The EDL, Alinksy, and an Earthquake in British Politics

An interesting discussion has developed in the comments section of Tuesday’s post about journalism and the legacy media. A commenter named Joe, who is relatively new to Gates of Vienna, has been making some important observations about Alinskyites, the far Left, and the English Defence League. By now that thread has only a few readers left, so his latest comment is reproduced below.

Joe highlights the same thing that I have said many times — the political Left is by no means the only force massing against the Counterjihad. The Cameron government is persecuting the EDL as vigorously as its Labour predecessor did. Republicans in the United States, ostensibly “conservative” protectors of American values and culture, fall all over themselves to placate Islam and condemn the “intolerance” and “bigotry” of people like Geert Wilders.

It was not a leftist publication that created this capsule depiction of the English Defence League:

This was published in 2011 in National Review to accompany an article on the EDL by Anthony Daniels (a.k.a. Theodore Dalrymple). Dr. Daniels and NR are hardly liberals or leftists. NR is one of the primary bastions of American conservatism.

This is what our so-called “friends on the Right” are doing to us.

No, it is not the Left that is the biggest problem. The whole political establishment across the entire Western world has mobilized against “Islamophobia”. Elected politicians of all political stripes, the permanent bureaucracy, the media, and the academy are almost universal in their condemnation of what we do.

That makes the Right the bigger problem, because everyone already knows the Left is the enemy of people like us. Yet people think “conservatives” are different, that they are simply like-minded people who somehow haven’t quite come around yet, and will in due course become our staunch allies. I have seen zero evidence to support this assertion during my nine years in this line of work, but many of my fellow anti-sharia activists persist in believing it.

Saudi money may be one explanation for the persistent affection that the Right has for Islam. Their attachment to the existing power structure — which provides them with so much power, so many perks, and as much lucre as they can jam into their already over-filled pockets — may be another one. But in any case, the Right remains as much of an obstacle to what we do as the Left.

We truly are the Shadow Culture.

Comment by Joe (edited for punctuation, capitalization, and typos)

Not sure I would be quite so quick in describing the EDL as a success story adhering to Alinsky though. Most of what they did involved street protests — and only that. I believe Alinsky advocated letter-writing and even “mass farting” at a classical concert — as well as ridiculing and lampooning of opponents. Not sure the EDL did much of that.

I didn’t say they’d read Alinsky and used it as a catechism. The street protests involved aspects that other political groups didn’t. They made protesting into “a day out”. Those who were not stalwarts were even known as “day trippers”. The establishment, the Left, and academics were all taken aback by EDL because it was something new. There are two groups of sociologists at British universities who have been studying EDL precisely because it was a new kind of protest movement.

EDL was involved in plenty of letter-writing, and phone call campaigns. They went into the meetings of the SWP and the UAF and took them over or disrupted them. The communists were completely unused to their enemy doing things like that.

EDL would go into Tower Hamlets any time they wanted. The police begged them to stop doing it. The demonstrations were only the most visible aspect of what EDL did. And they did it with a conscious idea that they would bankrupt local councils by the cost of policing. I heard it from some of the leaders themselves, and I was surprised that they were operating at such a strategic level.

But the EDL’s opponents — being mostly seasoned far-leftists — certainly ridiculed and demonised the EDL, and even propagated the ridiculous view that the EDL were “racist”, in a way that would make Alinsky proud. It led even the prime minister, David Cameron, to be a signatory of the EDL’s main opponents — United Against Fascism. And now the main thrust of opposing the EDL doesn’t even have to be the UAF — but mainstream journalists (even those on the right) and the likes of the “English Disco Lovers”.

Almost no damage to EDL was inflicted by the far left. The damage was done by the establishment: the media, the police, the courts, and no doubt government agents fomenting internal dissent (the police had fifteen infiltrators/provocateurs in the Green Movement, some working undercover for as much as ten years — of course, they must have had at least that number in EDL fomenting dissent). And EDL must take some of the blame too. Despite them not being a racist organisation, they failed to publicise that (e.g. by putting images from demos of white and brown and black people on their website). However, even to do that brings charges of “racism” from those who are determined that EDL must be seen as evil.

EDL offered an opportunity for many different groups who had suffered from decades of Islamic invasion to come together. But instead Jews, gays, Muslim women etc. lined up with the media and politicians to castigate EDL. EDL was the opportunity for Britain not to descend into civil war. People have made their choice, and civil war is what they will get. When the Jewish organisations, the gay organisations, and the right-wing press such as Daily Mail and Daily Express and Telegraph are insisting that EDL is “far right” and “racist”, don’t try and blame the far left. Is it the far left who have Tommy in prison for fraud, when Muslims who commit multi-million-pound fraud are given community service? Is it the far left who suspended a black Tory councillor because he expressed support for EDL? Was it a far-left government who banned demonstrations throughout London? Was it the far left judges who imposed ten-year banning orders on various EDL leaders?

If all you’ve got is a hammer, then everything looks like a nail. Again, it is a pathetic lack of vision on the part of those who consider themselves “right-wing”; they think that the whole process of Islamisation is being driven by “the far left” (those organisations Bat Ye’or has exposed are mostly not driven or managed by communists).

