It’s almost a year to the day since I launched manifestoproject.org. It feels like an eternity ago. It’s evolved quite considerably since I started it. As a political endeavour, though, it has been an abject failure. Perhaps it is down to my lack of powers of persuasion, but the point that political parties should have a firm intellectual foundation and stress tested policies has not landed with any of them.
There was never going to be any peaceful way out of this. Too many egos and emotions on the left were responsible for far too many mistakes, with far too deep and far too lethal implications for the heritage British population (by whom I mean those who can trace their history back to before 1945).
There comes a point where all that people on the Left will consider doing is doubling down on what, in any rational, sane world, would now be recognised as appallingly misguided mistakes. That is where we are now. They have made far too many mistakes, and there is no scenario in which they can admit them. In Germany's case, it was Merkel opening the borders in 2015. In the UK, the rot goes far deeper and can be traced back to both the initial Windrush invasion and the rejection of Enoch Powell, and then the Blair regime really opened the borders deliberately to rub people's noses into it. The replacement by Cameron and Osborne of the old Conservatives with Liberal Democrats, with a different logo, merely twisted the knife.
I realise that you're based in the UK and therefore have to be very careful to avoid any potential offences, however contrived, because the regime in power would do anything to make an example of you and even if acquitted, "the process is the punishment". There have been far too many examples from the trans-freak, cross-dressing, mutilation of children cult for there to be any doubt that, if one dares to contradict the prevailing orthodoxy, the criminal justice system can be weaponized to destroy you.
I've said for some time that I can only see one of two ways out of this:
1. Continued inexorable degradation of the status quo, with ever more third-worlders entering legally and illegally, the fabric of society being torn asunder, and a balkanisation of the United Kingdom gradually but inexorably taking place, destroying the legacy which those of us who served in the military and our forefathers risked all for. And balkanization is the correct term. There is no such thing as multiculturalism or diversity. It is an invasion that will lead to a new Lebanon or a new Iran. Eventually, it is just a matter of time. The degradation of society, the stabbings, the rapes are simply punctuation along that route.
2. A civil war. Whilst I was an Army officer, David Betz of King's College London was my tutor. I have watched with interest as he has anticipated, on many podcasts and YouTube videos, the risks of a British civil war. I agree with him in some respects that there is a risk, but where I depart from him is that I think the British population is largely old, weak, and cowardly. The population has also been deliberately diluted by invaders and traitors, and therefore I fear it will be too difficult to mobilise patriots in sufficient numbers using sufficient force to apply sufficient direct action to achieve decisive effect. But I hope I am wrong. In Spain in the 1930s, Franco successfully destroyed the communists, and kept them out for half a century. In Chile, Pinochet achieved similarly for almost two decades from 1973. Both made mistakes, which allowed left wingers to return (e.g., at the tail end of the Spanish Civil War, many leftwingers escaped, only to return decades later in the 1980s), but they set excellent examples. The best example by none is Lee Kuan Yew in Singapore. In Operation Coldstore, he successfully suppressed all left-wing opposition, but that was when enemy numbers were small and could be contained easily.
I realise that you must necessarily be studiously neutral for legal reasons, and therefore I address the following encouragement to those actually deployed on the ground in the future: good luck, god speed, you are defending a civilisation which has been betrayed by traitors and fifth columnists.
I don’t want to see violent paramilitary style operations on the streets of Britain but to an extent we already have this in parts of our great cities where our police enter and manage by consent with local leaders. What happened in Dover and Portsmouth are inevitable reactions from the indigenous people to this inequity and the unfairness of mass legal and illegal immigration. We know whose side the police are on. If push came to shove, what side would our military be on? Their leaders are woke but it’s the men who matter.
They are but whose side are the men on? I’m certainly no expert on Military Juntas but there’s usually some very influential leader not at the absolute top of the services who steps as leader to topple governments when they stop governing for the people. I’m probably a million miles off target now but one thing that Dover and Portsmouth brought home to me was we aren’t far away from the time when everyone will have to choose a side.
My take on this is that no elected government has actually wielded any real power for a long time now, beyond deciding what trivial things to ban or what to tax next to shovel into the maw of the black hole that is public finances.
Thus Burnham can do nothing about the boats in the same way that Starmer couldn’t. In part they are selected because they don’t want to do anything about them either. But assuming that they did they’d be out pretty sharpish. As with Chagos which defies any legal, strategic or political logic the entity that wields the actual power does not want to change course on the boats & borders issue.
I actually don’t think the diffuse power structure that actually controls the state wants the boats either – its just it wont be challenged. This has become like the familiar narrative of power versus challenger seen in stories like “one flew over the cuckoos nest”, “cool hand Luke”, “First Blood” or even the Exodus narrative from the Bible. The ‘Power’ cannot be seen to be defied and beaten.
Thus we reach an incredibly dangerous moment where the figures challenging authority are gaining support, and as you rightly point out, the means to settle this by electoral means are being quashed. Every rape and murder brings home the stakes of letting this state of affairs continue but the “power”, the “regime” or whatever will not back down because its authority is being challenged.
Where this goes from here is anyone’s guess, but its not going to be pretty.
There was never going to be any peaceful way out of this. Too many egos and emotions on the left were responsible for far too many mistakes, with far too deep and far too lethal implications for the heritage British population (by whom I mean those who can trace their history back to before 1945).
