OVERSEAS AID

It has now emerged that India does not even want the aid which the Liberal Democrat/Tory coalition government is lavishing that country. India was the largest net recipient of aid in 2010. Pranab Mukherjee told the Indian parliament:

'We do not require the aid. It is a peanut in our total development
spending.'

It has been revealed that British officials begged India to accept the aid:

'They said British ministers had spent political capital justifying the aid to their electorate. They said that it would be highly embarrassing if [India] pulled the plug.'

This is a truly disgraceful state of affairs, that scarce resources are being squandered on this scale simply to make a bunch of wet liberals look good.

The Tory MP Peter Bone said:

'India has its own foreign aid programme so it is absurd for us to be giving them aid. They are more than capable of looking after their own issues.

As for the 0.7% target, it is a vanity project that is being pursued for no good reason at all. I do not understand the Government's position on this and I don't think the British public do either.'

QUOTE OF THE MONTH

'The capitalists will sell us the rope with which we will hang them.'

- Lenin

This quote is worth remembering bearing in mind the news that British employers are advertising many thousands of jobs in Romania despite the high levels of unemployment at home. Jobs such as taxi drivers and even junior doctors are being advertised, despite, for example, there being an estimated 3,000 unemployed junior doctors in the Britain.

The Forum for Private Business is trotting out the usual cliches about there being a shortage of skilled workers, poor numeracy and literacy and a poor attitude. These anti-English insults should be ignored. The employers are recruiting foreigners because they can hire people at a lower wage than they might otherwise have to pay; they also believe that being pro-mass immigration makes them look good.

Once again it is the English taxpayer who has to pay for this. It is the English taxpayer who has to cover the cost of extra demands on essential services [eg schools and the NHS] and the other costs of mass immigration such as the needless levels of unemployment.

THE NATION STATE

There has been some talk in certain quarters about a crisis of capitalism. Even David Cameron has spoken of the need to make capitalism work and the Financial Times has been conducting a Capitalism in Crisis debate.

Last week BBC weighed in with an edition of Newsnight devoted to the issue. The Newsnight slant was to raise the issue of whether or not Marxism was an alternative. Ellie Mae O’Hagan, from UK Uncut, opined that socialism had been discredited as people had been conditioned by the Cold War and Stalinism. We were then treated to an interview with Eric Hobsbawm, a longstanding Marxist historian and communist apologist. Jeremy Paxman asked that ‘when we see capitalism clearly in crisis in the West now’ why was there no Marxist solution. Eric Hobsbawm’s response was that Marxism was a definition of problems that we need to deal with, and that he was pessimistic for the future that the next 20-30 years held.

There then followed a debate between Danny Finkelstein, Tristram Hunt MP [Labour], and Julie Meyer [an entrepreneur]. Tristram Hunt believed that the parameters of the debate are centre-Left and progressive. Julie Meyer defended capitalism and made the point that the government needed tax revenues and that you cannot tax a loss [a point made long ago by Enoch Powell, see the English Rights Campaign item dated the 3 May 2005]. Tristram Hunt went on the say that the capitalist model in Brazil, India and China was different from that of Western Europe and that Marx’s great achievement was to historicize capitalism.

Danny Finkelstein was unimpressed by the reverential awe being expressed of Marxism and pointed out Eric Hobsbawm’s longstanding support of the Soviet Union, which Tristram Hunt dismissed as ‘trivial and facile points’. When Danny Finkelstein pointed out that the Soviet Union ran short of paper to draw up the lists of those to be executed there were so many, Tristram Hunt dismissed this as ‘Sixth Form debating points’, proceeded to say that ‘the models of socialism that were implemented were very different to Marxist thinking’ and even quoted from Engels, although he did acknowledge that Marxism was not an alternative in the sense that we would return to the Marxian model of the 1850s. Tristram Hunt said that he favoured a John Lewis model economy.

There was a general consensus that the economy had been focused too much on the City and the financial sector.