The UAF was decimated by EDL. At the start of 2010, UAF could get 3000 people to a demo; by the end of 2010 they could get no more than 50. The UAF has ended up relying on Muslims to be their foot soldiers. In 2010, the UAF was bussing trade unionists and students across the country. They can’t do that any more, because the support is not there (they create local non-UAF identified front groups e.g. Walthamstow United). The problems for EDL came from the inside, from the media, from the police, from the government, and from other groups who are too scared to speak out alone, not realising that within the shield of the EDL they would have been safer. Alinksy was about bringing people together to effect change; people were instead very successfully kept apart.

It was all the establishment-connected groups who managed to corner EDL. I’m resigned to what the future of Britain will be. I threw all my energy into trying to avert it. As I said “The actions of EDL and MosqueBusters have just thrown some bumps in the road in the process of Islamisation. “

Those who think that their enemy is “the far left” are tilting at windmills. The enemy is far more pervasive. But simple people like simple explanations.

Whether EDL survives or not, I have no idea. Even if it collapses, it has achieved more in three years than the BNP achieved in twenty years. I doubt there is any group in Britain that has been subject to such attacks: from right-wing media, Muslim gangs, gay communists, international hackers, secret police, academia, church leaders, politicians of every stripe (from SWP to liberals to BNP). What EDL has achieved was a minor earthquake in British politics. For them to have persisted for 600% longer than the experts advised is amazing. And even if it was to disappear, there is now a network of several thousand people across the country who thought they were alone five years ago.

34 thoughts on “The EDL, Alinksy, and an Earthquake in British Politics

  1. Baron,
    while I agree with your observation that the political Right is about as tracherous, regrding islam, as is the Left, I disagree with your explanations: money and attachements.
    Such incentives may not be necessary, if there is just fear.

  2. The closest parallel in the US is the TEA Party – as in “Taxed Enough Already”. Sometimes even the elected politicians they would support keep them at arms’ length.

    EDL & TEA are symptoms of the problems in our respective nations. Their agenda speaks to the dissatisfaction average folk experience as they try to find a more comfortable position under the weight of the government thumb.

  3. the left and right in the UK have reached consensus; maintain the status quo in English politics and thereby retain power.
    that is why the both sing from the same hymn sheet.
    left and right are virtually indistinguishable in all their main policies, its only the minor details that differ.
    no one will budge from their position unless power is threatened, which is why UKIP has caused Cameron to pledge a referendum on Europe; he simply had to in order to survive politically.
    the EDL has upset the gravy train on immigration or at the very least brought the matter to the public’s attention.
    it is now the no.1 topic in the UK.
    the islamists and their useful idiots to left and right must be fuming.
    THE EDL MUST BE DESTROYED!
    that is the establishment’s goal, of that i have no doubt.
    that the EDL has no formal membership has left it vulnerable to infiltration and sabotage.
    they must change that.

  4. I think we have the same problem in the US. While some are screaming that we are headed for the cliff, the vast majority of politicians on the left and the right as well as the MSM ask us all to please go back to sleep.
    Never mind the 1.3 TRILLION dollar deficit or the 16.5 TRILLION dollar debt, you will all get your Obama phones and food stamps on time!
    Anyone that says anything against this is labeled as a “right wing racist.”

  5. @Joe -I believe you were referring to my comment. Yes, it ended up being the whole establishment against the EDL, although I was more alluding to who set the ball rolling? Back in 2009, when the EDL were being formed, they were a new movement. Very quickly however the word spread that the EDL were “racists” and “hooligans”. How did this come about? Was it not because organisations like UAF spread the word about the EDL’s supposed connections to the BNP? Once it was an established “fact” that the EDL were “racists”, there was no more need for the UAF to stayed involved – mainstream media and the political parties started to fall over themselves to demonise the EDL. Because in the New Britain, “racist” is just about the worst thing one can be. However, my point was – was the initial portrayal of the EDL and connecting them to the BNP not due to the “anti-fascist” groups?

    I missed the news about the EDL breaking-up UAF/SWP meetings (I’m not living in Britain at the moment) – if this is the case, then such a “success” would have indeed seemed impossible just a few years ago. But with them being lampooned regularly by the newspapers, television and with people seemingly wanting to disassociate themselves from them, it doesn’t seem to me that they have created an “earthquake” yet. There is still a long way to go…

    Today in the Guardian was a piece about a Guardian columnist confronting a racist passenger on London’s public transport. The crunch – why do London buses and the police “tolerate” such speech on the buses? Yet in the comments, there are many personal accounts of far more serious – and far more physical – incidents on buses and trains in London – mostly involving black and Asian attackers, many of them just as racist towards whites. The quantity of these accounts would give GoV’s “cultural enrichment news” a run for its money. Yet there are hardly any articles about this and, from my experience of living in the UK, hardly any interest in such issues. And on the rare occasion someone raises them, their tame comment about immigration will be preceded by an hour of insisting that “I’m not a racist” and that certain ethnic groups are not a problem.

