- Counter-Currents - https://counter-currents.com -

The Blackburn Speech

Blackburn [1]6,247 words

Editor’s Note:

This is the transcript by V. S. of Jonathan Bowden’s May 25, 2005 British National Party stump speech in Blackburn, Lancashire. A few unintelligible words are marked ???. If you can make out what Bowden is saying, please post a comment below.  

To listen in a player, click here [2].

To download the mp3, right-click here [2] and choose “save link as” or “save target as.”

Well, I haven’t had an introduction like that before in any of the 40-odd party meetings up and down the country that I’ve spoken at before now, so thanks very much. I’d obviously like to thank Blackburn and the northwest region for having me up here this Thursday evening.

Now, we just had a general election and I think the first thing that came across to me on the night of the election and the day thereafter was how well the party did nationally. Obviously, there were a few poor votes. You know, on the margins and in regions where we’re not strong. But the advisory council said we should really stand in 110 seats plus. There was a bit of mission creep up to about 120 seats, but, broadly speaking, we got good solid votes particularly in areas where we’ve got support, where we’ve got canvassers on the ground and where we’ve got demography.

People know who we are and voted for us in an explicit way, because you have to face it: we weren’t going to get a single Member of Parliament elected, but people voted for us not because they wanted to vote against a party or because they wanted to protest or recycle their vote or cock a snook or stick two fingers up to another party; they wanted to vote directly for this party which was blacklisted and ignored for much of the election. A little bit of a response from the media 5 to 4 weeks in, but in the 3 weeks prior to polling hardly a dickie bird. There was a lot about the chairman’s court case in the run-up to the run-up of the election, but in the actual election period there was little concentration on us. Little on UKIP, to be fair, but they’re a single issue movement concentrated on Europe. Quite a degree of playing the Greens up. A little bit of attention to Kilroy-Silk and his Veritas party that bombed in the election like UKIP who virtually lost 80-90% of all of their deposits in the 500 seats that they stood in throughout the country. Whereas we got some very decent votes: 1,900, 2,000, 2,100, 3,500, 4,000, 5,500; 16.9%, 17% in Barking down in the overspill in London where our people have largely moved to in order to get away from what’s going on in and near London during the last 30-50 years and where, of course, we have councilors. One of the reasons for that vote in Barking and elsewhere is because there are councilors in Epping Forest, there are councilors in Loughton, there was a councilor in Thurrock. There is a councilor who got over 50%, an ex-taxi driver, in Broxbourne in Hertfordshire.

So, where there is support on the ground and where people know you can win and they see that it’s not a wasted vote, they vote for you because they know that you’re there and you can see even in certain of the fringe UKIP and Veritas folks, just occasionally, that people have looked down a list of candidates. They’ve seen New Labour, they’ve seen Kennedy’s Liberal Democrats, they’ve seen Howard’s Tories and they’ve looked for a Right populist party somewhere in the list and they haven’t found the BNP, so they vote UKIP or Veritas. But it proves that even nation-wide in relatively inhospitable areas there is a Right populist vote, a vote that is to the Right of the Tories, that crosses class, that’s based primarily at the moment on ex-Labour voters who feel completely betrayed by New Labour but can also draw in angry third, middle-class types, ex-Tories and so on because everybody knows that this country is societally and culturally, if not economically yet, in very grave decline and has been declining decade on decade and year on year and generation on generation since the late ‘40s and early 1950s.

Now, Blair’s in hospital at the moment, apparently, with a slipped disc. What a pity, eh! Poor old chap! But he’s going to retire soon anyway, and Brown is going to take over. Now, the difference between Brown and Blair is nothing, is just a tobacco leaf, a piece of paper that’s put between the two of them. It’s true that some of the old Labour types prefer Brown because he’s a bit more dour, he’s a bit more sort of comfortable from a Trade Union type background, but in actual fact there’s absolutely no difference between them and haven’t people realized that in every cabinet meeting that decided on the Iraq War, that decided on everything else, Brown was sat next to Blair at every vote and in relation to every discussion. There is absolutely no difference between them at all! And, if we notice that at the last election, the one before last, Labour got 44% of the vote and 1/3 to 40% of all people in this society didn’t even bother to vote anyway. This time 60% voted, 40% didn’t and Labour’s down to 35%. 35% of those who bothered to vote. They’ve got the lowest proportion of our people and of any people to vote for them to form a government and they’ve got a majority of 60-70, which governments in the 50s, the 60s, the 70s would have killed for a majority like that and they’ve got it again with 35% of the vote and grinding down.

