of people who are being represented. It means 5.5% of people actually have representation in Parliament, and 94.5% of the people in that constituency didn’t vote for the person who’s representing them. And a huge number, the people who did, voted against him. That sounds pretty bad, but believe it or not, it gets even worse!

Because we’re talking here about people who are on the electoral register. They’re the only ones that appear in those statistics. And we don’t know how many people aren’t on the electoral register. There are plenty of people who aren’t even registered to vote. And if you’re not registered to vote, you still exist. You still have wants, needs, desires, you still require some form of representation.

So, in fact, you have a guy in this case, going to Parliament with 11% of the popular vote, 5.5% of the electorate voted for him, and that number is shrunk even further by an indeterminable factor, because not everyone is registered to vote. That is how the First Past the Post system works.

The First Past the Post system works in a way that fundamentally does not give representation.

Now, I know what you’re thinking:

“Look here, Mark, maybe that works like that in your abstract, but how does it work in the real world? You know, surely it’ll work like that in some cases.”

Yeah. People sometimes get elected with, you know, 30% of the vote, and sometimes people get elected with 40% of the vote:

“But surely when you take things on a national level, these things even out, and it works out.”

No, it doesn’t! It doesn’t work out at all!

So we’re going to take an actual real world case study now. And we’re going to take the 2015 general election, because the 2015 general election is a great example, and it’s one you will all remember. It’s in recent living memory, very recent memory. And you guys will remember it for a reason. Hopefully. Hopefully, you will remember this election for a reason.

So the Conservatives got to power with a majority. They won 330 seats. There’s 350 seats in Parliament. They had a five seat majority, they took 330 of the seats in Parliament, and they got there with a 36.9 percentage share of the vote. So if we’re rounding that up to 37%, that means 63% of people who voted, voted for other parties voted against the Conservatives, effectively. So here you see the effects of the First Past the Post system.

The First Past the Post system creates these minority governments, because although it was a majority, it didn’t have the majority of the support. This wasn’t a 50, 60% of people voted Conservatives. No.

[15:43]

Now, if you said to the public, well, the Conservatives won the general election with a majority in 2015. And I said:

“And if you said to them, what percentage did they take nationally?”

I think people would say:

“Oh, maybe 50%, maybe 60%.”

No! 36.9% of the vote, and they took 11, 300. Sorry, 11 million 334, 726 votes. Labour took 30.4% of the vote and they took 232 seats. And that worked out at 9, 347, 324 votes.

But let’s look a bit further down. The party that came fifth were Nigel Farage’s party at the time, which was UKIP at the time. He obviously left UKIP, but at the time, he was the leader of UKIP. UKIP took 12.6% of the vote. They took 3, 881,099 votes.

Now, to the people in the chat, do you know how many seats they won? One! They won one single seat! One single seat. How crazy is that? Nearly 4 million people voted for them. They got just over a third of the share of the vote that the Conservatives did. But the Conservatives took 330 seats! And UKIP took one. And it wasn’t really a UKIP seat, it was a conservative defector who basically got re-elected off the back of the fact that he was a longstanding MP in his area.

So that tells you a little bit about the way the system is stacked. That tells you a little bit about the way the First Past the Post system does not result in representative democracy, but in fact results in a government that has a minority share. It doesn’t have a majority. Not of the voters, anyway. And a party that takes a third of the vote that the winning party took, ends up with virtually no representation gets one seat. One seat compared to the Conservatives, 330 seats.

So this illustrates immediately that the First Past the Post system is broken. It’s not really representative. Not only is it not representative, it allows for minority representation. And I’m using the word “minority” because we’ll come back to that. I think you can guess where we’re going with that word.

So what does this lead to, then? Well, it leads to a situation where people vote tactically, and by voting tactically, people will look at the spread and say:

“I don’t want to waste my vote.”

And you must have heard this before. Anyone who’s been involved in politics, and I’ve been involved in politics politics pretty much more than anyone on the sort of quote, unquote, “dissident”. Right. And by that, when I say involved in politics, I mean I’ve been involved in campaign politics. I was involved in more council election victories and more electoral wins than probably anyone else in this country ever.

[19:21]

Because if I wasn’t directly involved in the campaign, which I was often, I was the guy who did the leaflets. I was the guy that did the leaflets for the MEPs who won. I was the guy that did leaflet for Richard Barnbrook. I was the one who designed all the propaganda for the Barking and Dagenham campaign, where we won twelve councillors and we won overnight. And I have canvassed in the West Midlands, I’ve canvassed in Yorkshire, I’ve canvassed in the northwest. I’ve been all over the country, so I’ve seen this!

But if you’ve spoken to anyone, you will have seen and heard these things, too. You will have heard exactly what I’m saying now.

“It’s a wasted vote! I didn’t vote for you because it’s a wasted vote!”

And I’ve heard that thousands and thousands of times:

“This is a wasted vote. I’m not wasting my vote. I’m not voting BNP because it’s a wasted vote!”

That’s what people used to say. And I’d say:

“What do you mean, a wasted vote?”

“So you’re only going to get 5%. So what’s the point in voting for you? You can’t win! I want Labour out. You can’t win. So if I vote for you, I’m helping Labour. So I’m going to vote for the Tories.”

And I heard that in other places, but the opposite way around:

“You can’t win, and I want the Tories out. So rather than giving you 5.1%, I’m going to throw my weight behind the next biggest party to try and unseat the party I don’t like.”

People are very aware of this. People are aware of not wasting their votes.

And I remember the first time I went to vote, I looked down the ballot paper, it was actually for a European election, and I saw Conservatives and I thought:

“Oh, should I vote for those? And I saw you. I think I’m going to vote for them instead!”

And I saw the BNP logo. I was like:

“I’m voting for them. I’m voting for the BNP!”

And I voted BNP.

And I was really happy.

And even though the BNP didn’t win, I thought:

“Well, I’ve put my tick in the right box and people are going to see if enough people vote BNP, that there are people out there who do want change, there are people who want an end to migration, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera.”

But it doesn’t work like that. If you’re not voting for a winning candidate, your vote doesn’t count, as we just said. So people say:

“Don’t waste your vote. Don’t vote for a party that can’t win. You should only vote for a party that can win! Vote for the party that can get the party that you don’t like out of power!”

There’s this desire to be on the winning team, a desire to create change. And people understand. You see, the electorate, nationalists often say:

[21:50]

“Oh, the electorate is stupid! The electorate don’t know what they’re doing. They’re idiots!”

That’s not true. The electorate do understand that. If you’ve ever knocked on doors, they will throw this in your face:

“You’re a small party, you’re not going to win! Why would I waste my vote on you?”

And I’ve knocked on so many doors. I’ve heard that, I’ve tried to argue with these people. I’ve said to them:

“Well, if you don’t vote for change, at some point you’re going to end up with these same two parties.”

And they’re aware of that. But the wasted vote is a big, big issue. Tactical voting is a big issue.

And this leads to this horrible situation where people are voting for the lesser of two evils.

“Oh, I really don’t like Labour, so I’m going to vote Conservatives!”

“I really hate the Conservatives. I’m going to hold my nose and vote Labour because I just want to get Sunak out of there!”

This is a major problem. It’s the flaw, the fundamental flaw of the First Past the Post electoral system. And now you’re thinking to yourself, I said earlier that I wasn’t going to present just my opinions, I was going to present facts. And I have. Now, as I’ve just said, I’ve campaigned on the street all over the country and been involved in more electoral wins than probably any nationalist alive today.

So what’s that taught me? Well, it’s actually taught me that everything I’ve just said is not only true from a public perspective, but it’s actually true from a party political perspective.

So when we used to walk around leafleting, you would often find other parties leaflets sort of hanging out of mailboxes and certain cheeky BNP members would pull them out and pocket themselves:

“I’ll pull that out, keeping that!”

Sort of a a cheeky little way to put yourself ahead.

And I remember seeing Lib Dem leaflets. And Lib Dems, although Lib Dems were completely aware of everything I’ve just said, and not only were they completely aware of it, they played into it. The Liberal Democrats actually played on this fear of a wasted vote that I’ve just been talking about.

So the Liberal Democrats knew, or know what I’m saying is true and they play up to it. They actually put this on their leaflets. So I’ve had Lib Dem leaflets in my hands that have shown a little graphic and they always used to have things on it like:

“Lib Dem’s winning here! Lib Dems, we’re the only ones that can beat labour! If you want the Conservatives out, don’t waste your vote. Vote Lib Dem!”

And they’d always have these little graphics and the graphics would often be something like a horse race with little jockeys on the back of the horses. And there would be the Labour horse, and the Labour horse would be near the line, the Lib Dem horse would be just behind Labour, and the Conservatives would be way back in the distance and they would say:

“Only the Lib Dems can beat Labour in this ward. Don’t vote for the Tories! It’s a wasted vote!”

They would play up to this. And I’ve seen Labour leaflets that have said similar things on it. They sometimes have these little graphs on, you know:

“Lib Dems are on 42%, Labour on 41%, Tories are on … whatever! Sort of 10%, others negligible! Don’t waste your vote! If you want to get rid of the Lib Dems, if you want to swing this council, vote Labour. Because we’re the only ones that can stop Lib Dems!”

And Lib Dems and Labour, they did this in Leeds. They did this in Leeds. I used to see these leaflets all the time. I’ve had them push through my door. I’ve had activists give them to me. This is something that regularly happens. So it isn’t just my observation. These aren’t just my takes. This is something that the other parties play up to.

The other parties are keenly aware this. The other parties are keenly aware of the flaws in this system, and they play up to it to lock out smaller parties.

[25:49]

Now, I’m going to give you another example.

Now, I used to know a girl whose dad I used to talk to a little bit about politics, and he was very much our way of thinking. He was a nice guy, she was our way of thinking.

And I remember speaking to them before an election and they said to me:

“Who should we vote for?”

Now, I knew there wasn’t really any nationalist candidates going to be standing, so I said:

“Look, if I was you guys, I’d vote UKIP, I’d vote UKIP because it’s your way of sending a message, a protest, that you want things to change. It’s your way of saying ‘no’ to the two party system.”

And the girl was like:

“That’s a good point. We should do that. Actually, I’m going to tell my dad that that’s who we should vote for. He was asking what your opinion was.”

So she went and told him what I said. She came back to me and says:

“Oh, no, he’s not voting UKIP!”

I said:

“Why not?”

“Because he’s going to vote Labour.”

“Why would he vote Labour? Why would he vote Labour?”

And she said:

“Well, he says that if you don’t vote Labour, your vote automatically goes to the Conservatives.”

Now, at the time, I was like, this is complete nonsense! And I just put this down to Labour, spreading this lie to get more votes and going to people who are maybe a little bit gullible or would believe things like this to get more votes.

But over the years, this sort of stuck with me, and I ruminated on this for a while. Now I think this guy actually misinterpreted what he was told. I think he heard something and, like, Chinese whispers he regurgitated it in the wrong way to me. And what he was actually told was:

“If you don’t vote Labour, you’re effectively voting for the Conservatives.”

[27:28]

So if you vote UKIP, and you were a Labour voter, you’re actually – because UKIP aren’t going to win – you’re actually taking Labour down by one, which means their vote is dropping closer and closer to the Conservatives.

And this is what people actually think! And this wasn’t a super political guy. He wasn’t going to nationalist meetings, he wasn’t reading Julius Evola, he was a normal guy, like, going down the pub, talked a bit of politics, didn’t like immigration, and he was keenly aware that if he didn’t vote Labour, he was actually helping the other party get in. And he really hated the Tories! This was a guy that grew up in the Thatcher era and couldn’t stand Maggie Thatcher, and he would never vote conservative! And he was like:

“Look, I’m never, never supporting the Tory Party! And if I vote for somebody other than Labour, I’m helping those Tories get closer to power!”

And, yeah, that’s what normal people think.

So the First Past the Post system is inherently undemocratic! And it’s not only inherently undemocratic, but it’s actually something that locks smaller parties out. It makes it infinitely harder for smaller parties to get representation. And even when a smaller party like UKIP takes nearly 4 million votes, it results in a single seat. And a result like that reinforces in the minds of normal people why UKIP or any other smaller party is a wasted vote, when it shouldn’t.

So I hope that sort of circles that off.

The first point is we live under a First Past the Post electoral system for the vast majority of our elections. It’s not representative democracy, it’s not designed to be, and it results in minority governments, it results in tactical voting, it results in people worrying about wasting their votes.

And essentially, it leads to the next point on our list of things we want to discuss.

It naturally tends towards a two party system. The First Past the Post system of voting creates a two party system, and then it props up that two party system. We’ve seen it! People tend toward the two largest parties, they tend towards the lesser of two evils:

“I’m voting Labour because the Tories really suck! I’m voting Tory because Labour were really bad on immigration! I’m voting for Labour this time because Sunak messed up the economy! Well, didn’t you vote for the Tories because Brown and Blair messed up the economy? Wasn’t the credit crunch the reason you voted Tory? There was all the credit crunch stuff, but now you’re voting them out because you think Labour are going to do a great job at fixing the economy, which was the problem last time!”

And this is the big issue, people voting for the lesser of two evils and flip flopping between two main parties, because otherwise it’s a wasted vote!

[30:56]

And this leads to those two large parties becoming more similar, to the point where they become what is known as “centrist parties”. So a centrist party is a party that sits a millimetre, …

So if you. This is a simplistic way of looking at things, and I know people are going to be saying:

“You can’t plot your political allegiances on a straight line from right to left.”

But that’s what we’re going to do for the sake of this.

So if you looked at a graph and you say, on this side, which is my left hand side, you’ve got your extreme Left. On this side, you’ve got your extreme Right. And right there, right down the middle, is your centre line. When you have a two party system, you end up with one party that is one millimetre to the left of the central line and one party that is one millimetre to the right of the central line. And you end up with two parties that say exactly the same thing, but are painted in different colours, and one attempts to appeal to everything to the left of that line and one attempts to appeal to everything to the right of that line.

And this leads to a situation where both parties push exactly the same agenda! And there is never change. And we’ve touched on something else here. People have short memories! So if people gave up on Labour 10, 15 years ago, they’re soon enough ready to give Labour another chance.

Now, again, this might just be anecdotal evidence, but I have campaigned all over Yorkshire.

Now, I went for dinner with an old friend the other day, it was a lovely dinner. Went out for lunch, talked about politics, talked about PA. He’s very enthusiastic about it. You know, he’s an old BNP man. And we were reminiscing about the old times, about knocking on doors in parts of Yorkshire. And he reminded me of a particular campaign.

And I remember I was very active in that campaign. I was there most nights of the week, and I was definitely there all weekend. And I was there in a suit, shirt and tie, knocking on doors, speaking to people. And it was a Labour area that the BNP ended up winning a council seat in.

And I remember that because I remember speaking to people in that campaign, and I remember people telling me:

“I will never vote Labour again! I’ve had enough! I’ve had enough. Nope! I’m never voting, … I’ll vote BNP, but I’ll never vote Labour again!”

This is what they said. And this would have been, I don’t know, maybe 2004, 2005, sometime in the two thousands, anyway. And these people were so sick of Labour politicians of Blair and Brown! They were sick of the Iraq war, they were sick of Britain’s foreign involvement in issues that didn’t concern them. They were sick of what was at the time massive numbers of migration, obviously dwarfed by migration now. They were never going to vote Labour again.

They’re now voting Labour again! They’re now the people that have just actually, by majority, voted in a Labour Mayor for West Yorkshire. That [chuckling] tells you everything they forgot. People are saying, this time, when the Tories go down, it’ll all be forgotten. It’ll never be forgotten. Rishi Sunak will sink them for good. Will he? Will he?

[34:44]

People said when Thatcher got in in 79, that was the end of Labour. But Labour were back in 97. And when Labour got in 97. People said the Tories were so corrupt, they were so awkward, awful! The cash for questions, the scandals, the sleaze! Because that’s what sank them:

“No one will ever vote Tory again after everything they’ve done!”

Yet, in 2010, they voted the Tories in again. And when they voted the Tories in, people were like:

“This is what we need. We need a change. Get Blair and Brown out. They’ve ruined the economy. They flooded the country. We’ll never forget what Blair and Brown! Seeing all these young soldiers coming back in boxes. We don’t want this. These people destroyed the country!”

That’s what people were saying.

And now here we are, staring down the barrel of a general election in 2025. Where Labour looks set to win, what will be a Thatcherite, or what looks today to be a Thatcherite or Blairite majority. Who would have thought it? Who would have thought that 14 years after the Tories were elected, people would be forgiving the party of Blair and Brown? But they’re embracing Starmer in record numbers for more of the same. More of the same!

So don’t think this two party system is easy to break up. The two party system is created by the First Past the Post system. It’s then propped up by the First Past the Post system. It creates this centrism where you have two identical parties and then people, by design, flip flop between those parties who basically rubber stamp exactly the same policies. And these people have short memories, you know, 10, 15 years down the line, they are ready to kick out the people that they voted in, and re elect the party that 10, 15 years ago they kicked out and vowed never again! This is a problem! And this is a reality of our system. And it’s another reality, just like the First Past the Post system that locks smaller parties out.

[37:12]

Now, the third thing I want to talk about is if it wasn’t bad enough that we lived under a First Past the Post system, if it wasn’t bad enough that this created this two party system which is unbreakable and hasn’t been broken post Second World War, you then look at the media’s role in elections. Because not only is the system terrible, not only are the main parties corrupt, best friends, and colluding to create this two party system where they scare people into not wasting their votes. The media makes all this so much worse by interfering and preventing any kind of freedom of information.

And what do I mean by “freedom of information”? Will the media work around this two party system to ensure that only the approved parties get airtime? And this is a massive problem! Is there a debate on TV? Yes, there will be. Between the approved parties. What will be their topics of discussion? Those issues will be decided on beforehand. Who decides upon those issues? Who decides who are the approved parties? Well, the media. The media who work with the approved parties, and love the first past opposed system and approve of all of the policies that the two approved parties agree to talk about. And this creates the absolute iron control over information!

Now, my dad was talking about this years ago and I remember him saying this at the time, and this was something that always struck me as so important.

And again, this is an observation of mine, but I think it’s pretty factual.

So I’m going to throw this out to you guys in the chat. How many times have you guys, just hit a one in the chat? How many times have you guys, if you guys ever watched one of these TV debates, have you guys ever watched an election debate on TV done by the BBC or ITV? Have you? I hope you have. You know, tell me if you have. What do they talk about in these debates? It’s always minutiae. It’s always minutiae! That would never make a damn bit of difference!

So one party is gonna spend an extra billion on the NHS, but is going to put tax up a penny on the pound for a certain tax bracket.

The other party, they’re not going to spend a billion on the NHS, but they are going to reduce the tax burden by a penny on every pound.

Does it make any difference? What are they actually talking about? Well, when you put this all into perspective, the NHS is billions and billions of pounds in the hole. It swallows billions and billions of pounds every year. 1 billion to the NHS would basically belittle more than a bandage over the festering wound. It doesn’t matter! And what’s your penny on your tax? Does the average worker notice this penny here, penny there?

And this is what they do with fags and booze. I don’t drink. I have the odd drink if it’s a particular occasion, but I don’t go down the pub. I certainly don’t smoke, nor do I recommend people should smoke.

[40:55]

But one of the ways these parties will try to win people over, is one of these parties, one of these parties will say:

“You know what? We’re only going to increase. We’re only going to increase cigarette and alcohol duty by a penny!”

And the other party says:

“Well, we’re going to increase cigarette duty by a penny, but we’re going to freeze alcohol duty!”

What? What? They’re actually arguing over a penny on your pint. So if a pint’s three pounds, okay, you would have to, if you voted for the party, that’s saving you a penny on your pint, you’d have to drink 300 pints. [chuckling] 300 pints to get a free pint back! Does it matter? Are you ever going to notice?

But the way they talk about these things, it’s total theatre, it’s total nonsense!

But then the public are talking about:

“I’m voting for the red party because they’re going to give it to the NHS and my mum needs a hip replacement!”

And then the other guys:

“No, I’m voting for the blue party. They’re freezing duty on alcohol. I’m getting a penny off each pint I drink!”

And you’re like, aahhh! Am I actually hearing this? Am I actually hearing these grown men arguing over this tiny, inconsequential minutiae when there are so many huge problems? And am I actually seeing an audience of grown adults cheering, clapping, applauding and going along with it? And it’s terrible!

And what makes it even worse is that audience I just told you about, they were all vetted before they came in, so they know when to cheer, what to cheer for, what questions to ask, because they’re never going to let a normal person in front of a TV camera to say:

“Hey, you know, my daughter has to go to school and she gets harassed on the way in there by the migrants sleeping rough on the side of the street on her route to school. When are you going to do something about this?”

