English Rights Campaign

to defend the rights and interests of the English nation

Thursday, December 01, 2016

A word to the criminal muslim migrants flooding Europe right now

"You aren't laughing anymore, are you?" - Donald Trump - Deplorables Remix

Saturday, November 26, 2016


'In a study of growth in Western economies since the war, from which he hoped to draw lessons for the U.K., [Nicholas] Kaldor argued that the rate of growth of a modern economy is fundamentally determined by the rate of growth of output per worker in manufacturing, and that this, in turn, is determined by the rate of growth of demand for manufactures. In these two straightforward propositions, Kaldor synthesised the central insights of the classical economists and of Keynes, and verified the peculiar role of manufacturing. He also made clear why productivity growth is a characteristic of manufacturing as a whole. As a particular manufacturing industry grows, its operations can be broken down into a number of specialist activities. This division of labour both increases output per worker in that industry and spills over into other industries. A new specialist toolmaker, for example, may as well provide tools for the motor trade as for textile machinery. So, in a modern industrial country, all sectors are closely linked to each other. One industry's output is another industry's input, and their destinies cannot be separated.
          Growth of demand for manufactures may come from growth either of the home or of the overseas market. In most countries it is the growth of the home market which is the major factor, for not only is the home market by far the dominant element in total demand – typically 80 per cent or more of the output of manufacturing industry is sold at home – but foreign markets are, by definition, less easy to manipulate. A country which relies heavily on export demand to maintain its rate of growth is likely to be dangerously exposed to the slings and arrows of world-market fortunes. So, although a high rate of growth of export demand can be a major stimulus, a high level of foreign trade is no guarantee of success. Of Britain's total domestic production from all industries, 18 per cent comprises exports of manufactures. The corresponding figure for Japan is only 9 per cent.
          … High growth of demand gives productivity growth, which, via price and non-price factors, gives competitive success, which in turn gives high growth of demand, which gives productivity, which gives competitiveness – and so on and so on. This is the principle of cumulative causation.
          The system can work in reverse too. Low growth of demand gives low productivity growth, which gives competitive failure, which gives low growth of demand, which gives low productivity growth … downhill all the way. A country which grows relatively slowly will see its relative position decline as others capture its markets at home and abroad. In the market system zero growth, however ecologically desirable, is impossible. For zero growth begets low productivity growth and so erodes the competitive position of industry until demands falls away completely and zero becomes negative: a recipe for clean air and human misery.
          When demand for manufactures ceases to grow, productivity may still rise as old factories are shut down – even though no new ones are built. Suppose, for example, that the whole of British industry were shut down apart from the Fawley oil refinery on Southampton Water where the value of the output of refined products per worker is enormous. At a stroke output per worker employed (and there wouldn't be many workers) would rise more rapidly than anywhere in the world. Then it would stop rising, for there would be no other factories left to close. Reducing the number of workers on out-of-date machines yields similarly limited productivity gains. This degenerate productivity growth occurs in most slumps and is just what has happened to British industry over the last couple of years, as large sections of British manufacturing have been closed. It is the swansong of a dying industry. Britain may be the best in the world at producing Rolls-Royces, but this will hardly be much good in the battle with Volkswagen, Renault and Datsun.
          It is one of the enduring fallacies of economics, shared by economists of left and right alike, that market economics are revitalised by a slump to emerge “leaner and fitter”. Lean certainly, fit perhaps – fit, and out of date. Reconstruction, which requires investment, takes place in a boom. It is the dynamic of growing economies that ensures true productivity growth. In the market economy the principle of cumulative causation ensures that success breeds success and failure breeds failure.'

– Lord Eatwell, as he now is, writing in 1982 in his book Whatever Happened to Britain?, in which he argued for a more protectionist trade policy.

Although the point made by Lord Eatwell may be sound, it should be recalled that 'Throughout the 1980s British manufacturing firms prioritised dividend payments in preference to R&D; with profits rising 6% a year, dividends rising by 12% a year, while investment rising by 2% a year' (see The Ponzi Class: Ponzi Economics, Globalization and Class Oppression in the 21st Century, chapter 8 The Monetarist Experiment, by Michael William – available from Amazon, Kindle and direct from CreateSpace). Manufacturing output in Britain continues to fall.

It is truly remarkable that in reporting the Autumn Statement from the Chancellor, Philip Hammond, while much has been said of the ballooning government debt and the continuing failure to reduce the government spending deficit, nothing has been said about the balance of trade deficit.

Saturday, November 12, 2016


‘I would respectfully say to my beloved European friends and colleagues that it's time that we snapped out of the general doom and gloom about the result of this election and collective “whinge-o-rama” that seems to be going on in some places.’
-       Boris Johnson, speaking about the recent Donald Trump victory in the US presidential election.