Before Blair became Premier in ’97, Labour had 425,000 members nationally. It is now 235,000 and dipping. All of the parties, with the exception of the Liberal Democrats, who are growing because of Left hostility to the way Labour is in office and because of Muslim and ethnic votes, other than the Liberal Democrats, no party really in this society apart from ourselves have any energy.

I heard a debate halfway through the elections, it was about 2 weeks into the 3½ to 4 week campaign, although actually that campaign had been going on for six months. No wonder politics bores people to death! Except when it’s associated with this organization, primarily. Because it goes on far too long! And in some ways democracy is endless. We have too many tiers of government, and we have too many devolved assemblies, and we have too much plebiscitary democracy, and yet many of our people have actually no power to decide real issues like the composition of the population of Blackburn for example.

I was told on the way here that Blackburn is 20% Asian. Now, I didn’t realize that before I got here, but 20%. Did anyone in this room, did anyone who doesn’t share the politics of people in this room who is White and English or British, vote for Blackburn to have its ethnic composition changed to the degree that it has been since Labour passed under Attlee the Nationality Act in 1948? And the answer is: No, they did not! No one has asked for this. No one has asked for a great wedge of Liberal-Left reforms since the late 1960s on the family, on immigration, on law and order, on homosexuality, on membership in what is now called the European Union. No one’s asked for any of these. No one apart from small elites, Tory, Liberal and Labour at the top, in the Commons and elsewhere and in Europe, to a degree, since the early ’70s have ever voted for any of this.

And whenever any of these core matters come near democracy, the elite starts getting into a panic. This is what’s happening in relation to this European Constitution. It’s one of these few occasions where for essentially foolish reasons and because of the premises of Sir James Goldsmith’s Referendum Party way back, actually, they decided to give us a vote on some of these core issues. Whether we have a constitution – boring, eh? – that federates us to a state in Europe that we never really asked to be a member of and they’re surprised that there’s a big British majority that says, “No! We don’t want to be part of this other state, because we’ve got a nation-state of our own!” And the political elite is running around saying, “It’s terrible, isn’t it? These ignorant plebs. We’re giving them a plebiscitary insight into our elite affairs. It’s disgraceful when these people know nothing about it.” As they perceive. And it will be the same on the currency, and it will be the same on hanging for murder, and it will be the same on the treatment that ought to be meted out to pedophiles, and it will be the same on family based issues, and it will be the same in relation to the mass ethnic demographic changes which have occurred in this society since 1948.

On all of these issues, you have a gulf between the population and the elite. Occasionally, there were people in the elite who were lightning conductors for sentiment from “below”: Alan Clark, Enoch Powell, and a few others, but essentially they are gone. Although each election every four years the Tories try – try, try, try – to reconnect with an element of their electoral base to get Blair and them out on the night and with a part of the general population. Don’t forget: they were in government between ’79 and ’97. They were in government between ’70 and ’74. They were in government between ’51 and ’64. They were in government for most of the period between 1880 and now, actually, although New Labour have encompassed an elite of their own which looks as though it’s going to go on and on and on, because increasingly the Tories are nowhere, and lots of people who used to join them because they wanted power. They didn’t give a damn what the party allegedly stood for. They wanted power in terms of middle-class economic welfare. That’s what you join the Tories for, and the Tories don’t offer people power anymore, which is why they’re stumbling from election to election. They’ve put on 30 seats and their own tame media, The Express and The Mail and so forth, said it was a great triumph because they weren’t devastated. A great triumph! To keep your vote from 2001 going back to ’97, to get your core vote out, to not put on one more vote and you remain flatlined where you were.