    The media and establishment are one thing. However only the people have the power to change them – through voting, and choosing which paper to read… When people themselves are afraid to discuss issues for fear of being branded racist, then the very mechanism by which any progress can be made becomes broken.

    • “Very quickly however the word spread that the EDL were “racists” and “hooligans”. How did this come about? Was it not because organisations like UAF spread the word about the EDL’s supposed connections to the BNP? Once it was an established “fact” that the EDL were “racists”, there was no more need for the UAF to stayed involved – mainstream media and the political parties started to fall over themselves to demonise the EDL. ”

      Before the EDL was formed, the chattering classes in Britain despised the working-class as “racist”, “violent”, “chavs”, etc. For maybe a decade, Julie Burchill was the lone voice pointing out that this naked hatred and prejudice towards the white working-class was the only form of fascism permitted in Britain. Any working-class movement that had not been co-opted by the chattering classes would be treated as beyond the pale. We have the ludicrous situation in Britain where educated, non-white people seriously believe that it is a logical impossibility for anyone who is not white to be racist. (Clearly they don’t know that Pakistanis are very racist towards black Africans; the Chinese are racist towards Indians and black Africans, and white people). Undoubtedly “race” has been used as the principle club with which the Left beat “the establishment” (i.e. the majority population of western countries). A movement is sweeping across the west though, with people asserting “anti-racist is code for anti-white”.

      By September 2009, about 20 to 30 UAF were outside Harrow Mosque, in front of 1500 muslim men, shouting through a loudspeaker “the Nazis are coming to burn the mosque”. I was standing close enough to hear the UAF chattering amongst themselves saying “we hope there will be a riot”. That was not an EDL demo, but about 20 EDL were there as bodyguards for a rep. from SIOE. The police arrested the rep. from SIOE rather than let him speak before the baying mob. Then the mob rioted, attacking the police, and the UAF ran off. It was clear from the 200 or so police officers there, that neither the police nor UAF expected 1500 muslims to be there.

      Like the Nazis hated the Communists, the UAF hate any other working-class movement, especially one that might take off (I was watching a video yesterday of the Communists in Athens siding with the police to attack the anarchists).

      Immediately following the Harrow demo, John Denham (the Labour government’s “Communities Minister”) said that the EDL were “Mosley’s blackshirts”. So, that positioning of EDL pre-dates anything UAF might do. Undoubtedly EDL could have made a concerted effort to show that the asians and blacks at EDL demos were safe. Although it is hard to know if the media would ever have changed their biased reporting.

      “I missed the news about the EDL breaking-up UAF/SWP meetings (I’m not living in Britain at the moment) – if this is the case, then such a “success” would have indeed seemed impossible just a few years ago. ”

      To my memory they broke up about 10 such meetings. It was so easy to do it, I don’t think they saw much point to it. They also broke up an AGM of McDonalds or KFC, where the company was debating using halal meat in all outlets (EDL worked in conjunction with the animal rights movement on that one).

      “Yet in the comments, there are many personal accounts of far more serious – and far more physical – incidents on buses and trains in London – mostly involving black and Asian attackers, many of them just as racist towards whites. ”

      These things need documenting. And the challenge needs to go out: since muslims are only 1/19th of the UK population, for every white man murdered by a gang of racist muslims, the Left should be forced to provide 19 examples of muslims murdered by gangs of racist white men. Here are 9 cases of racist muslim gangs killing white men and women in the UK in the last 10 years. http://4freedoms.ning.com/group/uk/forum/topics/racist-attacks-by-muslims Until people start to collect this information, and routinely challenge the media and the “anti-racists” with it, this will continue to be air-brushed from politics.

      ” it doesn’t seem to me that they have created an “earthquake” yet.”
      I said it was a minor earthquake. When you consider that political demonstrations have been banned for 3 months, and people have been banned from political action for 10 years, I think we can say it has caused a minor earthquake. What MPs and the media could not achieve over the grooming gangs, EDL managed to get things done.

      And all that with them being a bunch of amateurs who were not going to be scared off by violence. How they could be expected to withstand the attacks from every possible region of the establishment and from the scum of our society too, I don’t know. I have observed EDL very closely for 3 years, and I have very little to criticise them for. Since none of the police informants/provocateurs have been exposed, I have to conclude they are still well-ensconced.

      • I took part in an EDL march in Preston Lancashire a year or so ago. the crowd consisted of mostly white males BUT there was also a significant amount of Black AND Asians in the protest. The EDL is against Islamification of the UK and the building of super Mosques. The BNP and NF were against all non whites entering the UK which is RACIST. there is a fundamental difference in the two end goals

        • I never heard anyone mention that about the Preston demo, but it doesn’t surprise me (I saw black and asian people at both Dudley demos, and at London demos). And of course, I never saw any photos in the media about the Preston demo that showed anything but white faces (I distinctly remember the next day watching videos and photos of the Preston demo).

          All the photos that refer sarcastically to “white extremists” here:

          http://4freedoms.ning.com/group/uk/forum/topics/muslim-sponsored-report-edl-are-white-supremacists

          were taken in Nuneaton on the same day as the demo you were at in Preston. Interesting that NONE of the media showed any photos of the range of different people at those two demos (at the Nuneaton demo there must have been 30 photographers with “professional” equipment [some were probably plainclothes police, some communists]). With the photos from Nuneaton, I asked the individuals if I could take their photo, and did they want me to obscure their faces. In every case they agreed, and said they did not care about having their face obscured.

