British and Proud
09-03-2009, 08:27 PM
BNP Has to Adapt or Die (http://unrepentantbritishnationalist.blogspot.com/2009/09/bnp-has-to-adapt-or-die.html)
I am sure most visitors to this site are aware that the BNP has been taken to court by the Commission for Equality & Human Right (CEHR) over the party's membership criteria, which denies membership to non-European ethnic groups.
As a result of this, it appears as though our Chairman, Nick Griffin, is ultimately resigned to the fact that the BNP will have to to open up membership to all ethnic groups. The alternative is for the party to effectively be made illegal, at least as a political entity, and therefore unable to contest elections. He is quoted on the BNP's website thus:
“the forthcoming Equality Bill will, in any case, simply and unavoidably ban any political party from discriminating on grounds of ethnicity.”
He continues:
“Adapt or die is the only decision left to make, for failure to adapt would lead either to our being bled white through the courts or crushed by new criminal laws. Party unity is priceless, because a party of brothers standing shoulder to shoulder can be persecuted, but it can never be beaten or broken.”
Ultimately it is clear that he believes the BNP's membership policy can be changed without compromising our chief objective:
"I have no doubt that it is possible to redraft our constitution so as to ensure we comply with the new law while at the same time holding true to our core principles and most important of all to our purpose — to secure a future for the true children of our islands."
Now, personally I am angered by this whole affair, as it is an affront to democracy. It amounts to the government, the Labour Party, determining the constitution of its only real political adversary - although this has been done indirectly via a politically correct quango it has established. That is totalitarianism. IN A REAL DEMOCRACY THE PEOPLE SHOULD VOTE FOR WHOMEVER THEY PLEASE!
However, it appears we will have to accept change, so what are the implications of this? As I see it there are positives and negatives relating to permitting non-white members.
Firstly, and most worrying by far, is the possibility that large numbers of ethnic minorities will want to join in order to subvert and destroy the party. On the face of it, this is a real threat. However, an article in the BNP's Identity Magazine of would suggest this isn't so. The following passages appeared in the February issue from 2007:
Voting Membership
Nick Griffin explains how the new Voting Membership system will provide the BNP with the stable base needed for future rapid growth.
"We don't want to be either a dictatorship or a floppy liberal democracy; go away and come back with a system for a meritocracy. Overall policy formation should be in the hands of the people whose efforts make the party tick". This, in effect, was the message to the party leadership from an overwhelming majority at the BNP's first annual conference in November 2005. The leadership returned last November to the second Conference with a set of proposals to establish a new 'Voting Membership' tier in the party.
.
.
.
Voting Members...will gain the additional right to play an active role in bringing forward policy motions for consideration at Conference and to vote on them....To earn this right to be involved in this process and to influence party policy - and in order to protect the BNP's core nationalist principles from potential dilution by a huge influx of 'Johnny-Come-Latelies' at some stage in the future - Voting Membership will only be open to members who meet a number of important criteria:
Two years' unbroken BNP membership...fulfilling certain basic requirements to demonstrate genuine and sustained commitment on an annual and monthly basis.
In a nutshell this includes:
- a minimum of an average of one three hour activity session per week (arranged and monitored by local organisers).
- a financial commitment (£10 per month).
- political training (attendance at either the Summer School or Winter Training event)
So, and I am assuming the Voting Membership is still in place, it would take a lot of committed and dedicated people to subvert the party. Additionally, there is nothing to stop the party from making the criteria more rigorous. How about five years' continuous membership?
Additionally, I do not imagine that many people from the ethnic minorities wish to join the party if they are aware that they will not be able to stifle our progress or dilute the party's core principles. As Judge Paul Collins noted at the recent hearing, which was adjourned:
the EHRC had not provided any evidence that there was "a long queue of black people wanting to join the BNP".
It may surprise some people to note that the BNP already has at least one dedicated ethnic member, Lawrence Rustem:
Lawrence is a Councillor for a Barking and Dagenham constituency, and has been a member of the BNP for many years longer than I have. He is a chap who deserves a lot of respect, and though I am generally adverse to the idea of non-British members (I believe he is half-English), nobody can fault his dedication to the cause and I take my hat off to him.
If we do gain a small number of ethnic members, by promoting Lawrence into the senior ranks of the party - and a paid position - I believe we will be able to avert legal action from those that may contend they have been discriminated against.
Finally, let me say that this will, as Nick so eloquently put it, "quickly rue the day when they broke the very stick with which they have beaten us for so long". I believe we can emerge stronger from this, and it will be much harder for the press to smear us as a racist party.