The reason that the Tories try to reconnect with their electoral base every election is because they know that there are many issues where the liberal elite, of which they are actually a part and a subservient member, are completely out of kilter and completely out of step with the people in general circumstances in this society, and they know it, and they also slightly fear it. Because the one thing that prevents all of the votes for the BNP (upwards of 200,000 in the last general election, upwards of 800,000+ at the European elections) from translating into seats in a national parliament is the absence of a proportionate system.

Many liberals, gnawing at the edges of things, desiring to almost sort of coil the rope from which they themselves could be done in at a later date, are campaigning rigorously for PR. Every day, or every other day, The Independent, a tiny little elite liberal paper that sells less than 100,000 copies a day actually, is campaigning for proportionate voting, which of course would allow and let in candidates from this party to most tiers of government within the United Kingdom, particularly within England and especially in Yorkshire. One of the reasons, I understand, The Yorkshire Post is so anti-this party is because there’s a big bedrock of vote there that if you get people in at local district level and can even begin to get up to +10% in many Westminster constituencies.

Halfway through the election campaign, Radio 4 had a debate amongst various political scientists, journalists, commentators, and others, and one of them said, “Why’s the turnout so low? Why do people hate politicians so much? Why’s there so much indifference and why are people bored rigid with this election?” And a few of them shuffled uneasily in their seats, you know. “This bloke’s had a few,” you know. They said, “Look, we’ve got the system that we have. People feel betrayed by Blair’s government.” And people said, “Oh yes, but there’s always the danger that they could vote for these Right-wing populist and anti-immigration parties, you know?” They didn’t specify which party: UKIP, Veritas, but in a sense they’re really talking about this political organization. “They could vote for them, you know!” And one of them pipes up instantly, “Well, thank God we haven’t got PR!” Because the Westminster Village election system of first past the post corrals everything into the Tory and Labour areas.

It always used to be the case that a wing of the Labour Party was actually socialist in belief, and a wing of the Tory party did have certain patriotic views, just, but both of those phalanxes have gone. They’re completely gone, and the reason why a 1/3 to 40% of our people don’t even vote, and the reason why people sort of feel trapped into voting for the big blocs . . .

And many people vote Liberal just to protest! My father votes Liberal. He said, “I don’t like the other two. You’re an extremist,” he tells me, “and I don’t like the other two.” And I say, “Well, dad, why do you vote at all then?” He said, “Well . . .” I said, “Look, the Liberals want to decriminalize A, B, and C category drugs.” He said, “I don’t want to hear that!” And I said, “They want sex education for 5-year-olds and above in primary school.” He said, “I don’t want to hear that!” I said, “They want to adopt the Euro and get rid of Pound Sterling!” He said, “Do they, really?” I said, “Well, you’re voting for them!” You know, and he said, “You’re just a troublemaker!” And I said, “Why didn’t you vote Tory like you always used to?” He said, “Oh no, I’m not voting for Howard. I don’t like him.” And I said, “Oh, OK. What about Brown?” Because if you vote Blair you’ll get Brown. He said, “No, I couldn’t tolerate Communism.” So, I said, “Kennedy’s Liberals are slightly to the Left of New Labour, actually.” He said, “It’s all so complicated. I just can’t stand it.” I said, “Well, maybe you shouldn’t have a vote anyway.” Dangerous thought, you know. And he said, “Well, maybe I shouldn’t! We fought in the war for a vote!” And I said, “Yes, you did, Dad, and now you’re going to vote Liberal Democrat . . . But you don’t want homosexual marriage? You don’t want a federal Europe?” Kennedy was the only leader of a representative party in Britain who said mass immigration is a good thing. You never hear New Labour leaders, although they endorse it completely, say so too blatantly and the Tories say, “Come on in! Everyone can come in and work for the minimum wage as labor and capital moves around the world in a global system, but we don’t like it.”