There are several points to be made in response to this. Firstly, Marxism is a bloodthirsty revolutionary creed and not some intellectual attempt to understand the meaning of capitalism [see the English Rights Campaign item dated the 27 April 2005]. Secondly, the fact that more than 100million people were killed in the name of communism in the 20th century is being glossed over. Communism, of whatever sect of pretended intellectual status, is a vile and evil creed. Thirdly, the Bolshevik Broadcasting Corporation does not understand this. Would we expect to see Nazis on Newsnight opining that the Hitler model of Nazism was not true Nazism?

Fourthly, the agenda of the debate is being set to exclude the real culprits of the crisis which we undoubtedly face: globalization, including mass immigration and the EU. In capitalism a business failure does not necessitate the state staking the entire country’s wealth behind bailing out the failed business, and yet that is precisely what the British ruling class have done with the banks, whose overseas lending was in large part the cause of their demise. Yet the global economy has not bailed them out, it is the English taxpayer who has had to bail them out. Likewise, it is the national taxpayer who is has to fund the Welfare State which is now catering for a variety of nationalities, ditto the NHS. Mass immigration is ruinous to the country as a whole and the economy, and the determination to repopulate England with non-English peoples is incompatible with the survival of the English nation. The less said of the EU and the Eurozone the better, but once again it is the English taxpayer who has to meet the bills which keep piling in.

In short it is not a crisis of capitalism. It is a crisis of the nation state. It is the refusal of the British ruling class to defend the national interest that is the problem.

It is also to be noted that some alleged racially insensitive comment by a white person is denounced loudly to the point of hysteria, yet apologising for and/or glossing over communist genocide is seen as acceptable. This is the morality of the British ruling class.

QUOTE OF THE MONTH

'The fact is that a vast sum of money is going on a single upmarket project whose chief feature is its extravagant glamour. HS2 is gesture spending dressed up as growth. It is Concorde for slow learners.'

- Simon Jenkins

THE FRINGE EFFECT

The recent Feltham and Heston by-election has again revealed the collapse of the Liberal Democrat vote. This time they did just fend off UKIP who came fourth, polling 5.49% to the Liberal Democrat vote of 5.87% - 1,276 votes to 1,364 votes. By comparison the BNP polled 540 [2.33%] and the English Democrats polled 322 [1.39%].

Although UKIP failed to beat the Liberal Democrats, once again UKIP has demonstrated that it is polling better than the other two right-of-centre fringe parties.

Until recently UKIP has failed to poll well in elections other than the EU elections with proportional representation. UKIP has failed to poll well in local elections and can usually be beaten, almost casually, by both the BNP and the English Democrats.

UKIP is now pondering whether or not to support the campaign for an English Parliament. That they are taking a long time to re-examine their stance shows that many, if not a majority, in the party are opposed to an English Parliament and shows the angst that UKIP have over diluting their current single issue message.

Even if they do embrace the English Parliament issue then this would not necessarily make UKIP English nationalists. It is possible to support the calls for an English Parliament on democratic and constitutional grounds only. True English nationalism goes beyond that and UKIP does have an ambiguous stance regarding immigration and political correctness, to put it mildly [e.g. see the English Rights Campaign items dated 4 May 2005 and 17 November 2006]. Adherence to political correctness and mass immigration is incompatible with English nationalism.

QUOTE OF THE MONTH

‘Political unity, right or wrong, good or bad, is incompatible with national independence. The will to bring Britain into the Community is the will to give that independence up. Each one of us must take his own resolve. I can only say what is mine. I do not believe this nation, which has maintained and defended its independence for a thousand years, will now submit to see it merged or lost. Nor did I become a member of our sovereign parliament in order to consent to that sovereignty being abated or transferred. Come what may, I cannot and I will not.’

Enoch Powell

THE EU

David Cameron’s refusal to agree to the proposals being dictated to him by our EU partners [as they are continually styled] has not stopped the movement towards fiscal union [ie the economic policies of all EU countries being dictated by Germany] nor has it saved the City from EU regulation, which the our EU partners intend to impose by Qualified Majority Voting in due course anyway.