          I completely supported the idea of Casuals United and the “fatwa” they issued to journalists/photographers. http://casualsunited.wordpress.com/2013/02/21/comedy-gold-from-2009-as-the-commie-nuj-scream-about-being-called-hostile-edl/ It actually scared the media for the following few demonstrations (some photographers used to sidle up to people they recognise and plead with them to get the fatwa removed, as they had wives and kids to feed, blah, blah.)

          If EDL had thought it was a good idea, they could easily have had a “gallery” on their website showing the range of supporters they had (obscuring the features of people in the gallery to protect their identity). The contrast between what people would see on the EDL website compared to what the media showed would mean that people knew not to believe anything else they heard about EDL. I made this suggestion to people in authority in EDL on numerous occasions, but it was never taken up.

          This was such a dangerous movement to the establishment, that they have used the most extraordinary legal (and illegal) measures against EDL (the kinds of anti-democratic provisions not seen outside of wartime or when dealing with proven terrorists, such as the IRA).

          One man I know was fitted-up by the London police. Luckily for him, his job provided him with insurance to fight legal cases, otherwise he would probably have pleaded guilty when he was entirely innocent. His insurance policy meant he could pay £10k for a specialist technician to salvage CCTV images that showed that policeman after policeman stood in court and lied under oath. I am sure that in a significant number of cases people would not have been convicted if they had the resources and pressure groups behind them that the leftwing and the muslims have. But the people with money and power in Britain have left the working-class to fight this battle. (The notable exception is Douglas Murray, who has been prepared to take his own personal stand in this fight).

          None of the leftwing human rights/legal charities has ever condemned these anti-democratic and illegal actions by the establishment.

      • @Joe – I guess I am not familiar with all the EDL’s actions lately, so I accept they may have had more effect than I credited them for. Nonetheless – I remember reading stories from people travelling a hundred miles to go to an EDL meeting only to find that rather than it being a strategic meeting, everyone was drinking and not discussing what needed to be discussed. If that’s the level of professionalism, and if (as you say) they didn’t listen to your suggestions to put up the pictures of blacks and Asians on their gallery page, can they be surprised at the propaganda victory the left scored by successfully getting people to think of the EDL as “hooligans” and “racist”?

        As for the anti- white working class attitudes, yes they have become more accepted… yet for the past 17 or so years, people have been describing themselves more as working class. And yet in popular culture, from Harry Enfield’s Tim-nice-but-dim to Dizzee Rascal in his single “Sirens”, it’s posh people that have been the most ridiculed… And even in the immigrant groups, it seems as though the group people speak out against the most is the Poles. This in spite of them (as far as I know) committing no street crime or terrorist attacks to speak of. So are these anti-white working class attitudes really aimed at the working class, or are they just a part of general anti-white feeling?

        And to develop on Takuan Seiyo’s point – there are Jewish, Asian, GLBT divisions within the EDL… but is there a student division, or an academic division? The ones who’ll be ruling over us in twenty years are the ones at university today. Yet I haven’t heard of any EDL presence to speak of on campus. Even accounting for the inevitable SWP/UAF/Muslim attacks, can the EDL afford for students not to have their view heard?

        • “I remember reading stories from people travelling a hundred miles to go to an EDL meeting only to find that rather than it being a strategic meeting, everyone was drinking and not discussing what needed to be discussed. If that’s the level of professionalism…”

          I’m not claiming that EDL is some well-financed, slick, professional machine. It is a group of people most of whom never wanted to be involved in politics or political activism. From my experience, I’d say less than 1% are university graduates. Why should they have the financial and administrative skills associated with middle-class professionals? Staging this resistance has fallen to them precisely because the middle-class professionals are too cowardly to stand up to islamisation. I’ve lost count of the middle-class professionals who have said to me “I’m not getting involved with EDL until they show themselves to be a well-organised and professional organisation”. Those middle class people who are (in theory) against islamisation are too scared to speak out. And they refuse to associate with the working class people who have taken it upon themselves to get organised and speak out. EDL would not say to them: you are not allowed to join us. Just as EDL never said that to muslims, sikhs, jews, gays, etc. No, the blame lies with the middle class, and their fear/hatred of the working class.

          Most of the EDL would never demand of any middle class nerd on a demo (like me) that I go and get my head bashed in by the police (although hundreds on EDL demos are prepared to do that). But the middle class expect EDL to behave like lawyers, accountants, etc. before the middle class will join in. It’s pathetic.

          It’s the middle-class who are to be blamed for what is happening: it is not the working-class who run the country, the political parties, the churches, the media, the schools, the universities. Whatever failings are to be found with EDL, they have done the best they can. It is all the other groups who have not supported EDL who are to blame for what is coming.