I am sure most visitors to this site are aware that the BNP has been taken to court by the Commission for Equality & Human Right (CEHR) over the party's membership criteria, which denies membership to non-European ethnic groups.
As a result of this, it appears as though our Chairman, Nick Griffin, is ultimately resigned to the fact that the BNP will have to to open up membership to all ethnic groups. The alternative is for the party to effectively be made illegal, at least as a political entity, and therefore unable to contest elections. He is quoted on the BNP's website thus:
“the forthcoming Equality Bill will, in any case, simply and unavoidably ban any political party from discriminating on grounds of ethnicity.”
He continues:
“Adapt or die is the only decision left to make, for failure to adapt would lead either to our being bled white through the courts or crushed by new criminal laws. Party unity is priceless, because a party of brothers standing shoulder to shoulder can be persecuted, but it can never be beaten or broken.”
Ultimately it is clear that he believes the BNP's membership policy can be changed without compromising our chief objective:
"I have no doubt that it is possible to redraft our constitution so as to ensure we comply with the new law while at the same time holding true to our core principles and most important of all to our purpose — to secure a future for the true children of our islands."
Now, personally I am angered by this whole affair, as it is an affront to democracy. It amounts to the government, the Labour Party, determining the constitution of its only real political adversary - although this has been done indirectly via a politically correct quango it has established. That is totalitarianism. IN A REAL DEMOCRACY THE PEOPLE SHOULD VOTE FOR WHOMEVER THEY PLEASE!
However, it appears we will have to accept change, so what are the implications of this? As I see it there are positives and negatives relating to permitting non-white members.
Firstly, and most worrying by far, is the possibility that large numbers of ethnic minorities will want to join in order to subvert and destroy the party. On the face of it, this is a real threat. However, an article in the BNP's Identity Magazine of would suggest this isn't so. The following passages appeared in the February issue from 2007:
Voting Membership
Nick Griffin explains how the new Voting Membership system will provide the BNP with the stable base needed for future rapid growth.
"We don't want to be either a dictatorship or a floppy liberal democracy; go away and come back with a system for a meritocracy. Overall policy formation should be in the hands of the people whose efforts make the party tick". This, in effect, was the message to the party leadership from an overwhelming majority at the BNP's first annual conference in November 2005. The leadership returned last November to the second Conference with a set of proposals to establish a new 'Voting Membership' tier in the party.
.
.
.
Voting Members...will gain the additional right to play an active role in bringing forward policy motions for consideration at Conference and to vote on them....To earn this right to be involved in this process and to influence party policy - and in order to protect the BNP's core nationalist principles from potential dilution by a huge influx of 'Johnny-Come-Latelies' at some stage in the future - Voting Membership will only be open to members who meet a number of important criteria:
Two years' unbroken BNP membership...fulfilling certain basic requirements to demonstrate genuine and sustained commitment on an annual and monthly basis.
In a nutshell this includes:
- a minimum of an average of one three hour activity session per week (arranged and monitored by local organisers).
- a financial commitment (£10 per month).
- political training (attendance at either the Summer School or Winter Training event)
So, and I am assuming the Voting Membership is still in place, it would take a lot of committed and dedicated people to subvert the party. Additionally, there is nothing to stop the party from making the criteria more rigorous. How about five years' continuous membership?
Additionally, I do not imagine that many people from the ethnic minorities wish to join the party if they are aware that they will not be able to stifle our progress or dilute the party's core principles. As Judge Paul Collins noted at the recent hearing, which was adjourned:
the EHRC had not provided any evidence that there was "a long queue of black people wanting to join the BNP".
It may surprise some people to note that the BNP already has at least one dedicated ethnic member, Lawrence Rustem:
Lawrence is a Councillor for a Barking and Dagenham constituency, and has been a member of the BNP for many years longer than I have. He is a chap who deserves a lot of respect, and though I am generally adverse to the idea of non-British members (I believe he is half-English), nobody can fault his dedication to the cause and I take my hat off to him.
If we do gain a small number of ethnic members, by promoting Lawrence into the senior ranks of the party - and a paid position - I believe we will be able to avert legal action from those that may contend they have been discriminated against.
Finally, let me say that this will, as Nick so eloquently put it, "quickly rue the day when they broke the very stick with which they have beaten us for so long". I believe we can emerge stronger from this, and it will be much harder for the press to smear us as a racist party.