It is to be noted that it was the interests of the City which finally provoked the British veto, not the interests of the other sectors of the economy [such as fishing], nor the preservation of our democracy and sovereignty.

While Nick Clegg and some other Liberal Democrats initially supported David Cameron’s stand, their rapid U-turn has discredited them. The reactions of some Liberal Democrats have verged on the hysterical in their craven pro-EU stance.

The Bolshevik Broadcasting Corporation has been dismissive of the use of the veto and references to the national interest present it as something sordid. For a nationalized national broadcaster dependent on national monies from the ordinary people whose interests and values it holds in such contempt, this snooty approach is a wonder to behold. Perhaps the English people should no longer insult the BBC with their licence fee monies and allow the BBC to rely upon the EU for its funding?

Meanwhile, the case for the exit from the EU is not being properly put. The Tories, even some of the Eurosceptic ones, are keen to set out the supposed benefits of EU membership and how determined they are to remain in the EU. In particular they continue to assert that we have to be in the EU in order to have free trade with the EU. That is untrue.

One thing the veto does do is to increase the prospects of a referendum on the EU. Such would certainly be a way of parking the issue and allowing the public to decide rather than allowing the coalition government, which is divided on the matter, to pull itself apart.

Be there no doubt, the only way to safeguard our national interests is to leave the EU. So much power has already been conceded that we cannot solve our problems without leaving, as the determination of our EU partners to foist regulations and taxes onto the City via Qualified Majority Voting will prove.

Of more immediate concern is that David Cameron has been very eager to donate many tens of £billions to the IMF in full knowledge that those monies will be pumped into propping up the Euro. Even now, the Eurozone countries are plotting to get their hands on IMF money rather than use their own.

If we remain in the EU then:

1. We will continue to be ruled from the EU

2. We will continue to pay £15billion each year to the EU and will face the renewed attacks to completely abolish the rebate

3. We will face further demands to pay yet more £10billions to bail out the Euro

4. We will see the collapse in our fishing stocks and the decimation of our fishing fleet

5. We will be sucked into a new EU foreign and defence policy

6. We will be required to increase mass immigration to allow unlimited Turkish immigrants into this country with Turkish accession to the EU [NB the Tories are very keen for Turkey to join the EU]

7. Rules, regulations and general bureaucracy will continue to be imposed on us by Qualified Majority Voting

8. We will continue to be in a minority within the EU [as the present crisis has demonstrated]

9. We will witness the steady erosion of what little democracy and freedoms remain and the continued destruction of our national culture

10. WE WILL BE ABSORBED INTO A UNITED STATES OF EUROPE

If we leave the EU then:

1. We will be able to restrict our relationship with the EU to one of free trade only

2. We will escape from the Common Agricultural Policy and cut food prices

3. We will escape from the Common Fisheries Policy and be able to reclaim our territorial waters and fishing grounds – our fishing industry will boom, creating substantial employment

4. We will be able to stop paying £15billion each year to the EU

5. We will be able to repeal the bureaucracy that is strangling our economy

6. We will be able to properly re-establish border controls and end mass immigration

7. No more laws will be imposed on us from the EU, particularly we will be able to escape the so-called human rights nonsense

8. We will be able to manage our economy for the benefit of our nation, in particular, we will be able to move towards full employment by re-establishing a properly functioning national labour market

9. We will recover full control of our defence and foreign policy

10. WE WILL RECOVER FULL NATIONAL SOVEREIGNTY

THE EU

The Liberal Democrat/Tory coalition government has taken a supine approach to the Eurozone crisis. The Liberal Democrats are of course pro-EU and want a United States of Europe. The Tories are divided on the issue although the leadership, in particular David Cameron, is much more pro-EU than they would wish to admit.

In a recent speech, Nick Clegg said:

'No frontbencher in the coalition is talking about unilateral repatriation of powers from the European Union. Why? Because it simply is not possible - it does not work like that. We have to seek agreement with 26 other countries to get that repatriation. The idea that one can simply get on to the Brussels Eurostar, go over to Brussels and come back with a bag load of powers is simply not feasible.'