          “And to develop on Takuan Seiyo’s point – there are Jewish, Asian, GLBT divisions within the EDL… but is there a student division, or an academic division? The ones who’ll be ruling over us in twenty years are the ones at university today. Yet I haven’t heard of any EDL presence to speak of on campus. Even accounting for the inevitable SWP/UAF/Muslim attacks, can the EDL afford for students not to have their view heard?”

          By going to university, most people who are from a working class background are already aspiring to become middle class and professional. And we are straight back to them being too scared to speak out against islamisation on campus, and too condescending to associate with EDL.

          Recently a muslim preacher was invited to speak at Brunel University; he is on record as saying that gay people are to be executed. Student Unions across Britain had a “no platform” policy for fascism, and even though they knew of this man’s record, they insisted they must protect his right to free speech, and demanded that students who opposed him should not have a demonstration against him. There is zero support in universities for anyone to speak out about islam. Even in City University (where they have just closed the muslim prayer room), a couple of years ago one academic there spoke out about what these muslim fanatics were doing; she got death threats from students, and she complained in the media about getting zero support from police, her employers, and her colleagues.

          We are 5 years into a recession, and students in Britain are now having to borrow approx £50,000 to get a degree. What student is going to stand up and be a representative of EDL on campus, when they will be physically attacked by muslims and leftwing fascists, and when they could be disadvantaged in future employment by this association? Tommy has no bank account, because the police have taken control of them all. Many people have lost their jobs by being identifed as a representative of EDL or the counter-jihad movement. Two years ago there was an EDL student group; it folded because the youngsters running it got no support within the universities. From what I can see, it is not the EDL who are being elitist and exclusionary, it is the middle-class.

          It’s like watching a re-run of the 1930s, only as far as the state is concerned, the uber-mensch are the muslims. Of course, they are no supermen, but they are the protected mascots of liberal fascists (who, irony of ironies, passionately believe they are anti-fascist).

          I don’t worry about who will be “ruling” in 20 years time. We will be on the verge of civil war by then. The economy will have been in the toilet for a decade or more. The university Ponzi scheme will have collapsed. Britain will be indistinguishable from a police state. There will be hundreds of muslims in prison for terrorist crimes (there are already more than 100 in prison at the moment). http://4freedoms.ning.com/group/maps/forum/topics/mi5-s-list-of-british-terrorists-since-2001

          In the 1970s, trial by jury was suspended (Diplock Courts) in Northern Ireland, and the liberal-left in Britain was outraged at this infringement of civil rights. In 2007, the Diplock Courts were officially ended. Only now the government are talking of introducing the same principle for “terrorist crimes” in the whole of Britain. (I use scare quotes, because I am sure that plenty of people opposing islamisation will be imprisoned in these juryless-courts). And the liberal-left are silent about what is happening.

          We’ve lost our freedom of speech, our freedom to protest, now we are losing the right to trial by jury. And all the time the middle-class are clutching their skirts and saying “I’m not going to associate with EDL; they are too coarse and too common”. It wouldn’t be so bad if the midde class were all delighted about islamisation, but most of them are hostile to it. But they will just keep fleeing further and further, until there is nowhere left to run.

          People had the means to go and see for themselves what EDL was like (when a demo came to their town) were instead scared off by the media lies and by the violence that followed whenever the revolutionary communists were there.

          It is more than pathetic. It is tragic.

          • “It wouldn’t be so bad if the midde class were all delighted about islamisation, but most of them are hostile to it.”

            From my experience, I’m not sure they’re that hostile… or if they are, they’re hiding it pretty well. As Paul Weston’s essay says – their intellectual discussions are mainly centered around football, cricket or X-factor. Maybe, as you say, it’s because they’re afraid of consequences for their career and mortgage. Yet some do get past that fear. Gavin Boby being a good example… The question surely is – how to get more of them to discuss these issues freely and openly?

            As for the EDL, I don’t disagree that they try to do a lot. For the moment, they are Britain’s main hope. They do admittedly have an image problem though. They are seen as “racists” and “hooligans”. Not all through their own fault, I agree. But for this reason they scare the middle class – many of whose careers may be in danger for associating with a “racist” group. So if it wants to attract a broader (and bigger) spectrum of members, surely the question is – “how to change that image?”. Hence fighting that propaganda war is the key…

            It might be too difficult at the moment to set up an EDL group on campus without it being condemned by all the do-gooders there. But if there was a society called the “Free speech society”, which would support debates with EDL members, counter attacks on freedom of speech etc, it could make for a harder target for the Trotskyite groups. And any attempt by student unions to support the “freedom of speech” of Muslim hate preachers advocating death to gays, as you described, while actively trying to deny that right to EDL speakers who have never called for anything remotely similar should be highlighted, protested with posters on campus, etc. If you can’t protest the Muslim hate preacher, at least protest the student union protecting them!

  6. I’ll be watching Joe’s comments, very interesting, worth reading twice. When did fear of being called a racist outweigh everything? In England, Europe, US, Canada and Australia? Don’t we all think it’s time to stand up in whatever way we can? I like to say, well, I am a racist and then give an argument as to why I am not but why people might think I am. I have more cojones than say a George Galloway who ladylike in his high heels trips out of the room, saying he will never debate an Israeli.