There comes a point where all that people on the Left will consider doing is doubling down on what, in any rational, sane world, would now be recognised as appallingly misguided mistakes. That is where we are now. They have made far too many mistakes, and there is no scenario in which they can admit them. In Germany's case, it was Merkel opening the borders in 2015. In the UK, the rot goes far deeper and can be traced back to both the initial Windrush invasion and the rejection of Enoch Powell, and then the Blair regime really opened the borders deliberately to rub people's noses into it. The replacement by Cameron and Osborne of the old Conservatives with Liberal Democrats, with a different logo, merely twisted the knife.
I realise that you're based in the UK and therefore have to be very careful to avoid any potential offences, however contrived, because the regime in power would do anything to make an example of you and even if acquitted, "the process is the punishment". There have been far too many examples from the trans-freak, cross-dressing, mutilation of children cult for there to be any doubt that, if one dares to contradict the prevailing orthodoxy, the criminal justice system can be weaponized to destroy you.
I've said for some time that I can only see one of two ways out of this:
1. Continued inexorable degradation of the status quo, with ever more third-worlders entering legally and illegally, the fabric of society being torn asunder, and a balkanisation of the United Kingdom gradually but inexorably taking place, destroying the legacy which those of us who served in the military and our forefathers risked all for. And balkanization is the correct term. There is no such thing as multiculturalism or diversity. It is an invasion that will lead to a new Lebanon or a new Iran. Eventually, it is just a matter of time. The degradation of society, the stabbings, the rapes are simply punctuation along that route.
2. A civil war. Whilst I was an Army officer, David Betz of King's College London was my tutor. I have watched with interest as he has anticipated, on many podcasts and YouTube videos, the risks of a British civil war. I agree with him in some respects that there is a risk, but where I depart from him is that I think the British population is largely old, weak, and cowardly. The population has also been deliberately diluted by invaders and traitors, and therefore I fear it will be too difficult to mobilise patriots in sufficient numbers using sufficient force to apply sufficient direct action to achieve decisive effect. But I hope I am wrong. In Spain in the 1930s, Franco successfully destroyed the communists, and kept them out for half a century. In Chile, Pinochet achieved similarly for almost two decades from 1973. Both made mistakes, which allowed left wingers to return (e.g., at the tail end of the Spanish Civil War, many leftwingers escaped, only to return decades later in the 1980s), but they set excellent examples. The best example by none is Lee Kuan Yew in Singapore. In Operation Coldstore, he successfully suppressed all left-wing opposition, but that was when enemy numbers were small and could be contained easily.
I realise that you must necessarily be studiously neutral for legal reasons, and therefore I address the following encouragement to those actually deployed on the ground in the future: good luck, god speed, you are defending a civilisation which has been betrayed by traitors and fifth columnists.
The 'white' population of this country is still around 85% and you are wrong to assume they are all old,weak and cowardly.
A British style civil war is coming and you will start to see how determined the indigenous British people are.
I don’t want to see violent paramilitary style operations on the streets of Britain but to an extent we already have this in parts of our great cities where our police enter and manage by consent with local leaders. What happened in Dover and Portsmouth are inevitable reactions from the indigenous people to this inequity and the unfairness of mass legal and illegal immigration. We know whose side the police are on. If push came to shove, what side would our military be on? Their leaders are woke but it’s the men who matter.
British Top Brass are part of the problem.
They are but whose side are the men on? I’m certainly no expert on Military Juntas but there’s usually some very influential leader not at the absolute top of the services who steps as leader to topple governments when they stop governing for the people. I’m probably a million miles off target now but one thing that Dover and Portsmouth brought home to me was we aren’t far away from the time when everyone will have to choose a side.
It would need to be a Colonel level led coup.
Successful mass civil protest must remain peaceful and individually coordinate on a starfish structure or individual cells throughout the country.
Read Gene Sharp's little book 'From Dictatorship to Democracy' for inspiration and start your own local cell!!
I expect Burnhams globalists to redouble their efforts to bring about a civil conflict in the UK.
It looks like Trumps arranging a truce between Ukraine and Russia.
Once Ukraine and Iran quietens down he will hopefully go for the globalists. Not a moment too soon.
Good to see people getting ready. I’m an old fart now (70s) but I’ve been working out for a while to give a hand when needed.
My take on this is that no elected government has actually wielded any real power for a long time now, beyond deciding what trivial things to ban or what to tax next to shovel into the maw of the black hole that is public finances.
Thus Burnham can do nothing about the boats in the same way that Starmer couldn’t. In part they are selected because they don’t want to do anything about them either. But assuming that they did they’d be out pretty sharpish. As with Chagos which defies any legal, strategic or political logic the entity that wields the actual power does not want to change course on the boats & borders issue.
I actually don’t think the diffuse power structure that actually controls the state wants the boats either – its just it wont be challenged. This has become like the familiar narrative of power versus challenger seen in stories like “one flew over the cuckoos nest”, “cool hand Luke”, “First Blood” or even the Exodus narrative from the Bible. The ‘Power’ cannot be seen to be defied and beaten.
Thus we reach an incredibly dangerous moment where the figures challenging authority are gaining support, and as you rightly point out, the means to settle this by electoral means are being quashed. Every rape and murder brings home the stakes of letting this state of affairs continue but the “power”, the “regime” or whatever will not back down because its authority is being challenged.
Where this goes from here is anyone’s guess, but its not going to be pretty.
Success will only come from a mass people's movement demanding change that ultimately turns our politicians into our servants and not our masters.
These are the six demands that should become the focus for our protests.
https://harrogateagenda.org.uk/