They don’t let that happen. They’ll never talk about these big issues.

And what’s more, the media never hold them to account.

So not only do the media only cover the approved parties, not only do they decide upon the issues beforehand, not only do they control the debates and control the studio audience around the debate and decide who actually gets to speak to the politicians, they airbrush out all the politicians failings, airbrush it all out! Covid didn’t happen! Tory. Immigration. Promises of getting immigration under 100,000 a year, didn’t happen! Forget that. What about promises? I don’t know. On anything else? On the economy, on the NHS? Every time one of these political parties fails to make good on their promises, the media covers for it.

[44:01]

So you have the First Past the Post system of voting. You have this two party system that creates this centrist, immovable block that people are scared of voting outside of it, and then that’s all surrounded by the media who are telling people:

“This is normal, these are the approved things. This is what people want to hear. People don’t want to talk about immigration, people only want to talk about a penny on the pint. People want to ask, how long are you freezing fuel duty for? What? We need fuel duty to go down. We’re paying one pound 46 a litre at the pump. Why don’t you knock something off it? Oh, no, no! The Tories are going to freeze it for six months. Labour only for three months. Oh, better vote Tory, then!”

And it’s the same hogwash again and again and again! And then if the media do get someone on who is an outsider, if the media actually do get somebody on, all of a sudden this toothless, smiling simpleton who has interviewed the Labour and Tory candidates with smiles and softball questions that were so easy to answer that somebody with an IQ of 75 would have managed to knock them out the park. All of a sudden they show their teeth. The vampire teeth come out and they go in for the kill:

“Your candidate in Greenwich said this. You said this when you were 21. Didn’t your party have a member who once said this?”

And you’re thinking to yourself:

“What’s going on?”

They didn’t ask the Labour Party leader, Kier Starmer, why he let numerous high profile paedophile cases go unanswered and just wave them away. They’re not asking him that affected people’s lives. You’re talking about a candidate that we’ve got in Greenwich that posted an NG meme the other week. What are you doing? You know, Bill from Greenwich, he posted a meme about the British Royal Navy sinking a migrant boat. But you’re talking about that like it’s the end of the world. But you’re ignoring the fact that the Labour Party took us into the Iraq war on, you know, bogus information and lies, that their new leader basically let people like Jimmy Savile walk free. You’re ignoring the fact they covered up the grooming scandal. You’re asking them, how great will life in Britain be under you, Sir Kier. But to the nationalist guy, don’t you have a candidate that once posted the edgy meme? What? And it gets worse!

Because, as I said, I’ve got more experience than most. I remember standing in Leeds and the front page of the newspaper the day before the election was a big picture of me and it simply read:

“Don’t vote for this Nazi!”

So the media that are meant to be impartial, these are meant to be the people that impart the facts.

So the public can decide absolute BS!

They are completely corrupt! They feed everyone lies. They put on this pageantry that I’ve just spoken of and sometimes they literally tell people:

“Okay, we’ve got a two party system, but this guy here in Richmond Hill, in Leeds, we think he could win. We think he could win. So don’t vote for this Nazi!”

It’s completely corrupt! It’s absolutely corrupt to the highest level!

So that’s the first three points. First Past the Post system, the two party system and the media’s role. And I bet you’re thinking, it can’t get worse, can it, Mark? Whoo. It gets worse!

[47:32]

So all of this is created to ensure that this two party system is created, held in place. There’s never any proper debate, there’s never any oversight. And you have your information, you know, filtered through the sewage pipe of the media. But just in case all of that doesn’t work, just in case all of that does not work, [chuckling] you’ve got the safety valve parties.

So they are nervous because they think:

“Well, maybe, maybe there’s a chance that some people will vote outside of the mainstream.”

So they create parties that say things that nationalist parties do, and then they give those parties huge amount of airtime, so nationalists vote for them rather than the nationalist alternative.

Now, I know UKIP got huge. I know UKIP got huge and I’m talking about UKIP, Brexit Party before, and I know UKIP got huge. But back around, 2004, before the Euro elections, no one was talking about UKIP. No one cared about UKIP. People cared about the BNP. The BNP had its first councillors elected in 2002. It got more in 2003. People were buzzing about the BNP’s potential! The BNP was huge news.

Then all of a sudden, it came to the Euro elections, where they won a rare election that was run on PR. Sadly, they’re gone now.

So that’s that Avenue’s closed to us. And what happened? All of a sudden, the media, total blackout on the BNP:

“UKIP are going to do well. If you want to vote against immigration, if you want to vote against Europe, vote UKIP. Forget the BNP!”

They didn’t even say forget the BNP. They just stopped talking about the BNP.

So this big threat that had been looming, the party that everyone was scared of, the party that all the scare stories had been written about, the party that was actually winning council seats, they stopped covering. And the safety valve is rolled out and everyone voted UKIP.

And at that point, the BNP didn’t get any candidates elected at the Euro election. The BNP was projected to, but the safety valve party comes out.

So this makes things even worse. And the media plays play this up.

[49:56]

So it was always the same. Two or three months before a European election, all of a sudden, UKIP reappeared. Farage was on everything. He was invited on every single chat show, every discussion show. The Daily Mail would be running puff pieces for him, the Express would be running puff pieces for him. Nick Griffin’s face was airbrushed out of everything:

“No one talk about the BNP!”

And the public believe it. The public are like:

“What? What the media is saying there’s a chance we could maybe vote for somebody different here. Who is this? Who is this bold challenger? What? And they’re against immigration!”

And you’re the little guy in the BNP going:

“We’re against it too! You know, we’re the ones who’ve been telling you about this for the last five, six years. We’d be the ones knocking on your doors. We were the ones winning council seats. Vote for us!”

But people didn’t.

And I remember in 2004, we actually had a family, lovely family in Leeds, join he BNP.

And I remember going and visiting them when they joined to say, would you like to come to a meeting and introduce ourselves? And we said:

“Oh, did you vote for us locally? And this family were a family that lived in Richmond Hill, which was my ward. And they said:

“Yeah, of course we did, Mark, mate, we had a poster in the window for you. We told our friends to vote for you.”

I was like:

“Thank you so much! Thank you so much!”

And he goes:

“But we didn’t vote for you in the Euros.”

I was like:

“What? What? Why?”

And he was like:

“Well, UKIP had a better chance. Everyone was talking up UKIP. UKIP were the ones that seemed to be a shoe-in for that election.”

And I was like:

“Well, thank you for your vote.”

But if everybody who had voted BNP locally and was so enthusiastic about BNP at the local elections had voted BNP in the Euro elections, I think we’d have got a seat there. I think we’d have actually got a seat back in 2004. But we didn’t because the “safety valve” was rolled out, just like they’re rolling out Reform now, just like they rolled out the Brexit Party.

And people will say:

“Hey, Mark, but you keep calling a ‘safety valve’. How can you prove it’s not a legitimate party?”

Well, I can actually prove it’s not a legitimate party. How? Well, at the last general election, when, was it the Brexit Party at the time were challenging against Boris Johnson, they actually looked like they were going to swing marginal seats.

So there are marginal seats where there’s only a thousand or so votes between Labour and Tory. And the Brexit Party, if it had stood in those marginal seats, it would have split the Tory vote and it would have destroyed the Tory Party. Boris wouldn’t have got in. It would likely have been a hung Parliament, or even taken it close, maybe to Corbyn actually winning. So what did the Brexit Party do? As soon as the Brexit Party could actually have some kind of decisive effect on the election, Farage and the Brexit Party withdrew all their candidates! Well, if that’s not a safety valve. If that’s not proof of a safety valve party, if that’s not proof that it’s rigged in that sense with a safety valve, that when that safety valve looks like it might present a threat to the system, it withdraws.

[53:23]

Now, the Brexit Party did stand. The Brexit Party did stand, but they withdrew all their candidates from marginal wards to ensure that the Conservative Party didn’t lose seats.

So people did vote Brexit Party, but only in seats where it would have no effect whatsoever!

Do you see where I’m coming with this? This is the system we live under. So we’ve got, First Past the Post, boom! Bad system, not representative! The two party system! The media propping it all up.

And then just in case anything looks like it might go wrong, you have the “safety valve” parties.

So that’s why the system is so difficult for nationalists to actually crack.

Now, I didn’t go in to anything here about vote rigging. I didn’t go into any sort of fanciful stories about stealing ballot boxes. I’ve stuck completely here to actual things that you guys can observe.

And I hope that this portion of what we’re saying has been interesting. And I hope it’s been informative.

But there’s a lot more to come.

I’m just going to have a little bit of my Red Bull and then we’re going to have some more. It’s a very hot day here. It’s a very hot day here.

So I’m going to talk about the turnout now.

Now, one of the copes that nationalists have is that turnout is low. Turnout’s low, people aren’t voting.

And one of the takes that I see rolled out every now and again, well, every now and again, quite regularly, whenever I talk about elections, one of the popular copes or takes is:

“The real winner is apathy! Apathy was the real winner of this election!”

Now this is basically what people say when they’re kidding themselves into thinking that there’s loads of people who want to vote but they’re not voting. And there’s this vanguard of people just waiting for the right party to come along and then all of a sudden turnout is going to go through the roof and nationalist parties are going to be elected. So usually it’s 50% turnout, but when the Right nationalist candidate stands, turnout is going to jump to 90%, he’s going to pick up all the votes and boom! Revolutionary voting patterns!

No, this is garbage. It doesn’t happen. People have been saying this for my entire time in nationalist politics.

So when I was first out leafleting, which is probably back at around, 2000, people were saying:

“We just need the people who aren’t voting to get out and vote.”

And here we are in 2024. And those people who weren’t voting in the year 2000, they ain’t voting now either. They ain’t voting now.

[56:20]

And what’s more, turnout isn’t that low. I saw turnout in a lot of areas was usually around 30% to 40%. 30% to 40% was generally around the norm when I used to stand in Leeds. You’d see about 36%, 34%, sometimes high twenties now. Yeah, turnout is a bit lower in some areas, I’ll grant that, but turnout is low for council elections.

And a lot of people who say “Apathy’s the winner” don’t really understand electoral cycles.

Now, in the area where I live, there was no information about the elections. I think we got two leaflets through the door that the entire electoral run, we got our polling cards through the door and we didn’t see anything else. There was No campaigning on the day, no loudspeaker vans, no posters, no placards, nothing! No buzz, no razzmatazz, nothing! It was just there and then it wasn’t there. That causes low turnout.

But let me explain how turnout works, and I hope you understand this because I’m going to use an analogy.

Now, I hope you’re all familiar with the World Cup.

So the World Cup happens in different stages. You have the World Cup qualifiers where all the teams play in-groups to find out who’s actually going to get to the World Cup. Then when they get to the World Cup, teams get put into groups and they play the World Cup group stages. Usually two teams go through from each group and they enter the World Cup knockouts. Teams advance through the knockout stages until the semi-finals, and then finally you get the big day, the World Cup Final!

Now, why am I bringing up football? Because I don’t really like football. It’s okay, but it’s not my favourite thing. So why am I bringing it up? Well, the number of people who watch a World Cup final is absolutely humongous! So potentially billions of people. Somebody can Google it. Billions of people probably watch the World Cup final.

In fact, I’m going to Google it. “How many people watched last World Cup final?” Last World Cup final was watched by 1.5 billion people globally. That’s huge! That’s huge! And those people, you might say they’re football fans. But where were those people when the World Cup qualifiers were? Because they weren’t watching. And they weren’t watching, really, in the group stages. A few more watched in the knockout stages, a lot more watched in the semi-finals, but the big turnout was, for them, the big one, the World Cup final.

So, yeah, people who are football fans, they tend to have fewer people watching the qualifiers, few more watching the group stages, because the World Cup’s officially started. A lot more watching the knockouts, a lot more watching the semi-finals and then huge numbers watching the World Cup final. That’s how it works. Not everyone who watches the final watches every other game. Now there are hardcore people who turn out and watch every single game. They’ll watch from the qualifiers right through to the final. That’s rare. And it’s the same with elections.

[59:40]

Now in this country the World Cup final is the general election. And you cannot miss a general election. It’s all the media talks about. It’s all the press talks about. It’s all over social media. There’s billboards, there’s posters, there’s loudspeaker vans. Your house is getting bombarded with leaflets that are delivered by Royal Mail on behalf of the main parties. There’s party political broadcasts, sometimes two a day. You cannot miss it! And turnout goes up massively! Turnout goes up massively! It goes through the roof. All of a sudden, your turnout is up to usually somewhere between 60 and 80%, depending on the constituency.

But when you have your councillor elections, or your European elections, or these smaller elections, turnout is much, much lower. These are sort of like your World Cup qualifiers, if you like. And you will see this again when it comes to the next general election and people get to go out and actually vote for a Parliamentary candidate, and it’s who’s going to run the country, not who’s going to decide where the dog poo bins go on the local council, who’s going to run the country? The stakes are higher, the buzz is more. This is the big one. People understand the importance of this. Turnout will go up, it always does.

So don’t look at the turnout of local elections and say:

“Normal people aren’t voting anymore because they’re just sat at home waiting for the Right candidate to come along.”

They’re not! And they won’t! You will see this happen in waves. It always happens this way. Council elections are often neglected and low turnout is often an indicator of the number of leaflets and the amount of publicity material that goes out around an election.

So these are relatively normal occasions.

And what’s more, you will find the same at Parliamentary by-elections. As a rule of thumb, Parliamentary by-elections have much lower turnouts than a general election. And because of that’s why you tend to have more upsets occur at Parliamentary by-elections than you do at general elections.

Now, bear in mind everything I’ve just said there, because we’re going to come back. We’re going to come back to that because this little thing about turnout comes back and bites us in the end, at the end of our story.

So now I’ve said all that I’m going to do a breakdown of our recent results and I’m going to talk about all the nationalist parties and I’m going to group Reform in that I’m going to ask, how did all the nationalist parties fare in the UK?

And I’m going to ruin the surprise. Reform got two candidates elected nationwide!

And as for ethno-nationalist parties, not a single ethno-nationalist party got a single candidate elected. And that leaves us with a total number of elected ethno-nationalist candidates in this country as a big fat round zero! There’s none! There isn’t a single councillor in this country who stood for an ethno-nationalist party. That is how it works. And that is the truth!

[1:03:04]

So let’s go through them all. But look, I’m going to only mention two parties by name, the rest of the parties, because I’m not going to be accused of being bitchy. You can guess who the other parties are. I’m going to call them party 1, 2, 3, 4, etcetera.

So I’m not directly taking a dump on any party by name, except for Reform.

Now, reform got two people, candidates, elected nationally. That is appalling! Why is it appalling? Because that is the safety valve party. If the safety valve party, if the civic nationalist safety valve party can’t get elected, the ethno-nationalists aren’t either. That’s a rule of thumb, I’m telling you. And Reform should have knocked it out of the park. Reform have millions and millions of pounds. They’ve got Farage, they’ve got Katie Hopkins, they’ve had Conservative Party defectors, they’ve got Richard Tice on TV all the time. We’ve got the Daily Mail and the Daily Express bigging them up, and they’ve got GB News!

GB News is basically like Reform’s political, … You know how we have these streams. Well, that’s what GB News is for Reform. They’ve basically got a channel that’s on the air, I don’t know whether it’s 24/7 but they’ve got a full-time broadcasting channel shilling for them. They’ve got Farage on there, they’ve got Katie Hopkins shilling for them on Twitter, they’ve got defectors from the Conservative Party, and they’ve got a war chest that’s in the millions of pounds. And they got two people elected. That’s a disaster! It’s an absolute disaster! And if they flopped now, when it’s a low turnout, what are they going to do at the general election?

Well, I’ll tell you what, it’s going to be worse! The Reform Party did disastrously! And if the Reform Party, and I’ll tell you this now, people were talking about:

“Well, this time when people go out to vote, they’ll vote for anyone but the main parties!”

You know, we’re going to see a massive breakthrough here. And the same hurt the Left. Galloway’s party only got four elected. It wasn’t a good night for people on the Left or the Right outside of the mainstream. The big winners, Lib Dems, who jumped into second place, and Labour, who absolutely took the lion’s share, took over 1,000 candidates.

The fact of the matter is they did not do well.

Now, talk about the next party. We’ll call this party, party number one.

Now, this party had a good strategy and PA helped this party. They stood in police commissioner elections and they actually did all right. And you gotta guess this one. This one’s the English Democrats. So I say I’m gonna name two. I might as well name them. The English Democrats had a good strategy. They stood for police commissioner elections.

[1:05:09]

Now, why is that a good strategy? Because there’s only two elected positions in the country which actually create change. What do I mean by that? Well, if you get elected as a sole councillor on the council, you make no change. Even an MP getting elected has a voice, but can’t actually make any form of legislative change.

So it was great when George Galloway got elected, but can he make any legislative change? No, he can’t. But a police commissioner can. If you were elected as police commissioner, you can actually sack the Chief Constable, you can decide whether budget spent, you get to employ your own team, and you actually get to ensure that the police in your area do as you’re telling them because you’re their boss. So that’s a position that is worth winning.

The other position that’s worth winning is a directly elected Mayor, because they have a similar power in that they can impose policy, they can impose all forms of local changes. So say an English Democrat got elected as a directly elected Mayor. They could say:

“Look, everyone gets a St George’s Day parade in the town.”

These are good positions to go for. But it wasn’t great.

You know, we helped Robin Tilbrook put out, in total, 45,000 leaflets were put out for the police commissioner election, for Robin Tilbrook. We put out between 30 and 35,000, and English Democrat activists put out another 10,000. I would say, in the chat, guess how many you think the Tories put out? Well, the Tories put out, I’m not going to make you guess. The Tories put out half a million! And yeah, you heard that right. And not only did they put out half a million, there was a section on every council candidate standing in that area saying:

“Don’t forget to vote for us for police commissioner elections as well!”

So they have half a million leaflets put out directly for the police commissioner, and they got a section on every single council election leaflet in that area as well.

So even though there was a Herculean effort of putting out this 45,000 leaflets, and that takes a lot of time, what did it result in? Well, Robin took a respectable result for such a large area and he took 45,000 votes. But unfortunately, it was a mile off. The Conservatives won. So that wasn’t a great result. It was hard fought, but it wasn’t a great result.

Now, the next party that I’m going to talk about, they got humiliated. The next party is a longstanding nationalist party. They’ve never in their whole history, and I think they were founded in about 2011. They’ve never had a councillor elected. I think they’ve had one councillor under their banner, but that was a councillor they inherited. It wasn’t a councillor that they directly got elected. So after over a decade of activity, they’ve never had anybody elected under their banner. And they stood two candidates. Neither of them got anywhere near winning sand they stood in the GLA as well.

[1:0911]

Now, I remember when Richard Barnbrook got elected to the GLA [Greater London Assembly], he took 5.4% and won a seat. And that was a massive thing! These guys took 0.8%.

Now, to get that 0.8% of the vote, they claim that they spent 35 grand.

Now, it cost ten grand just to go on the ballot paper. It cost another ten grand to go in the Mayoral booklet, so it’s probably factual they spent 35 grand to get around, 20,000 votes. And to get 0.8%. And they were beaten by a guy called Count Binface, who is the modern incarnation of the monster raving loony party. He’s a guy that turns up dressed in fancy dress with a bin for a head and like, a robot face cut into it. And he basically, the candidate I’m talking about, the nationalist, got beaten by this comedy candidate. And that’s terrible!

Now, I know it’s in London, and I know London’s only 36.8% White British, but to come away with 0.8% of the vote and get beaten by the comedy candidate, that’s grim! So Reform did terribly. The English Democrats big effort, but unfortunately didn’t do anything. And this party, 0.8%, beaten by Count Binface. And spent 35 grand to get humiliated.

The next party. This is another old party. This was a party that was formed when the BNP entered into decline in around, 20011. Again, they’ve been going well over a decade. Now they have had a couple of elected councillors and an MEP at one time. But they never got those councillors elected. These were just people who defected to them. Again, it’s another party that’s been going over a decade that has never, ever managed to actually get anybody elected under their own banner. They stood some candidates. Again, it didn’t go very well for them.

The next party is a newer party. It was a party that was formed by people who split away from PA. They did disastrously! They spent a year telling people that they’re going to be standing all over the country. They stood in one single seat! One! They said:

“We’re going to be standing everywhere. Local community politics is what we’re doing!”