And there are these appalling asylum seekers. Have you seen the cover of The Mail today? But the Liberals say it’s marvelous; it’s wonderful; it’s humane; it’s what we voted for when we set the UN up; it’s everything we ever wanted. “So, you vote for them, Dad. You feel free to do so.” But many people vote Liberal because they can’t stand the other two blocs.

My experience of this society is that there are fewer hardcore liberals than there are hardcore patriotic people. You find people in your own lives people who really think political correctness is a good thing. Yes! Who really think race-awareness courses and sexual identity courses for civil servants and related bureaucrats are good things. Who really think that policemen in the Metropolitan Police should be sent on these sorts of things, and we are paying for all of these things. You never find them! You never find them outside the mass media, small parts of the arts, small parts of the entertainment industry and essentially bits of the academy. Tiny, small elites in and around London, pretty much. But in the mass of the population you never find them. You never find people who say, “Mass immigration! Come on in! What a marvelous boon it’s been to us all!”

And there’s been a degree to which every popular instinct of our people has been channeled into areas such as football and drinking and having a good time and Friday and Saturday night as the society, as its level, as its culture, as its propensity for crime gets worse and worse and worse. Blair will say he’s going to stamp down on yobbery. Although yob is a politically incorrect term, actually. I don’t know if anyone’s told him. There’s a degree to which he’s going to do something about disorder in the streets. Disorder in the streets? We’ve sent a third of our army to Iraq. This week we’ve sent 500 more troops to Iraq to train the new client regime to hold their own people down at America’s bequest. We’ve spent I think it’s about seven and a quarter billion pounds already on our involvement in the Iraq War. The Blair regime doesn’t control the streets in south London! He doesn’t control the streets in south London, but we’ve sent a third of our army and a quarter of our tanks to Basra and southern Shia Iraq to control that situation when a million of our people of indeterminate political views, many of them Leftist and pacifist admittedly, marched against that war. And Tony said he was listening. “I hear you,” he said and then went straight in with Bush.

Now he’s in again, and he says from his bed, you know, as he lies there prone, holding his back, he says, “I’m listening! I’m listening!” This is his new thing. He’s listening to his MPs; he’s listening to his shadow cabinet; he’s listening to all of it. Well, why doesn’t he listen to us and say that our people never voted for a multiracial or a multicultural society; they didn’t vote for most liberal, allegedly progressive and reformist measures which have come in the last 40 years; they didn’t vote for the criminality which increasingly in the cities and elsewhere resembles the United States.

77,000 in prison now and yet prison, quite clearly, doesn’t work, does it? It doesn’t work! We’re going to have three categories for murder now, like in America up to a degree. A, B, first and second degree homicide and then a manslaughter residual category. There used to be a time, you know, in this country when a murder, particularly a sexual murder or murder of a child, for example, was absolutely shocking. Absolutely shocking! It would convulse the media for weeks, if not for months. There’s a murder a week in Bristol. There’s a murder a day in London. There’s a murder every other day in Glasgow. It’s become routine. It’s become routine throughout this society because drugs are everywhere, criminal gangs are everywhere. Because a psychopathic pedophile went mad in Scotland about 10 years ago in Dunblane they banned handguns all over the country. We can’t even have our Olympic and Commonwealth teams train with handguns. They have to go to the Channel Islands; they have to go to the Republic of Ireland. There are a million illegal guns in the possession of criminal gangs of multiple ethnicities since that came in alone, and many of those weapons have come in from Serbia and the ex-Balkans; they’ve come in from Northern Ireland as the paramilitary groups have got rid of their old spent gear; and they’re also replicas and all sorts of other things that have been stolen and adapted and used in various ways.

