The economic crises…in simple language!

So here we are, we are officially in recession. What makes me laugh though is that the news media, the government and the worlds economists are still failing to explain the current economic crises in terms that the normal man and woman are able to understand. Now personally, I like words, so I have no problem understanding their technical jargon. But the masses? Not a chance! Purely because the explanations are worded so that the average man and woman can’t understand, and if anything, it could be said that understanding is the last thing our masters want. So here you go…..

Britain has stopped working. You see, if you or I had no job and no income, we would still need to live. Now let’s assume that you had plenty of money in the bank account. After all, like Britain, you have worked most of your life so it stands to reason that you will have some savings of some kind.

Well, this is exactly what has happened with the UK. In the past we had a big industrial economy. We sold goods to the world, which brought in lots of money and as a result we were big and powerful. But there was a problem, the unions – realising how much money Britain was making – decided that they wanted a larger slice of the pie, so they went on strike, nearly crippled the economy and Thatcher had to knock them down to size. Sadly though, in doing so, she also destroyed what was left of Britain’s industrial power house.

So there Britain was; out of work, but luckily enough, out of work with a healthy bank balance. Over the next few years however Britain brought everything from the world. We stopped making stuff ourselves, stopped selling stuff to the world and stopped earning money…we just spent. But never mind, our people still had jobs…albeit jobs with foreign companies who sent all of their profits back to their families. And so, when the money ran out, we raided the overdraft.

Don’t worry though; we have Gordon Brown, the UK’s most successful Chancellor of the Exchequer in years. Thankfully, we have had him balancing the check book and as a result things aren’t as bad as they could be…What a load of bollocks!

You see some very searching questions need to be asked at this point. I come from Swindon, and it just so happens that Honda, Swindon’s biggest local employer, has had to get rid of 1000 members of staff who they can’t afford to keep paying. After all, with the banks not lending as much money anymore people can’t afford to buy as many new cars. The result? They’re all off down the jobcentre in two weeks time for a special Honda sign up for state benefits day. So here we have another problem…those who those foreign companies can’t afford to pay anymore, now have to be paid by our government…or Britain!

So not only is Britain not working, the overdraft is maxed out and to top it all off Mrs Britain has 1000 new children to look after.

The problem is that all of those unemployed people are going to have trouble finding work. Over the past ten years the Labour government have allowed the biggest immigration influx in British history to take place, and just like our people, they needed to work. So they went out and took up the last of the jobs. So now, we are left in a position whereby the job market is maxed out. There are no (or very few) surplus jobs. And as I am sure any good economist will tell you, a healthy economy needs surplus jobs…if only to ensure that the people don’t become a burden on the public purse and to make sure that we don’t end up working in an employers market…i.e. big business, realising that they can have their pick of the workforce, lower wages!

But never mind…at least somebody is going to do well out of this financial crises…even if it isn’t the British public!

You see, big business and big time bankers, they all donate money to the campaign funds of certain politicians and supposedly, don’t expect anything in return. A million here, a few million there, it all adds up. But let’s be honest, the current economic system only serves big business. Let us not forget that we live in a trickle down economy.

The idea is that if you give money to those at the top it will trickle down to those at the bottom. So basically, we give money to the man at the top, who takes his cut first. He then passes it down to another person who takes their cut who then passes it to another person who takes their cut…and we divide what’s left over between us. The problem though is that we no longer have enough to share between us. It seems that we weren’t actually getting enough money, so the men at the top lent us some money…which we then couldn’t pay back….so not only did they take most of the money to begin with, but they then offered us the world, debted us out and now we owe them what money we do have.

Luckily though the interest rates were lowered…after all…we want to make sure the big time bankers get their money back…but never mind, at least it shows our politicians are taking care of us!

DL

cultural-nationalism: the philosophy of the future?

I first wrote the following article back in June 2006, however it has since been edited and I am republishing this in the hope that nationalism can begin to move forward. Hopefully, many of you will come to see why cultural nationalism must be the philosophy of the future.

