Uniting the Resistance.

As the global enemy advance, more and more people are waking up to the diabolical game being played out, with us as the victims and in too many cases as the pawns.  The awakening of the people should be something to rejoice in.  However, the Establishment has very little to worry about, as far from being a unified force to reckon with, the Resistance is fragmented to the point of absurdity and not only this, it is wracked with in-fighting and ego-centrism which negates any chance of overthrowing our mortal foes.

In the UK, the media is so hysterically multiculti that anyone who doesn't go all out to praise immigration, homosexuality, pædophilia, abortion, miscegenation etc etc, is labelled as 'right wing', and thus automatically as evil. The imbecile public then refuse to vote for anyone 'right wing' as we all know that right wing means Nazi and Nazi means Gas Chambers!! The parties thus labelled (or perhaps more accurately, libeled) do not help themselves either - they bicker over the minutest details of policy and make a point of standing against one another. The bemused member of the public then has a choice of several parties who are to the uninitiated, pretty much the same. The result is the splitting of the anti-Establishment vote, with each party donating £1000 per seat contested, to the enemy for the privilege of playing a game that they cannot win!

The Establishment doesn't leave anything to chance though, as entire parties are created to take protest votes. UKIP only did so well in the EU elections due to being a part of the Establishment, wholly controlled by the eternal enemy.  UKIP cannot be counted as part of the Resistance any more than the kosher collaborators of the EDL can.  The general public see UKIP as their saviours, with some seeing them as the party which will first liberate us from the EU, then ultimately free us from the immigrant invaders who have been used as foot-soldiers in a war to destroy our culture and our very gene pool.  They will be sorely disappointed when UKIP fails to fulfill either of these hopes.

Democracy is a sham and it always has been. It is a puppet show which we should steer clear of.  Democracy is a tool for the implementation of communism/liberalism (same thing), as it treats everyone as the same, regardless of race, sex, intelligence, age, experience etc.   Participation gives the charade legitimacy.  

A 16 year old paki-stani rapist who wants Shariah Law, who by virtue of liberal lunacy has just come to live in Scotland and has no knowledge of the Culture, Language, History or Traditions of the UK and/or Scotland, has the same voting power in the forth-coming referendum of splitting from England, as a 70 year old Scotsman who has worked his entire life to build the country.  This is clearly not right, but it is the essence of democracy; a fraudulent farce with all the sophistication of a daytime television programme; a pathetic marketing ploy to convince the people that the placing of a cross on a ballot paper will grant them their every whim - just so long as their whims are halal/kosher-certified.

Joseph Stalin best summed up the reality of the democratic system when he made the following statements:

• I consider it completely unimportant who in the party will vote, or how; but what is extraordinarily important is this—who will count the votes, and how.

Stalin may have been speaking about elections within the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, but the futility of elections in the representative system is obvious for those who care to examine the nature of the system.  In the UK, as with most European countries (if not all), all parties and individuals who progress within the system, do so only because the views they air are tolerated by the legal-political-economic Establishment.  Anyone who strays from the 'politically correct' path, faces public censure by the controlled media (quite possibly for the sake of appearances in the case of controlled opposition such as the EDL and UKIP), or imprisonment ( and worse) if they go too far out of the acceptable sphere and really will not play the game. 

• Ideas are more powerful than Guns. We would not let our enemies have guns, why should we let them have ideas? 

Now the second quote by Joseph Stalin encapsulates the entire modus operandi of the democratic state.  The people are presented with false choices which may appear real enough, but do not stand up to scrutiny.  In the UK the major parties will promise almost anything which they believe the people will want.  If the people wish to leave the EU, they will promise a referendum; knowing full well that they cannot deliver it due to changes at European level which will make exit from the EU impossible by the time they propose to hold it.  Of course when the people want Muslim rapists and Jewish financiers to be expelled from the country and never let back in, the job of offering such policies is handed over to the myriad 'nationalist' parties, the majority of which are controlled by the State to some degree and are merely acting as proxies. 

The way in which the parties which officially stand outside the Establishment are controlled, is through division and pandering to an obsession with ideological minutiae.  In the 1970s the UK had a nationalist party known as the National Front, which had mass membership and began to believe that it had a chance of gaining control of the nation through general elections.  The NF vote was all-but wiped out by a sleight of hand of the Establishment, which employed the full power of the media to convey the impression that the Conservative Party under Margaret Thatcher would stop immigration and start repatriation of non-Europeans. 

The 1979 General Election pledges of the Conservatives were shame-faced lies; the party not only failed to repatriate anyone, it enacted policies which increased immigration; policies which have been ratcheted up by every government of every hue ever since.  Not content with taking vast amounts of money from the NF membership in election deposits for the 303 seats which were contested (every single deposit was lost), the powers-that-be ensured that a post-election NF would not be in a position to find a better strategy than fighting at national level; infiltrators and ne'er do wells split the NF, with the formation of a succession of rival organisations, including the now notoriously kosher, BNP.

The National Front went from being one of the largest Nationalist organisations in Europe, to a very small organisation indeed.  Internal splits caused by outside (State-controlled) trouble-makers, alongside egomania from people who should have known better, saw the creation of numerous organisations, some of which stumble on to this day.  The National Front achieved a degree of ideological purity which was truly astounding.  For anyone who wishes to understand the absolute essence of the National struggle, one can do no better than read the NF publications, Nationalism Today and New Nation.  

