Posted on 06/06/2004 8:27:08 PM PDT by MegaSilver
BRITISH MEN and women sacrificed their lives in the 1939-45 war to protect our freedom. It was a time when the nation rallied together to resist Nazi tyranny and repel the German invasion of Britain.
People gave their all in the belief that their efforts would preserve something very special for future generations - the British way of life.
Sixty years on, we are now told that this British way of life is not something special, but something that we should forget about. We are not allowed to celebrate British culture. We are told to feel ashamed of our history. We are told not to fly our flag or celebrate our Christian religion in case it offends new arrivals to our country.
When we complain we are told we are racist and that our society is riddled with inherent racism.
The British National Party doesn't believe that it is racist to want your children to have a British and a Christian upbringing. It's not racist to want your children to go to school and learn to be proud of their history and the sacrifices made by past generations. It's not racist to want to be able to celebrate British culture and traditions in our own country.
But most importantly of all, it is not racist to want to protect our own very special way of life by calling for an end to any further immigration into Britain.
Whenever New Labour, the Tories, or their friends in the media attack the British National Party, they always resort to calling us silly names to try to smear us.
*They call us 'thugs', yet it is the thugs of the Labour Party who regularly try to harass and intimidate our candidates at election time.
*They call us 'nazis', yet the BNP is totally committed to strengthening democracy, many of our older members are World War Two veterans, and we have Jewish members, some of whom stand as BNP candidates at election times. But whenever they do, they get singled out for 'special treatment' by Labour party thugs and bullyboys. The 'New Nazis' are in New Labour, not the British National Party!
*They call us 'far right', yet our policies of re-nationalising the railways and rejecting GM crops are far more radical than anything New Labour can come up with.
*They call us 'extreme', yet it's Labour and the Tories who are the extremists, taking us into a war that nobody wanted and handing over our sovereignty to Brussels without even asking the British people if they could do so.
The BNP is made up of ordinary people who are fed up with being ignored by the old gang parties. Men and women who want their politicians to put the interests of the British people FIRST!
Alas, I the BNP is right about one critical issue which might actually sway my vote were I a UK citizen: Islam is not compatible with Western notions of free society, and as horrible as it sounds, close monitoring of Muslims and repatriation of the radicals may be Britain's only hope.
It doesn't and they know they'd not have a snowball's chance if they didn't have radical muslims to deal with (that Polyphemus with the hook).
These guys seem like Pat Buchanan followers.
Parts of this article are applicable to American society/government/culture too. If this kind of racism is wrong, I don't want to be right. :)
Too many decent, ordinary folks are holding their noses and voting for the BNP.
Let the U.S. be warned. You want an uprising of the Far Right... allow as many non-assimilating immigrants as physically possible.
They follow David Duke... not even Pat is that bad (I hope not).
I agree
No, I totally agree with the statement. (Okay, I admit it: I'm sort of a Paleoconservative. Go ahead and throttle me, folks. ;) ) If the BNP was really like this--focusing more on culture than race, making sharp distinctions between immigrants who had assimilated versus those who hadn't, and the threat of Islam to the West--there would be nothing actually objectionable about them. The problem is, the BNP's and its leaders' track records suggest a slightly grimmer picture.
Nevertheless, the BNP is right on at least one ultra-critical issue (which is quite arguably more important than anything else on the table at the moment) and for that, I won't condemn anyone for voting for them.
Buchanan tends to be more concerned with culture than with race. That Western culture is predominantly the domain of white people explains why it is convenient to sometimes refer to "whites." If it's not racist for blacks to extoll the virtues of their culture (which, despite what you'd think from the idiot rappers on MTV, is in many respects quite close to that of Americans of European descent), why should it be racist for whites to extoll the virtues of the culture we built?
Perhaps, though what makes it objectionable is the use of skin color to describe the people who build the culture. "Europeans" might be a more acceptable substitute (though ethnic Europeans generally do have white skin).
But back to Pat Buchanan, while I do sometimes wonder if he needs to loosen the tin-foil hat when it comes to certain topics (especially Israel), I find that a number of objections to his writing (and that of other Paleocons) stem more from anoyance/shock at his having violated the "politically correct" barriers than objections to the actual content. Then again, I lean a bit more toward Paleoconservatism, so it's entirely possible that I'm just biased. After all, many people here like David Frum and I have little to no tolerance whatsoever for him, so...
I've not read too much David Frum BUT I used to like Pat before I got turned off. My mother LOVES Pat Buchanan though. She asked me if she could vote for him (she says she's not voting for Bush).
Weird... I never thought of European history and literature as being 'white'. I guess because while I was being taught it was never said this is WHITE history and culture. No one ever told me Shakespeare was white *lol* That's why I don't get the 'afrocentric' movement. Propents of 'afrocentric' or 'black history' can't expect to be able to engage such and not be questioned.
You know any statement about race (esp. black or white) is controversial in the media.
LOL!!!
A suggestion for your mother: Michael Peroutka (the Constitution Party candidate) has some similar views to Pat on a some issues (e.g., he opposes the Iraq war, he wants a five-year moritorium on immigration). If she's not going to vote for Bush, she might as well support a hard-line Conservative.
Weird... I never thought of European history and literature as being 'white'. I guess because while I was being taught it was never said this is WHITE history and culture. No one ever told me Shakespeare was white *lol* That's why I don't get the 'afrocentric' movement. Propents of 'afrocentric' or 'black history' can't expect to be able to engage such and not be questioned.
Heh... you're right there. And you know what I find funny? In its own pitiful way, the "Afrocentric" movement is VERY Eurocentric. Its [intellectually dishonest] proponents apparently think that they must show that blacks had a major hand in creating the foundations of Western Civilization if blacks are to have any sort of worth in the world.
You know any statement about race (esp. black or white) is controversial in the media.
Editors are terrified of women, homosexuals, and racial and religious minorities. For some reason, they're scared of Jews, too, which is kind of interesting because they seem to hate Jews all the same. Granted, they don't hate Jews as much as they hate white people and Christians (and ESPECIALLY white Christians), but Jews seem to rank at least reasonably high on their hit lists. It's just that fear usually keeps them from taking ugly shots.
Personally I think she will vote for Bush. If not, well I can see her listening to my sister and voting for Nader SHEESH! Voting conservative is more in the best interests of immigrants than the democrats. I can explain that but I'll need to drink four more cups of coffee *LOL*
As for proponents of 'afrocentric' curriculum well I gave up debating. David Livingstone was 'afrocentric' IMHO. It's one of those issues that I've decided to stop talking about since it drives people nuts.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.