Local community politics. They stood in one seat and they polled disastrously! They put a national campaign into one seat and polled disastrously! Their candidate got 569 votes and came second with, 23% when he stood as an independent. When they had a national mobilisation to get him elected under their banner, his vote dropped to 355 votes, his percentage share dropped to 13% and he was budged down into third place. That is a disaster!

[1:12:10]

And these people were talking about local politics, local community policies, and that was a national effort. They had people travel over 200 miles to go campaigning for him. They had everything. They claimed they knocked on doors, they put out multiple leaflets, they put up placards all over the ward, and they got fewer votes when standing under their party banner and putting in a national effort than they did when the guy stood as an independent a year earlier. If that doesn’t tell you everything, what does?

Now, finally, there is another party again. People who used to be with PA, this party broke away. These guys didn’t even stand. These guys have said:

“No, we’re not going to be standing in council elections. Council elections are waste of time! We’re just going to stand in the big national elections, in the general election!”

Well, that’s ridiculous! To say that you’re not going to stand locally but you’re just going to leapfrog over everything and stand in the general election is absolutely ridiculous!

My prediction is these people who, again, have talked big about elections, I don’t believe they’ll even stand. And their leader himself has already said he ain’t going to stand. He’s not going to stand under his own party banner. I mean, why would he? This is the state of nationalism.

Every party I’ve just talked about there, and I haven’t named some of them because I don’t want to get involved in drama, but I have given you a genuine breakdown of their results, and all of them failed. And Reform got two people elected out of all of the candidates that stood.

And I’m going to give you a reality check here. I’m going to give you a reality check. Do, you know how many council candidates there are in Great Britain?

So basically, I’m going to break down what Great Britain is first. Great Britain is England, Scotland and Wales. The United Kingdom is the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. So this excludes Northern Ireland.

So we’re talking about Great Britain, the mainland.

Now, Great Britain has about 19,000 council seats. And there isn’t a single one in the hands of an ethno-nationalist party. Not a single one! And let’s say some of these small parties did win a council seat. Let’s say one of these parties that were putting in a huge national effort to win one council seat, won that council seat. One, would it make a difference? And two, this is even worse. What is the long term strategy?:

“Well, we’re going to win one council seat and keep going like that every year!”

Well, where does that get you in a thousand years? You’ve got a thousand candidates? It’s not a viable strategy, that’s all I’m going to say.

So this year’s results were the worst, or some of the worst I’ve ever seen! And nationally there are two Reform councillors and there are three people who stood for a strange offshoot of Reform called Reform Derby. They were elected last year.

So that’s maybe five people, part of some form of safety valve organisation, out of 19,000. It’s grim.

[1:15:32]

So saying all that, we’ve got one thing left to discuss, or two things.

The first is a historical perspective. Let’s look at the history of the only party, the only party to ever succeed at the ballot box in any meaningful way under an ethno-nationalist banner. That’s the BNP. That’s the British National Party, who won at both local, regional and national elections!

So we’ve got to talk about these guys. We’ve got to talk about them. And look, I’m going to say this. I don’t like him, he doesn’t like me, he’s always sniping at me. But Nick Griffin was the leader of this party at the time. And when I first met him, I had nothing but admiration for him. And he had an electoral strategy. And that electoral strategy bore fruit for a short amount of time.

So I’m going to give you a brief history lesson.

The BNP did do well in the short term. It took 56 councillors, one county councillor, giving it a total of 57. It took a member on the GLA, Richard Barmbrook, and it returned two MEPs, two, to the European Parliament. That was massive! That was massive! And it seems really, really powerful, compared to what we’ve got now. And let’s talk about this. Let’s do a brief history. Let’s run through it really quickly.

Well, how did that happen? Well, Burnley in 2002 was where it all started, and there was three councils elected in Burnley.

And I’m not taking anything away from the Burnley guys. They put in a lot of hard effort. But do you know how that happened? Do, you know how that happened?

Well, I’m going to tell you. It wasn’t what people say. It wasn’t just a local revolution. In 2002, there was a quirk of the electoral system where every single ward in Burnley had its boundaries redrawn. So every single councillor was being elected. Usually councillors are elected for a four year period.

So there’s a year of elections, a year of elections, a year of elections, break, a year of elections, a year of elections, and it rolls around like that.

However, this particular year, the whole council was up for grabs. So instead of voting for one candidate, you voted for three. This quirk of the system meant that three BNP councillors got elected. Because the BNP ran a genius campaign that said:

“Vote for your usual party, but lend us one of your votes to create change.”

Now, that was an amazing win! And I’m not taking anything away from it. But it was a quirk of the system. It was a quirk of the system that helped us get in. Will there ever be a quirk of the system like that again? I don’t know.

[1:18:22]

So the ball started rolling in Burnley, not just because of hard work, but because of luck and because of the quirk of the system. And you can’t ignore that it’s like saying:

“Well, we won the battle and our people fought hard, but, you know, it did happen to be raining that day and that really affected the other army, so they couldn’t mount their cavalry charge as they usually do.”

Well, yeah, you may have fought well and your troops do deserve all the credit that they are receiving, but you can’t overlook the fact there were other factors that led to that.

Now, following that, there were a number of by-elections that the BNP won. They won a by-election in Blackburn. I was on the ground and I designed many of the leaflets for that campaign, including a smear leaflet against the Lib Dems, which won’t worked absolutely fantastically!

There was also a by-election in [word unclear]. I was on the ground for that every single day. That was in Halifax and that was the coldest I’ve ever been in my life. I’ve spoken about that on stream before. And we won those. But what did we do to win those elections? Well, there was about 40, 50 activists from all over the country on the street almost every day. These efforts were massive! It wasn’t one or two people leafleting. These efforts were massive! And this took us through to 2004, and the European election.

Now, the European election was going to be big for us. This was where Nick Griffin was meant to be elected to the European Parliament, and he didn’t. It was a disaster and it knocked the wind out of our sails. The party was nearly destroyed then. Why? Safety valve! UKIP came out of nowhere, took a load of our votes. Nick Griffin missed out and the party went into this deep malaise, this deep depression.

There were a number of councillors elected that year, that softened the blow. But Richard Barnbrook narrowly missed out on the GLA as well. All of this was very, very difficult for our people. All of this made things a huge knock and the party did falter. I remember the aftermath of the 2004 European election. The party was on the brink of just going down the pan. It was absolutely terrible! And it did start to falter. And straightaway we went into the 2005 general election and that was not great either. The 2005 general election was not great either. But something saved the party. Two things.

Firstly, there was the there was a number of terrorist attacks committed by second generation migrants, migrants that were born here. And this had been something that the party had predicted and Nick Griffin himself had predicted in speeches. This caused people to start talking about the BNP.

[1:21:08]

But then also myself and Nick Griffin were arrested. And that made absolutely huge national news and it caused outrage! The party was in the headlines again. People were talking about us being the ones that predicted these terror attacks. People were talking about the fact that we were being arrested for basically speaking the truth and we were never out of the press.

And that took us to 2006, Barking and Dagenham. And this was the BNP’s best ever year in terms of electoral results at local level. The party was flying high. Everyone was talking about Islamic migrant terrorism. Everybody was talking about Nick Griffin and Mark Collett and the free speech trial and this persecution. More people than ever were reading our website, wanting to know what we were doing. And Margaret Hodge went out campaigning and Barking and Dagenham. She was told by numerous people that were voting BNP. And she went into some rage fueled rant on TV saying:

“Eight out of ten people in this area considering voting BNP. I don’t know what’s gone wrong!”

I remember designing the leaflets for that campaign with Richard Barnbrook in a studio flat he used to live in Leeds. It was tiny. He slept on a fold out sofa, I slept on the bed. We were up from sort of like eight in the morning designing these leaflets. And they were massive, expensive, glossy, a four leaflets. And it was a real ethno-nationalist message on them.

The top picture was London on VE day. The parties at VE day, all White, then Barking and Dagenham, a market in the present day, just full of Muslims and other migrants. And it said:

“This is what London was, this is what it’s become. Is this what you voted for?”

And people voted BNP en masse. Overnight, we went from no councillors to being the official opposition on Barking council. I think we stood 13 seats, and twelve of those councillors got elected. If we’d have stood in every seat, well, it would have just been unbelievable! We were the official opposition, and Richard Barmbook and Bob Bailey, who were down there. One was in charge of Barking, Richard, and one was in charge of Dagenham, Bob. They were cock of the hoop! It was fantastic! It was absolutely a brilliant time!

Moving into 2007, though, our votes started to drop off a little bit. And this is where reality hit in. You know, you’d gone through 2002, you’d grown on that. In 2003, you’d have the by-electionsc also we built on it in Burnley. It gave people real confidence and we won more seats in Burnley in 2003. 2004, we won more councillors. But the European election was a disaster for us.

[1:23:54]

But then there was this massive boost in publicity. There was Barking and Dagenham, there was councillors getting elected, it seemed, left, right and centre all over the country because of this publicity boost.

But 2007, things were different. Things started to slow down and the enemy had got a real measure of the BNP. So 2007 was the first year we actually started to see BNP candidates lose seats. So some got re-elected, but some start to lose their seats because the other parties ganged up on them. Hope Not Hate leafleted against them. And over time you could see this was a war of attrition. And we all thought that once we got councillors in an area, it would be constant growth. But it wasn’t. We started to see slightly lower votes. The free speech trial was still going on, but it was running it’s course. People weren’t buzzing about it anymore. Things were going a little bit downhill and we lost seats.

People like Jim Lewthwaite and Arthur Redfern, who’d been elected in 2004, lost their seats in 2007. And people were like:

“That’s really disappointing!”

We also saw a number of defections. We saw people throw in the towel when this happened. And things looked really a little bit less sure of itself. And this massive high that we saw Barking and what we thought was gonna be the beginning of the forever of just upward cycling, it wasn’t anymore. It just wasn’t.

And then we went into 2008.

Now, 2008 was a funny year because Richard Barnbrook did get elected to the GLA with 5.4%, which was massive news. But on the council seat side, the council growth had really slowed. And I told you we’d become a party of by-elections. We’re doing very well at these by-elections. We were bussing in 40, 50 activists to win these by-elections. And I used to go down, Nick Griffin would go down, other people would go down, we’d all be knocking on doors. It would be fantastic!

But those seats started to dry up. And the last ever by-election win came in 2008. And that was actually Paul Golding. He won a seat. I think it was in., … Was it Sevenoaks? Was it Sevenoaks? Was it Stevenage? I can’t, … It began with “S”.

But anyway, he won a seat then, but that was the last council by-election we ever won was in 2008. But people were still happy because Barnbrook got elected. It was 5.4%. I designed the Mayoral insert, and we used the same leaflet we used in 2006. So me and Richard Barmbert, we designed a sort of a take on this leaflet that done really well, that showed London on VE Day and London in the modern day. And we asked people all over London, you know:

“How’s it going?”

[1:26:39]

And I remember we used to travel down and we would have, you know, 100 to 200 activists out on the streets over a single weekend. All the members of staff would travel down, Griffin would go down and activists from all over the country. Some would come on the Saturday, some would come on the Sunday. I remember my dad coming down with a Carload from the east Mids. So on the Sunday you’d have a different team than on the Saturday. It was absolutely massive! And we were putting out tens and tens of thousands of leaflets and Barnbrook snuck in. He needed 5%, he got 5.4%. It was fantastic!

And that kind of papered over these cracks. And these cracks were that the council election wins were getting fewer and further between, but now we were winning on this big stage, so that papered over the cracks.

And this continued into the 2009 Euro election. The 2009 Euro elections were massive because obviously Andrew Brons was actually the first to be elected. He won his seat slightly earlier than Nick Griffin. And I was there at the count and the elation to be at an election count where a BNP candidate wins an actual seat at the European Parliament was brilliant!

And I remember being really cocky and I remember that Andrew Brons took the seat from a Labour politician and as he was leaving, I can’t remember his name now. I remember shouting to him:

“Hey, mate, don’t forget your P45 on the way out!”

And all of our guys were roaring with laughter, we were so happy. And then Nick Griffin got elected a few hours afterwards when his count. We had two MEPs and this was national news, we finally had people elected on a national scale.

And this again papered over the cracks a little. We were winning these PR elections with quite low votes, sometimes with in margins, but we weren’t winning the council seats anymore. And it seemed a long time since Golding was elected and we were doing well, like we were in previous years. In previous years, you know, we won by-elections in Heckmondwike, in [word unclear]. Heckmondwike is near Huddersfield. It’s in Kirklees. We won in Heckmondwike. We won in Blackburn. You know, we won by-elections in Halifax. But they were getting few and far between now. We just weren’t doing the business. The days of by-election wins in London boroughs were gone. We just weren’t doing that. But the European seats seemed great!

But then 2010 came.

Now, remember what I said earlier about football matches and turnout and people watching? Just remember that. Because this happened. We had won all these low turnout elections, or when there were quirks of the system, like there were in Burnley, and we’d won at these PR elections where we only needed 5.4% or 4.5% to get someone in.

But when it came to the general election and there was this huge boost in turnout, remember I said earlier, remember this bit! Because it came to bite the BNP on the arse. Not only did we perform disastrously at the general election with the higher turnout, but every single councillor that was up for re election on that day was hit by the higher turnout, and they all lost. Bar one!

[1:30:02]

There was a guy in Pendle called Brian Parker. He was the only person in the whole country to keep his seat. Everyone else lost theirs. And it was catastrophic! You know, those twelve seats embarking in Dagenham, all gone in one single day. We went from being the official opposition to not having a single seat.

Chris Beverley in Leeds. Boy, I’ve never met a guy that’s worked harder than him. Chris Beverley would do his work for the party in the morning. By early afternoon, he was out leafleting or selling papers. By late afternoon, and just after tea, he was knocking on doors. There were leafleting teams when it was bad weather, because no one wanted to knock on doors when it was bad weather. That guy literally worked every day of the week to get elected in Morley South.

And what happened? What happened? He lost his seat in 2010 because of the increased turnout. And it was a complete collapse. The BNP, which had once at its height, had these know 57 councillors, GLA member and two MEPs. The councillors were just absolutely swept away! It took the steam out of the party, and the party went into a complete tailspin.

And by the time it came round to the European elections in 2014, there was only Nick Griffin and maybe one or two councillors left. Everything had gone. Richard Barnbrook had defected, Andrew Brons had defected. The party had split several times and it was over! It was all gone. It was all ruined!

And I can tell you this now. I’m not going to sit here on the stream and cry or moan or weep, but it was gut wrenching to see everything that had been built and all those hard won victories just washed away, like that! Just gone, finished! It was over. It was a disaster! It was a disaster!

And I look back at it now and it seemed like we were on the cusp of power. As a young man, with my whole life ahead of me, I genuinely thought, we as a party, are on the cusp of victory! And we, as a party, are going to win, in that air, you know, we’re going to win! We’re going to take. We are going to take the whole thing! And we didn’t. It was over.

And, you know what? Do you want me to be really honest with you? Well, there’s no point being anything other than honest. I look back on it now. We had 57 counsellors out of 19,000. We had a member on the GLA and we had two MEPs. It was massive!

[1:32:42]

But in the grand scheme of things, it was probably nothing more than sort of a large beetle climbing up an elephant’s leg and giving it a nip. That’s all it was.

And that makes me sad, because I worked for a decade of my life. I gave my best. Best years of your life are probably between your 20th birthday and your 30th. [chuckling] Trust me! If I look back and if I could go back in time and sort of relive bits of my life, I’m pretty sure the bits I relive are all in those ten years. [chuckling] They were good times. And I gave those years to the BNP. And I did my best. I played my part.

I’m still here playing my part. I’m not going anywhere unless they kill me or put me in jail. And if they put me in jail, I’ll come out and I’ll still be here.

But the point is, I gave my best and so did many people. But everything was washed away with one bad election.

And that’s how fragile it is if you were to draw an analogies, and you guys know, I love my analogies, it’s a bit like a sandcastle on the beach. You know, I’ve got to say this. It was like that. It was like those kids that spend all day and they build this multi tiered sandcastle and they put the shells on and the seaweed, and they’ve got a moat, and one big wave comes and it’s gone! That was it. And all that’s left is just this little sort of hump where you can say:

“Was there a sandcastle there a while ago?”

And there was. Brian Parker was still there, and that was it. That was it. The party was just gone!

And I wonder, could that be replicated today? Well, the reality check is this. Not only was it really not that considerable, when you look at the 19,000 counsellors, 70 something MEPs, the 20 GLA members and all the bodies, we didn’t get people elected to, Parliament, the Welsh assembly, the Scottish Parliament, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera! And now there’s the police commissioners and the directly elected Mayors and all the other places you didn’t get anyone elected to.

The reality check is, first, were we actually as big as we thought we were?

And secondly, can we be replicated? Are things different now? And, yeah, they are.

Back in the BNP days, you know, people weren’t losing their job for saying they voted BNP.

Back in the BNP days, there wasn’t the stigma that there is now.

Back in the BNP days, demographics were better. You know, London was over 50% White British. Now it’s 36.8%. You know, the BNP took 5.4%. The only ethno-nationalist candidate, the candidate that stood you, the ethno-nationalist candidate, that did stand for the GLA, his Mayoral insert looked pretty much the same as Barnbrook, very similar to Barnbrook’s all the way back in 2008. But he got 0.8%. He got maybe a 6th of what Richard’s vote was. This tells you things have changed.

[1:35:46]

We’re never getting in some of these places. We’re never winning in Barking and Dagenham. I doubt we’d ever win now in seats in Bradford where we’ve won before, places like Keighley. What’s the situation today in Burnley? You know, as I said, London, it’s gone!

So could that small series of victories actually ever be replicated? I don’t know. I don’t know! And for it to be replicated, what would we need? Because, you know, never before has there been this ethnic mix. Never before has there been this sort of drive to weed nationalists out of everywhere to send Prevent* round to their houses for talking about demographics. There’s never been this much pressure. And there’s never been this few White Britons to vote for us. Can it be replicated? I don’t know! But set to everything I’ve said tonight, I think there’s a lot to be taken in here and you get to decide.

[* About Prevent: Prevent is a national programme that aims to stop people from becoming terrorists or supporting terrorism. It works to ensure that people who are susceptible to radicalisation are offered appropriate interventions, and communities are protected against radicalising influences. Radicalisation can happen when a person develops extreme views or beliefs that support terrorist groups or activities. There are different types of terrorism, and Prevent deals with all of them. The most common types of terrorism in the UK are Extreme Right-Wing terrorism and Islamist terrorism. Source: UK Gov]

Now, finally, I’ve got one last small point before I do the questions and answers. Things are different in Europe. And people keep saying this, well, why are things different in Europe? There’s a few reasons, and I’m going to run over them shortly.

In a lot of European countries, there’s proportional representation. You have regional bodies. You know, the MPD in Germany elected to regional bodies. You know, the AfD in Germany elected to regional bodies. You know, some people say:

“There’s less political stability in Europe because all of the countries in Europe have, one time or another, lost a war or been occupied.”

Britain hasn’t. Britain hasn’t been occupied in that way. That way it’s government, it’s political system, it’s establishment has never lost it’s legitimacy in the same way that the French have, in the same way that the Italians have. The Germans have. These huge world events have an effect on the national consciousness. There’s not a revolutionary mentality in England, Scotland and Wales. We did have an English Civil War, and then we reversed that and begged our king back.

You know, in France, it was a revolution sort of every five or six years at one point, and they’ve still got that in them. Just look at the Yellow Vests. You know, it’s the same with Germany. Germany has always been a loose sort of Confederacy of provincial powers, if you like. You know, Prussia is a perfect example of that you know, the Prussians never truly saw themselves as German.

And that’s why across Germany, you will tend to find that certain regional bodies vote completely differently and are represented completely differently to others. You’ve also got the fact that half of Germany within living memory fell under Soviet rule. And East Germany votes completely differently to West Germany. We know these things.

There’s been different factors that have affected the national consciousness of those people, but Britain has never had that. We’re an island nation. We have been largely unaffected by these things.

[1:39:10]

And as such, we are stuck in this pattern, isolated on a little island, stuck within, so that the liberal Democratic milieu that I’ve discussed earlier. So we do not have in our country electoral system conducive to change. We’ve got the two party system. You know, we have these safety valves. Other countries, they’re different. They’re different. And we could spend all night explaining this.

I’m not going to go into this in detail, but things are different in Europe for different reasons.

Anyway, that’s really all I have to say, and I hope you really enjoyed the stream. I’m going to do the questions and answers now. We’re going to fly through them because obviously we’re coming up to 2 hours. I didn’t realise I’d been speaking too long, but I hope you’ve enjoyed this. It’s been a bit of a lecture. I do like doing these streams and I hope you feel that you’ve got value for watching tonight.