  7. I insist, as is my habit, that by limiting these observations to the realm of Islam, one is losing sight of the larger pattern, and therefore the possibility of devising counter-measures. Is the American “Right” any different with regard to Hispanization than the British “Right” is with respect to Islamization? Is the anti-racist din any different from the “We are a nation of immigrants” braying ? Who has cut the United States at the knees, perhaps forever, by exporting its industries to China and inundating the US with Chinese-made crap also entailing the relay to China of trillions of $US and an endless stream of US technology. Is the Chinese colossus now credibly threatening the US with a hot war and — almost as devastating — the “nuclear option” of using $3.6 trillion in China’s foreign reserves to destroy the American dollar — is all that a creation of Alinsky-reading Weathermen or of suit wearing, church going, free market-believing “conservatives”?

    Joe has made two comments I want to build on. One about the ruling class’s disdain and enmity to working class people and any political movement fuelled largely by the working class. Absolutely true. That’s why I took a reader to task who was chiding me for engaging in intellectual-speak rather than writing in a style and vocabulary that could move the hoi polloi. However, I contend that the white working class in any Western country has no chance — except after everything has crashed — against the university-educated managerial class that’s running its country. Those who want to save their countries and restore them to what they were in 1953 have to pull in intellectuals from every nook and cranny where they may be found, for only such people have the tools to deconstruct the deconstructors, expose the war in “peace,” the injustice in “justice,” the iniquity in “equity” and the racism in “racism.”

    Second, it’s a great moral and tactical mistake to try to prove that one’s movement is not racist, proffering evidence of black and Jewish members etc. There is no shame or evil in organizing as a political force of the erstwhile owners, builders and defenders of the land where lie one’s ancestors’ bones. The very premise that racism is the cardinal and unforgivable sin is the enemy’s premise; accepting it one starts playing the game by the enemy’s rules. The real question is that some “racist” principles and sentiments are defensible, and therefore they ought to be defended. The others, after Hitler, cannot be. This goes for the very vocabulary in which such matters are discussed, too.

    Here, again, an intellectual’s probe is needed for the required discrimination. It seems to me that BNP, for instance, that I had much hope for in its beginnings, has failed precisely because it did not have someone with the intellectual’s analytical kit in these matters.

    • “by limiting these observations to the realm of Islam, one is losing sight of the larger pattern, and therefore the possibility of devising counter-measures. ”

      I agree. Islamisation is just part of the process.

      ‘is all that a creation of Alinsky-reading Weathermen or of suit wearing, church going, free market-believing “conservatives” ‘

      Who knows who is to blame? It may not be one group; it may be overlapping groups. The eventual outcomes may not be what any/all of them ever intended. There are certainly more than these two groups you have identified, but even if there were only these two groups, the interactions and conflicts of both could have led us to where we are. Islamisation, massive public debt, globalisation are all inter-related, and all need to be fought, because they spell disaster for the west. Globalisation was being fought in the 1990s by a mixture of far-left anarchists and far-right capitalists (e.g. James Goldsmith).

      “Those who want to save their countries and restore them to what they were in 1953 have to pull in intellectuals from every nook and cranny…” and vice versa. I have been to plenty of meetings where it was the uneducated working-class who grasped complex points before the degree-educated middle-class grasped them (they have unlearning to do).

      “it’s a great moral and tactical mistake to try to prove that one’s movement is not racist, proffering evidence of black and Jewish members etc….The very premise that racism is the cardinal and unforgivable sin is the enemy’s premise; accepting it one starts playing the game by the enemy’s rules.”

      There we will have to agree to differ. Men make history, but not on grounds of their own choosing. A history of racism and slavery exists, and it is pointless to deny it. A discourse of anti-racism exists, and it needs to be challenged. I think EDL took the same position as you: racism is not our issue, therefore we are not pandering to it. I think by refusing to recognise the context, they handed the interpretation of EDL to the “anti-racist” Left.

      Most of the non-white people I know (half my family are not white) do not see racism as this huge obstacle. Racism is undoubtedly the principle tool worked-up by the Left to beat the establishment: it is their principle route to power. But it can be turned against the Left. Their hypocrisy over racism proves the Left is nothing more than an unprincipled lust for power. People need to take the Left’s agenda and turn it back on them. The history of the west is the moral high ground when it comes to racism and slavery; it is only ignorance of how terrible those things are/have been in other cultures that makes people think that the west has a worse record when it comes to racism.

      Challenging the Left and immigrants on their culture/history of racism is a powerful weapon. I’m quite happy to say: I will start to care about muslims being murdered by racists, when muslims stop conducting their racist murders of white Britons, and when the Left starts to object to these racist murders. Until then, I refuse to care about what happens to muslims.

    • Re: “A history of racism and slavery exists”

      That history exists in every other culture, and in the Muslim one to a much greater degree than in the Western one. To genuflect, uniquely, for sins and crimes that afflict all of humanity is crazy and perverse.

      But then you need to know the histories of other peoples and other cultures, and you have to know them well enough to get past the wall of silence and distortion. That includes the further obstacle that because most of those cultures, except for the Northeast Asian ones, are so much more primitive than the Western one, they don’t even have history in the sense we understand that word.