Danny Lake

---------------------------------

Cultural Nationalism

British culture attacked from within

Most people have seen in the media the images of Nick Griffin and Mark Collett on trial, as well as the constant barrage of mainstream propaganda that appears to put forward the image of a nationalism locked in the pits of some kind of Neo-fascist Nazism; and it is sometime easy to see how a great many – rather ordinary Brits refuse to vote for or even acknowledge any kind of sympathy towards nationalism.

Within the above paragraph is a hidden question; the question I am talking about is what can we [as a philosophical group] do to change peoples fears and concerns with regards to nationalism? The answer to this can only be nationalisms permanent disassociation with far right politics. Since Nick Griffin won the BNP’s leadership election in 1999, he has led the party down the route of modernisation; a route that has seen the BNP thrown into a circus of media publicity, a route that has led to one hundred plus council seats and the party becoming the official opposition in Barking and Dagenham. Given the results of the past nine years no one would be foolish enough to argue against the growth in support for nationalism. But it is undoubtedly true – as I said earlier – that Britain’s nationalists needs to make a break with those whom they have traditionally called their allies; if not for practical power winning reasons, then at the very least because of philosophical differences that exist between the BNP’s leadership (and other assorted far right politicians/political groups) and their quite normal and decent membership.

In order to discover the path to further political successes we need to address not only the concerns of the people, but the fears of the people. From what I can gather through talking to people from all walks of British life, the main concern is racism. Now naturally people do not want to see the mistakes of the past repeated, but at the same time people do not want to see fresh mistakes made. Multiculturalism as I am sure most who read this article will agree – has failed to work; but multiracialism has not.

Now ok, I can already hear nationalisms old hands screaming blue murder at the very thought of what I have just written, but please take the time to read further. Our task in our quest for political power is not to tell the people how we want them to live their lives, but for the people to tell us how they want to live their lives. To fail in this task is to fail Britain and its citizens. Some may disagree, but I see multiculturalism and multiracialism as two separate things altogether. Multiculturalism is the false idea that peoples of completely opposing cultures can live and work together in harmony, and this as we know is untrue and has failed; as can be seen in the way in which Islam has largely failed to integrate into British society. Multiracialism however, is the idea that people of different races can live together providing that there is an acceptance of minor cultural differences or a similar culture in existence. History has proven this to be true in more ways than one; the Celtic tribes that came to Britain integrated with the native Britons, just as the Anglo Saxons eventually integrated with the Celts. To go even further it is also true that the Norman conquest of 1066 also resulted in the integration of another European people – in this case the Normans themselves.

Now if I were to contrast modern Britain with 11th century Britain, it could be argued the same thing is happening. In modern Britain we have many black people (a people with a shared history i.e. empire and commonwealth) who have integrated themselves into, and accepted British culture and the British way of life as their own. Our task must not be to alienate these people or their friends, but to take them on board and allow them to help build a Britain that we all desire – a Britain that [economically] their ancestors helped to build. One thing that nationalists have to realise is that by alienating Britain’s black population, we are also alienating their white friends; and in doing so we alienate a huge section of the population which results in our loosing votes as well as the opening up of ourselves to an ever increasingly hostile media. This is not to say that Britain should open it’s doors to the entire commonwealth, but is rather a recognition of the fact that those who Britain’s racists look down on are the descendents of people who contributed just as much to our nation as the ancestors of Britain’s native population; both economically and industrially speaking.

I am fairly confident that I am not alone in having spoken to people whilst on the campaign trail who have said that their concern is not the many friendly black citizens, but the Islamic extremists. I am also confident in believing that I am not the only person to have been told by those self same people that although they agree with the BNP on many an issue, they will not be voting BNP because they have black friends and they believe that they will deport them if they gained serious political power. What is more I further believe that I am not alone in being unable to shatter their misplaced fears because of their awareness that the BNP is open to whites only; and what is more as a decent human being I would not want to lie to them anyway.

