Tag: labour party

Which Way Forward?

Will Wright

The history of the British extremist Left

I have always believed that in any group of people, those individuals who are most sure of themselves will influence the rest of the group. In politics, a person who is convinced that he is right will influence someone who is not sure what he really believes.

When a convinced political type is placed among people who are already halfway towards agreeing with him, the job of winning them over should be so much easier.

When the Trotskyites infiltrated the Labour Party, in the 1970s, they formed an organised group, originally called the Militant Tendency. I believe that they influenced a lot of more moderate socialists and dragged the Labour Party leftwards.

The Militant was especially effective in recruiting the Labour Party Young Socialists. From a British Nationalist perspective, Labour Party Trotskyites were largely indistinguishable from Socialist Workers Party Trotskyites.

The ‘Entryist’ Trots were so successful that Neil Kinnock (himself very left-wing) had a tough job expelling all of them from the Labour Party. Outside of Labour, they formed the Socialist Party and were never as effective again.

A second attempt

Much more recently, a campaigning group within the Labour Party, called Momentum, threw its weight behind the leadership ambitions of Jeremy Corbyn. Corbyn was always careful to insist that he was a “democratic, mainstream socialist.”

Gormless Ed Milliband had changed Labour’s internal rules, so the rank-and-file members could elect the party’s leader. Corbyn was twice elected as leader, by a big majority.

Momentum had to avoid what Militant did and not identify too closely as a party within a party. But they were successful in enthusing left-wingers inside the party. The Labour Party was dragged leftwards, from an already left-wing position.

A personal experience

In the 1980s, I worked with a member of the Militant, at the Post Office. Whenever I worked with him, he was fine and we got along okay. But we clashed at union meetings.

He would put forward a motion, that had nothing to do with the workplace – some far-Left cause, often involving donating branch funds. Trade union membership was compulsory, at that time, but only the more left-wing people actually attended union meetings.

Our Trotskyite colleague was intelligent and articulate and could easily persuade more moderate people to go along with him – until I spoke up. When a vote was taken, his motion was voted down.

After a meeting, about ten of us would go to a pub. That included the Militant and me. He usually sulked with me for the first half an hour but then came around.

This experience showed me how the extremist Left operated and succeeded.

Nigel Farage’s parties

UKIP, the Brexit Party, and currently Reform UK have all constitutionally barred the way to membership for anyone who ever belonged either the National Front, or the British National Party.

Either Farage, or someone working with him behind the scenes, recognised that authentic British Nationalists might very likely turn the rank-and-file membership Nationalist. That would be likely to happen even without an organised bloc. Because we Nationalists have an ideology, which Farage’s parties have always lacked.

Farage clashed with UKIP’s National Committee and so he wanted to rule the party as a dictator. When that could not happen, he left to start another party.

Both before and afterwards, Farage has always driven out those who disagree with him, as well as anyone who appears to have an independent charisma of their own.

When Farage did that with Rupert Lowe, Lowe created his own party and had a success that surprised Farage. Restore Britain was born.

The opportunist mind of Nick Griffin

Nigel Farage had boasted to Establishment figures and the mainstream media that he was the bulwark against ‘far right extremism.’ He claimed that his presence in British politics destroyed the BNP. When Nick Griffin and Andrew Brons entered a Brussels bar that Farage’s MEPs frequented, Farage boasts that he had them thrown out.

Rupert Lowe complicated the picture. Restore Britain did NOT ban British Nationalists from membership. Nick Griffin quickly spotted that.

In his Substack column, Griffin stated that ALL British Nationalists should now join Restore Britain. Nationalists are very thin on the ground these days. But some followed Griffin’s suggestion and did join Restore Britain.

Others decided to do that quite independently of Griffin, people who are not fans of his. I am told that included Steve Laws of Remigration Now.

Griffin believes that the patriotic cause cannot succeed electorally. But he also thinks that British Nationalists could influence and eventually recruit Restore Britain’s members for the community-building work which Griffin believes will become necessary for White survival.

I think Griffin is right that ideological Nationalists could and should influence Restore Britain’s rank-and-file. Griffin points out that Restore Britain’s membership is ten times the strength of the BNP’s membership at its peak.

I think that both Reform UK’s and Restore Britain’s rank-and-file members are closer to us than to their own leaders.

In the era of internet influencers and online booksellers, any party which does not have an ideology is open to influence from people who do have an ideology and clear aims.