      On the issues of racism and slavery, while fully acknowledging our own transgressions, you don’t defend; you attack.

      If you have the right tools. Hence the value of “intellectual.”

    • To expand on your term racist, always when confronted by whatever stripe who calls you a racist, always retort that you are not a racist, but a western culturalist and that our western culture is vastly superior to any others, period. The look on the faces is always one of confusion and taking the wind out of their self righteous sails. Try it, it makes for very interesting exchanges.

  8. Joe wrote:

    “We have the ludicrous situation in Britain where educated, non-white people seriously believe that it is a logical impossibility for anyone who is not white to be racist.”

    This may be simplistic. I think educated non-whites know quite well how much various forms of racism are not uncommon not only among their peers in their particular race, but among other races of non-whites. If they know this, why then do they continue to purvey the notion Joe described? It is reasonable to conclude that when they talk about “racism” they are not talking about what the anxiously sincere whites of the West are talking about. What educated non-whites are referring to is simply a power dynamic, where the whites are perceived to have more power, and that is then perceived to reflect an eternally unfair situation of which Colonialism was its honest expression, now continued in a crypto fashion. And by “unfair” they do not refer to equity in the white Western sense, but again simply a power relationship. They feel their tribe deserves power, and they resent the superiority of the white West, and will push every meme and every button they can to try to exploit this. And, coincidentally, the white West is dominated by a paradigm based upon Shame and Guilt for its own “racism” — again, a very different “racism” (actually, a reasonable concept to be reasonably eschewed, although the white West has twisted it into an irrationally morbid self-criticism). The educated non-whites thus have handed to them, by the white West, on a silver platter enormous fodder to be exploited to their advantage in this regard.

    And what I’ve said above, while it is a problem in relation to educated non-whites in general, it becomes a much more serious, and far deadlier, problem with regard to one particular ethnic minority (perceived as such — which is all that matters — by the white West): Muslims.

    • I agree with you. So let me re-state it from:

      “We have the ludicrous situation in Britain where educated, non-white people seriously believe that it is a logical impossibility for anyone who is not white to be racist.”

      to

      “We have the ludicrous situation in Britain where educated, non-white people state to white people in a non-joking manner that it is a logical impossibility for anyone who is not white to be racist.”

      The person I have in mind who told me she could not be racist because she was not white was a teacher of law at a British university. When challenged on this she seemed to struggle to comprehend that what she had just said was a racist statement.

      I’ve spoken to educated “moderate” muslims who have merrily admitted to their preparedness to engage in severe, gang-violence against white people. And a few minutes later they have told me of how they have successfully sued employers (or others) for “racism” against them! The hypocrisy did not seem to be at all evident to them.

      The line of sophistry that the Left and the “black power” movement (says it all really, it’s about power, not equality) is that racism can only apply when there is a power relationship, and that white people are always in the position of power. That is what needs to be challenged. If non-white people are far more ready to be violent, and are preying in gangs, then the power is all in their favour. Once again, information needs to be collated (I’ve seen people argue that statistically it is white men who are massively and disproportionately the victims of racist violence).

      And the whole “deconstruction”/”anti-essentialist” doctrine can be used against the concept of “race”.

  9. This is all very interesting in that it makes me think about Australia’s attitude to Geert Wilder’s visit there. The hatred from their broadcasting network was terrible. The man was not allowed to speak and when he did he was belittled. The usual anarchists in the streets saying HE could not speak. Why? So Australia? You are immune to Islam? Every ignoramus interviewed him and told Geert Wilders he was a racist. Funny to me since I spend my life saying yes I am a racist, debate me? Naw they are all little baby boys running away at the word racist. I prefer to laugh at them, like racist old fatty George Galloway and his lovely desperately trying to shed their red armor you know that lovely photo on the beach. Is that young nice girl his daughter, I am sure, who would want that old wrinkily man? Not any young girls I know. But a lovely young woman followed him out of the debate, heels clicking in high dudgeon. Was she the lovely in the video? I wonder, someone should fill us in about George Galloway and his gals.

    • “The man was not allowed to speak and when he did he was belittled. The usual anarchists in the streets saying HE could not speak.”

      These “arguments” by the neo-fascists are so predictable, that any intelligent person should be anticipating them, and have demolition tactics to hand. When people say “we have a no-platform policy”, the response is “fine, so you are saying you want all conflict to be settled through violence not by dialogue?”

      “Every ignoramus interviewed him and told Geert Wilders he was a racist.”

      That can be challenged by saying to the interviewer “only racists believe that the concept of ‘race’ has any significance; I despise racists like you who seek to promote this bogus idea of racial difference”.

      Those are my responses. You can have an entirely different set of responses. But someone like Geert Wilders should have anticipated all these attacks, and have rebuttals to all of them. Preferably rebuttals that make the opponents look like the scum they are.