The reason that we have so much trouble and so much criminality and so many youth problems on the streets . . . And everyone sees it; people privatize themselves. If they’ve got money, they live behind walls, they live behind grills, they have private estates, they have things where you have to press multiple buttons to get into the corridor that leads to another one that leads to their flat somewhere upstairs. But they can all see it. Everyone from the roughest estate to the Albany in the center of London. They can all see it as the tide either wraps around their door or comes nearer to them and the reason that we have so much of it is because there is no discipline and no order in the society and the police are now firemen. If someone’s bleeding in the street and there’s glass around their heads, they’ll come and they’ll come when it’s over, because they don’t want any trouble. They come to pick up the pieces when it’s over. When it’s a really serious crime they’ll put a regional or national crime squad on it, and they’ll deal with it.

Right close to where my family lives, actually, there was quite a notorious case recently where two girls were abducted and gang-raped and tortured and killed (or one of them was killed) and dumped in a park in the Thames Valley to the west of London. They put the regional and national crime squad, our sort of sub-FBI, our FBI in the making, on this, and they got this Islamic gang of multi-ethnicity, some of them are Albanians, who are from south London. They got them within a week. But this was part of what is believed to be gang-related violence, because one of the girls was living in a hostel that had been firebombed by this group the week before, so obviously something is going on.

This proliferation of criminality around drugs, particularly around crack cocaine, is happening in towns and in cities and in provincial centers, including areas of the country where habitually it’s not really necessarily thought that that sort of thing goes on, but it is going on because it’s spreading out of London; it’s spreading down from Birmingham; it’s spreading out of cities in the northwest. It’s been here for a long time anyway in the center of Manchester and in other zones, and it’s because our state has lost its grip, and has lost its grip because it’s intoxicated with ideas that mean you can’t keep certain tendencies in society down. Because you have to be tough-minded about the nature of human nature.

A Labour MP, I forget his name now, but the one who’s influenced by certain Anglican and socially Christian ideas, said that for the first two terms of Labour’s government from ’97 to just about now Labour had a naïve view of human nature. That human beings are naturally good, called the Pelagian belief in philosophy. That human beings are naturally good and that all you need is to change a few structures and spend a bit of money and consult the community. Well, the truth is that human nature is not like this, and it has never been like this, and you have to have structures of order and discipline for people. You have to give people a space. Our people always demand the right to say what they think and, within limits, be who they are and that’s being restricted on all sorts of other fronts now coming from a different direction.

But there is a low level of chaos now in this society and we have a situation where the bulk of the citizenry are between the state and armed gangs. The only people who are armed in this society are semi-organized crime and the state. Everyone else is in the middle waiting, hoping problems won’t afflict them and theirs, because “We’ll be alright.” There are many people in my father’s generation, without personalizing it through him, and people slightly younger who say, “I’ll be dead in 20-30 years.” I hear this all the time from people! “I won’t be here to see it!”

I met a chap who’s a moderate Republican recently from Ireland. A non-violent one, a nationalist one. And he said, “In 50 years, Ireland” this is the Republic of Ireland, “will have a non-White majority.” In 50 years! It’s probably 60 or 70 actually, but, you know, who’s counting? The truth is if they have the immigration that south London’s had, in 60 years they’ll be a minority in their own country. All this IRA violence against us, all this fighting for their own independence, it won’t matter a damn! They’ll be a minority in their own country! What was it all for!? What was it all for?

But factoring it out from them to look at ourselves, more importantly, what has it been for if we become a minority in our own cities, in our own inner cities, in our own country and what will it do to our culture, which increasingly (I’m the sort of cultural officer of this party) vast numbers of our people know nothing about. Nothing about! Posh and Becks is not English culture or it’s not what it’s about. It’s just a sort of irrelevance fed by a mass media.

Many of our people go through school and they are taught to partly despise what they are and where they have come from. Anything which is cultured is posh, is elitist, is not for us, is against us. Median capitalist and low level trash is all what we want and we’ll get or are fit for. Our people do no national service; our people know nothing about the empire; many of our people know nothing of our great musicians and artists and writers or even prior political leaders. A quarter of all schoolchildren doing government in school from 14 to 16 (government, government!) can’t name the party in power: New Labour. We face everywhere a degree of blind ignorance in who and what we are, because if you want to basically break a population down you remove the mental tier first because then people are adrift and are aimless and are wandering about. That’s why politics bores them. That’s why Blair and Howard and Hague and Duncan Smith and Kennedy and Steel and Ashdown and Kinnock and the other Smith, who died hiking on a Scottish mountain, then Blair took over and Brown after him; that’s why they bore our people rigid.

