This is an article of mine that was published in the Japanese English-speaking media back in 2005. In addition to evolutionary differences in DNA as a driver of HBD, it also posits faster biologial diversification through something called "neoteny." Much of the political agenda of Liberal globalists and the Left is based on the view that we can't be all that different from each other having "branched out" from Africa a mere 60,000 years ago, giving us very little time to evolve significant racial differences. This theory of neoteny, which is still admittedly in its speculative stage, could represent a useful addition to the armoury of those who believe that differences between human groups are more substantial and should be recognized and respected in our social and political organization.


The British National Party is now at an important crossroads. After the successes of the last decade, the party has been weakened by a split between supporters of the party’s leader Nick Griffin and his opponents, many of whom have been pushed out of the Party. Despite this, at the last leadership election this July, Griffin was re-elected by the narrowest of margins. While there have been calls from some to form a new nationalist party outside the control of Griffin, others believe that the way forward is to continue working within the BNP. What follows is an article by John Bean, a leading figure in nationalist politics, identifying key points and tactics in the struggle to secure the goals of British nationalism. This is an article that has relevance not only for British nationalists but for nationalists everywhere.

Colin Liddell

Hanging on as leader, Nick Griffin.

by John Bean

For Nationalism to achieve the minimum of power required to act just as a brake upon the socio-political policies that are destroying our national identity—let alone reverse it as is required—ideally we need to win at least two Parliamentary seats and five MEPs within the next decade. Council seats and members of such bodies as the London Assembly are but stepping stones. We cannot, for example, follow the tactics of Gramsci and the Frankfurt school with the successful Marxist Long March Through the Institutions, for time is not on our side.

The long-term success by incremental steps of the Marxists and liberal-minded “useful idiots” who have made up the bulk of our teachers at schools and universities over the past 30 years has encouraged the nation to reject its cultural heritage without knowing it. This has resulted in our being colonised by a tsunami of Afro-Asian immigration. For immigration to continue, even at half of its present rate (as the Tories suggest they are aiming for) for another decade, could mean that the battle is lost. In 30 years at a “reduced” rate it would definitely be lost. Therefore the policy of ending immigration is not negotiable under a reformed BNP or a new Nationalist party. It must take priority over all other aspects of policy.


America's answer to Polandball.

"The West is the best and we'll do the rest," sang Jim Morrison on that damning 1967 indictment of poor parenting and pharmacological excess, The End. Despite it's intended irony, the lyric nevertheless reflected the realities underlying US foreign policy at the time, which consisted of believing in the Western way, stepping up to the mark when challenged, taking responsibility for what happened on one's watch, and trying to win in the cold light of day and with the world's media watching. Heck, America still gets it in the neck for that famous photo of one gook shooting another gook in the head.

With the Soviet Union doing such a good job of being a shining beacon of progress in those days with its cheap shots against neo-colonialism, inequalities of wealth, and mean differences in height and body mass, America had to do its best to fight the good fight and to go down with the ship when holed below the waterline, as it did in the 1970s, a decade which can be likened to one enormous session of navel gazing: cue Apocalypse Now.


In his amusingly-titled article “Smells Like Dead Junkie,” Jim Goad, an iconoclastic icon if ever there was one, takes rhetorical dead aim at Kurt Cobain, the famously fame-hating rock star, heroin addict, and supposed voice of Generation X, who took literal dead aim at himself back on April 5, 1994, when the self-directed Shot Heard ’Round the Grunge World tore a massive hole through the Nirvana frontman’s peroxide-fringed head, knocking the life out of this lead screamer’s poetically plaintive blue eyes and caking the ceiling of the celebrated anti-celebrity’s Seattle mansion with his gorgeously tortured brains.


The Nobel Art of Self Deception

There’s no getting away from it: Whiteys strive for importance on a non-stop, seven-days-a-week, bending-over-backwards, sell-their-own-grandmothers-for-it basis. I say this having spent much of my life in Africa, Asia, and London, so I have ‘control groups,’ as the scientists say, to help me measure tendencies like this.

Not every Whitey of course, but enough of them. in contrast to other groups, for it to be a general characteristic. But even in cases where they don’t appear to be striving, I think a lot of them really are. Take Andy Nowicki’s recent article on über-slacker Kurt Cobain. What was that thing with a shotgun if it wasn’t an attempt to out-nihil all the other gurning grungers?