What I am talking about is not the opening of the floodgates in order to allow every cultural or ethnic group into Britain, but the maintenance of individuals rights as people who are culturally British, even if they aren’t ethnically British. I say that if a person thinks like Brit, acts like a Brit and is British in everything they do – from the holidays they celebrate to the language that they speak – then they are culturally British, even if not ethnically British.

What I am saying here is that ethno-nationalism – whilst technically correct in that the British people (i.e. the ethnic English, Scots, Welsh, Cornish and Ulstermen) share a common ethnic ancestry – needs to realise that Britain has changed since the days when those groups were the only inhabitants of these islands in the North Atlantic. This is not to say that I want Britain and its people to go coffee coloured; because as someone once said to me – there will always be white people who will only procreate with white people, just as there will always be black people who will only procreate with black people. What the British people need to realise is that the old adage that your enemy’s enemy is your friends could never be more correct. If we are to eliminate the crux of our nation’s social and political ills, then we must find unity in our similarities instead of divisions in our differences. Ultimately it is all Brits (in this instance I am referring to the cultural group) who are faced with having their heads placed on fundamentalist Islam’s firing block – not just the ethnic Brits. For that reason I would say it is a sound argument to state that British nationalism needs to modernise and extend the hand of friendship to other would be victims of Islamic extremism; because to do otherwise risks not only our safety and well-being, but the safety and well-being of future generations.

Ultimately white and black Brits live in search of the same thing – liberty and justice, freedom of thought as well as freedom of expression, not to mention a very real sense of security and identity. Furthermore, to deny others the rights and freedoms that we ourselves live in search of is to join the ranks of the same people that we accuse of withholding or wishing to withhold even further, these basic rights and freedoms; and one thing I can say for sure is that I for one do not want to stand accused of doing so.

If you look at the French FN – who for a number of years has had its membership open to non whites – then it is easy to see how an awareness of culture over ethnicity, can have hugely positive results. The fact that Le Pen came second in the French presidential election – with a black running partner – more than proves this statement to be correct; and what is more the French FN has proven that it is possible to have a patriotic political movement that protects white’s rights as well as having an open door policy on party membership. As I am sure most will be aware the FN has several officials who are of non white heritage; and not only do they work just as hard as their white FN counterparts, but they also help secure the patriotic black vote.

Furthermore, to say that nationalist party’s such as the BNP should be open to whites only means that such party’s would have to stay true to that statement and ensure that all of their elected representatives are Caucasian. That statement does however have an air of ridiculousness about it. Anyone who wishes to stand behind such a policy would do well to bear in mind the hard work carried out by two of the BNP’s own elected councillors – Pat Richardson, who is Jewish; and Lawrence Rustem, who is half Turkish. Now both of these people have done a lot for both the BNP and nationalism as a whole, and in doing so have come under fire from many a different quarter; not least because of the party memberships firm stance on ethnicity being the primary factor in determining a persons ability to join the BNP.

I firmly believe that if nationalism [as a philosophy] is to move beyond the fringes then it needs to cut ties with the racism and bigotry associated with far right politics, and make a play for greater cultural and political understanding. To do so would not only bring the benefit of preventing the growth in hostile media coverage, but would also help the British people understand that nationalism and fascism/Nazism/racism are not mutually exclusive.

To stifle growth now, when we have the ability to go so far is akin to signing Britain’s death warrant. If we are to continue to see a rise in nationalisms electoral successes, then we have to make changes now; because to back away from the example set by the French FN, will only result in the death of nationalism and with that, the British peoples last chance of cultural, ethnic and national preservation.

DL

Nutrition and obesity: a crises!

It seems to me that there is a crises facing Britain (this may extend into other countries as well, I know it does in the US) and that is the lack of nutritional awareness and the extremely concerning growth in obesity…in particular childhood obesity.