Can two strategies both work at the same time?

Nick Griffin is not the only prolific Nationalist writer on Substack. His former protégé, Mark Collett, writes there too.

I now think that Collett has matured into a good Nationalist. He is now a middle-aged married man and a father. He has had other ‘mentors’ since he parted company with Griffin.

Collett too has been observing Reform UK and Restore Britain. Collett, like Griffin, now appears to think that Nationalist efforts at elections are futile. But unlike Griffin, he has not abandoned hope of remigration.

Collett thinks that Nationalists should want a Reform UK general election victory. But why? He believes that would destroy the Conservative Party. I am not sure without re-reading him whether he also believes that Labour could go into terminal decline too.

Collet states that the two main parties have been entrenched for a century, but Reform UK would have much shallower roots, if ever a real Nationalist revival takes place.

I do not disagree with Mark Collett, in principle. Both main parties certainly deserve to die.

But if Reform UK is to win, that would need Restore Britain to disappear. Either to merge with Reform UK or have a pact. That thinking puts Collett up against some of his colleagues in the Patriotic Alliance. Those following Griffin’s entryist strategy with Restore Britain.

Could Griffin’s and others’ ‘entryist’ strategy with Restore Britain work in tandem with hoping for a Reform UK government? It seems unlikely. That puts me in a quandary.

It depends on whether you think Reform UK could actually win a general election and whether you believe that is desirable. It is far less likely to happen if Rupert Lowe’s Restore Britain takes say 10 percent of the votes, that would otherwise have gone to Farage and Reform UK.

If we were to believe that instead of Reform UK, Restore Britain could win a general election, then we should support them. But no one believes Restore Britain could do that.

Are both Griffin and Collett right? Or are they both wrong? Or should we choose one strategy over the other?

Copyright (c) 2026 Will Wright. For permission to reproduce this post please contact the author through this web site.

A Jewess’s rant in The Spectator against the British body politic

Martin Webster
Note: This post was first published in November 2019.

Hysterical, self-pitying, self-indulgent, arrogant, spiteful, illogical, hateful.

These are the adjectives which came into my mind when reading Tanya Gold’s tirade “‘Utterly betrayed: Britain’s Jews are now politically homeless” by Tanya Gold – in The Spectator of Saturday 9th November 2019 – initially against the Corbynite left of the Labour Party, but which developed against much of our country’s body politic.

In the end, I was left with a sense that she was raging against the British people and nation as a whole – even the gentile world at large. This is nothing new in the voluminous canon of Jewish contemplation about the “goyim”, the inhabitants of the non-Jewish world.

Tanya Gold
If somebody had published such a screed against Jewry they might find themselves charged with some sort of “hate crime”, under a law devised by Jewish lawyers and pushed on to the Statute Book at the behest of Jewish organisations such as the Board of Deputies of British Jews and Jewish parliamentarians (of all parties) and their gentile philo-semitic colleagues (of all parties), all of whom are at once:
(a) perpetually hungry for Jewish financial and media patronage bestowed by the likes of the Conservative/Labour “Friends of Israel”organisations,

and

(b) terrified of being marked down as “anti-semitic” if they refused any Jewish demand.

I found that the case which Tanya Gold’s article seeks to assert self-destructed as I read it, so I will not seek to deconstruct it in detail here. I will simply point to one short passage which exposes the school playground level bigotry – and hence the hypocrisy – of this woman who seeks to denounce bigotry:

I have not considered voting Conservative before. But I won’t. There is
a respectable strain of Conservatism, but this is not it, not for me – one
glance at Jacob Rees-Mogg’s face is enough

Jewry seeks to control all political parties

Judah has become rampant in Britain not only on account of what the founder of modern political Zionism, Theodor Herzl, described as “the terrible power of our purse”, and not only because of the ever-increasing Jewish control of the media, but because Jewry has been able to dominate all the parliamentary political parties – and a lot of the minor parties as well.

In that latter regard, let us not forget Jewry’s sustained effort, circa 1998 to 2007, to get British National Party leader Nick Griffin “on board”, only to find that he and his party were so “flaky” that they had to turn their effort to dominate the “far Right” to cultivating the man who calls himself “Tommy Robinson” and promoting his “English” [sic] Defence League. I chronicled all this in my Electronic Loose Cannon e-mail bulletins issued during the first decade of this century while the BNP was still significantly extant.