There’s almost a manic depressive element to many of our people. I know loads of Labour voters and they hate Labour! And they voted them back! I met a chap before the election who said, “I can’t stand Blair. I absolutely loath the bloke’s guts, but I’ll vote him back.” And I said, “Well, why? Why do it?” He said, “Well, there’s nothing else. The Liberals are nothing. The Tories? Couldn’t vote for them. And you either don’t vote, or vote Labour.” It’s because, in a sense, people think that there is no other option that this party will continue to grow from the outside in.

The problem it faces is two-fold. The first problem is, “You’re alright, but you can’t win.” Which is what people say. And the second is demonization, that people are sort of frightened. I have people stand up in meetings and say to me, “Will they,” whoever “they” are, I suppose in a general sense the establishment, “will they know if I vote for the British National Party?” I say, firstly, “Who cares?” and secondly, “Tens and tens of thousands of people voting on plebiscites for parties at elections: the system’s not bothered about that!” It’s only when there’s enough people massed together that a representation ensues and then they’ll get worried. And they are worried. Even by that vote in Barking, Labour has had a special internal commission since the election about how they “roll that back,” as they would call it in inverted commas, within that borough. The MP says she going to relocate all of their offices from Westminster. She means these swanky offices that cost just under a billion pounds and are on the other side of St. Stephen’s Gate opposite Parliament Square. She’s going to relocate all of that back to Barking, because she says she’s going to plug into the white working class again. That’s what she said. She’s going to plug into the white working class again because “people feel let down,” she said. Well, people feel “let down” because we’re subject to endless changes in our borough and people who are old feel nervous about it.

The BBC did a Vox Pop. They went out into the streets of Barking and people said, “No, I never voted for them.” Quite clearly lying. They got some Irish chap who said, “Oh yes, I voted National Front.” But you know what he meant, you know. They had another woman say, “I’m not against anyone, and I haven’t said anything, but I voted for them.” It’s almost as if, “Put the chains on and lead me away,” you know, because the BBC were there. And the only reason that vote happened is because activists for about four months before the election went door to door. Tens of thousands of doors that were multiple occupancy and so on. They went door to door and they demystified the party and they de-demonized it at the level of the street and because that happened you then got the response that, “Oh, you’re not really like that then!” Because they expect no hair, sort of your knuckles on the pavement, you know. This is what they expect! This is what they expect and if they don’t get it the scales sort of drop and they say, “Oh, alright. I’ll vote for them then.” Because it’s the equivalent of voting for the flags behind the speakers here on this table tonight. That’s all. Of course, when that happens you will see the reversal. When all the people who put their St. George’s Cross flags out when England plays, when the people who supported the rugby team in the World Cup down in Australasia, you know, without really knowing the rules of that game, just because it was England and just because the team was almost all White subliminally, when people feel that they can vote for the BNP and it’s as normal as that, as normative as that, as given as that, when they feel that is normalcy for them, then you will almost have to restrain some of our own people in their own ardor, but that’s the other way around from the situation that we now face.

Because we face a population that’s cowered, that’s slightly afraid, that’s traumatized by the attention of mass media, that when they’re not with people they know look behind them slightly before they make a dangerous or illiberal or politically incorrect remark . . . It’s remarkable, you know. People who know nothing about politics, people who couldn’t name you half of New Labour’s cabinet, as if that’s of any importance, they’ll know what political correctness and incorrectness is. When they make a remark of some sort which they think’s a bit iffy, you know, at work or with somebody they think ought not know where they come from politically, even just a moment, they’ll look behind them. Even if they don’t look behind them physically, they’re doing it mentally and morally and emotionally, and this is from a country that once ruled a quarter of the world. Our people are frightened, except in certain gatherings and pubs at night and with their own family, to say what they think about how their cities and towns have changed since ’48, about how there are at least +6 million non-Whites in the country, at least 10% now. Whatever the statistics, whatever the last census said and didn’t say, that’s the fact. Just look around you.