Today I went shopping and as usual this meant visiting Iceland (for my fresh meat: i.e. minced meat, chicken and fish…great prices) and Sainsbury’s (everything else: bread, veg, flour, herbs, tinned tomatoes, pasta, porage oats etc). As I was walking through Iceland I took the chance to look at the ingredients that goes into the pre-packaged processed foods and “just add water” sauces that a disgustingly large number of Brits are coming to depend on, and found myself pondering what I believe to be one of the great questions of our time.

What if – as looks likely – the world was to be plunged into another global war? What if the current world food shortage was to begin to affect those of us living in the western world (which considering the rise in bio-fuel production and resultant cut back in food production isn’t unlikely)? And what if, given mankind’s rush to use up the last of the worlds natural energy resources, we in the west found ourselves unable to power the cooker/microwave/fridge freezer? To put it simply, how the hell would people survive?

Finding themselves incapable of cooking their oven chips and unable to buy/cook their pre-packaged, processed crap; the inevitable result would be mass starvation. With a vast majority of the microwave/processed food “fresh veg and meat isn’t real food” generation unable to feed themselves or their genetically modified offspring, you can’t help but wonder how long it would be before the “New Orleans scenario” began to hit people on a national level and mass rioting began to hit the streets.

Personally, I am/would be ok. I can cook a decent meal from the most basic of real ingredients and as a result I have a nicely toned stomach and not an ounce of excess fat. But society? They are/would be screwed!

If you want to loose weight and/or give yourself a better chance at surviving in the event such a scenario hits us (which hopefully it won’t do)…learn to cook some real fucking food!!!

I once was a little overweight, now I’m not. I once would have been fucked in the event my gas cooker/microwave/fridge freezer wasn’t working; now I would just kill an animal, find some veg’ and get a good sauce/gravy/soup going.

Luckily though, I still have Sainsbury’s and the nice man who kills my food for me…..

DL

Show of Hands: Country Life

Israel/Palestine: is the solution a sovereign Jerusalem?

Well the news media is raging with the story of Israel’s invasion of Gaza. Personally, I am not going to give too much of an opinion on the matter today. I have said what I think, and that’s that as far as I am concerned Israel’s invasion is vastly disproportionate. If you want to know more about the background, please read the following two posts of mine:

Decolonisation and the Middle East

Israel: the modern day Goliath

For now, what is needed is not blame. To be fair I have my opinions as to who I think is in the wrong over what particular issues are involved – but that isn’t going to solve anything. What is needed is a solution. So let’s look at things this way.

Considering that “ownership” of Jerusalem is such a hotly contested issue; with the Al Aqsa mosque (Islam’s third holiest site), the church of the Holy Sepulchre (supposed location of jesus’ crucifiction) as well as the temple mount and the western wall (significant in both the jewish and islamic religions) – it would be fair to say that no one religion or national group has any right to claim it as their own. In effect, it belongs to the world. So how about this? Make Jerusalem an independent city state (just like the vatican). The bottom line is if no one people can have it without another group of people wanting to take it off them, then give it to everybody.

As for Israel and Palestine itself, well that could be solved with a simple two state solution. Ultimately what is needed is a sovereign palestine for the palestinian people, a sovereign Israel for the Israeli people and a sovereign Jerusalem for the world….who knows, maybe it could actually work!

DL

Post-partisan Politics

"We are all Republicans, we are all Democrats."
-Thomas Jefferson-

It could be said that politics is the means by which societies problems are solved; and in effect, all politics is a problem and a solution.

It has been argued that the 20th century was the time of partisan politics, but the 21st century, that is to be the time of post partisan politics. Mark Satin, the editor of the radical middle newsletter attributes this thinking to Barack Obama and labels post-partisanship as the “first uniquely American ideology”. However, it could be argued that this could not be further from the truth. Whilst the academic argument surrounding post-partisanship may originate in the US, if post-partisanship is taken to be solution focused politics, then essentially, given the fact that problems vary depending upon the surrounding circumstances, there can be no pre-ordained ideal solution – just an individually tailored response to a given political problem. Meaning that there can be no ideology. In effect, ideology itself is surplus to requirements.