Wednesday, November 09, 2016


Despite all the poll predictions, and the self-satisfied confidence of the Hillary Clinton campaign, Donald Trump has decisively won the US presidential elections. Rarely, has a campaign been so bitterly fought or more deservedly won.
The English Rights Campaign item dated 5th March 2016 highlighted the similarity between the USA's current predicament and that of Britain at the start of the 20th century, and drew a cautious comparison between Donald Trump and Joseph Chamberlain. That comparison is merited by the campaign victory. The Donald can genuinely be credited as being possibly the greatest campaigner and political strategist in the history of democratic politics. He has further pulled together a team of capable people around him, and together they have built 'a movement'. This 'movement' needs to be sustained.
Clinton offered crude political correctness. She was contemptuous of those she demonized as 'deplorables' (see the English Rights Campaign item dated the 12th October 2016). She prattled about a glass ceiling and assumed that for her to be the first female US president would be a favour to the American people. In the event, the ordinary Americans prioritised patriotism, were determined to Make America Great Again, and voted to tackle the problems surrounding the trade deficit and illegal immigration.

If a Trump administration can now deliver, then the American people have a hope of putting a stop to the political correctness, and associated issues (in particular immigration and race war politics), that has been imposed upon them. They have the prospect of a better economic future in a proud, patriotic and booming America.

Monday, November 07, 2016


'I am so tired of this politically correct crap.'
– Donald Trump
As the US presidential campaign reaches its climax, Donald Trump has stuck to his guns regarding both immigration control and the need for trade reform. To end mass immigration and to bring trade back into balance would transform the US economy for the better. Well paid manufacturing jobs would no longer be transferred abroad, and the end of mass immigration would stop the downward pressure on wages as well as to ease the strain on public services and housing.
These two policies are reason alone to vote for The Donald.
All Hillary Clinton has to offer is more political correctness.

Saturday, November 05, 2016


Below is an extract from a speech made by Donald Trump in Phoenix on the 1 September 2016, on the issue of immigration:

DONALD TRUMP: I am going to ask — these are really special people that I’ve gotten to know. I’m going to ask all of the “Angel Moms” to come join me on the stage right now.
These are amazing women.
These are amazing people.
I’ve become friends with so many. But Jamiel Shaw, incredible guy, lost his son so violently. Say just a few words about your child.
(SPEAKER’S VOICE): My son Ronald da Silva (ph) was murdered April 27, 2002 by an illegal alien who had been previously deported. And what so — makes me so outrageous is that we came here legally.
Thank you, Mr. Trump. I totally support you. You have my vote.
TRUMP: Thank you, thank you.
(SPEAKER’S VOICE): God bless you.
TRUMP: You know what? Name your child and come right by. Go ahead.
(SPEAKER’S VOICE): Laura Wilkerson. And my son was Joshua Wilkerson. He was murdered by an illegal in 2010. And I personally support Mr. Trump for our next president.
(SPEAKER’S VOICE): My name is Ruth Johnston Martin (ph). My husband was shot by an illegal alien. He fought the good fight but he took his last breath in 2002. And I support this man who’s going to change this country for the better. God bless you.
(SPEAKER’S VOICE): My name Maureen Maloney (ph), and our son Matthew Denise (ph) was 23 years old when he was dragged a quarter of a mile to his death by an illegal alien, while horrified witnesses were banging on the truck trying to stop him.
(SPEAKER’S VOICE): Our son Matthew Denise, if Donald Trump were president in 2011, our son Matthew Denise and other Americans would be alive today.
(SPEAKER’S VOICE): Thank you. My name is Kathy Woods (ph). My son Steve (ph), a high school senior, 17 years old, went to the beach after a high school football game. A local gang came along, nine members. The cars were battered to — like war in Beirut. And all I can say is they murdered him and if Mr. Trump had been in office then the border would have been secure and our children would not be dead today.
(SPEAKER’S VOICE): Hi. My name is Brenda Sparks (ph), and my son is named Eric Zapeda (ph). He was raised by a legal immigrant from Honduras only to be murdered by an illegal in 2011. His murderer never did a second in handcuffs or jail. Got away with killing an American. So I’m voting for trump. And by the way, so is my mother.
(SPEAKER’S VOICE): My name is Dee Angle (ph). My cousin Rebecca Ann Johnston (ph), known as Becky, was murdered on January the 1st, 1989 in North Little Rock, Arkansas. Thank you. And if you don’t vote Trump, we won’t have a country. Trump all the way.
(SPEAKER’S VOICE): I’m Shannon Estes (ph). And my daughter Shaley Estes (ph), 22 years old, was murdered here in Phoenix last July 24 by a Russian who overstayed his visa. And vote Trump.
(SPEAKER’S VOICE): I’m Mary Ann Mendoza, the mother of Sergeant Brandon Mendoza, who was killed in a violent head-on collision in Mesa.
Thank you.
I want to thank Phoenix for the support you’ve always given me, and I want to tell you what. I’m supporting the man who will — who is the only man who is going to save our country, and what we our going to be leaving our children.
(SPEAKER’S VOICE): I’m Steve Ronnebeck, father of Grant Ronnebeck, 21 years old. Killed January 22, 2015 by an illegal immigrant who shot him in the face. I truly believe that Mr. Trump is going to change things. He’s going to fight for my family, and he’s going to fight for America.
TRUMP: These are amazing people, and I am not asking for their endorsement, believe me that. I just think I’ve gotten to know so many of them, and many more, from our group. But they are incredible people and what they’re going through is incredible, and there’s just no reason for it. Let’s give them a really tremendous hand.
That’s tough stuff, I will tell you. That is tough stuff. Incredible people.
So, now is the time for these voices to be heard. Now is the time for the media to begin asking questions on their behalf. Now is the time for all of us as one country, Democrat, Republican, liberal, conservative to band together to deliver justice, and safety, and security for all Americans.