What Nick Clegg has pointed out is true. He is simply stating facts. What he is saying may not be palatable but that does not alter the accuracy of what he has said. In reality, there is no way that Britain can reclaim any significant powers from the EU, given the determination of the other EU countries to proceed with their integrationist project, and given the necessity for unanimity to achieve a treaty change.

The reality is that the only feasible policy is to leave the EU. There is no alternative. This fact particularly impacts upon the prospect of a referendum on the relationship with the EU. Presently, the suggested questions to be put to the electorate include a sort of middle option of renegotiating our membership with the EU and staying a part of it. This daydream might sound very nice and moderate, but it is a fraud.

There will be no renegotiated relationship for the reasons that Nick Clegg has set out. What would happen were the electorate to vote for this option and it was ostensibly pursued, is that the option would fail and the British ruling class would continue as before, with the result that we would continue to see our freedoms, rights and monies given away, and our country would continue to be absorbed into the EU superstate.

THE ONLY ALTERNATIVE IS TO LEAVE THE EU.

What is now needed is leadership to set out the merits of leaving the EU, and to disown any lure of a fraudulant fudge of a renegotiated EU membership that can never happen. We need the leadership to encourage the English to make a stand, something that Ian Smith pointed out was always very difficult [see the English Rights Campaign item dated the 15 April 2005].

QUOTE OF THE MONTH

'Indeed the entire history of the relentless expansion of the EU's powers since we joined what was then the Common Market in 1973 has been a tale of brazen deceit, broken promises and disenfranchisement of the electorate by all three major political parties.

Remember Labour's 2005 manifesto pledge on the new European Constitution? "We will put it to the British people in a referendum." Nothing, surely, could have been more unequivocal. Yet when it came to signing the Lisbon Treaty, in which the new constitution was enshrined, Gordon Brown conveniently forgot about it. Or, rather, he fobbed off the public with the monstrous lie that Lisbon (referred to in official documents as "the Constitutional Treaty") was not, in fact, a European Constitution at all.

The Tories and Lib Dems were no better. Both promised explicitly to put the Constitution to a referendum. But as soon as they were in a position to do so, they smirked and said: "No point now. Lisbon's been signed."

Wherever Europe is concerned, there's always some snivelling shyster's excuse, some weasel-worded legalistic technicality seized on by the politicians to wriggle out of their commitment to give the public their say. (And these days, when all else fails, there's always that catch-all standby: "Sorry, old boy. The Coalition agreement won't allow it.")

So it is that, one by one, the ancient powers of Britain's once sovereign Parliament, paid for by the blood of our ancestors, slip away to Brussels - into the hands of unaccountable European Commision, where voters will never be able to touch them again ...

Meanwhile in the Continent's capitals, the Europhile political class pushes its ambitions ever further, enmeshing one nation after another in its anti-democratic web.'

- a recent Daily Mail editorial.

THE CULTURE OF CRIMINALITY

The recent collapse in law and order, followed by its eventual reinstatement, is the direct and inevitable consequence of the culture of criminality which has been promoted by the British ruling class. In 2006, even David Cameron was speaking out in support of hoodies who had been barred from the Bluewater Shopping Centre; they had been banned because hoodies had been using their hoods to hide their identities while committing crimes [see the English Rights Campaign item dated the 16 July 2006].

More devastating is the judiciary's open promotion of promotion of serious criminality. Judges have grandstanded their so-called human rights credentials in order to keep immigrant murderers, rapists, drug-dealers etc. in this country and not deport them back to their own countries. This last week, one illegal immigrant drug-dealer, who has already been deported twice before and has been using fake identities and false passports, had his sentence lowered specifically in order to help him stay here and not be deported again. Furthermore, there is the constant stream of English taxpayers' monies being funnelled into organised crime via the immigration system. The majority of illegal immigrants enter this country with the assistance of organised crime [Tony Blair told the European Parliament that: 'It is estimated that 70% of illegal immigrants have their passage facilitated by organised crime groups'] and their ability to stay here, even when their illegal presence is exposed, merely provides a good living for organised crime and an incentive for further people smuggling. Scotland Yard has even employed terrorists [see the English Rights Campaign item dated the 18 December 2008].