Now we get the latest Nobel Peace Prize, which, as far as I can be bothered to find out, is decided by yet another clique of self-important Whiteys in some Scandinavian country. What is it with us Whiteys that we want to make up dumb, self-important prizes and drop them from the sky on their baffled recipients? You definitely won’t catch the Africans, Arabs, Indians, or Chinese going in for this sport.


The term Nationalism—as it is known outside of the West—is mostly synonymous with the anti-colonialist and anti-imperialist sentiments of the 19th and 20th century, that is to say Nationalism from the perspective of an Asian, African, Middle Easterner or Latin American is not merely an affirmation of ethnic and cultural identity, but also the rejection of White colonial or imperial authority, and to a certain degree, white culture.


There's a great sketch by the British comedy duo Mitchell and Webb, where they play two members of an SS division. During a lull in the fighting on the Eastern Front, the Mitchell Nazi turns to the Webb Nazi and says, "Have you looked at the badges on our caps recently?" before announcing, "They’ve got skulls on them!!!" I was reminded of this scene when I read Alex Kurtagic's otherwise excellent article "Women on the Left" and saw that his composite photo of female right-wing paragons included an undue amount of Nazi eye candy.


London's burning.

by Colin Liddell

Thanks to the Metropolitan Police's ridiculous policy of appeasement, a large part of North London resembles a bombed out scene from the 1940 Blitz following a night of rioting by the city's Afro-Caribbean "community." The riots started after about 300 people gathered outside a police station in the gang-infested area and demanded "justice" following a shooting incident in which a policeman and a suspected gang member were both shot in what appears to have been an exchange of fire.


Some occurrences have a touch of unreality about them. They seem so unlikely that an alternative explanation must be in order. Indeed, last week’s Oslo massacre has many speculating about a vast conspiracy of some sort orchestrated by a shadowy, all-powerful cabal to manipulate world opinion in some nefarious manner.

Yet the simplest explanation of events—however seemingly outlandish—is usually the parsimonious one. Thus, it appears that Anders Behring Breivik—this preening 32-year-old Nordic pretty boy with a narcissistic proclivity to photograph himself playing dress-up—really did commit one of the worst atrocities in recent Scandinavian history all by his lonesome.


The issue of gay “marriage”—so perpetually in the news these days—in itself little concerns me. I find the very notion grotesquely absurd, but then it’s really no skin off my reactionary Catholic nose if men want to live with other men or women with other women in arrangements that they consider to be, in some warped way, “matrimonial.”

I am, of course, troubled by certain patently totalitarian aspects of the homo matrimonio crusade, which I have already discussed at length, but I’ve really got no serious beef with gays who seek only to “live and let live,” and don’t intend to harass the rest of the world into acceptance or approval of their behavior. I’m far too much of a solitary-dwelling, crusty-crabbed curmudgeon to get the least bit exercised over what other people are doing with their genitalia. I don’t really want to know—I won’t ask, so please don’t tell. But in the privacy of your homes, or bathhouses…whatever, man. Just keep it far away from me.


Across Europe ethno-nationalist parties have been making considerable gains, but in Britain, one of the countries most threatened by mass immigration, multi-culturalism, and the liberal fascist thought crime legislation needed to maintain this unnatural state, the main ethno-nationalist party, the BNP, has been failing miserably.


There are those who would joke that it's no surprise that the French are good at running. But humor aside, it is great to see Christophe Lemaitre win the gold medal in the 100 meters sprint at the latest European Athletic Team Championships. His blistering run, in which he clocked up a personal best, not only saw him add to the European Athletic Championship title he won last year, but also helped to further undermine the myth that only Blacks of West African descent can compete at the top level in sprinting.


Recently, White Nationalists have touted Metal—particularly Black Metal—as a uniquely Caucasoid sound, one which has the power to unearth the badass fury of proud, salt-of-the-earth, put-upon honky folk in an age of mounting multicultural tyranny and insufferably smarmy media-enforced White guilt.

