I would also argue at this point that there are grouplets that are reasonably effective in one area such as the Brittanica Party in Glasgow. This small group of people have run for office in Glasgow and are, I am sure effective, but are they a political movement? Again, no. They are a local pressure group active in local politics.
I was involved in two “Unity” projects that were aimed at creating a movement in Great Britain.
1. The Nationalist Alliance:
This was an alliance of the White Nationalist Party, England First Party, Wolf’s Hook White Brotherhood, Spearhead Support Group and several active Independents. The typical member was one who had left the BNP in 1999 and had unsuccessfully attempted to revive the National Front, and unashamedly racial. This party was active in supporting the late John Tyndall, who was ostracised from the inner circles of the BNP during the race-hate trials, this movement was poised to be the alternative to the BNP years before the NF made it’s comeback. So what killed it?
Poor leadership and internal splits after the unexpected death of John Tyndall were the primary factors, but also the BNP was still gaining traction and over though the principled nationalists felt they were better off staying put. The party split and ultimately folded to be replaced by the British People’s Party.
2. The Nationalist Unity Forum.
This was a series of meetings put together by Dr. Jim Lewthwaite who had left the BNP after the 2010 General Election, to set up the Democratic Nationalists. This party was highly active in Bradford and Dr. Lewtwaite began linking up with other small patriotic outfits, including the intellectual speaking circuit in London, to try and build up an alternative to the BNP. Once he had obtained the backing of ex-BNP members from the North East of England and the ex-BNP Yorkshire and Humberside MEP Andrew Brons, they founded a new party but this has struggled to take off.
My involvement in this was not welcomed by the hierarchy of this drive as I was considered “too extreme”, though I had spoken at some of their meetings and obtained some support on an individual, one to one level. Also the party I was representing (the British People’s Party) did not appreciate me supporting this effort and they were forging links with the National Front - a party they eventually ended up merging into.
Other than the BNP and the National Front, those are the only nationalist parties that have the right to call themselves a movement. Here is how I judge a “movement”.
· The party must have an active leadership.
· The party must be represented in every region of the country with an active regional leadership.
· The party must be represented in a sizeable number of counties by an active county leadership.
· The party must be able to make news and turn out activists on short notice in any area of the county.
· The party must be seeking to unify and engage with the wider public.
· The party must have an inventory of tactics and use all of them regularly, be it meetings, fighting elections, demonstrations or what have you.
· The party must be making progress at the ballot box, and not permanently in decline.
· The Party must possess and distribute regular literature to the public as well as internally.
I believe that to have a movement we have to be seen as putting out a unified message, and give hope to our people. I think we should forget the keyboard warriors, those trying to sell their wares and crackpots with single a issue agenda of their own. And it goes without saying we must exclude those who commit miscegenation and sexual perversion as well as followers of any of the Jewish political movements.
I think that if we start bringing these activists, independents and micro parties together who are doing their own bit as a loose association with a common set of criteria (as above) we can ditch the time-wasters and kick start this movement up again. Either independently of the existing parties or as a supporting back-up reserve.