Anyway, we’ve got some very generous Superchats, so I’m going to start over on Odysee now. Beer Hall Pooch gave 1488. Thank you so much! And said:

“Hail Mark. I put my money where my mouth is. Me and Pete Rushton says leading nationalists need to meet privately to figure out a new way forward. Ideas, strategy, tactics on the table. We are now messing around with outdated positions. We’re not saving all Whites. Please discuss important.”

Look, I would happily meet at one of these things and happily discuss things, but solutions have to be multifaceted. You know, from my point of view, I’ve always said community building has to come first. I kept saying we live in a world of minority wins! Why do you think Muslims win at elections? Muslims aren’t the majority, but if there’s 10% of Muslims in an area where there’s a 50% turnout and all of them turn out all of a sudden, that’s a 20% block vote. That’s enough to swing an election.

So all the candidates have to go to that Muslim and offer him something, and whoever offers him the most wins the election. White people don’t organise like that.

And the first thing we have to do as White people, if we’re going to win elections like the Muslims do, like other minority groups do, is we have to build a community. I’ve been saying since the outset, at Patriotic Alternative, that we need to build communities! We need to build. And part of those building communities is owning land, owning buildings, you know, moving together, living together. There’s so many things that can be said, and this isn’t the stream for it, but we need to organise our people! And then we can win elections. We can’t win elections with atomized, isolated, lost individuals who don’t act as a group.

[1:42:01]

The reasons Muslims win elections is because they’re not isolated, they’re not lost, they’re not atomized, they still stick together! We are lost as a people! We have to find ourselves first, guys. If you put elections before community, you’re putting the cart before the horse. Community has to come before elections. The times when Whites have stuck together, say, like the miner strikes, what was that built on? It was built on community.

Eddie gave $20. Thank you so much, my friend. He said:

“Thanks for the stream, Mark.”

Well, thank you, my friend. Albion Forever made a statement. He said:

“Hi, Mark. Would it be suspicious for a party to get registered when the Electoral Commission are aware that they have been breaking the law?”

I know what this is in reference to. Look, it’s emerged that one of these recent parties to get elected, there was a Freedom of Information request. One of the parties that recently got registered, it’s been revealed by a Left-wing source that did a Freedom of Information request that the Electoral Commission was aware that that party was breaking rules, laws and had members that had shared terrorist documents but still allowed them to be registered. It is suspicious.

Albion Forever also said:

“Hi, Mark. Did, you know, that the Fairchild A10 Thunderbolt two has a single 30 millimetre gatling cannon and two general electric turbines? When it fires it’s gun and puts it’s engines to full, it will actually accelerate backwards. That’s how powerful it is.”

Thank you. British Gammon gave $25.

Thank you so much for your generosity. Great to see you again here tonight, my friend. He said:

“In the absence of a nationalist candidate, would it be better to encourage people to turn up and spoil their ballot rather than vote tactically or not vote at all? And would the establishment even care if thousands of people voted, ‘None of the above’?”

Yes. Yes, yes, yes, yes, yes! British Gammon is on the money! Look, if there’s no one in your area, spoil your ballot. And that might sound childish, but it’s not. It still counts!

Imagine if tomorrow we lived in an area where there was 10,000 people and there was a 50% turnout. So that’s 5,000 people voting and 6,000 of the 5,000 people voting. And 60% of those people, you know, 3,000 people went and just wrote “none of the above”. Okay, nobody gets elected off that. But the media would have to report that happened. That is a statistic that gets recorded. That would be something that causes waves. And look, when that has been tried, the media does report it. People talk about it. You know, if 60%, 3,000 people on that 50% turnout of that 10,000 voters did do something like that, that would create waves. Never ever just stay at home.

Because if you stay at home, you’re basically saying:

“I don’t have a voice!”

Use your voice in any way you can. I have always voted when I’ve had the chance and I’ve always done something, even if it is just spoil my ballot.

Getting very hot here tonight [having a drink].

[1:45:01]

But yeah, British Gammon is 100% correct. And he’s knocked it out of the park! Do always do something, never do nothing, even if it’s something small. Antimatter gave $40.12. Thank you so much! And he said:

“Donation.”

Well thank you kindly, Stan one gave $14 and said:

“Donation again.”

Thank you kindly. Albion Forever said:

“Interestingly, in Ireland, which has a revolutionary oppressed mentality, we don’t see that translating into electoral changes, but instead into huge protests.”

Well, look, I’ll settle for huge protests at the moment! Would you not sell for huge protest? Huge protests would be a step forward forward! Albion Forever said:

“Do you agree that the Muslim vote swung the vote for George Galloway in Rochdale?”

Well, of course they did. One dollars from BaleBreach said:

“Stevenson said he would vote Galloway. So that’s me and him. Tollah and Arab Social Nationalists are sympathetic. Are we all nuts, mate?”

Look, vote for people who are against the establishment or people who are perceived to be against the establishment. You know, I’ve already said, I would vote for anybody who is against those establishment parties as long as they’re not pro-immigration. It’s as simple as that.

And if you can’t vote for anyone, spoil your ballot paper!

Oh, and by the way, the BitChute stream is working. There’s eight people watching us there. It’s a start. [chuckling] It’s a start.

So thank you, BitChute. That is nice to see.

Now we’re going to go over to the Entropy Superchats. We always do them in this order. VM gave $10. Thank you so much! And he said:

“With all the mixed results, I’d say it’s still important to stand candidates without breaking the bank. As election time is prime time to raise issues. It also applies pressure to establish parties to move the Overton Window our way, building accessible bridge to the nationalist future.”

That’s a good point. Look, I’m not saying we shouldn’t stand any candidates.

What I’m saying is we have to put community building first. We have to put community building first! And if we don’t put community building first, we’re in trouble. But if we move to the same areas, if we organised, if we bought property or land and we actually build community, we could stand in a limited number of seats, get people elected and govern our own affairs. There’s nothing to stop that. And if there are elections which are good for us, so say somebody say a Labour Party candidate got taken to court and sent to jail for being part of a grooming gang or something like that, where it’s expedient for us to use the electoral system. We should do. We shouldn’t cut off the electoral route altogether. I don’t believe that. But putting all our eggs in that basket, as you can tell, it’s difficult.

VM gave $5. Thank you so much! Said:

“The great issue with tactical voting is that once Labour get in, the media will enforce the propaganda. The people of Great Britain voted against the racism of the Tories. Our electoral system is our voice box with a deliberate handicap.”

[1:48:03]

Thank you so much! Britannia’s reckoning gave $3. Thank you so much! Said:

“Capitalism has been a far more powerful weapon for Zionists than communism. The sooner nationalists start bashing capitalism as much as they bash communism, we make progress.”

I’ll bash capitalism and communism all day. Throughout my entire political life, I’ve always said they are two sides of a same anti-White coin! Britannia’s reckoning gave $3 thank you so much! And said:

“The key to electoral victory is a party Left-wing on economics and Right-wing on immigration and culture. The closest at the moment is the SDP.”

Well, I agree with you again, but the SDP get disastrous results! VM gave $3 thank you so much! Said:

“Our biggest drawback is no unanimous, agreed local plan. Split the Nationalist Party’s independent safety valve, RVP and spoil vote. We must ensure clear issues from focus community direction on each seat.”

We do! But the fact is, nationalism is riven by splits! It’s riven by splits, it’s riven by infighting, it’s riven by egos!

You know, when I started PA, the wholeidea of PA was anyone could come on board and do activism their way. I say to people:

“It’s up to you. It’s up to you. How do you want to do your PA work?”

If you want to do.

If you want to do electoral work, do electoral work, I’ll support you.

If you want to do community politics, I’ll support you.

If you want to do fitness and health, I’ll support you.

If you want to do gaming nights, art nights, music nights, you know, beer and burger nights at the barbecue, do what you want, as long as you’re doing something nationalist. Litter picks, great! Camping and hiking, great! I said that to people and what happened? People got their knickers in a twist because I wasn’t doing exactly what they wanted me to do and they stormed off and formed their own little tiny groups and then failed.

Why? Why do that? They did that because they had to be in charge, and they believed that everything had to be done their way! I think we need PA and I think we need an umbrella group. Where people can do things.

So if you want to do a book club, come to PA and do PA Book Club. You want to do fitness, you want to do going out and getting fit and training with young lads, join PA Fitness. You know, you want to put out leaflets. We back independent candidates, we do this! It’s got to be a multifaceted approach where everyone can play their part in the way they want to. These petty squabbles over minor differences and ego driven micro parties are terrible! They’ve dogged nationalism for decades, and the people running them should be ashamed of themselves.

[1:50:41]

You know, I’ve said to everyone:

“Come here, stand under this banner, do it the way you want to do it, and we can all stand together.”

People don’t want that they want to run their own little thing and it’s not working out. Britannia’s Reckoning gave $3. Thank you so much, said:

“Reform winning a London assembly seat is decent. Giving the demographics Reform may have a million or two, but the Lib Lab Con have a hundred times that!”

Thank you so much! Britannia’s Reckoning gave $3:

“The British Democrats say they received the most votes out of any nationalist party, but some of these parties need to merge. What’s your relationship like with them?”

I think they. When they say they won the worst votes, I think they got about 300 or something. And they discounted the English Democrats, who took 45,000 in Robin’s [Tilbrook] seat.

So, you know what’s that? They didn’t! They didn’t! And it amounts to a hill of beans. David Peterson gave $10. Thank you so much! He said:

“Tell us what you think about Griffin on Question Time. As someone who worked in a supportive capacity to him before such a humiliating experience, no offence, my friend, but you were head of publicity at time. Did he just ignore your advice? How did the pre-event prep play out?”

I’ll answer this question, although it’s going to create drama, because he’s not going to like my answer and he will be upset.

But the fact is, Nick Griffin’s Question Time performance was probably the worst, single worst thing to happen to the BNP. It was a turning point in the BNP’s history! It was basically the only time that the nationalist has ever been allowed on Question Time. And it was the greatest fumbling of the ball that I’ve ever seen!

And it was largely down to the fact that over time, Nick Griffin had become too complacent in his debating skills, in his ability to put himself over. He was too used to speaking to captive audiences, or to small time radio hosts and on smaller shows. It was basically like a boxer who had gone round and knocked everyone out in local gyms, in nightclubs, in county fairs, and then was given a shot at the title.

And although he thought he was great and thought he didn’t have to do much more, he had to do a lot more.

[1:53:04]

And I remember clearly in the time running up to Nick Griffin going on Question Time, people urged a number of things. There was people who urged that he prepared, that we got him into better shape, both physically and mentally. I suggested that he started going to the gym more. He tidied himself up a little bit. He didn’t like that suggestion. He won’t like me talking about that. But I said:

“Look, you’re in the European Parliament. You got the access to probably the best gym in the whole of Europe. You should use it. You need to tidy yourself up, you need to go out there looking smarter than you’ve ever looked.”

He didn’t like that. He said:

“Didn’t have time for that.”

And I said to him, you know, personally, like I was his friend, I didn’t say this out of nastiness. I said:

“Look you need to have some mock runs at this. You know, you need to get 10, 12 people in a room with you and people to talk to you and throw your questions and go through everything so you’re ready.”

And other people were like:

“No, no, no! He’s the boss. He’s the boss! He doesn’t need that. He’s the best!”

And he listened to them. There were other people. I remember a guy called Lee Barnes, who was his legal adviser at the time. He told him not to go on to call in sick, sending Andrew Brons as a replacement at the last minute, because they’d have to put Brons on the TV. And they wouldn’t have the same dirt on Brons they had on Gryphon. I thought that was a bad idea.

And Gryphon basically went in there green. He went in there green. He went in there without the correct training, without looking as smart as he could, without being the man that he needed to be.

And I’ll draw, not an analogy, I’ll just put forward an example of somebody who did this. Apparently, when Tony Blair first went on Question time, before he became Prime Minister, the Labour Party the weekend before, took him to a hotel and they basically stayed in a hotel and they took him into a conference room and for the entire weekend, they broke him down, they abused him, they threw questions at him. They absolutely mauled him for a weekend! And when he came out, he could answer everything, every smear, every piece of crap thrown at him. He knew what to say if the Tories on there threw something at him, he was ready.

And when he went on Question Time, he knocked it out the park! And the rumours are that before he went on Question Time, he was so nervous because they’d been grilling him all weekend that he was actually sick in the green room in a bin before he went out there! And I’ll say this, I’m not saying you should go out for your big moment as a nervous wreck, because that’s not great! But a few nerves, a few butterflies in your tummy are better than overconfidence.

[1:55:58]

And I believe that Nick Griffin was massively overconfident. He refused to prepare, he refused to improve himself physically or mentally before it. And he was listening to people who were blowing smoke up his arse, who were telling you he was the best of the best of the best of the best! And that no one could get the better of him, and that he knew his trade better than everyone, no one could do better.

And he went out there and he choked and it was a disaster! And he will now say in response this:

“It wasn’t. It was the best thing ever! The BNP were on 20% of the national vote after it, because it was so great!”

That’s not true. It’s nonsense! It shattered the BNP. And I’ll explain why it shattered the BNP at the time that happened.

At the time that happened, it was, how can I say this? Basically, there is one group of people. Towards the end of the 1970s and beginning of the 1980s, the traditional class divide of working class and middle class began to break down. And that happened and accelerated with the end of the miner’s strike, the destruction of the union. And we ended up moving to a country which has what is called “Middle England”. Middle England are the broad middle class. They’re not the upper class, they’re not the super rich. They’re people who own their own homes, have a stake in society. They want their kids to do better than they did. They usually work in good jobs or run their own businesses, and they’ve got something to fight for!

And that Middle England vote were the people who voted Thatcher in, who then rejected the Tories and voted Blair in, then booted Labour out. They have been the people that have always swung general elections. When Middle England move, when, and I’m not saying middle class, I’m saying Middle England. I’m saying these broad middle block of owner occupiers. You know, the White van man. The guy runs his own business. The guy’s got a bit of a stake in society. When they vote, when they vote, they’re the ones that swing elections. And that is a fact.

And those people have never been involved in nationalism, or have been involved in nationalism hesitantly. But the BNP got those people involved. They started to make inroads, they started to attract people that were friends with my parents. People who first were disgusted when they found out that I joined the BNP, were finally saying:

“Well, actually, Mark’s got a point, Carol, Morris, I think your lad might be right. I’ve just dropped around with a little donation. Please put it in the coffers. I’m definitely voting for you, Carol, if you stand in this area again.”

Those people were coming on board. They came on board and they opened the BNP up to a wider audience. And that’s when the BNP was rising. That was when it was in its ascendancy. And that’s what tipped the BNP over the edge, especially in the Euro elections, on these big regional lists, because Middle England were coming on board. We weren’t just the party of the estates anymore.

[1:59:26]

And Chris Bev really saw that in Morley South. He was a guy who became the King of the new build estate, where there’s the self employed window cleaner, the guy who runs his own electrician’s business, the local plumber. They owned their own new build houses and they were voting for Chris. This was a big swing. This changed everything.

And I’ll tell you this now, those people swing general elections, and they were coming on board with the BNP. And that Question Time was the thing that scared them off. They were tentatively dipping their toe in our pond and saying:

“We like this. We want a bit of this.”

And I’ll tell you, this is just anecdotal, but I remember my dad saying to me that there was a guy that lived on his street that always used to, when he went past, because my dad used to be into biking and would always go cycling on Sunday morning, and he’d always stop by and they’d always give him a wave. And if he was walking down the street, he’d always, you know, talk to him:

“Oh, Morris, have you got the latest Voice of Freedom for me? How’s it going?”

And he walked past him. After that Question Time, my dad was like:

“Hi, mate, how you doing?”

And the guy just said:

“It wasn’t good, was it, Morris?”

And that was it.

That was it! The guy never took a Voice of Freedom again. He didn’t really want to know. That was it. And these people were turned off by that. And unfortunately, it was a body blow! The party didn’t collapse overnight. The sort of support, the traditional nationalist support, remained intact. But that Middle England vote that were coming on board, it scared them off.

And that was just before, obviously, the 2010 general election. And the 2010 general election, that Question Time appearance and the problems in the party at the time, the personal issues, the fractures, the issues over where large sums of money had disappeared from and the fact the party were in debt, all of that sort of came together and that was it. Post, 2010, it was over!

So I hope that was a good explanation.

David Peterson gave $5. Thank you so much! He said:

“I know we spoke before about this, but you’re on a good one tonight. How do you feel about Young Nazi and Proud? Also, do you think the stigma was different back then, hence Young Nazi and Proud?”

Stigma was totally different. Look, you couldn’t make a documentary like Young Nazi and Proud today.

So when I’ve been on Young Nazi and Proud, I’m not saying it was a good thing, because it wasn’t. And it dogs me to this day. And, look, I feel embarrassed about that. For me, it’s like water of a duck’s back. So I laugh it off now. I treat it like it’s all fun and games. And I get enough people. I’ve enough people over the years come up to me in bars, pubs, clubs in the street, ask to hug me, ask for a selfie. I’ve had girls come up to me and give me a kiss over it. It’s been great in, some respects.

It’s also been bad and it’s something that I’ve had to laugh off uncomfortably at times.

[2:02:16]

So there’s been good and bad. But that documentary of a young lad who’s a bit of an edgy Nazi, was played some for laughs, some seriously, some tragedy. Some of it made me look like a bit of a fool! Some of it made me look like, very dedicated. Some of it made me look a bit weird, some of it probably made me look a bit brave, some of it I looked quite multifaceted. And yes, some of it was embarrassing.

But I’ll tell you this, that couldn’t be made today. You couldn’t call a lad Young Nazi and Proud on a documentary and play that like it was played. The guy would be getting his door kicked in! It’s a completely different situation now. The term “Nazi” that carries different connotations. You know, back when they did Young Nazi and Proud you could go to music gigs where there were certain fruity, [chuckling] you know, flags from a foreign regime that existed in the 1930s. People would sell CDs. All that’s been cracked down on. Things are different now. Things are very different!

But yeah, it has affected my life.

But I don’t think anyone could do a documentary like that now and play it the way it was the person who had that documentary made about them today wouldn’t be called a young radical, you know, political thinker who was played as maybe odd, a bit insecure at times, which obviously I was in my early twenties and I said some stuff that I’m not proud of but the fact is if you made that documentary today, it wouldn’t be Young Nazi and Proud. They would literally be saying:

“That young lad was a terrorist!”

That’s where the goalposts have moved

VM gave $3. Thank you so much! Said:

“With all the thoughts I made aside, this is exactly why the PA model works. It’s a dynamic vehicle that endures the ebbs and flows of elections on a community level. Great and informative stream. Thank you so much!”

David. Peace. And gave another $5. Thank you very much. Said:

“One’s in the chat to buy a house in the ethno-nationalist cul de sacs. Two for no. Everyone comes to the ethno-nationalist cul de sac!”

Look, people know where I live. I actually said to people:

“Come and live on the estate I live, there was houses up for sale.”

I even offered people small loans to help them buy houses in this area. People didn’t want it. People didn’t want it. That’s the problem. Nationalists don’t want to move to the same area. And every nationalist I’ve asked to come to this area and live near me have always said no, no, I won’t because my family live here and I’m not moving away from them.”

[2:04:43]

And then other people said:

“Well, I want to go and live here because it’s my dream to go and live this other side of the country.”

Or:

“I don’t want to live in this kind of area. I want to go and buy a farmhouse in the middle of nowhere.”

That’s their prerogative. But getting nationalists to agree on something like an ethno cul de sac is virtually impossible! But I would love all of you guys to come and live on my street. Mainly because I’ve just perfected cooking chips in a variety of different animal fats. I’ve been trying with lard, and I really need friends in this area to come. Come to my house, eat my homemade burgers and eat my homemade, traditionally cooked hand cut chips! Because I need feedback, guys. I need feedback! Come and live on my estate and we’ll be barbecuing every weekend.

We’ve got two Superchats here from hedgehog 82. Gave $2 both times. Thank you so much! Said:

“People haven’t even got the brain cells to ask themselves why. Why does the government borrow money with interest when they can print interest free money? Like why the government is in two trillion’s worth of debt?”

Yeah, good point. So Much Need, another $2, and said:

“People are unaware most of the tax they pay is just paying down the interest on government borrowed money. A certain German man removed the central bankers and Germany became the most prosperous nation in Europe.”

