“More people would support a political party that pledged to stop all immigration or promised to reduce the number of Muslims than one that encouraged multiculturalism… the research suggests much of the electorate remains open to views traditionally associated with far-right groups.”
The poll, commissioned by the Extremis Project which describes itself as “an independent group monitoring extremism and terrorism”, also provides disturbing proof of the effectiveness of leftist “multicultural” and “anti-racist” propaganda over the last five decades, according to a report in The Guardian newspaper (link below):
“…large majorities of 18-to -24-year-olds rejected radical rightwing policies, with 60% saying that a party campaigning to halt all immigration would make them less likely to support it or that it did not matter to them… Less than a quarter of 18-to-24-year-olds said they would be more likely to vote for a party that promised to halt all immigration, compared with more than half of those aged above 60. Similarly, 27% of the younger age group said they would vote for a party that campaigned to reduce the number of Muslims, compared with 49% of those aged over 60.”
The longer we wait, the more time these alien cultures and unassimilable foreigners will have to invade and occupy once-proud Britain, and the more our White countrymen will become “conditioned” to accept their own displacement and disinheritance.
The problem, perhaps, is the difficulty in finding leaders with the moral fibre and inner strength necessary to accept the insults and approbrium they will face, together with the maturity and leadership capabilities needed to start the disciplined and determined tide of White resistance necessary to reverse this unwanted invasion and punish those responsible.
In that regard, I view the leader of the British National Party, Nick Griffin, as a serious obstacle.
He is clever enough to hold on to the BNP reins of power, but too juvenile to be effective. Somewhat like a “bed-blocker” in a hospital, he prevents someone else from having a chance to lead.
He is a “leadership-blocker”.
And the reason that I think this, is his inexplicable reaction to being invited to a Buckingham Palace tea-party together with fellow “Member of the European Parliament” Andrew Brons, both of them BNP members.
According to the Independent newspaper, his invitation was because of his MEP status, and had nothing to do with his leadership of the BNP. And yet, in an e-mail message celebrating the invitation, Griffin said: “Who would have believed it ten, or even three, years ago? Remember the Establishment thought us no more than an annoying fringe party back then, they laughed at us and sometimes it hurt us, I know. One thing’s for sure, they’re not laughing now!”
(That in itself is strange enough, as the previous year The Guardian reported that Griffin had turned down an invitation to attend the annual tea-party as a guest of BNP London assembly member Richard Barnbrook, saying that he had “no wish to embarrass the Queen.”)
But the Establishment was laughing again soon enough, as Griffin continued on to say: “So, as it is you, the members, supporters and donors that have sent me to Her Majesty’s Garden Party, what should I say if – presumably due to some ghastly blunder by a courtier – I actually meet her? I want you to give me your thoughts and what you would say in my position, (be reasonable now, I have no intention of taking up residence in the Tower!)”
Of course, he was promptly kicked off the invitation list, and “this highly symbolic breakthrough” was irrevocably lost. The Queen discusses politics with the Prime Minister, and possibly on occasion with her other ministers of state, but in public she is completely neutral and will not get involved in any political discourse whatsoever.
Griffin had to know this, and I can only assume that he was so utterly overwhelmed at his (this time personal) invitation, that he became lost in euphoria and his common sense took leave of him.
Then again, perhaps he was dumb enough to think that he could manipulate the Monarchy for his own purposes. Or, perhaps he thought that martyring himself would help the cause – a dangerous move for a man with a largely traditionally-based constituency.
Who would want to have a man like this running the nation?
In “The British National Party’s Nick Griffin must go!” (August 14th, 2010) I commented as follows: “Nick Griffin abused the garden party invitation, tried to use it as a propaganda coup and personal bonanza by asking BNP members to tell him what they would like him to say to the Queen if she spoke to him, and the “banning” was perfectly predictable to anyone with half a brain.”
I concluded by saying that “…the current debacle now draws my attention to such issues as his being styled ‘Leader’, rather than President or Chairman. That carries connotations that are not helpful at this time… And, phrases such as “I will never let you down” and “now I really need your help” indicate that there is rather more “Griffin” in the BNP than I feel is good for it.”
As the “Extremis Project” poll makes vividly clear, time is running out. The sooner the BNP can replace “leadership-blocker” Nick Griffin with a more practical, feet-on-the-ground leader, the better.
See “Voters more likely to back an anti-Muslim party than reject it – poll” (The Guardian, September 16th, 2012) here.
See “Palace bans Nick Griffin from palace garden party” (The Independent, July 22nd, 2010) here.
See “BNP leader Nick Griffin bows out of Buckingham Palace garden party” (The Guardian, May 27th, 2009) here.
See my commentary “The British National Party’s Nick Griffin must go! (August 14th, 2010) here.