Jewry’s strategy has been simple for the past 100 years or more: It seeks to exert a controlling influence over all political parties, factions and tendencies so as to protect Jewry both here in Britain and abroad – especially (post WW2) Israel, which is the totem pole focus of its essential tribal and hence political loyalty.

It is because Jewry sees its once stranglehold grip on the Labour Party slipping, at least for the moment, and because it fears that if Labour’s bid for independence is allowed to succeed then the revolt might spread to other major parliamentary parties, that it is making war on the Corbyn-led Labour Party with increasing ferocity.

The Conservative Party purports to be fighting the 12th December General Election to “Get Brexit Done”. In my view that slogan is a confidence trick because the “Brexit” which Boris Johnson is offering is not an implementation of the 2016 Referendum result which mandated a clean break from the EU and all its institutions.

Parties which seek to escape
Jewish control to be destroyed

Jewry is engaged in this election, increasingly by giving support to the
Conservatives, not to achieve any sort of Brexit (to which it is opposed as a revolt against the internationalist and cosmopolitan milieu in which it thrives but all others involved degenerate) but to shatter the Corbynite hold on the Labour Party and, thereby, to demonstrate to the entire body politic that parties and politicians who seek to escape Jewish control will be destroyed.

It was this motivation that prompted the Board of Deputies of British Jews, via the Labour Friends of Israel, to set up in 1977 the Anti Nazi League (“Anal” to nationalists) in alliance with the “anti-Zionist” Socialist Workers Party, then led by a group of Israeli passport-holders fronted by a man who called himself “Tony Cliff” but whose real name was Ygael Gluckstein. In the run-up to the 1979 General Election Anal subjected the National Front’s lawful activities to mob violence. Their objective was made clear with their chant: “Smash! Smash! Smash the National Front!” It is deliciously ironic that among those active in Anal’s “Red Rent-a-Mob” are people who are now being witch-hunted as Corbynite “anti-semites”within the Labour Party.

Jewry’s strategy in treating the current Labour Party with the same venom – if not, yet, with the same degree of physical violence – as it deployed against the NF in the 1970s strikes me as very high risk. In making such an effort Jewry puts itself on view to the general public in a way that it traditionally prefers not to do. The nasty, neurotic, self-worshipping aspect of Jewry’s personality becomes exposed, as it is here for all to see in Tanya Gold’s article.

“Anti-semitic” or not, the Labour Party is multi-racialist

This is not a plea for anybody to vote Labour on 12th December! Whether or not there are “anti-semites” within the Labour Party, that party – be it “Blairite” or “Corbynite” –  adheres to unrestricted immigration not only from Europe but from the whole of Africa, Asia and South America and actively approves of inter-racial mating. It seeks to allow the families of illegal immigrants to “unite” here, not in their own ancestral homelands. Corbyn himself in his younger days flaunted his relationship with the negress Diane Abbott, now the Labour Shadow Home Secretary.

When Coloured Immigration into the UK commenced in the late 1940s the
Communist Party was comprised for the most part of Scots and Jews. To begin with the Jock element was in the ascendancy and proclaimed (correctly in my view) that Coloured Immigration was a “bosses” plot to undermine the wages of British workers. But the Jews, fearful of where such sentiments might lead if British society became less, not more, cosmopolitan, fought back and eventually turned the CP in favour of immigration and multi-racialism. (“Workers of all Lands Unite!”) This policy development soon influenced the Labour Party. Those seeking to know how the CP influenced Labour Party policy in the 1940s have only to read Douglas Hyde’s 1951 memoir: I Believed: The Autobiography of a Former British Communist.

This “Communist” multi-racialist policy is in fact an essentially Jewish policy; a strategy devised to leave non-Jewish nations/societies weaker and, relatively, Jewry stronger. If Jewry sustains its internal discipline, via Judaism and societal pressure, which interdicts marriage with non-Jews (“Vot? You vant to continue ze vork of Hitler?”) whilst promoting all manner of non-Jewish races to inter-breed with each other, then the culturally/ethnically distinct Jewish population will develop its patriotism and objectives whilst all manner of other folks are dissolved into racial/cultural chaos.

Not that the Jews are a particularly ethnically homogeneous nation, but as I have remarked before: In the Land of the Blind, the One-Eyed Man is King.

RSS
Follow by Email
Facebook
Twitter