Hedgehog, you may be spiky, but you’re not wrong. David Peterson gave $5. Thank you so much! He said:

“Are you still friends with the journalists from Young Nazi and Proud?”

This is really interesting, actually. No, I’m not. [chuckling] But he did contact me when I left the BNP and said:

“Would you like to do a follow up documentary?”

And basically what he wanted me to do is say that I was repudiating my past. And I was like, I would happily talk about where my life has gone wrong or where I think my life could have gone better or how could I have made better choices. But I’m never repudiating nationalism and I’m never standing up there and saying:

“That the things I said that were ideologically were all wrong!”

You know, people might say:

“Oh, well, what did you say that time in your car when you were depressed because your girlfriend was late?”

Whatever. You know, young lads say daft things, but I’m not going back on my political points. I’m never going back on those.

And he didn’t want that. He didn’t want Young Nazi and Proud Part II where I was sort of middle aged, you know., Still, still Nazi, and still Proud! [chuckling] he didn’t want that. He wanted a:

“This is how being sucked into a political organisation ruins a man’s life.”

And I don’t consider my life to be ruined. I don’t consider myself to be an unhappy person. I consider myself to be happier!

[2:07:16]

One of the reasons why I spend such a huge portion of my time on the phone to people, helping people and talking to people about their problems and trying to boost people’s morale and do these community outreach things is because I want to spread happiness. I want other nationalists to live a good life.

And I’ve had a chequered past and yeah, I’ve had some mad times and maybe some bad times, but I’m still here. And generally speaking, I think I’m quite an upbeat and positive guy. That’s why I like doing these streams. That’s why I love holding the camps, that’s why I love going to the events, that’s why I love doing all these things with you people. That’s why I love this community. That’s why when I started PA, I wanted a movement like this. That’s why when we have one of these camps or when we have conference, I shake everyone’s hand coming in, I give everyone a hug before they go home, because I genuinely do love all you guys and I treat you like family.

Any guy, any of you who know me and have said, look, can I come to your house?”

You guys have all been invited to my house, out for dinner with me. And I’ve treated you all like brothers. I’ve treated you all like extended family. You know, my wife’s cooked for you, you’ve been welcome in your house, I’ve broken bread with you. That’s what I believe. I genuinely believe that it is community first. And I live that every day of my life.

And I suppose that’s the final message for this stream. I don’t think there’s any more Superchats. But oh, there is. There’s one more from Beer Hall Pooch. Thanks so much:

“BNP should have put Brons in at the last minute as a feint against the system. Lee Barnes, think what you will, suggested this.”

I said Lee Barnes suggested this and the [word unclear] agreed because we held Brons in high regard. He’s Third Position and has that cosy uncle demeanour that would’ve sold with the public.”

A lot of people said that at the time. My dad always maintains that.

But look, the takeaway from this is whatever you want to take away from this stream tonight. But my takeaway from this is always the same. If we’re going to win at the ballot box, which is very hard, it’s almost impossible, like I’ve just laid out. And even if you do win, just wait until one of those high turnout elections rolls around like a tsunami and washes away your sandcastle.

But before we do any of that, we need a community.

And that’s what I’ve spent the last five years of my life trying to do. I’ve put myself on the line, I put my family on to build this community because I believe in it.

And I’m not counting elections out.

But what I am saying is if you put all your eggs in that basket like nationalist parties have in the past, you’re not going to win! Because the system is designed so you don’t win! And the only small groups that do win are the ones that built a community first. And that’s what we must do.

So I just want to say thank you to everyone who tuned in. Thank you to everyone who’s with us. It’s been a long stream. I genuinely thank everyone who’s been here with me for 2 hours and ten minutes. It’s been a good one. I’ve really enjoyed it. I hope you’ve enjoyed it. I hope you’ve all learnt something. I hope you’ve got something out of it you want. I thank everyone who donated so generously as well, from the bottom of my heart, you guys have been extremely generous tonight. I couldn’t be more grateful.

And finally, I just want to say, if you are out doing activism this weekend, if you are out doing community outreach, if you’re out leaflet in for an election, whatever, you’re doing, good, good! But bear in mind, the foundation for victory is out there and we can see it. We can see it because other people have achieved victory. And that foundation is a solid one. It’s community, it’s coming together and it’s doing something that we can build upon. Don’t put the cart before the horse!

But do stay safe. Do have a good weekend, whatever you’re up to.

I’ll be back on Sunday with Warren Balogh for our film review. We’re reviewing The Long Good Friday. It’s his choice. Be there Sunday 07:00 pm If you want a light hearted stream. I hope you’ve enjoyed tonight. I really have. I love you all. Thank you for being part of this amazing community. I hope to see you all later in the year, at one of our community events. Thank you and good night, everyone. Love you all. See you soon.

[2:11:05]

END

top

Millennial Woes

A Gram of Woes No 45

Tue, Nov 7, 2023

[Woes does an interesting round up of current events and his take on things, especially Tommy Robinson and his plans for a counter protest against pro-Palestinian protesters in London on Sat, Nov 11.

It was also very good to see Woes get stuck into that stuck-up Douglas Murray and his usual self-righteous display of grovelling suck-up to zionist power, the very people causing the destruction of the West that he claims to bemoan!

– KATANA]

https://odysee.com/@millennialwoes:4/Gram202345:a

Published on Tue, Nov 7, 2023

Description

A Gram of Woes: 7th November 2023
November 8, 2023
1,837 views
135
8
Support
Save
Repost
Share
Millennial Woes
@millennialwoes
11K followers
Join
Follow
https://www.millennialwoes.com/gram
00:00:23
Tommy vs the Palestinauts
00:40:09
Peter Hitchens walks out of interview
00:42:03
Halloween and Guy Fawkes Night
00:46:21
Support genocide or you’re an anti-Semite
00:48:43
Saudi Arabia condemns Israeli hate-mongering
00:49:38
Audrey Hale manifesto
00:52:32
The British state stoking tensions
00:53:11
AfD declared an extremist organisation
00:54:26
European confederacy and petty nationalism
01:01:18
Have we reached peak Jewish power?
01:15:21
Israel and the future
01:15:48
A circus of fauxism
01:17:30
Personal disorganisation
01:17:50
Western civilisation is now a chimera
01:18:12
Swindon woes
01:26:21
Token black luminaries
01:27:52
Smoking Ban Redux
License
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode
File size
160.03 MB
Less
0
50 comments

_____________

TRANSCRIPT QUALITY = 4 Stars

1 Star — Poor quality with many errors, contains nonsense text 2 Stars — Low quality with many errors, some nonsense text. 3 Stars — Medium quality with some errors. 4 Stars — Good quality with only a few errors. 5 Stars — High quality with few to no errors.

NOTE: Users can help improve the quality of this transcript by putting corrections in the Comment section. Thanks.

TRANSCRIPT

(Words: 11,916 – 1:30:37 mins)

2023, Week 45.

Hello, everyone, and welcome to A Gram of Woes, on regularly, Tuesday the 7th of November 2023.

So there’s a lot to talk about actually, I have a lot of things:

“Woes. With the news that pro-Palestine demonstrations are set to take place in London on Armistice Day and a Patriot counter-protest planned, how do you see the events playing out?”

“Most of us know it’s a trap, but it feels impossible sometimes to get through to the Patriot crowd, who care little for the realities of the situation and always reply with, ‘So we do nothing?’, when warned to stay away from London on Saturday. What adds more suspicion into the mix is that Tommy Robinson’s Twitter account has been reinstated at a terribly convenient time.”

Well, that gets us into a number of the things that I wanted to talk about.

So the Gaza thing continues. There are some awful pictures and footage that have come out recently. I try to avoid them, but it’s kind of difficult when you’re on social media. It continues, it gets worse. Tensions around the whole thing in terms of the conflict spreading, seem to have lessened somewhat since last week, I think because, well, I don’t know, I guess the time has sort of, sort of passed. There hadn’t been escalations, basically.

So Russia isn’t getting involved, China isn’t getting involved. Russia, I did see something that they were giving some sort of weaponry or defense system. I think it was a defense system to the Palestinians, but that’s all I’ve seen. And then Yemen did declare war, apparently declared war on Israel, but I’ve heard no more about that. So maybe that was fake?

So the point is that we don’t seem to be looking at World War Three, which is obviously a relief. But at the same time, that means more of this corrupt system will go on and on for the foreseeable future.

So that’s the general situation.

However, the split between Zionists and their supporters and their opponents has only deepened in the last week.

So you’ve got a real divide here! A huge divide now! Between what has been called the Left and the mainstream media and certainly the political establishment in every country. The mainstream media is actually being. I wouldn’t say fair, but it’s not being entirely pro-Zionist. Even the BBC is being fairly even handed.

So it’s an interesting thing where for the first time, you’ve got a sort of bifurcation in the mainstream for the first time in a long time. I mean, Covid, Ukraine, climate change, LGBT and the migrant crisis for the last ten years at least, the mainstream has very much been one unified entity. It’s kind of weird that it would take this issue to rupture that. Of course, they’ll still be united in all of those other issues, but this is different.

[04:023]

I also think that it has changed people’s view of Israel, and especially Zionism. I think that it suffered a huge amount of PR damage. And that is why it was interesting that several high profile Twitter accounts were reinstated over the last week because of the PR damage done to Israel and Zionism. It’s very interesting that Tommy Robinson and Katie Hopkins, and I think there was a third one, I’m forgetting now, got reinstated on Twitter. Which means unsuspended, got their accounts back with all their followers.

And I think that Tommy Robinson has about 300,000 followers, something like that. He’s big on there and he’s been on Telegram ever since, with, I think, 150,000 followers on there ever since. But upon being reinstated, he said:

“It’s nice to have a voice again.”

Which is interesting and rather depressing about how realistically Telegram fits into the ecosystem of social media. Because ultimately it is public, technically, but the general public aren’t there, whereas Twitter is much more open. I mean, you will see a tweet being shared and talked about in the media. You won’t see a Telegram post. They won’t be quoting a Telegram post in a Times article or something like that.

So anyway. And he was welcomed back. Tommy was welcomed back to Twitter by numerous people, including Sargon of Akad. There’s a screenshot doing the rounds of, you know, it just feels like we’re back in time! We’re so back in time, to coin a phrase. And it’s tedious and tiresome and fucking annoying! It could be 2015 again. And not in a good way, not in the optimism. Well, not 2015, 16, the optimism. No, this is 2015, 16, let’s moan about Muslims!

To get back to the whole thing, because there are numerous facets here.

So the tensions, the pro-Palestine demonstrations spreading all over the West, getting very large. And then it was announced that there would be a large, a really big one on Remembrance Day [Armistice Day] on the 11 November, which is obviously commemorating the war days, especially the two World wars, the Poppy and so on.

And it’s something that’s sort of intrinsic to British culture, certainly all of my lifetime, since the First World War, so over 100 years. It’s something that matters to us. It’s one of those traditions that binds us together, even those of us who certainly were not alive at that time or even the Second World War. This has been one of those staples of British culture which matters! Not that the remembrance itself about war obviously matters, but I think another way in which this matters is that it is a British tradition.

So it’s something for the British people especially, really only the indigenous British people. Because all the migrants, all the immigrants weren’t here. They were not here 100 years ago or even for the Second World War.

So this is not for them. It’s very much our heritage!

[08:01]

So when the pro-Palestine people say that they’re going to basically gate crash this, that’s not just uncouth, rude, it’s also perceived as anti-British. And there will be a contingent among them for whom it’s not anti-British like, they’re British Lefties who want to use Remembrance Sunday to bring awareness to their issue. But a great number of them, it will be anti-British because they won’t be British in any real sense.

And of course, this is a good example of how this whole issue is bringing to people’s minds the idea that these migrants are not really British, that they haven’t really integrated, that they don’t really care about the country or its culture or heritage. And so multiculturalism does not work! The real issue is that mass immigration does not work. But they’ll blame it on multiculturalism, which is the allowed euphemism here. They’ll say, well, if only they integrated, not multiculturalism:

“If they integrated into British culture, then everything would be okay. But in the meantime, we will be angry at them for not integrating.”

So this is the reaction that you’re now seeing from the other side. And cue Tommy. So he’s allowed back on Twitter! And apparently Elon Musk actually had a private meeting with Rishi Sunak just a few days before this happened.

So it’s going to kick off big time? Well, that’s what people are saying. That’s what the mainstream media are saying. They’re fears of a far-Right.

Of course, Tommy Robinson is called far-Right. So he’s associated with nationalism, with the dissident Right, the Alt-Right. Very annoying! Because the man is a dumpling. Worse than that, he’s not just thick. Well, he’s not just the class dunce. He’s the class clown as well.

In other words, he’s not just thick, he’s an attention seeker. He thrives on this. And he thrives on chaos and drama, which is why his crowd was always just absolutely rife with drama, like a soap opera. Because that’s the kind of person he is.

And he doesn’t really, I don’t think he really understands much, but he doesn’t need to. He does understand that some brown people aren’t like us. And that’s really it:

“Some brown people rape our daughters and sisters. Well, they should integrate. They should integrate more and then they wouldn’t rape our daughters and sisters!”

It’s fucking grug, grug stuff! And not even true! At least if it were accurate, you could say, well, it’s basic and stupid, but it’s true. It’s not true! And it is delusional about the reality of, well, different people’s identity, religion, race and so on.

The only way for them to really integrate is for us to be dissolved and them. So it’s a dreadful situation in which there is no other solution but for them to leave the country. That’s really the only solution here. Well, from my perspective. From their perspective, the solution is for me and all of us to dissolve into them.

[11:55]

But I don’t see that as a solution. I see that as a travesty!

So anyway, to get back to all this, I don’t think he understands much, but he does understand., … He is a natural leader, although he doesn’t have any strategy or brains or whatever, he does have charisma and he does love attention and he loves to be important. And people like him. For all his flaws, he is a likable character, on the surface. So he’s friendly, he’s outgoing, he’s loud, he likes a laugh, he’s a lad! So people warm to him.

So anyway, he is back on Twitter! And one of the first things he says is that literally, one of the first things he said, having got his Twitter back, was that he was going to “rally a nation” and specifically in the Remembrance Day event.

So it’s a counterprotest to the counterprotest, I’ll be specific. It’s like “patriotic” in inverted commas. Counterprotest to the pro-Palestine counterprotest to remembrance Sunday. So they’re saying that they’re going to protect our statues and all that.

Now, the word patriotic, we should be careful about this because in a low brow sense, these guys, these Tommy fans, are patriotic in the most basic sense. They do care about their country, their kin, their local town. They’re very sort of basic, simple people who don’t understand any of the abstractions that are going on! They just want the people they know to be safe. And increasingly the people they know will be multiracial and mixed race, but they just want them to be safe. And that’s really all the thinking that there is.

But that is a form of patriotism!

So when I say “patriotic” and inverted commas, it’s not exactly fair. They are actually enacting that instinct to protect homeland and kith and kin [one’s acquaintances and relatives]. That is the heart of patriotism. But unfortunately, the fact that it is grug and low brow matters, because it leaves them vulnerable to being manipulated and used like cannon fodder. And I think that’s what’s happening here.

Now, whether there will be violence at this. I mean, there will be some violence that’s just inevitable when you’ve got a bunch of drunk North FC types and a bunch of pro-Palestine [chuckling] Arabs facing off in central London. Yeah, there will be some violence for sure.

What I think is there might even be like a stabbing, something like that. But what I think is there won’t be major violence. I think this will turn out to be something where the mainstream media has got everyone worked up about it in expectation, and then actually it will pass largely without much bloodshed.

[15:27]

But the point is that the point will have been made, right? I don’t think they actually need much violence in order to make the point, which is:

“These brown people are bad because they don’t support the jews! They don’t support Zionism! I’ve got a jewish friend, he’s just like anyone else. He’s very upset about what these brown people are doing!”

Et cetera. That’s the point that will be made here. And that’s all that it’s supposed to make. That’s all that it’s supposed to do.

And that’s why Tommy Robinson has been reinstated on Twitter and why the mainstream media is crowing about this, about this whole thing, the counter-protest and the counter counter-protest.

I think it’s all orchestrated. And Morgoth put a good article out today when he talked about the Behavioural Insights Team, the Nudge Unit. And he made this very interesting observation that the Nudge Unit is used to pacify people. That’s basically what it’s done. The purposes to which it’s been put have all been to calm people down, get them to just do as they’re told, all that.

But what if it could also be used in the other direction to agitate people? And why wouldn’t it? You’re Garnering all this knowledge about what makes people tick and how to make people do what you want them to do. Well, you can put that to any use, can’t you?

And I agree with Morgoth and other people have made the same point over the last few days, that all of this is being orchestrated. The British state, not necessarily the British government as such. The politicians, I think they are largely dumplings. They don’t understand anything. But the British state is infested with civil servants and NGOs and so on, which are run by, I think, far smarter people and they know exactly what they’re doing here!

And basically it’s a fictitious patriotic drive where you get everyone worked up. And ultimately it’s about nothing! Because what if well, ultimately it leads to nothing. Because what would Tommy Robinson, his crowd, what kind of Britain do they want? They want the Britain of, well, 2010, 2015, [chuckling] I’m not sure. Maybe 2015, but without the Pakistani grooming gangs. So they just want everyone to integrate together. It’s the nihilism.

But that’s the best that this kind of patriotism could lead to, and it would be the dissolution of everything that we are culturally, genetically.

So that’s Tommy Robinson’s function, as well as just to distract people from real nationalism and real patriotism, like actual thinking patriotism, which is a huge part of it as well:

“This could be a golden opportunity to highlight the catastrophic failures of multiculturalism only for the football crowd to ruin everything and place all the focus on the emerging threat of the far-Right.”

Well, exactly!

So there are numerous things there. It will highlight the catastrophic failures of multiculturalism. Yes. But in a way that is useful to the establishment, because they can say:

“The test of multiculturalism is, do we all support Zionism or not?”

Which [chuckling] is fucking mental!

[19:17]

Anyway, the other aspect is that the football crowd, that’s Tommy Robinson’s crowd, will go in and be, … They will certainly be drunk. They will certainly, some of them be on drugs, and they are certainly looking for a fight! They are certainly looking for violence. So they’ll go in and cause mayhem!

And then the result is that the media, the government, the state, can then blame the far-Right and Tommy Robinson. But more importantly, the far-Right, for causing all this violence, which they have ginned up! Including by getting Tommy Robinson reinstated on Twitter.

I mean, I just don’t believe that that was spontaneous. I just simply don’t believe that he and Katie Hopkins, any more than I believe it was just a bizarre coincidence that Way of the World and I were banned from YouTube on the very same day! No! No, that doesn’t happen!

And similarly, Katie Hopkins and Tom Robinson being reinstated on Twitter on the same day, just a week before this all kicks off. No! It’s obviously orchestrated. They actually really should have staggered it. Like, have one of them reinstated one day and then another one, two weeks later or something, because that would have been more plausible.

The [chuckling] point is that they can do something like this right out in the open, obviously, and people won’t even notice! The grugs won’t even think it’s suspicious that Tommy and Katie were brought back onto Twitter on the same day. Won’t even fucking occur to them that that’s odd! Because they’re just thinking about the fight. They’re just thinking about:

“Eh, we’re going to stick it to those Arabs!”

Cukg.

And the thing is, they might. And then, as JR says, there will be a lot of violence then, and then a lot of grugs going to jail, but also the far-Right, that generally what is called the “far-Right”, I really reject that label. I don’t like it! I’m not comfortable with it.

But nonetheless, it is what we are called, and all of us will be demonised alongside that.

So then we are, I mean, they could even say it’s “terrorism”. The far-Right is the “terrorist threat”, because:

“Well, they stabbed some brown people on this protest!”

And I don’t even think it will be stabbing. It’ll be bottling, it’ll be fists, that kind of thing. Because Tommy’s crowd and the football crowd, they’re not a black street gang.

As far as I know, there hasn’t been anything like knives or guns or anything like that. I’m just trying to think what’s the worst that could possibly happen. It’s not going to be shootings, it would be stabbings. I think that’s as far as it could possibly go in terms of violence.

And I’m not saying that. I’m not trying to diminish that it’s obviously fucking awful! But I’m using that as the worst case scenario here, that there are stabbings at this.

It doesn’t really matter, though, because whatever happens, the media will use it, will create the impression that they desire about these events. As usual, they can work with almost anything.

[23:10]

“Also note that despite everything, there haven’t been any attacks that we might have expected as well. As do you mean terror attacks by Muslims serves to only further the idea that Tommy and co are just bullies.”