Recently, Lambeth council spent scarce resources to celebrate the Brixton Riots of 1981 as being the 'Brixton Uprising':

'To mark the 30th anniversary of the 1981 Brixton Uprising there will be a special event held at Windrush Square and Brixton Tate library on Sunday 10th April, 2011. Starting at 12 noon in Windrush Square and then from 1pm inside Brixton Tate library, the event will hear first hand witness accounts from members of the public on the Uprising, performances from special guests including LINTON KWESI JOHNSON, moving images and sound clips from radio and news archives, photographic stills on display and an opportunity for the public to relate their own testimonies of the Uprising to be recorded and archived by the Black Cultural Archive.'

Linton Kwesi Johnson is a Jamaican ‘dub poet’, whose work contains graphic descriptions of alleged police brutality during the 1980s, including one entitled ‘Ingland is a Bich’. No doubt a revisionist history of the recent looting will portray the looters as oppressed freedom fighters.

The tolerance of open vote rigging has corrupted our democracy. The dishonesty of the constituency boundaries and the open constitutional fix of the devolution imposed on England against the English breeds contempt. The less said of the dishonesty and criminality of British politicians and their expenses the better.

Economically, we do not have an economic policy. We have a banking policy. Bankers, who have laid waste our economy, continue to live the millionaire lifestyle courtesy of the English taxpayers' monies used to bail them out. The banks are not lending to small businesses and have not passed on the low interest rates. The coalition is happy for the banks to profit from charging excessive interest rates and refuse to insist that the national interest, and the interests of ordinary people, come first.

The Tory/Liberal Democrat coalition government's priority is to dramatically expand the size of the overseas aid budget, despite overseas aid being used to make payments to the families of suicide bombers in Palestine and despite the disappearance of aid money into corrupt politicians bank accounts and property portfolios. The president of the Democratic Republic of Congo owns no less than 16 of the most luxurious flats and houses in Paris! Aid to Rwanda is to be increased by 57% despite the president's repression of political opponents and despite a UN report detailing the appalling war crimes committed by the Tutsi army.

The Tory/Liberal Democrat coalition government is not satisfied with lavishing English taxpayers' monies on British banks, but have likewise made substantial handouts to Irish banks and to bail out the Eurozone, even though we are not a member of it. Our economy is haemorrhaging more than £3billion a year as Polish immigrants send monies back to Poland. Immigrants are taking 3 in 4 of all new jobs, a trend that has increased under the Tory/Liberal Democrat coalition government.

Meanwhile, the hapless David Starkey has found himself a victim of the British Inquisition for have the temerity to refer to Enoch Powell and to suggest that 'a substantial section of chavs … have become black. A particularly sort of violent, destructive, nihilistic gangster culture has become the fashion'. Starkey's contrasted this fashion with a more responsible attitude held by the majority. Needless to say, the British Inquisition has condemned Starkey as being racist.

As with the terror attacks, there will be some huffing and puffing from the British ruling class, nothing lasting will be done, and then it will be a return to business as usual. Ordinary people will continue to lose their jobs due to the policy of mass immigration; David Cameron has previously stated that he considers immigrants pouring into England to take jobs as 'a good thing' [see the English Rights Campaign item dated the 16 October 2006].

David Cameron has pronounced that we not only have a broken society, but that part of it is 'sick'. But what has caused this sick element? English society used to be settled and peaceful. It is the onslaught of political correctness that has caused the breakdown in our society. The riots and looting we have witnessed are the true face of political correctness, which David Cameron thinks is a good thing as it encourages politeness [see the English Rights Campaign item dated 15 November 2005].

It is the political correctness of the British ruling class that needs to be confronted and there are no signs of that happening. It is the British ruling class that is sick.