Essentially, post partisanship implies that there can be no left or right wing politics, no “one size fits all” approach to politics, no quick fix and in effect, no complete ideology – but rather a solution tailored to the individual policy or political problem. In an age where these is no black or white, in an age where there is an ever increasing number of grey areas; is post partisanship the “grey area” focused politics that the world has been waiting for? And furthermore, is post-partisanship the way forward?

If we are to accept that post-partisanship takes the bits that work from various ideologies and applies them to any given problem as a solution, then what of ideology itself? Does that man that ideas such as nationalism and libertarianism become void? I would argue not. Present in the academic world are a number of ideas, such as nationalism and libertarianism, which focus on specific areas of thought rather than having an approach to all problems. Nationalism focuses on issues surrounding national sovereignty and opposition to supra-nationalism, and libertarianism focuses on issues of liberty and freedom of choice. In effect, it could be argued that post-partisanship, unlike bi-partisanship, is the ideal approach to take when looking at issues of national sovereignty and civil liberties; if only because they both arguably have a philosophical twist and as such allow all sides to be kept happy.

If man is to accept that the world is made up of different groups and as such those groups have different, and in some cases competing viewpoints based upon their social group and/or their ethnic/cultural background; then in effect it could be argued that post-partisanship accepts these differences in opinion by allowing a dialogue between these groups to exist – or as it has been described “relationship focused politics”. However, being realistic it is perhaps necessary to understand that a solution for the American people would not be the same as a solution for the British, the Russian or the Chinese people – and as such political problem solving needs to occur as locally as possible if national politics is not to conflict with the international. Essentially, if post partisan politics is to work, then potential for disagreement has to be limited – meaning that breaking down big, centralised governments can be the only way forward. In effect, if there are less people to please, then the potential for disagreement is decreased.

Furthermore, political libertarianism (not economic), the idea of individual liberty and the right to choose is fundamental in understanding post-partisan politics. One of the principles of post-partisan politics is that “there must be an overriding commitment to diversity of opinions and perspectives” – an idea that, it could be argued, is libertarian by it’s very nature. In effect, everybody has the right to be satisfied, everybody has the right to have some input into the solution – regardless of whether they are from the left or the right of the political spectrum. The fundementle aim is compromise and/or acceptance of other belief systems, an understanding that within anothers ideology there may be the answer that you seek yourself. An understanding that we are not always right and that sometimes, with a little help from those we do not ordinarily agree with, it is possible to complete the bigger picture. If there is no liberty, if there is no freedom to choose, then there can be no post-partisanship – because if anything, post partisanship is the ability to choose. Post-partisanship is the understanding that there is no wrong idea, there is no false thought – all can contribute to the overal solution.

As it is, so far as academically accepted political approaches go, post-partisanship is very much a new idea; even if it is argued that post-partisanship is the academic worlds answer to grey area politics. The only question is as to whether it has a place in the future. Personally, so long as the world continues to argue over limited resources, and so long as different national groups compete and disagree with each other, post-partisanship and dialogue between opposing factions can be the only way forward. Essentially, the solution is all that matters.

DL

Further reading: A new blog, a new direction

White working class feeling neglected says government report

Hazel Blears, the Labour governments ‘communities secretary’ (whatever that is) has been kind enough to inform the people of Britain that the white working class are feeling as if they have become second class citizens in their own country, and are feeling neglected by the government that they elected. Well…no shit Sherlock!

The reason for today’s post however is not to poke fun at the obvious aspect of Mrs Blears statement, but to bring attention to her clearly displayed ignorance. Mrs Blears has informed us that our concerns are misplaced and that the truth is we just don’t understand. She said – in the typical “it’s not what you say, but what you don’t say” Westminster manner "There are an awful lot of myths about that people can come into this country, they can get a council house, they get grants for thousands of pounds - a lot of that is simply not true."