Yes, yes. Well, they can say that after the fact. They can say that:

“The Muslims, the pro-Palestine crowd, would disapprove of their point of view, but nonetheless, they were peaceful. But Tommy and his crowd went in there and beat them up, raised hell with these poor brown immigrants!”

And by the media, we mean the state, can manipulate and use this any way it likes in contradictory ways. They’ll gin up loathing for the Muslims, for being anti-semitic, anti-Zionist, but then gin up sympathy for the Muslims when they’re beaten up by the Tommy crowd. And they’ll gin up sympathy for the Tommy crowd for being patriotic, but then condemn them when there’s violence at this protest. Condemn them as animals! And even see Tommy going to prison again for what he organised:

“He organised violence that he meted out to those poor Muslims on Remembrance Sunday!”

And you can see the narratives, the storylines that they would construct for all of this.

Anyway, so let’s see. You could get lost in talking about all the different implications of this, the different facets of it. But I think I’ve covered the broad thing there.

So I’ll read this question again:

“With the news that pro-Palestine demonstrations are set to take place in London on Armistice Day, a patriotic counter-protest planned. How do you see the events playing out? Most of us know It’s a trap, but it feels impossible sometimes to get through to the patriot crowd who care little.”

Yes, it is impossible because they tend to be pretty thick! That’s just the fact of the matter:

“Who care little for the realities of the situation. And they always reply with, ‘So we do nothing?’, when warned to stay away from London.”

The truth is, we should do nothing, because we don’t have power. And so to do anything is to just lay yourself wide open to the predations of the powerful. That’s the truth! Yeah. We should do nothing. I don’t like it. I really don’t like it! I wish we could do something. I wish we could have our way. I wish we could get our ideas across in the public sphere and in the political sphere and transform Britain. I really do wish that!

But in this current situation, we have no power at all! And our enemies do have unlimited power!

[26:07]

So if you put yourself out there, you’re just a mix between puppet and cannon fodder. They will use you, however they like, to condemn all of your beliefs, to condemn your actions on the day, to condemn you as a person. They’ll dig up your past. They’ll paint you in whatever way they like and everything you believe in in whatever way they like! Because that’s what the powerful can do to the powerless, and we are basically the powerless. I’m sorry. It’s a depressing thing to say. But it’s true. And we have to face up to that because acting like we have power or we have the vicarious power of the state, like the state will back us up when we go and protest something, that’s unfortunately just bollocks!

The LGBT activist, he has the power of the state backing him up, so to speak, when he goes on a gay protest. [chuckling] But actual patriots and even fake patriots like Tommy don’t! Well, Tommy, this is weird. He does have the backing of the state, insofar as I’m certain they got his Twitter reinstated and I’m certain they are using him. I wouldn’t even be surprised if there is a spoken agreement between him and the state:

“Sometimes we’ll send you to prison. Don’t worry, it’ll be cushy, but otherwise we want you to cause trouble.”

I wouldn’t be surprised if there’s some sort of agreement between Tommy and the state.

But the point is, yeah, he is a fake patriot because of what his ideas lead to.

And ultimately, I don’t really, … I mean, I think he does care about Britain, but I think he cares more about having an argy-bargy:

“I’m getting lots of attention!”

Exactly!:

“It’s not going to change the demographics of London.”

Precisely.

Oh, Douglas Murray:

“Must admit, the Douglas Murray interview on Trigonometry got my blood pumping more than any intellectual discourse I’ve heard or have read in the last three years following Woes, AA and Morgoth, etc. Everyone on all sides is absolutely obsessed with the jews. Fuck off, man! And remember that to get a job done, you sometimes need to take all the allies you can get, get them all out.”

Well, look, if you’re talking about achieving mass deportation of Muslims, that would be terrific. Is that what this is going to lead to? But otherwise, these are not our allies. Douglas Murray is not our ally. Organised international jewry are not our allies.

And if you think they are, you’re a fucking fool! Just look at who started mass immigration! Look at who campaigned for Hate Speech laws relentlessly! Look who orchestrated the migrant crisis in 2015 onwards, and tell me that these are our fucking allies! Are you mad? I don’t know what you’re saying. I’m sorry if I’ve misunderstood something, but I just don’t understand.

Douglas Murray. His job is to prevent the general public from realizing what I’ve just said. And his appearance on Trigonometry, which I haven’t watched, … But those two as well. Trigonometry as well! Their job is to mislead people and prevent them from realizing the stuff I’ve just said.

Go and Google Andrew Joyce, Empire Windrush and you’ll find an essay on Occidental Observer that fucking lays it out for you! The stuff that Douglas Murray certainly wouldn’t want anyone to know! And really doesn’t want anyone to know!

He’s a piece of shit! The last few weeks it’s been disgusting! And his self righteousness, his dramatic way of speaking, his solemnness! This is all faux. It’s all fake! It’s all put on! It’s disgusting! It makes me sick, really!

[30:47]

For 15 years or more he has been a paid traitor to his people, riling them up about the Muslims pointlessly. Maybe there is a point to it. Maybe the British state realises that mass immigration has been a disaster:

“The Muslims aren’t integrating. So what we’ve got to do is gradually gin up loathing for them among the indigenous Brits and then that will justify us sending them all back!”

Do we believe that?

And then that’s the purpose of Douglas Murray and so on and Tommy Robinson, that the British state secretly wants to deport all these Muslims and reverse multiculturalism! Absolute bollocks! Because they continue bringing them in year after year, thousands upon thousands! Hundreds of thousands probably every year. So they would have stopped that years and years ago if they had any intention of mass deportation now. Or is it that the Muslims’reaction to the Gaza conflict has made them suddenly see:

“Oh, these Muslims aren’t integrating. We’ll have to deport them all! Quick, release, Tommy!”

Bollocks! Something is going on here that they’re not going to implement mass deportations, I don’t think. I mean, how can it just have occurred to them now that they’re not integrating?

So, no, I think there would be some token deportations. Red meat for the Tommytards and the Conservatards. But that’s it. The grander narrative here will be that the far-Right is evil. The far-Right is violent and stupid and low brow and so forth. But also that the Palestinians are awful for, … Well, that the Muslims are awful for being anti-semitic.

But they’ll also say that the far-Right, that Tommy crowd, is also anti-semitic. While he diligently rejects any form of awareness of the jewish question [JQ] and vehemently discourages it among his supporters, the state and the media will nonetheless call him an anti-semite, even though he’s funded by jews, in league with God knows how many jewish organisations, has jewish colleagues. Nonetheless, the likes of Hope not Hate will call him anti-semitic, and the BBC and so on.

Or they’ll say that his politics, his ideas, leads to anti-semitism. So he’ll be condemned for that. All the while the problems continue.

And that’s really what’s going on here. I think it’s just a containment mechanism. It’s just a red meat for the various concerned parties. But it won’t actually lead to any big social change, any policy change. Oh, yeah. So he wanted to fight for Israel. Yeah, there’s all that. There’s all that as well.

[34:12]

I mean, you could go into it. But I’m trying to keep it general! [chuckling] So that I don’t lose the thread. And he made the Shalom film, all that.

He actually has the same attitude as the British state, that multiculturalism is fine, it’s wonderful, until jews are harmed by it, then it’s terrible!

So we don’t really exist! And I bet you if you said to Tommy Robinson:

“What about the British people?”

He would probably say:

“Well, who do you mean? We don’t really exist. We’re all from Africa!”

Because he’ll have heard those slogans. I don’t think he’ll really understand anything. Maybe I’m underestimating the guy, but he just seems to get habitually used by Ezra Levant, jewish organisations, the mainstream media, the British state, especially the British state. Used and abused by them:

“Don’t know the details of what Tommy is trying to organise, but anyone who still thinks after Charlottesville on January 6, that IRL [In Real Life] protests are a smart idea is probably not going to make it.”

Yes, I agree. That’s exactly the point. These things are orchestrated beforehand, during, and especially afterwards! After the fact.

So, yeah, I guess that’s the takeaway. The summary is people should not go to this protest on Armistice Day, Remembrance Day, because it’s a trap. I think they want some amount of violence. As I say, I don’t think it’s going to be a bloodbath, but there will be fisticuffs, that kind of thing.

And I think they want it. They want to get a few photographs of some slob or hooligan punching a harmless brown guy. That would be ideal. That would be what they’d love to have at the end of this. But maybe also violence from the brown guys towards the hooligans.

And, of course, in the eyes of the middle class, this just looks like a fucking nightmare! It will look:

“Okay, so this is what patriotism is. Oh, dear! It’s having a tracksuit on and drinking a bottle of Newcastle Brown ale in public, and then getting into fisticuffs with a Muslim chap!”

And [chuckling] that’s not going to be attractive to the middle class! Which, of course, is exactly what they’ve always wanted to make nationalism, patriotism, repugnant to the middle class, to the educated. And Tommy has diligently served them well in that regard. Over and over again!

But then so have other elements of actual nationalism. To be fair, they’ve made it very easy for the state and the media to demonise this kind of stuff. But point is that as long as the middle class are on board with generally some diversity, multiculturalism, then nothing’s going to change. What Tommy and his grugs do is. Well, yeah, I’m just saying he is a leader, but he’s a leader of morons! And he’s certainly not going to change the culture or have any idea.

In fact, his only ideas for improving the culture and improving Britain would be, as I said earlier, that we all race mix. The guy’s in dumpling! I’m sorry, but he just does not seem to be very bright. He has that sociopathy that I think is very typical of political leaders and yeah, a cynical grifter. Yeah, I agree. Oh, yes:

“The brown men like Rishi Sunak will emerge as the voice of reason. Let’s not forget that Tommy’s cash till will be ringing louder than ever!”

Yeah, right.

[39:02]

So, yeah, what Tommy said on Twitter was:

“Saturday, eleven, eleven, eleven, London. Your country needs you!”

Echoing the famous poster with Lord Kitchener.

So that’s four days from now. So we’ll see what happened.

Unity News, they’re saying anyone who has still a functioning brain and cares about this country should stay well away from this obvious Fed op. Yes, I agree.

Nick Clews says:

“I don’t think it will be anything.”

Well, maybe nothing will come. Maybe it will just be a big sort of tension raising exercise in the media and then not much will actually happen.

But the point will have been established, nonetheless. Even though nothing happened. The point, it will have been inserted into people’s minds that the far-Right is a threat, which is really the goal with all of this, is to insert into the public’s mind certain ideas.

Oh, no, I didn’t see this interview with Hitchens and Alex O’Connor. Is that the one where he walked out of it after and he, … It took 17 minutes to, … Hold on a minute. Yes. Yes, I did! Yes, I did see this! I watched the whole thing. It’s a 17 minutes “walkout”, where he takes that long arguing with the guy. He’s standing up, he’s putting on his bicycling outfits and all that, and he’s still arguing with him for 17 minutes! And honestly, I’ve had three relatives who had dementia, and it manifests early on in different ways in each person. It’s different.

But one of the ways is a sort of frustration that they’re not keeping up with things, early on, in the progress of the disease. They realise that they’re not quite on the ball and they feel that other people are tricking them, moving too far ahead, confusing them.

And honestly, I’m a bit concerned. I am because for all his flaws, I like Peter Hitchens. And that was a strange thing, that 17 minutes walk out. I mean, it’s funny to watch. But during it I did start to think, was he just in a bad mood on this particular day? Or is there something more going on here?

Anyway, oh, I should have, … Right, okay, so Halloween happened and I was meant to do a stream with Lichtmesz with Martin Lichtmesz, about ghosts for Halloween, but unfortunately that didn’t happen. There was a technical screw up at his end that meant that we couldn’t do it.

And he also had to miss the Decameron the next day as well, which was very unfortunate. So we’ll see about rescheduling. It’s a shame. I really was looking forward to it, but unfortunately that couldn’t happen.

[42:35]

Also, Guy Fawkes Night happened. And on both of these occasions I scheduled loads of pictures throughout each of the Halloween and Guy Fawkes Day. Because I like both festivals, if you can call them a festival. I’m not sure what the word would be. But especially Guy Fawkes Night. I prefer that to Halloween just because it’s more dark and serious and rooted in British history. And I’ve got fond memories of the sights and sounds and smells of bonfire night. So it’s closer to me. And I was kind of disappointed that we couldn’t. Didn’t do a stream about it to commemorate it. But I thought:

“Well, there’s not actually that much to be said about. You’d say the same thing every year!”

Yeah, [chuckling] but it’s just a shame. It’d be nice to commemorate it in some way, to take part in it in some way.

And so my way was to post photos, mostly from yester, well, all from yesteryear, Guy Fawkes Night being celebrated by people, especially kids, throughout the decades. That was lovely. I liked that. So I hope people enjoyed those photos.

Halloween, I probably enjoyed it more when I was a child. I do like Halloween, … And this is the biggest cliche. So I’m sorry to say it, I don’t like how commercial it’s become. I don’t like that it all feels fake and plasticky. I think it should be local. I think you should keep it local. I think that things should be made by your mum or your friend’s mum, and by the wee shop, they should sell things. But I don’t like that. It feels very shallow.

And I can see Bonfire Night going the same way. Eventually the kids won’t make a Guy. I don’t even know if they still do that nowadays?

But I can imagine Amazon selling a Guy that you can burn. So that you don’t need to make your own, because it’s inconvenient! [chuckling] And I really hope that doesn’t happen.

But anyway, yeah, I liked Halloween as a child. Small, but as you get older, for the reasons I’ve just given, it starts to seem a bit shallow and American, sort of meaningless, which I don’t like saying because it does have roots. All Hallows Eve. It does have roots in European culture, but it’s all a bit shallow nowadays.

And I think that it’s salvageable, though. I mean, it’s perfectly salvageable. It just, you know, we should not. Well, we should have a better culture than we do, basically. Yeah. I mean, kids will always love Halloween, of course. Yeah. Probably the most internationally recognised day. It really is world-wide. And, yes, it’s very shallow. Yeah. It just feels like, as I say, plasticky. Silly.

I made the point last year about turnips, that it used to be turnips that we used in Britain, whereas it’s become pumpkins. And that’s just one sort of manifestation of this, where everything becomes Americanised over time. I don’t like it. Don’t like it at all!

[46:18]

And the Guardian and the BBC, there’s an article in MSN.com called “How the Guardian and BBC got swept up in a wave of anti-semitism”. And, I mean, this is amazing! So no matter how this is, you know, just to be fair and even handed about the conflict is in certain eyes to be “anti-semitic”.

And of course, to be anti-Zionist is to be anti-semitic in certain eyes. And no matter how craven your support for jews and the jewish people is, if you don’t support them carpet bombing Gaza and killing huge numbers of small children, then you’re an anti-semite! This is insane!

And that’s the thing. Look how craven, how absolutely committed to diversity and multiculturalism the Guardian and the BBC are! But if they say something critical of Israel’s conduct in this conflict, then they’re anti-semitic. So fucking tiresome! Oh, yes. So and this is an example of them ginning this up for Tommy and his crowd:

“Home Secretary Suella Braverman, who is not White and is married to a jew. Suella Braverman refers to the anti-war, pro-peace., …”

So this is the Palestine side:

“Refers to the anti-war, pro-peace protests as hate marches!”

Anti-war, pro-peace equals hate marches because it’s anti-semitic! So, in an article in Jewish Chronicle [chuckling] from March this year, long before this conflict started, Braverman wrote:

“My husband is a proud Zionist. We have close family members who serve in the IDF.”

[chuckling] There we go! She’s not compromised at all!

Oh, this is the thing I was trying to remember earlier. This is a letter from the Ministry of Foreign affairs in Saudi Arabia:

“The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia condemns, in the strongest terms possible, the extremist remarks by an Israeli occupation government minister regarding dropping a nuclear bomb on the besieged Gaza Strip, which show the pervasiveness of extremism and brutality among members of the Israeli government. Moreover, not dismissing the minister from the government immediately and only freezing his membership constitutes the utmost disregard for all human and religious moral values and legal norms by the Israeli government.”

There we go. That was another minor event that happened this week.

Oh, okay. One thing was Audrey Hale, the transsexual gunman who opened fire in a Christian school in Nashville last year. The manifesto has been leaked. And one page in the manifesto says:

“Kill those kids, those crackers! Going to private fancy schools with those fancy khakis and sports backpacks with their daddy’s Mustangs and convertibles. Fuck you little shits! I wish to shoot your weak arse dicks with your mop yellow hair! Want to kill all you little crackers. Bunch of little faggots with your White privileges. Fuck you, faggots!”

It’s interesting to hear a transgender using the word “faggots” I guess that’s like black people using a certain word [nigger]. They’re allowed to do it.

[50:35]

So this is the manifesto that the FBI would not release last year, when the shooting happened, they kept it under wraps. And you can see why. It was anti-White. It was expressly anti-White, the killing. Let me see this. Audrey Hale. And it’s weird, because as far as I can see, that is a White person, a White boy. I can’t even tell whether it was, … The jawline looks male, but it looks like, … No, I think it was originally a girl. And, yeah, that does look like her.

Anyway, the point is, Audrey Hale was White herself, but she seems to have been, well, pumped full of not only hormones, but also anti-White sentiment, anti-White beliefs. And that has formed part of her killing crusade. If what I’m saying is accurate, then that means that this is what they say about nationalism, that it leads to killing. To moan about Muslims or multiculturalism leads to murder!

Well, then this seems to be that exact thing, where you’re going on and on about how awful White people are, and then that leads to them being killed. Especially by black people, but even by this transgender. [chuckling] it’s all quite weird!

So, yeah, you can see why they wouldn’t release this manifesto at the time.

Whereas if it’s a racist White guy and he’s got a manifesto, they always release that it’s just so fucking annoying!

And a poppy seller in Edinburgh, Waverly station train station. He’s 78 years old and he was punched by pro-Palestine protesters, apparently. That was one thing that happened here. There are tensions, there are real tensions.

And I think on all sides, the tensions are being stoked by the mainstream media, by the British state, deliberately, knowingly. Because whatever the fallout is, they can control it. Or so they think.

Anyway, let’s, because I’ll get on to that later.

Another thing that happened was the AfD has been declared an extremist, Right-wing extremist organisation by the Federal Office for the Protection of the German Constitution. I’m guessing that’s the equivalent of our Home Office. But it’s the Saxony Anhalt office. It’s one division, as far as I know, not the general country. And in Saxony Anhalt, the AfD scored higher than the Christian Democrat Party, the CDU, for the first time, and that was just a few days ago.

And then this guy declares them Right-wing extremist organisation. This is how they do it. They are clearly very worried about the AfD. And you can moan about the AfD, a bunch of cucks or whatever, but it’s based enough for the establishment to be clearly very concerned about. Unless that too is a fiction that they’re manufacturing. But I just don’t get the feeling that is the case there in Germany.

Okay. Ross asks a question:

“In order to survive in a world of superpowers, do you think Europe might have to unite into a European superstate? It seems to me that nationalism in the traditional sense is dead and Imperium Europa is the way forward.”

[54:41]

Well, I’m with Mosley on this matter. He also believes in a European federation, but he clearly was devoted to Britain. I mean, you can do both. It’s not a contradiction. I mean, you could say it’s serving two masters, but not really, because Britain is part of Europe, so it makes sense. I mean, I don’t think that we should be opposed to France and Germany and Belgium and Sweden. I think that they are our allies, they’re our colleagues, our brothers. So we should put our interests first, but we should also put their interests second, and we should collaborate with them and help each other out.

I mean, there will always be brotherly sibling rivalry, but that’s just something for adults to deal with which they should fucking well be able to. It certainly doesn’t mean that we should be sabotaging each other or going to war with each other. And especially because we now know the full scope of the human species and just how different most of them are from us Europeans.

Regardless of the minor differences between us, the contrast between us and outside of Europe is much starker than any contrast within Europe. And that should be very clear to everyone at this point. If you can’t see the point of European identity and the salience of it at this point, then you’re just a retard!

So I do think that European identity clearly matters. There is such a thing as being European. There absolutely is! It’s part of being a civilisation. But that does not contradict love for one’s country, one’s own homeland, any more than love for one’s town precludes love for one’s country. Of course it doesn’t. My town is my favourite place and so on.

But that doesn’t mean, therefore I’m opposed to the rest of the country. Fucking, that’s ridiculous! No one would ever say that. I don’t think anyone has ever said that! [chuckling]

And yet we have this idea that to be pro-Britain is necessarily to be anti-Europe or opposed to other European countries. I just don’t see it. I don’t see it. I understand the logic of the thinking, but I just don’t think it’s actually true in the real world unless we make it true! Unless we decide to behave in that way. So we’ll moan about the French and the Germans and all this, like certain civic nationalists do, or the Spitfire Bulldog nationalists who are just a bunch of morons.