These writers probably have a point, in a way. It seems to me, though, that what’s uncouth remains uncouth, whether it sports gold teeth, a Flava-Flav necklace-watch and sagging britches, or moon boots, a Def Leppard T-shirt and a mullet. That is to say, a nigger is a nigger, whether he’s Black or White


Trying to poz Bibi's Negev hole?

by Colin Liddell

What’s Super Autocue-reading Boy up to this time? A couple of weeks after unleashing his “Seals of Death” against the Bearded-but-almost-forgotten One, which was one week after unleashing his recently re-remembered Hawaiian birth chit, he now comes out, 1960s-Batman-style, with a new, shiny, Middle-Eastern peace plan that looks set to upset the Jewish lobby—Biff!Zap!Bam! Kapow!

Is this more evidence of the “chaos theory” that Igor Shishkin says lies at the heart of American foreign policy? The simple, low maintenance theory for all this is that Obama is simply making pointless “feel good” sound bites, with those pulling his strings knowing full well that a reversion to Israel’s pre-1967 borders has as much chance as a snowball in the Negev (85 percent of which is used by the Israeli military for training purpose). May as well send a train down a track without any sleepers.

A slightly more abstruse theory is that the White House’s “Big Idea” at the moment is to place itself at the forefront of the Arab Spring, even though this might deprive the Democrats of some of the more naïve shekels.


by Colin Liddell

In 1935, the Austrian physicist Erwin Schrödinger conceived a famous thought experiment known as Schrödinger’s Cat to express a paradox that exists between unverified states in quantum mechanics. The basic idea Schrödinger wished to ridicule was that with two unobserved possibilities – in this case a cat in a box that was either dead or alive – both exist until the box is opened.


In the modern information overload society, you
only have two choices – to be a dupe or a crank

by Colin Liddell
"God bless America! That evil, murdering scumbag Osama Bin Laden has been sent to meet his maker, Allah, and get his 72 virgin goats to fuck. May he rot/ burn/ boil/ marinade in hell, etc., etc., etc."
But before we get too carried away, a couple of points:
  1. Were you there? And even if you were the hired help paid to dance around in a balaclava and shoot off blanks, do you actually know what was going on?
  2. Does the American government ever lie about, twist, or distort the truth?
Without going into the numerous inconsistencies of the 9/11 story and the oddities of this case, like the fact that the body was quickly dumped in the sea, past instances of blatant deceit, like the WMD farrago that preceded the invasion of Iraq and more recent lies about Libya, should at least make us wary of swallowing anything originating from the U.S. government.


To paraphrase Harold Macmillan, a “wind of change” is blowing through Africa. But, unlike 1960, when the former British Prime Minister made his famous remark, the wind today is not that of a growing national consciousness in the mud huts and shanty-towns, but instead the stiff breeze of a new kind of Neocolonialism.

Already this year, we have seen significant events in three places: Sudan, Libya, and most recently Ivory Coast, where the country’s President, Laurent Gbagbo was successfully removed from power with the active military participation of France and the United Nations. In these three cases we can see the emerging lineaments of a new modus operandi in Africa, one that secretly recognizes the limitations of African society, and under a false flag of humanitarian concern ruthlessly exploits what the continent has to offer.


In his hilarious, horrifying, and profoundly insightful short book The Screwtape Letters, C.S. Lewis assumes the persona of a mid-level administrative demon in Hell instructing his cousin, a guardian Devil on Earth, in the myriad ways to steer his client down the slick and well-trod road to damnation. At one point, the infernal bureaucrat narrator exults at just how cleverly demonic propagandists have trained the foolish humans to be on guard against the very type of wrongdoing that is least likely to happen in a given era’s Zeitgeist:
"The use of Fashions in thought is to distract the attention of men from their real dangers. We direct the fashionable outcry of each generation against those vices of which it is least in danger and fix its approval on the virtue nearest to that vice which we are trying to make endemic… Cruel ages are put on their guard against Sentimentality, feckless and idle ones against Respectability, lecherous ones against Puritanism; and whenever all men are really hastening to be slaves or tyrants, we make Liberalism the prime bogey."
Currently, a fashionable outcry has arisen in chic circles against the sadly ubiquitous phenomenon known as “bullying.” While many people are, no doubt, sincerely opposed to wanton acts of cruelty and humiliation by the strong and well-placed against the weak and vulnerable, one must nevertheless be aware that taking a political stand against bullying is, at best, a bland, empty gesture, much like opposing drunk-driving, homelessness, child abuse, or pollution; worse, it is quite often a brazenly fraudulent stance, since bullies as such are in reality not the true target of most contemporary “anti-bullying” campaigns. Instead, certain political interest groups have hit upon the idea of characterizing their opponents as ipso facto “bullies,” simply because they have the temerity to oppose what is so obviously right and true (gay marriage, legalized abortion, or some other ideological hobbyhorse), which can only be a result of hateful and repugnant motives, the same kind of mean senior football jock to steal a puny ninth-grader’s lunch money and shove him in his locker.