Well said Hazel, there are a lot of rumours floating about, but you forgot one thing. Whilst it is true that they may not get grants for thousands of pounds, this is because the houses that the Revised Tenancy Agreement (a document that was protected by the official secrets act until released into the public domain by a whistleblower) provides them with already contain everything they need. But it doesn’t stop here. She also informs us that "The vast majority of people who come to this country have to go into the private rented sector, they don't get council housing”

A few questions though…who pays the rent? And with limited social housing, huge waiting lists and a housing shortage, why aren’t Brits living in these houses?...especially when you consider that we have thousends of homeless people living on our streets

But never mind…the labour government have mentioned that the native British are pissed off so maybe we will keep off their back for a while now that we have been told we just don’t understand.

Just in case you’re interested, a copy of the Revised Tenancy Agreement can be found here (if you have any trouble opening the individual adobe files, I found right clicking on the file and selecting "open with...adobe" worked)

DL

Israel...the modern day Goliath

So the latest news from Washington DC is that Hamas are to blame for the rise in violence on the Gaza strip – logic that you just have to love. Now don’t get me wrong, I am by no stretch of the imagination a friend of Islam, but philosophically I am a nationalist and I’m sure I’m not alone in saying that Israel’s response was not only vastly disproportionate, but their presence on the Gaza strip is decidedly questionable…especially given that their only evidence of their right to that land is a 2000 year old story book….but never mind, since when did the truth get in the way of a nice spot of nation wrecking!?!

In the interest of balance though, let’s look at this another way. The Palestinians are terrorists…just like Jerry Adams and Nelson Mandella…oh no…hang on…they were freedom fighters…ok…let’s try this another way…

If you put my family name into google (Lake) you will see that there was once a Sir Thomas Lake who lived in a big manor house in London. As it was though the house was sold to the ministry of defence in order to pay some bills or something to that effect. Anyway, lets say that several hundred years down the line I was to find that Sir Thomas Lake was in fact a distant relative (which in case anybody is wondering…he isn’t…at least not to my knowledge) and I made a claim for my estate and all it’s belongings to be returned, what would happen? That’s right, I would be told to bog off. So why should Israel be any different?...oh no...done it again...hmmm...well anyway.............

Even assuming that the current location of Israel is their historical homeland, they were absent for quite a while and certainly didn’t mount what could be called an effective defence…so tough…the Palestinians have been there for two thousand years or so and can justifiably claim to have more right to that land than the “Israelis” can.

But sorry, Israel has been attacked; or so the story goes anyway. The truth of the matter is that Israel, the country that has broken over a hundred UN resolutions in their persecution of the Palestinian people, is anything but a victim. An overly aggressive bully, yes; a victim, most certainly not. Let’s not forget that Saddam Hussein's Iraq was invaded for much less than this, yet Israel’s flouting of international law and continued persecution of a national group goes unquestioned.

Is it just me or does this all seem a little iffy?

DL

2009: a new year, a new beginning

So here we are, 2009. For many of you this year will be very much similar to any other, but for me it is to be the beginning of a new chapter in my life…the beginning if you like of all the future has to hold.

Last year was one of many changes for me; not least of all my exit from the world of organised political activism. However, upon much reflection I’m walking a new path and hopefully you, my readers, will be right beside me throughout 2009.

As well as a new career path this year will see an increase in activity and hopefully will lead to a growing public awareness of the ideas espoused within these pages. Remember people, real change has to occur in our lifetime, if not then it is simply too late and the foundations of destruction that our parents generation laid will grow into a full blown cathedral of self destruction.

As usual, please be sure to keep visiting and don’t forget to pass this address on. If there is any way in which you would like to help me with this blog, or if you have any ideas – whether an article, a video you think needs to reach a wider audience…anything! Then you can contact me by emailing me at:

voiceofyouth@hotmail.co.uk

Happy New Year everybody!

DL