And as I say, historically, the time for that kind of small minded, petty nationalism is just absolutely over! It was over in 1945. It was over in 1918. We just should not be behaving like that towards each other or talking of each other like that.

[57:57]

I mean, I’ll make jokes about the French now and then, but it is a joke in the end. I absolutely want the best for the French. I don’t want the French to be Muslimified or blackified. Absolutely not!

People use the term “petty nationalism” in different ways. The way that I’m using it. What I mean by it here is that small minded nationalism, where you got this idea that you only care about your own country and are suspicious of other European countries. I think that’s silly!

The other way in which people use the term petty nationalism is, well, to simply care about your country. There are people who think that we should all be sort of cosmopolitan to some degree. And I disagree with that. I think it’s very natural and healthy to have attachment to your homeland, to what you have known, to the culture and people and history of your nation. I think that’s absolutely right! So to call that petty, I think, is ridiculous!

So anyway, that’s what I think about that.

And as for federation, yes, there should be some sort of federation, but it should be run by people. Well, it should be run by good people and formulated by good people, not managerialist husks, and certainly not nutters, [chuckling] technocrats and so on.

First and foremost there should be a love of, well, what we are. And if that were the guiding principle, if that were the heart of everything, then the EU would actually be a good thing. It would be a force for good.

So I don’t think that the EU entirely negates or discredits the idea of European Federation. I think it’s European Federation done in the worst possible way and with a retarded mentality. But that doesn’t mean that European Federation is always foolhardy by definition. I just don’t think that’s true at all. And I agree with what you’re saying in a world of superpowers, and that is the reality. Geopolitics is you can’t just put your head in the sand and just ignore what’s going on in the rest of the world. If you do that, the rest of the world will just rape you. That’s what the powerful do to the weak, unfortunately, in politics.

So, yeah, superpowers matter. Power matters. Geopolitics matters. And nationalism has to take place within that arena. You have to acknowledge the realities around it.

I mean, how else are you going to protect your country if you don’t acknowledge the realities of the power structures that you’re operating within?

So there we go.

And then Black Pigeon Pilled asked the question:

“Have we reached peak jewish power?”

Which is a very interesting matter.

And this is what I was saying, what I alluded to earlier, that the establishment think they can control the story after the fact, because they’ve got that power. Because historically, for a long time they’ve had that power, and now they’ve got the Nudge Unit to do it in a more slick know, inculcate ideas into the public and so on.

[1:01:47]

But there is a sense, and Counter-Currents did a podcast a few days ago with Morgoth and Pox Populi and Endeavour, which was a very interesting debate, and I shared it on Telegram, about this matter. Has jewish power peaked now?

I remember Richard Spencer once saying about 2018, sometime like that. He said that jewish power actually peaked in the mid 90s. Clinton, that sort of era. And the Iraq war and Afghanistan war actually helped to reduce it. And it’s been reducing ever since. It’s been diminishing ever since. Which would make sense because demographically it’s actually not looking good for the Ashkenazi in America. Their kids keep marrying out and not having enough children of their own. And in the establishment, especially the universities, there’s a lot of brown people now who don’t want to promote or enrol jews! [chuckling] Because they are anti-semitic, I mean, they actually are consciously anti-semitic.

So of course, those brown people have been aided in arriving in America, in the West by jewish organisations much of the time.

But nonetheless, once here in the West, they’re quite anti-jew. They’re quite anti-semitic because they don’t know who brought them here, who paved the way for them. So it doesn’t matter.

So the point is, to some extent, jews in America are being devoured by the things that they have helped create. And actually, well, I wrote a summary of this for someone else, but I don’t think I need to, … Things like Critical Theory and White Privilege because they get rolled into that, they get associated with being White by brown people at least.

And then imperialism, supremacy, all this kind of stuff, historical structures of systemic violence and oppression, all of that. They’ve been inculcating that in the curriculum all over the West. And now Israel is invading Gaza. And mean, it seems almost like a genocide. And certainly there are jews speaking genocidally about the Palestinians. So that looks a lot like supremacy and imperialism and racism and the powerful abusing the weak.

And there’s really not much that you can say in response to that except:

“Well, it’s the jews! So they’re an exception! So they can get away with doing stuff like this. It’s fine for them to do this!”

But that’s a ridiculous thing to say. Even with the Holocaust as a justifier!

“Well, yes, it might be supremacy and it might be racism and it might be mass murder and it might be an invasion, but it’s okay for the jews to do this because of the Holocaust, 80 years ago!”

That doesn’t really, I don’t think that convinces many people because they just think:

“Well, yeah, but two wrongs don’t make a right.”

[1:05:21]

I mean, just because you’ve been abused doesn’t mean that you should abuse other people. So even for people who fully believe the Holocaust narrative, it still doesn’t serve as sufficient justification for Israel to do what it’s doing. [chuckling] So there’s that.

And then generally about jewish influence, there is also that the mainstream media is falling apart slowly, and it’s happening much more slowly than we initially thought it would. But it is happening!

And the question is whether it can successfully transition to online., … I don’t know. But just now, the situation just now, it looks like once the Boomers die out, television is gone. The old media, I think it’s surviving because of the boomers still, because they’ve always got TV on in their living room all the fucking time! And it’s blaring the BBC or whatever. Once they’re gone, there won’t be a TV on in living rooms up and down the country, blaring the BBC. That will no longer be the case.

So that means that the mainstream media, as a persuasive propaganda tool, is losing it’s purchase on the population. And so if you’re using that tool to condition the population and enact your power, well, then you’re losing power! Because the tool just isn’t working anymore! [chuckling]

And I think that’s going to be ever more the case. As I say, unless they can successfully transition to online stuff. But I don’t know if they can! I don’t know. Maybe they can. Maybe for normies, the BBC YouTube channel will be what they look at on YouTube and they won’t go to any other website, perhaps.

So, yeah, the answer to the question, I think it is, and I think that jewish power is declining. And we talk about “jewish power”, that in itself is an anti-semitic concept. I believe it’s regarded as “anti-semitic”, which is kind of ridiculous because every group has power. So of course the jews are going to have power. There is going to be a thing called jewish power, just like there is a thing, British power and US power, and so forth.

But nonetheless, the very concept that jews collectively would have power and the desire to use it is often regarded as an anti-semitic trope. [chuckling] It’s just absurd! And why would any group not want to have power and to use it, and to have uses to put it to? Of course it will!

But, yeah, I think that it is declining.

And then another part of it is just the Holocaust, as I said last week, I think the Holocaust is just, I mean, there was already jewish power in America and Britain long before the Holocaust. But the Holocaust was something that really inaugurated and justified it. And the Holocaust is now a long time ago, and it just doesn’t mean to younger generations what it meant to the boomers and the silent generation.

[1:08:53]

So that’s that. And I don’t think there’s anything you can do to combat that you can have endless Holocaust stuff in the media and in education, but it still seems like something that happened a long time ago. And within a context that we can’t even recognise now, the context of national pride. To your average teenager today, it’s unrelatable! It’s unrelatable for the millennials in their thirties and forties. It’s just that we’ve never lived in a context where our countries were oriented towards our people.

So it’s a very difficult thing to get worked up about the possibility of something like the Third Reich happening, or something like the Holocaust happening in Britain today. No one thinks that! No one thinks it’s not going to be that.

If you’re going to put people in concentration camps, [chuckling] ironically, it’s going to be World Health Organisation bollocks! It’s going to be the UN, it’s going to be the World Economic Forum decreeing that this must be done for the good of the public. It’s not going to be the national government saying:

“We don’t like this minority, so we’re going to put them in camps!”

That is just completely unrelatable. I think.

So, yeah the Holocaust has lost it’s purchase, and that will only continue, especially as Western populations become more diverse, which really, these jewish NGOs are killing the goose that lays the golden egg there. But that seems to be something that they do.

And what we care about is what we care about what’s good for us. And that’s not the Holocaust, and it’s not the mass immigration either. It’s us! It’s our countries. The fact that our governments aren’t oriented towards our people, that is the problem!

In short, I think that the answer to the question is, yes.

But in the meantime, for now, jewish power very much remains a very real thing. And there will also be other reasons as well, within the jewish people that they’ll start believing their own propaganda. Their ethnocentrism, which is very strong, will nonetheless be negated by their beliefs. If they really do believe that race is a little rubbish and it’s just an illusion, and that we should be open minded and that we should learn from other types of people, then there’s no point getting into that marriage that your parents are trying to push you into with that rich but dull banker from the Rubenstein family. You’re interested in that exotic student you’ve met on your business studies degree at whatever university you’re at. So this, I think, is the situation for many young jewish people today.

And so again, the ethnocentrism that they’ve had in the past, I think, is being corroded by their own stated beliefs that they state for the Gentiles, but nonetheless, it weaken their own standing. It does weaken their own identity, which in turn weakens their political power as a group.

Now, as I say, it’s a slow process, and I’m not going to say it’s going to necessarily nullify jewish power throughout the West.

[1:12:55]

But I do think you’re not looking at the situation of 1995 anymore. I tend to agree with Richard Spencer on this. I think that it probably peaked in the mid nineties. And ever since then it has remained a thing. And even today, even now, it’s still very powerful! I think that they told Rishi Sunak:

“Get Tommy Robinson back on Twitter.”

He had a meeting with Musk and it happened. That’s what I basically think happened here.

So I don’t mean to say it’s over, that jewish power is just not a thing. It will always be a thing. As long as they exist. Of course they will have some amount of powers by definition. And I think they will remain an especially powerful group, probably forever or foreseeable future.

But I don’t think they’re going to have, I mean, well, to put it a different way, jewish power is not going to be the monolithic thing that it was in the past and without that transformation, et cetera, et cetera. [paraphrasing Babara Lerner Spectre]

Yeah, China replaces them. That’s the whole other thing. Yeah, China! It’s a whole other aspect of this. And Russia is a different thing as well. It’s obviously different from the West, but it’s also got these weird tendencies that you wouldn’t expect.

The point is that Russia is its own thing and it’s quite bizarre and in some ways it is beholden to some of the same ridiculous ideas that have done such damage in the West.

But yeah, China is clearly a rising power. And that also is going to weaken jewish influence in the world.

Oh, the Holocaust memorial in Victoria Tower Gardens. Yeah, that’s a whole thing. As I say, I do believe that their power is waning.

So actually, I think that’s probably why they kvetch so much to have these memorials, to try to bolster their declining power. And that’s regardless of what happens with Gaza, just now with this conflict, I think this is still the case.

As I said before, I think this is the last time that they could do something like this. But the long term consequences are still bad for the Israelis either way. Maybe they should move to somewhere else in the world. I don’t know. I’m not saying that is true. I’m just saying maybe something for them to look into. Because clearly it’s an endlessly precarious, nasty, situation in Israel for everyone. But that’s their problem. And it shouldn’t be ours, and it shouldn’t have anything to do with us. We shouldn’t need to know about it.

And part of the perversity of the age we live in is that it is our problem! And that we are talking about it! And that we are spending an hour and a half talking about the various ramifications of this march. What’s it got to do with any of our culture, any of our heritage or history?

You’ve got a bunch of brown people, the pro-Palestine crowd, and then you’ve got a bunch of faux patriots, largely organised by jews on the other side, fighting it out so as to be condemned by a media that is certainly compromised in multiple directions, and a British state that is completely corrupt.

So it’s a very shitty situation!

[1:16:46]

And I’m not going to black pill people. I’m just outlining the variety and degree of bullshit that’s going on here, and just how disconnected and it is from us and our interests.

So I would say, just to emphasise, in case anyone hasn’t gleaned this already, I expressly discourage anyone from attending this counter-protest with Tommy Robinson in London on Remembrance Day. I think it’s just an absolute trap! 100%! And nothing good can come of it.

All right, well, I guess that’s everything. I should have taken time to organise the notes better beforehand. That is a lesson. This has been an unnecessarily arduous talk because I didn’t organise the notes beforehand. For anyone doing similar things learn from my mistake. [chuckling] One with Thumbs. That’s a good one!

At this point, yes, I think the Western civilisation is a chimera. This is a system of systems, but it’s not a spiritual conquest. It’s become a bureaucratic fucking nightmare! Did I finish my fight with Sargon? The Sargon thing? [chuckling] challenged him to., … Oh, this is the whole thing with Gad Saad. Sargon I can’t see his Twitter, right? Because I’m blocked.

So I’m not really aware of what he’s., … Yeah, so Gad Saad has been kvetching on Twitter for the last few weeks, and Sargon seems to have decided that Gad Saad is an ally, a friend of the West, against Muslims against Islam. And yes, sure, he’s not as bad as some of them, of course he isn’t.

But the message is still the same. He’s not pro-White Identity or heritage or whatever what I would call Western civilisation. He’s a consumer looking for a safe place to consume, like many (((wanderers))) and many non-Whites. And what he wants is the West to be fit for that purpose. So he’s not an ally in any real sense.

And for Sargon to think that he is, I’m sorry, it’s typical of Sargon. I mean, he’s, sorry, he’s not the sharpest tool in the box! And he doesn’t have much excuse at this point. He has many people that he could be learning from. If he can’t fucking work it out himself, which he clearly can, he has many people he could be just [chuckling] asking:

“Can you just explain this to me or just tell me what is the situation here?”

But he never does.

He arduously argues against you for years, and then eventually quietly realises that you were right all along. And he adopts your talking points, but acts as if he came up with them himself. And you are still an idiot! That’s what he does. Because he doesn’t have much, well, any integrity. I’m sorry, but that’s basically the situation. He’s a man without much intelligence and without much integrity.

[1:20:35]

And I’m sorry to say that because it sounds bitchy, and it is bitchy. But it’s the truth and it’s relevant. I wouldn’t say it just for the sake of it. I’m saying it because it’s relevant. And it matters, too, because he’s holding people back with this nonsense! And it’s what he’s always been doing. I mean, right back to 2015 when he said that:

“The alt-Right, the SJWs, Right-wing SJWs!”

Just a moron. It’s a fucking stupid thing to say!

And this is what he specialises in, these thought terminating cliches, these stupid gotchas! Horseshoe theory and so on, that prevent thought. [chuckling] That’s what he does.

So, no, he certainly won’t be on Millenniyule 23. I actually don’t think I would have him on Millenniyule. I would do a stream with him, but I wouldn’t want it to be part of Millenniyule, because it just feels like that would be sullying Millenniyule at this point. And I know that sounds like sour grapes and I’m lying, but honestly, I wouldn’t want to have them on Millenniyule! Because I want Millenniyule to be not combative. I want it to be good spirited and so on.

And with Sargon, I would want to be combative. So the Millenniyule wouldn’t be the venue for that.

Yeah, exactly! It should be cozy. And I also, frankly, more egotistically, I think that he would need to earn the right to appear on Millenniyule because he’s snubbed me for years now.

So, no, I’m not just going to take him back like that! No, he’d have to do some work.

Yes, he has been combative on Millenniyule. If you watch the 2017 one, for example, or the 2016 one, and definitely the 2015 one, when he appeared on it uninvited – but nobody was invited as such. It was an open hangout so anyone could join. And he joined. And he was certainly just, … He spent four or 5 hours misunderstanding and pretending to misunderstand, which is a combination. He does both of those.

On the one hand, he’s not bright enough to understand what you’re saying, but he is bright enough to pretend to misunderstand those bits that he does understand. [chuckling] Fucking hell!

So, yeah, just not the best.

I mean, the only reason we have to talk about this guy at all is that he is big, he’s powerful, he’s influential, and that’s an aspect of the perversity of the age we live in. A guy like him should not have influence. He should not be prominent. Unfortunately, because of the abundance of midwits in the world, there are many, many people who will follow a guy like him. There we are.

“I like the gay little thing about us adopting SJW language.”

I mean, what the fuck? He’s obviously trying to get us to look like morons. Oh, yes, that was some weird thing.

And that was another one where it took ages to explain the idea, as if he was talking to a fucking five year old. So you’d have to go very slowly so that I’ll understand. But all it actually had the opposite effect where I was thinking:

“Sargon, will you get the fucking point? What the fuck are you trying to say here? Taking ages!”

And eventually he did lay it out very simply, and I thought:

“Okay, well, that’s just a stupid idea!”

Once you can see it clearly, it’s just fucking stupid!

So, yeah, I agree.

Anyway:

“Is Woes really discussing Sargon?”

I’m afraid so. And you’re right, I shouldn’t be:

“You should have really bludgeoned him for that one!”

[chuckling] Well, I’ll be honest, if he did agree to our stream now, I would bludgeon him!

And I think he knows that. I think he knows that I wouldn’t be treating him with kid gloves now. So he’s not going to do it. But he wouldn’t do it anyway because he doesn’t want to be shown up. And he also doesn’t want to be associated with me, or any of us.

So, yeah, the days of him doing impromptu debates and discussions that is long over, he’s not going to do that. He’s playing it very safe. And I understand that for no one wants to lose their income and whatever. But then fucking check out of the discourse. Don’t keep polluting it with your low brow, low-T nonsense, obviously. But he does, and it’s exasperating!:

“I should gate crash an online event of his.”

Well, [chuckling] I’m pretty sure his mods would have me banned in short order, but I don’t think he even does events that you can gate crash, does he? I’m not sure. All right. Okay. That’s all.

I’m not going to go on about that guy anymore. It is bad when I’m talking about him. Because I know he won’t be talking about me, so I shouldn’t be talking about him:

“He was a valuable gateway.”

Yes, he was, for sure.

I mean, I certainly got lots of new followers from that four hour debate that I did with them for years afterward, so it was certainly good for me. Far better than it was for him. [chuckling] But he’s not going to make that mistake again.

“Neil deGrasse Tyson loses his mind.”

Oh, God. [chuckling] I mean, he is thick as fuck! He’s just a dumpling. And it’s embarrassing! It’s embarrassing because he’s like the Thomas Sowell of science. People think of him as very., … Oh, and Thomas Sowell! I saw a clip of him. Oh, fuck! Someone asked him:

“Where does anti-semitism come from?”

And he came out with the old canard that:

“It’s about jealousy of jewish success, because it’s always easier to hate someone else than to hate yourself for underachieving!”

Well, thanks for that, Thomas! I don’t rate Thomas well, I’m sorry.

I mean, yeah, he comes out with some good middle of the road observations that have been said by other people already, but in and of himself, no. If that’s the best that they can do, and let’s face it, it is the best they can do! Then I’m not impressed.

[1:27:30]

As for Neil deGrasse Tyson, he’s the definition of a diversity hire. He’s only got his career at all because he is black. But he’s certainly not bright. Holy shit! And that clip of him talking about the vaccine, I mean, that really should condemn him forever. Dreadful!

Holy shit!

“King Charles has confirmed that Rishi Sunak will introduce a permanent smoking ban in Britain for everyone born in 2009 or after.”

So nobody born after January 2009 will ever legally be able to buy cigarettes. Holy fuck! So anyone under 14 now, or 14 or under. Will never be able to buy cigarettes. That’s something else. Yeah. I’m against this. I don’t approve of this.

I mean, I don’t approve of smoking, really. I know it’s bad for you and it be discouraged, but I don’t agree with banning it. And I still enjoy being in the presence of people smoking, even though I’ve not., … A cigarette has not touched my lips for three and a half years! And I’ve never been close to doing it, to smoking. You just make a decision and that’s it. You’re no longer a smoker, so why would you smoke? It’s easy!

But then I did have a sort of maybe divine intervention there to help me with it.

But anyway, if I can do it, anyone else could do it!

But then again, what about the other things that I’m addicted to, like Coca Cola? Whole other issue.

So the point is, I don’t agree with banning it, but at the same time, I’m not surprised that they’re doing this because it has been going this way for a long time in this direction.

So there we go.

And yes, PGM says:

“Meanwhile, we have weed at the liquor store.”

Well, that’s in Canada. Yeah. I do suspect that cannabis is just going to be decriminalised everywhere in time because ultimately it serves their ends, it serves their purposes. People are just stoned and listless, which they already largely are.

All right, I think that’s it.

All right, well, this has been a good one, I think. A bit disjointed, but nonetheless, I think it went fairly well. Yeah So thank you. Thank you for the comments. Thank you for the Superchats. I will see you again next week, hopefully on the correct night of the week.

And in the meantime, bye bye for now.

[1:30:37]

END

top

Dangerfield

Be Very Scared!