We have a situation now where Blair sees no problem. Blair sees no problem in what has happened. The Oldham riots were all down to this party apparently and its satanic machinations. The fact that groups transplanted from different parts of the world will have different agendas, form different forms of culture, look askance at each other in certain situations, and will come into conflict in relation to scarcity even if that conflict is just democratic . . . That will happen, and has happened, and is happening.

All American cities are racially zoned. People know where they can go, and they know where they don’t go. All American police departments, basically, have different racial criteria for how they deal with and police different sections of their own urban and semi-urban spaces. We are going to follow that. It’s already begun in London. There are schools in Luton which are 90% Asian and 90% Muslim, and they teach their own way of looking at life, which is totally legitimate biologically and culturally for them. But it’s not legitimate for us, and we never wanted it in our country, and we never asked for it. Even when we ruled them we never imposed similar dispensations upon them, even under the Raj up to its disestablishment in and around ’48 when independent countries emerged on the Indian subcontinent. Because a people are what they are racially, and everything begins on from that.

Now, you meet liberals all the time that say that the greatness of culture, the greatness of science, the greatness of law, and of art and of everything high has nothing to do with race at all. “Nasty people. Horrible idea to say that.” But in actual fact, you will lose what you have and what you have been and what you are and what your children will be, if that connection is broken down. But our people are deeply worried about that. They are deeply worried about the politics of race.

If ever a BNP spokesmen appears, usually with some demonic lead-up, in the mass media, they will say, “Are you a racist?” “Nick Griffin, are you a racist?” Whoever it is, Doc Edwards, whoever is on the media at that time. The truth of the matter is, of course, that race is the basis of meaningful cultural and national politics. The term “racism” was coined by Leon Trotsky, the Soviet Communist leader, in 1927. That’s where it comes from. But it’s been used now to keep you out of the debate before you’ve even opened your mouth. The truth of the position is that all groups are in favor, ultimately, of the power of their own kind and of their own group and their manifold manifestations in culture, in art, in science, in law, in statecraft, in military power, in forms of the state, in just the building of a place to live like Blackburn here or any place else. Each group manifests itself in order to live and in order to survive and in order to have a natural habitat and a country and a land and a language and various forms of spirituality for itself, which is why when people around you and in your families and in the communities in which you live tell you that they are bored to the back teeth with politics and that they’re all the same you can tell them there’s one party in the country, and almost everybody, no matter how stupid, bluntly, knows the name of this party. They know the name of this party.

Many of them couldn’t even name your MP and know that he used to march against the Vietnam War and has now voted for the War in Iraq, which as Foreign Secretary he superintends in Blair’s regime, if he were a student he’d have to throw eggs at himself, as he once remarked . . . People who couldn’t even name him in this town. Those lads shouting outside that window, they probably couldn’t even name him and his departmental and ministerial responsibilities are. But they know what this party is!

And why do they? Because it’s the opposition to Straw, and he’s immaterial to what he represents in Blackburn and elsewhere. It’s the opposition to liberalism, to drift, to mass criminality, to homosexuality as a fake marital union, to mass immigration and the loss of our cities, to the denigration of our past, to merging our state into a nation-state in Europe that we don’t wish to be part of, although we wish no ill to White people living in Europe, but we wish to govern ourselves. But even the lads outside, for whom politics is sort of a football chant, know that this is the party that ultimately stands to them as the opposition to that which exists and governs us now and is gradually, painfully, slowly coming in from the margins of the society towards the center.

Because 50 years from now this party will be talked about as one of the movements which came out from the population to confront the decline and defeat which has gone on for 50 years and which will help, by itself or with others from amongst our people, to reverse its damaging effects.

I thank you very much for your indulgence and ask you to put your hands together for all our speakers tonight!