I have a confession to make. Despite contributing fairly regularly to this much demonized “extreme right-wing” publication, I’m really a rather bland moderate, possessed of unexceptional ideas. In fact, you could best describe me as a bit of a fuddy-duddy; strictly a pipe, slippers, and cocoa sort of guy as far as politics is concerned. If I have a true comfort zone, it is the white line running down the middle of the road that we all happen to be travelling on.

This probably sounds like I’m denying the old tried, tested, and time-worn political categories, and I know there are many who wouldn’t blame me if I ditched this terminology derived from 18th-century French parliamentary seating arrangements, but, no, not this week. For me there still is a Right, a Left, and a Centre; and my favourite locale is the latter, which means I’m very far from the “extreme Right”!


Just like most countries in the West, the United Kingdom has now become a “moral welfare state” (MWS). Just like the socio-economic version, this involves helping those deficient in some way by imposing a kind of levy on the general population. Indeed, revealing the Left’s far greater success in the cultural realm than the economic, it could even be said that the MWS has made considerable progress and that now moral communism exists in the UK, where people live according to the dictum:
From each according to his morality, to each according to his depravity.


Jews trying not to have their backs against the wall.

by Colin Liddell

Ellison Lodge’s attempt to bring order to the debate about Jewish nationalism and influence in America was very laudable and plausible. His categories have the appearance of fairness and balance, which is an achievement in an area that generates so much “heat” and miasma.

His four categories also have a pleasing symmetry and simplicity that almost reminded me of Newton’s laws of planetary motion. However, after a few days rolling them around in various portions of my rather convoluted and un-geometrical mind, I couldn’t help thinking that they made the classic Western (or White) intellectual error of equivalence, which is treating things as if they all exist on the same plane.


by Ellison Lodge

The crux of Byron Roth's disagreement with Kevin MacDonald is essentially that Prof. MacDonald makes criticisms of Israeli nationalism that he would never make about European peoples. This critique is frequently leveled against Patrick Buchanan by writers like Larry Auster.


The real wild man of rock.

I’ve been a U2 fan since the 1980s. But one thing that has continually bothered me over the years, as I am sure it has a considerable number of my fellow fans, is Bono’s extracurricular urge to be seen as some sort of Messiah figure, especially as his moral compass is about as accurate as a sundial in a coalmine.

Over the years, this has not only led him to pen some naïve and cringeworthy lyrics, but, in the latest case, has seen him flirt with the genocidal ideology of Marxist ANC extremists, who, egged on by the anti-White racism implicit in the international Marxist movement, believe in butchering all Whites in South Africa.

During a recent interview Bono suggested that ANC chants like “Kill the Boer” and “Bring Me My Machine Gun” had a legitimate place in South African culture, demonstrating gross naïvety or something worse.


While the multiple Oscar-nominated film The King’s Speech may be called a passably entertaining period piece, it is far from being a great movie. The fact that this film has won such overwhelmingly effusive plaudits from the Academy and critical establishment does, however, raise a fascinating question: Can a filmmaker, by referencing every acceptable cinematic “meme” and dishing out all the requisite thematic “tropes,” succeed at manipulating supposedly educated and erudite people into thinking that his film is far better than it actually is?

Put differently, can a mediocre and forgettable flick come to be regarded as “excellent” if it tells the chattering class exactly what it wants to hear and shows it just what it aches to see?


Contrary to what most of the pundits are saying, the recent Oldham East and Saddleworth by-election in the UK was very revealing about the state and direction of British politics.

With Labour winning a seat they have held since its inception (42 percent of the vote), the Liberal-Democrats coming second with a marginally increased percentage of the vote (31.9 percent), and the Conservative vote being squeezed in a seat they had little hope of winning (12.8 percent), political commentators have been left with little of interest to remark on. But this is because they have been ignoring yet again the increasingly important substratum of British politics and how it impacts on the top flight.