Having achieved an ideology which was based on self-reliance, love of own (rather than hatred of others), tradition and respect, further in-fighting saw the great advances lost as the ITP split off and the minute National Front renamed itself the Third Way and shifted headlong into becoming precisely the kosher liberal entity which the NF had campaigned against.  The Third Way name has since been changed again to the National Liberal Party.  Those who call themselves the NF today come from factions who split from the NF in the 1980s; the NLP is the NF in its current phase.  The multi-culti, wishy-washy pro-homosexual, pro-Jewish, pro-immigrant NLP may seem a long way from the NF of the 1960s, but it is a logical result of the politics of the ego over the needs of the people.

We who proclaim our lofty ideals and our commitment to our people, are our own worst enemies.  We allow ourselves to be swayed by personalities and to become obsessed with tittle tattle about our alleged rivals.  Just as the NF split itself into near oblivion, with what is left of it becoming a liberal disgrace, the fracturing of the 'nationalist' movement continues apace.  People who are allegedly on our side, spend more time back-biting and spreading malicious gossip about one another than they do promoting the cause.  When they do promote the cause, it is to promote their particular faction and to denigrate others - recruiting from rival organisations rather than getting new blood involved.  I find the lunacy of it all, breath-taking.

If there is one thing the British people are very good at, it is not learning from the mistakes of the past. Once again, in the UK, there are two organisations which call themselves the National Front (perhaps imagining that resurrecting a name discarded by a now openly multiracial organisation would inspire the British people). The inability to unite within the same organisation is astonishing when one considers that both NFs have the same policies, same symbols, claim the same heritage and except for the people leading them,  are the same!  One would have hoped that having seen the largest nationalist organisation in Europe shattered to the point that every egomaniac in the movement had his own little fiefdom, the focus of the post NF world would have been unity of purpose, if not of organisation.  Nothing could be further from the truth. 

As if to prove that the anti-Globalist movement in the UK really is (to paraphrase Mussolini), Lions led by Donkeys, there are a wealth of rival factions in the nationalist arena,  all of which spend more time and effort trying to poach members from one another, than trying to save the nation.  The many groups include the BNP, British Movement, Racial Volunteer Force, British Freedom Fighters, NF (London-based), NF (Hull-based), National Action, Britain First, England First, British Democratic Party, English Democrats, Harmony Party, British Resistance, Liberty GB, Western Spring, the various Defence Leagues and Infidels, League of Saint George, and many others besides.  These do not include the likes of UKIP and NO2EU which are labelled by the media as sitting alongside the anti-Establishment groups, and seen to be by the electorate.  When the rival factions make their mutual hostility public by standing against one another in elections (often with literature pointing out real (or made-up) flaws), is it any wonder that the electorate find the whole fiasco confusing and irritating?

Standing against one another dilutes the vote, as those who oppose the Establishment parties find themselves confronted by parties who they would vote for, which differ only by name rather than any important policy.  Many people who would vote for an anti-Establishment party realise that to do so would be pointless.  They then either vote for one of the Establishment parties (hoping to elect the lesser evil) or do not vote at all.  As a result, the rival factions lose their deposits (effectively contributing to the coffers of the Establishment) and promote the image of weakness in the movement and an inability to rise above petty differences and personality issues; both of which, sadly, are true.  The obsession with only dealing with 'our own' insofar as already active members is concerned, coupled with hostility to the same people because of different factional labels, is our downfall.  It has to end if we are to avoid total genocide. 

The people do not care about the label used by the party which will deliver a freedom from the EU, repatriation of non-Europeans, end of rule by the Bankers, a restoration of British Industry etc etc.  The people only care about the policies.  So much could be achieved if the rival factions would only agree to stop fighting one another and to at least unite on single issues when given the opportunity.  Right now, the people of Scotland (and a good many foreigners who have no right to be there anyway) are being asked to decide if Scotland should remain in the UK, or split off and become a different slave state of the EU ruled by the same Jewish money power and multi-culti traitors, just with a different local administration centre independent.  Are those who support the Union putting differences aside on a simple yes/no vote?  Are those who support Scottish nationhood (and by extension English nationhood) putting their differences aside? Unsurprisingly, in both cases, they are not.  If we cannot unite under even these simplest circumstances, when can we?

We need some form of Nationalist Council to allow all the would-be fuhrers the space to be kings of their own castles, whilst avoiding confrontation with others.  Whether this can be achieved is debatable, but something needs to be done.  The Greek anti-Capitalists of the left wing variety were similarly fragmented before they had the wisdom to form the Coalition of the Radical Left (Syriza).  Rather than competing as thirteen rival factions, they united behind a common banner whilst maintaining independence as individual organisations.  The wisdom of abandoning this independence remains to be seen, but the initial ethos of Syriza worked.  Can we not do something similar ourselves?  Isn't this better than financially feeding the Establishment whilst watching our nation die through failure to get beyond personality issues and egomania?

To quote (again) Joseph Stalin (no I'm not a Stalinist, I just appreciate the wisdom in these selected quotes),

• We think that a powerful and vigorous movement is impossible without differences — "true conformity" is possible only in the cemetery.  

We don't have to like Stalin to know that there is much truth in these words.  Let us indulge our differences and find a way which allows our differences of thought to flourish, but not to become justification for fighting one another as the real enemy wipes the floor with all of us and our people cease to exist.