      • I’ve been observing the left throwing around the words “racist”for the past decade. It makes non-Muslim people, especially younger ones react primarily from the heart of ignorance. While older ones react from the head of logic, reasoning, and experience. There in lies the gap between young and old, naive and seasoned. When the crocodile starts biting vocal feminists, gays, dog lovers, dhimmis, liberal dummies and children…. perhaps Europe will awaken to the threats of Islam. But it will be too late. Muslims will outnumber the kuffars at the voting booth. Like the other 57 OIC nations, non-Muslims will be driven out or enslaved. In the past decade, there have been many pockets of resistance. These need to be filmed and documented on a continual basis. Examples include gays getting beat up or forced out of “No Go” zones, dogs and puppies mistreated by Muslims, women forced to cover themselves, and children victimized by grooming gangs. Nothing short of this type of exposure will change a liberal, multicultural mind, especially in the West.

      • “only racists believe that the concept of ‘race’ has any significance”

        Precisely.  And thus – according to you – only racists are correct.

        Race has biological significance; anyone who watches who wins the Olympic races, and who wins the Olympic swimming contests, understands this – though there is far more to it than that.  Race has mental significance; anyone who spends time with a statistically significant group size of students attempting to teach them will notice that.  Race has criminal significance; Jesse Jackson noticed that.  Race has significance all up and down the line.  The question of to what extent that significance must be taken into account in organizing human affairs is a separate one, but to say that it is of no account or has no significance is something only a blind fool – or a deliberately dishonest leftist – would assert.

        “We’re not racist” is the rallying cry of losers. If you are at all representative of the EDL (I have no idea whether this is the case) then the EDL has lost already. The English are a distinct ethnicity within the distinct white race, and both the English and the white race have a right to preserve that distinction and to exist. If you can not justify even admitting that much, you are the walking dead, and deserve neither help nor sympathy, because you will not help yourselves.

        (this may get submitted twice due to a combination of user error and unexpected browser behavior)

        • ““We’re not racist” is the rallying cry of losers. If you are at all representative of the EDL (I have no idea whether this is the case) then the EDL has lost already. ”

          I presume you are an avowed racist. Since you think EDL are losers and have lost, can you explain in what way you racists are winning?

  10. I appreciate the thrust of Baron’s introduction; however, I find in a couple of places of his locution there still lurks something essentially equivalent to the very problem he’s identifying:

    “…the political Left is by no means the only force massing against the Counterjihad.

    NR are hardly liberals or leftists. NR is one of the primary bastions of American conservatism.


    No, it is not the Left that is the biggest problem. The whole political establishment across the entire Western world has mobilized against “Islamophobia”.

    The problematic terms in the quotes above are the active descriptions of “massing against” and “mobilized against”. I’m not disputing that active policies exist among sociopolitically influential non-Leftists. But I think the problem of relatively passive PC MC (with regard to the problem of Islam only), often sincerely assumed as axiomatic givens is far more important and is the the primary factor responsible for the persistence of the West’s myopia. Not only that, this mass of passive functional PC MC is what allows the more activist PC MCs (whether they be Leftists or conservatives or floating somewhere pleasantly between) to pursue and implement their agendas.

    By the way, I have found that several illustrious scholars who have modeled their academic careers in philosophy and history and religious studies after their mentor, philosopher Eric Voegelin (1901-1985) — including Barry Cooper, Fritz Wagner and Eugene Webb — are basically PC MC about Islam. And if anyone knows anything about the academic subculture of Voegelinians, they may likely be the least Leftist people on the planet. The website VoegelinView is their official site, and one finds many examples of a disturbingly PC MC outlook on Islam — and only on Islam. Otherwise, concerning every other sociopolitical issue, they are quite solidly “conservative”.

  11. The bottom line is that White-European-Christians are going to have to reform the tribe and advocate without reservation or apology for their interests and well being.

    Until then, it’s all downhill for European Christians and their institutions, nation states and peoples.

  12. Daniels and NR are hardly liberals or leftists.

    I beg to differ. Daniels and NR are highly liberal in certain important ways. For true conservatism and a realistic assessment of the Joys of Jihad, I recommend Larry Auster:

    On the empty conservatism of Theodore Dalrymple

    As is so often the case with Dalrymple’s writings, he relentlessly recounts horrific social ills in such a way as to plunge the reader into an abyss of cultural despair, rather than attempting to identify the principle of the social phenomena he’s describing, their moral and spiritual source. Such an examination might lead both author and reader to an understanding of the error that got society into this mess (and clear insight into a problem, even a terrible problem, is energizing rather than depressing), which in turn would suggest, at least in theory, a way out of the mess, namely the repudiation and reversal of the error. But no. The main thing for Dalrymple, a medical doctor who has abandoned his native England to live in France, is not diagnosis and cure, but indulgence in thoughts so black and searing that the closest equivalent I can think of is that ultimate literary nightmare, Edgar Allan Poe’s “The Narrative of Arthur Gordon Pym.”

    http://www.amnation.com/vfr/archives/021323.html

    • Remember John Derbyshire was kicked out of National Review after his rumination on The Talk – White Peoples Version.

      And the criticism of Dalrymple applies to Victor Davis Hanson as well. They are two peas in a pod.

  13. Pingback: We truly are the Shadow Culture — Winds Of Jihad By SheikYerMami

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>