The UK Online Safety Bill

Thu, Sep 28, 2023

[In this video Dangerfield warns us about the Online “Safety” Bill, saying:

“The UK Online Safety Bill slipped by virtually unnoticed, leaving a wake of crushed civil rights, shattered freedoms, and silenced free speech. This unprecedented assault is a chilling display of authoritarian censorship, a haunting advance in compliance and control of the people these maniacs are supposed to represent.”

– KATANA]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TYWencq_0-Y

https://odysee.com/@DANGERFIELD:6/be-very-scared!-the-uk-online-safety:3

Published on Thu, Sep 28, 2023

Description

0:04 / 15:04
Be VERY Scared! The UK Online Safety Bill
Dangerfield
19.4K subscribers
Join
Subscribe
311
Share
Thanks
Clip
Save
1,865 views
Sep 28, 2023
The UK Online Safety Bill slipped by virtually unnoticed, leaving a wake of crushed civil rights, shattered freedoms, and silenced free speech. This unprecedented assault is a chilling display of authoritarian censorship, a haunting advance in compliance and control of the people these maniacs are supposed to represent.
►Sign up to my SUBSTACK for my FREE written stories:
https://chrisdangerfield.substack.com/
►My NEW Short-Form YouTube channel:
/ @dangerfieldwordsandthings
►Become a MEMBER and get access to PRIVATE INTERACTIVE STREAMS
/ @dangerfieldchris
►To support via SUBSCRIBE STAR (recurring and one-off donations)
https://www.subscribestar.com/dangerf…
► My TWITTER: https://twitter.com/JunkieWrites
►ENTROPY DONATIONS:
https://entropystream.live/app/Danger…
►FOLLOW me on GETTR:
https://www.gettr.com/user/dangerfield
►Dangerfield’s TELEGRAM
https://t.me/s/strangerfield
►To support via BITCOIN:
1L1Hyf5y4hZ1BQUCfYAzjMnAuATmN6jns6
►My ODYSEE Channel:
https://odysee.com/@DANGERFIELD:6
►My TWITCH channel
https://www.twitch.tv/chrisdangerfield
►Get a FREE SHARE when using my link to sign up to FREETRADE:
https://magic.freetrade.io/join/chris…
Transcript
Follow along using the transcript.
Show transcript
Dangerfield
19.4K subscribers
Videos
About
155 Comments

_____________

TRANSCRIPT QUALITY = 4.5 Stars

1 Star — Poor quality with many errors, contains nonsense text 2 Stars — Low quality with many errors, some nonsense text. 3 Stars — Medium quality with some errors. 4 Stars — Good quality with only a few errors. 5 Stars — High quality with few to no errors.

NOTE: Users can help improve the quality of this transcript by putting corrections in the Comment section. Thanks.

TRANSCRIPT

(Words: 1,917 – 15:04 mins)

I was saying to people last year:

“Be careful what you say on online platforms, even when they say they’re, you know, encrypted.”

Well, they’re not anymore. They can see anything.

Should you be afraid? Yeah, …!

Hello, people. I haven’t got a lot of time, but this is going to be a short video anyway. But I was going to put my light on and I thought:

“No, the contents of this video demands a gloomy darkness, like a cloak that has just been dragged over the UK!”

I am, of course, talking about the UK Online Safety Bill, which has just kind of been passed in the background:

“Oh, it’s nothing! It’s not that important. It’s not that significant!”

I think it happened yesterday. Yeah, just signed off. They’re just waiting for old King Charlie to give it the go ahead, which he will, of course:

“Oh, I don’t know about this, this looks terrible!”

And I’ve had a look at this Bill and it’s terrifying! I had trouble sleeping after it. I don’t even live in England.

But the fact that what’s happening in Canada, what’s happening in America, what’s happening in Australia, this beats all of that, hands down. This is unprecedented authoritarian! This is real world 1984. I know it’s a cliche, I know it’s a trite thing to say, but the UK is there. They’re absolutely there!

Do not be confused! This is outright censorship! This is outright censorship, but it’s also an attack on your civil rights. And it’s also an attack on your basic right to privacy. This is a three pronged attack on your ability to question the authoritarian political orthodoxy of the moment.

Like I said, there’s three main elements to it. There’s your rights, your civil liberties and your freedom of expression, or what we used to call your rights, your civil liberties and your freedom of expression. Because as far as I’m concerned, the research I’ve done on this, they’re gone!

And the way they’ve done it is predictable and not even clever. This is a real ham fisted, blunt weapon attack. The majority of it is around “protecting children”:

“Oh, no, that’s what we’re doing! We’re protecting children.”

And they’re not! It’s absolutely nothing to do with that! And they’re attacking the platforms, they’re attacking your Facebook and Twitter, but not just social media, because I’m not sure if I’d give a shit about that, really.

I mean, I should, I suppose, but this is also going to include Telegram, WhatsApp, SMS messaging. Yeah, seriously, text messaging. It’s not going to get to the point, this bill, the UK Online Safety Bill, now means that if you want to question the political orthodoxy, you’ve literally got to do it in real life, because you can’t do it, … When you go on, WhatsApp, oh, this is encrypted end to end. And Telegram, this is encrypted end to end. Well, the UK government can go to WhatsApp.

And say:

“Hey, can you decrypt these?”

Is it decrypt or de-encrypt? You know what I mean:

“Can you decode these people’s private conversations?”

And much like “reasonable suspicion” that the police have used for decades to lock people up for nothing, that’s all they need.

“Now, we think something harmful has happened. We think something potentially harmful or dangerous is occurring. So we want you to de-encrypt these conversations so we can read them.”

And if the platforms refuse to. And this is how they spun it as well:

“Oh, no, we’re not going after individuals. No, this is about the platforms, because we’re looking after the kids!”

If the platforms refuse to do it, that’s a criminal offence, and they go to jail! They get locked up. WhatsApp, Telegram, all the usual suspects, they’ve already got plenty of legal provisions for this kind of stuff. Of course they have.

Because if they didn’t have, they would have been gone a long time ago. This stuff’s already there. This really is unprecedented! I can’t believe how it’s just slipped through.

This is probably one of the most dramatic changes in the way we use the internet. This isn’t only going to affect the UK, because if you’re talking to someone in the UK from another country using WhatsApp, well, they’re going to decrypt your messages as well.

And so your privacy is gone! Your freedom of expression’s gone! Because at any time, the government can say:

“No, we think something bad’s happening. Show us what they’ve been saying.”

And the platforms will, because otherwise they’re going to go to prison. It’s absolutely insane!

They ask it, those people, the platforms, are going to do it.

“Harmful information.”

The other really bizarre part of this. There’s a whole section in it about a “duty to protect women and girls”.

Now, why isn’t there a duty to protect “people”? So children and women and girls? Or what about protecting blokes? No, it doesn’t matter. No, fuck them! Fuck them! Literally it is. It’s not, it’s figuratively. But no, there’s a whole section in there that these platforms have now got a duty to protect women and girls.

Well, how are they going to do that? Well, my first thought is, well, what about the men’s rights movement? You start talking about that sort of thing. You start questioning feminism! You start questioning an idea! An idea!:

“No? What? You’re not a feminist? You’re criticising feminism. No, we want to see your messages. If they don’t do it, we’re going to lock them up. And if we see your, and when we see your messages, if we decide that that’s potentially harmful to women and girls, you’re in big trouble!”

Absolutely insane!

All that stuff, people will not be able to talk about men’s rights issues. People will not be able to criticise feminism on these platforms anymore.

The only way you’ll be able to do it is to meet up in real life.

Now, imagine this. Imagine you get interviewed, imagine you’re at a rally, or a protest and you get interviewed. And then someone puts that interview on social media and Telegram. And you’re saying things that they think is a danger to women and girls, like daring to question feminism, daring to question the gender orthodoxy.

Well, you’re in trouble! They might have to edit that out. That stuff will not be allowed to be spoken about on social media platforms anymore. It’s too dangerous! Because of the way social media works, this affects the whole world.

And if you don’t think this is the sort of a mark in the sand where everyone else will follow, well, then you haven’t seen the last 10, 15 years of how it works. These test it, everyone else follows.

There’ll be a complete abandonment of pro-male discourse on the internet because the platforms don’t want to risk it. It’s insane!

And it comes with criminal, … This is a criminal case. If they don’t give them this information, if they don’t give people your personal chats, they’ve broken the law and they’re going to prison! It’s terrifying!

And then the last one, because of the three I’ve identified looking at this Bill as a whole, I think there’s the three, there’s this protecting children, the duty to protect women and girls.

And then the last one, which is kind of a catch all, “Disinformation”. Disinformation!

It’s a criminal offence in the UK now to talk on these platforms, and it be disinformation:

“You don’t support Ukraine? Well, that’s disinformation. You said something positive about maybe someone else in that little situation. No, that’s disinformation!”

And they can read it and you’re in trouble. They say:

“No, it’s about the platform, this is about the companies, it’s not about individuals!”

Well, hang on, you’re blackmailing, you’re bribing. No, it’s blackmail, isn’t it? You’re blackmailing the platforms to dish the dirt on what people have been saying!

So it’s only the platforms to get to you and me. So unless you are 100% with the ideological orthodoxy of the day, they’re coming for you!

And so people won’t be able to talk about it. This stuff will disappear offline:

“Don’t support vaccines. Well, that’s disinformation!”

They’ll land your details over, they’ll see what you’ve been saying:

“Well, let’s go back a few more years. Let’s see what he said five years ago, six years ago, seven years ago.”

Because the really snide thing about these bills, of course they can retroactively use them:

“Oh, it’s not just moving forward. No, I want to see what he said on WhatsApp. For the last six years!”

When we all thought it was peer to peer encrypted and we were told that only me and the person I sent it to could see this. No, they’ve got access if they want it, they’ve got access to everything you’ve said on all social media platforms online. Even YouTube.

I mean, I say “even YouTube”, but yeah, YouTube.

And here’s the kicker, if you didn’t think all that was bad enough, wait for this. Listen to this. This is true. The BBC, the British Broadcasting Corporation, funded by British taxpayers, are totally exempt from the UK online Safety Bill! They can say what they want, they can do what they want. They’re exempt! It’s written into the Bill that the BBC are exempt from this bill.

I had trouble sleeping when I’d done my bit of research into this yesterday, because I’d heard a bit about this, but I thought:

“Well, no one’s really talking about it. It can’t be much.”

And then a mate said to me:

“Have you had a look at that?”

About three in the morning, I got up for a piddle, Jimmy Riddle, and I got a text. He said:

“Have you had a look at this UK Online Bill?”

And he sent me it over a PDF. And I was sitting on the toilet reading it. And after I read it, the whole Bill, I just sat there on the bed thinking:

“This is absolutely terrifying!”

I was shaking! Even talking about it now, even bringing it even bringing it back up to me now.

And I think this is the tip of the iceberg. Look where we were five years ago compared to where we are now.

Well, look where we are now. And imagine where we’re going to be in five years. And I don’t like saying this. I don’t like saying this because I grew up in an amazing country. I’m fucking glad I’m out of that place! It’s a terrifying, living, stroke, dying, dystopia! And be fucking careful! I mean it.

I was saying to people last year:

“Be careful what you say on online platforms. Even when they say they’re encrypted.”

Well, they’re not anymore. They can see anything. Should you be afraid? Yeaaah.

Now, I’m not trying to scare you, but you should be afraid so that you start thinking about it, so that you can start talking to people. Not online, though. No, there’s no place for that anymore.

Fucking BBC exempt!

See you later.

[15:04]

END

top

Brownie

Patriotic Alternative on BBC News Night

Thu, Sep 21, 2023

[BBC News Night recently featured a so-called “investigation” of Patriotic Alternative protesting around the UK against the invasion of the country by “refugees”, being part of the anti-White replacement agenda.

Rather pathetic attempts are made to smear PA by saying they have an “extreme ideology” that’s “racist” and have shown admiration for Adolf Hitler (boo hoo)!

– KATANA]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QyAn7mDiitg

Published on Thu, Sep 21, 2023

Description

1:35 / 10:52
Patriotic Alternative on BBC news night
Brownie
12 subscribers
Subscribe
30
Share
462 views
Sep 21, 2023
Patriotic Alternative on BBC news night
Our lovely segment on Newsnight. Don’t think that could’ve gone any better!
please don’t forget to LIKE SHARE SUBSCRIBE
STAY SAFE NATIONALISTS
Transcript
Follow along using the transcript.
Show transcript
Brownie
12 subscribers
Videos
About
40 Comments

_____________

TRANSCRIPT QUALITY = 4.5 Stars

1 Star — Poor quality with many errors, contains nonsense text 2 Stars — Low quality with many errors, some nonsense text. 3 Stars — Medium quality with some errors. 4 Stars — Good quality with only a few errors. 5 Stars — High quality with few to no errors.

NOTE: Users can help improve the quality of this transcript by putting corrections in the Comment section. Thanks.

TRANSCRIPT

(Words: 1,754 – 10:52 mins)

[Morgoth discusses the media reaction to the murder of the Conservative MP David Amos by a Somalian invader. Rather than deal with the event honestly, the system directs the conversation towards the agenda of the need for more control over the population through removing internet anonymity. This is just part and parcel of living in modern Britain where the system’s lies and deceit rule.

— KATANA]

Morgoth’s Review

Britain

A Land Without Truth

Oct 22, 2021

Click here for the video:

https://odysee.com/@MorgothReviews:5/britain-a-land-without-truth:a

https://www.bitchute.com/video/1VY2oht5JMhE/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BRWet-RQUnE

Published on Oct 22, 2021

Odysee Description

Morgoth’s Review

Britain: A Land Without Truth

October 22nd, 2021

1,074 views

Channel profile picture

Morgoth’s Review

@MorgothReviews

7,224 Followers

Following

Buy me a pint here:

https://www.subscribestar.com/morgoth-s-review

Buy me a coffee

https://www.buymeacoffee.com/morgoth

Bitchute

https://www.bitchute.com/channel/morgothsreview/

Thanks to Theberton for the intros and outros

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC_0KCOY6LkteChDivbb6QBQ

LBRY URL

lbry://@MorgothReviews#5/britain-a-land-without-truth#a

Claim ID

a7288d5a86ca83405f3da10aa3c485397e11ce29

SHOW MORE

34 Comments

Thanks to Theberton for the intros and outros

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC_0K…

TRANSCRIPT

(14:04 mins)

[00:00]

[Intro music and imagery by Theberton.]

[00:18]

A Conservative MP called David Amos was recently murdered by somebody the media called an “Islamist”. This kind of thing isn’t new to British people. And because we’re people who’ve been artificially divided against ourselves, the various factions created by the artificial divides all went silent when news of the murder broke. What passed through the minds of everyone engaged in the politics and discourse was the recognition that a terrible event had happened. That it was a tragedy. But also that their political and cultural faction would be affected by it.

The question and the reason for the hesitancy, was that few hours which passed before they knew the identity and the motives of the killer, a politician has been murdered in a church. This is going to have consequences. The priority then is finding out which faction is about to take the hit. All sides hoping that it isn’t theirs.

Thousands of social media influencers on the edge of their seats, like the time King Joffrey died in Game of Thrones, when he was poisoned. Who did it and why? Whoever did it is going to be hunted. And we have to hope it isn’t us.

When we eventually did get the big reveal, the identity of the killer meant it was the liberal, or establishment side of the divide, which would seem to be expected to take the blame. And the more right-leaning populists who could breathe a sigh of relief, that to a certain degree they had been vindicated in their opinions. And the politically correct types who call them “gammon”, would have to take the loss.

But this isn’t actually what happened. Instead the politicians, and then the liberal social media influencers, decided that the real issue wasn’t what, let’s say the angle that the populists wanted to take at all! The real problem was the general hatred being dished out to politicians online. And that issue quickly shed its skin and became about online abuse in general, especially against women.

And given that the populist side of the equation are more prone to using anonymous accounts, this means that they are now set to take the loss, and not the liberals, or the establishment in general.

The system elites themselves also seem very keen on digital IDs. And so presumably this is what will be required to access the internet in a post-anonymous era.

But what actually was the reason for David Amos’s murder? What does that reveal about our country? These questions are in the language of think tanks and apply psychology wonks being “de-prioritized”. The wider aims of the establishment and the media, both social and the old school variety, simply steamrollered over whatever is convenient and created their own “truth” to reinforce their own agendas and long-term aims.

On the face of it, the slaughtering of a politician should have at least revealed something about our country, how it functions, something that would need an answer. Or to put it slightly differently, it raises questions about our country and the direction it’s going in.

In a healthy society those questions would at least lead to some degree [?] and other common discourse. So they could be worked through. Not just with the hope of some sort of political solution, but as an act of catharsis for the population. There would be debates and discussion based on the events and what led to those events. People would get angry. Some people would be shocked. But it would at least in some way reflect a reality based on something that actually happened.

What we get instead are lies! And then narratives founded on those lies. As if they were the most obvious truths, that you’d have to be an idiot not to understand it!

People don’t like being lied to. The British feel every day that what they’re being told by their masters is our best a half truth, and at worst just downright complete fabrication! But soon you’ll have to be careful if you complain about it, because they’re coming up with yet another lie, which will result in you being worried. Because they’ll have you! They’ll know who the dissenters are, after they scrap online anonymity. And what makes you vulnerable.

It’s a lie to cover lies! And they hope [this] will prevent lies in the future being a problem for them, because people will be intimidated, and nervous about calling them liars!

In his extended essay “Live Not by Lies”, Alexander Solzhenitsyn wrote, quote:

“Yes, at first it will not be fair. Someone will have to temporarily lose his job. For the young who seek to live by truth this will at first severely complicate life, for their tests and quizzes too are stuffed with lies. And so choices will have to be made. But there is no loophole left for anyone who seeks to be honest. Not even for a day. Not even in the safest technical occupations can he avoid even a single one of the listed choices – to be made in favour of either truth, or lies, in favour of spiritual independence, or spiritual servility. And as for him who lacks the courage to defend even his own soul, let him not brag of his progressive views, boast of his status as an academic, or a recognized artist, a distinguished citizen, or general. Let him say to himself plainly: I am cattle! I am a coward! I seek only warmth and to eat my fill!” [February 12, 1974]

End quote. It goes without saying that Solzhenitsyn knew a lot about living in a system built almost entirely on lies I’m coming to the conclusion that Britain is objectively not that far away from the level of lies told within the USSR. Lies don’t need gulags and firing squads. But he’s pointing out something profound here. Actually a couple of things.

A system of lies will gradually close off all the exits that lead the truth. It will create a list of options, of choices that the individual can adhere to.

The problem is that they’ll all be creations of the system, and therefore all lies. The corruption and deceit then spreads through the organs of the system like a fungus into its media, and eventually engulfs the individual who dwells within it.

How can the individual remain honest and truthful when they no longer even have access to the truth! Everything they cleave to simply feeds back into the system’s narrative complex, reinforcing it.

As Solzhenitsyn puts it though, there will be those who benefit, who will go along with the lies for personal gain. And they will then lie to themselves as a way to justify their decisions.

While sifting through the garbage on Twitter, looking to see how the as we’re reacting to the day of the David Amos killing, I saw a tweet from Ash Sarkar. A made for TV Left-wing firebrand.

In August she was invited onto the BBC to talk about the government’s carbon reduction scheme, or some such. She couldn’t make it for some reason and the BBC replaced her with Stanley Johnson, Boris Johnson’s father. Sarkar acted indignant, and then framed it as the Beeb simply giving TV slots to the establishment. But she missed, or tried to conceal a truth here – as they always do. And that 20-something TV Leftists are entirely interchangeable with millionaire Tories in their 70s.

From the perspective of the system, it didn’t make a blind bit of difference which one of them sat in that seat, because they both agreed on the fundamentals. The truth and the scenario is one of manufacturing consent, of offering up what looks like a choice. But isn’t really.

The lie is to pretend that there is a choice. And then Ash Sarkar had to engage in yet more dishonesty by conjuring up a narrative that she was a radical being replaced by an establishment figure. Once again the lies spread and replicate like a fungus!

And in Britain, we’re choking to death on the fungus of lies! Modern Britain, as it exists now, is a lie, because it was a top-down agenda being forced on the people. It keeps itself in place with more lies, and the ideology it spreads through the media and academia is just another layer of lies!

Is it that everybody is evil? Well, no, not really. It’s that institutions are corrupt. And because these institutions create “truth”, which is to say, the narratives and stories which inform politics and how we think about politics, they formulate their views on that. And in many cases they are given incentives to protect the narratives from scrutiny.

But what this has resulted in after years, and years, is essentially a country which calls itself “liberal democracy” and adopts the airs of a civilizational force in the world, but which in reality is politically and intellectually barren!