Let’s fix this horrible, horrible, problem. It can be fixed quickly. Let’s our secure our border.

Thursday, November 03, 2016


In a programme shown recently on British Channel 4, 'Michael Moore in Trumpland', Michael Moore took the opportunity to produce some half-witted pro-Clinton propaganda. From its content, this was Michael Moore's own take.

The programme began with Michael Moore setting out some of the problems which were causing ordinary Americans much anger. He gave examples of the economic difficulties and the consequences of it and of the hardship caused. He specifically recalled an incident in which Donald Trump had threatened tariffs to some business bigwigs in response to American multinationals planning to move production abroad, and of the dumbstruck response of those bigwigs that someone had dared to stand up to them.

Michael Moore referred to Brexit and those he described as the 'Brexit States' in America. He drew a comparison with the anger behind Brexit and behind the support for Trump. He said that a vote for Trump might make people feel better for a few weeks. He referred to Britain's Brexit vote and then thundered 'and now they regret it'. He cited some Remoaner petition calling for another referendum. He said that were the Americans to vote for Trump, then after a brief euphoria it would be a case of 'and now your fucked' and all because 'you wanted to send a message'.

It should be made very clear that the British did not vote for Brexit because they 'wanted to send a message'. The Brexit voters meant it, and they most definitely not regret it. What they do regret is the government's prevarication regarding the repeal of the 1972 European Communities Act (which is the basis of membership of the EU). The Brexit voters are increasingly angry that their vote has not been acted upon.

As Michael Moore averred with his aforementioned recount of Trump confronting the multinational bigwigs, only Trump is prepared to robustly defend US economic interests. The Americans have nothing of which to be afraid other than their own doubts; and they have much to gain by bringing their trade back into balance.

Michael Moore's programme went steadily downhill from that point. His case for supporting Hillary Clinton was threadbare, if not infantile. He was dismissive of the concerns of the impact of mass immigration, and even dismissive of the concerns of ordinary white Americans that they are expected to become a minority. He thought that having a women president would be a good thing. He played an extract of a speech that Clinton had made as a 22-year-old, in which she spoke of fear. He lauded Clinton's career triumph in a sexist society. She risked having her bottom pinched.

And that was it!

One needs to keep a sense of proportion when being force fed mawkish propaganda from the feminist lobby. Many women may feel aggrieved at the restrictions they have had to face to succeed in their careers, but society has changed and continues to change to accommodate the changing role of women, in a more prosperous society with better healthcare and education. This is a process of civilization.

It should also be remembered that young men have also had their problems. Previous generations of young men had to face going over the top in World War One, or storming the beeches at Guadalcanal or Normandy, or fighting in the jungles of Vietnam. Many were unable to provide for themselves or their families during the 1930s Depression as they queued for a mug of soup.

Women too, have had more serious problems. To take Joseph Chamberlain (a wealthy man and the late Victorian era's greatest statesman) as an example. He was married three times. On Friday 16th October 1863, Chamberlain's first wife, Harriet, gave birth to Austen. Harriet became ill on Sunday and her condition rapidly deteriorated. Chamberlain was advised to prepare himself for the worst. On Tuesday Harriet said: 'Well, I have had a very happy life, and I am perfectly happy whichever way it is'. On Wednesday Harriet was delirious and she died just after midnight.

In February 1875, Chamberlain's second wife, Florence (who had already four children, Neville, Ida, Hilda and Ethel), gave birth to a child. The doctor remained all day and at 4.30pm came downstairs to confirm all was well. At 5pm Florence fainted and died. The child died hours later. Both were buried in the same coffin.

Not only is this a matter for women, as can be appreciated, Joseph Chamberlain was gutted by the loss of his wives. He went on to marry the American, Mary Endicott, in 1888. On her arrival in Birmingham, she was greeted by Chamberlain's supporters and friends and told: 'Madam, you have not come amongst strangers … “Dear lady, welcome home”.'

Thankfully, society has improved the lives of women, not least by advances made in medical care, and will continue to do so.

Michael Moore acknowledged Donald Trump’s determination to bring the USA’s trade back into balance, and that alone is reason to vote for him.