A new approach to nationalism

A New Approach to Nationalism

Loading word count...
Listen to this article

Over the last 50 years, the development of British nationalism has been one of diminishing returns. Every generation, the leading organisations became shadows of the ones before, and the goalposts shifted lower and lower. The struggle for National power gave way to a desire merely to win, at best, a few seats on a local council. And throughout this development, a kind of politics that pushed for national change found itself more and more marginalised and lingering in the political doldrums. This is precisely why a new approach is sorely needed, one which disregards the thinking which led to decades of failure, and recognises that everything that has hitherto happened in British nationalism, has led to the point that it finds itself in now. If the point it finds itself in now is terrible, then the methods that led it there must, on the whole, be flawed.

The fixation of the ‘Ladder Strategy’

The prevalent logic in nationalist politics is that in order to achieve power, you start at the bottom ‘rung’ of the supposed ladder. You engage at a ‘grassroots’ level, targeting parish and local councils, and then, only with time, work up to greater things. This is a misunderstanding of the nature of the system. Local councils are not a stepping stone to parliamentary government, which MUST by necessity be the ultimate goal, since it is the only level at which issues like immigration, the economy and political reform can even be addressed. Local politics is a different area of operations entirely, and deals entirely with addressing localised, small-scale issues. The sort of issues that are ultimately just symptoms of larger – National – problems. The way in which parties like the Liberal Democrats and the Greens only achieve any sort of real success at local political level is illustrative of what happens when you fixate on localised politics. A nationalist party that fixates all of its resources into getting onto the ‘bottom rung’ of local politics will find, even after many years, that it is a ladder which doesn’t actually lead anywhere.

The difference between Tactical and Strategic victory

To understand why fixation on local-level politics is a trap is to understand the difference between a tactical win and a strategic one. Tactics win individual battles, like the battle for a particular seat or a particular postcode. Strategy wins wars, like the war to save a people from annihilation. The English might have won the battles of Agincourt and Crecy, but they lost the Hundred Years War. A town or village might win the battle to evict a migrant hotel, but the demographics will still turn against them in other ways regardless. The fixation on local-level politics as the ‘primary’ battle to be won, is to win battles without those battles meaning anything in the wider context.

The only battles worth winning are those which can be translated into strategic level victories. And the battles which do that are the ones which facilitate power at a national level, which means seats in the Westminster parliament.

Short-term and Long-term gain

When people campaign locally against issues that are caused at a national level, such as immigration, grooming gangs, etc, they have to ask themselves: Do we want to be better off in the short-term or in the long-term?

Because when people crusade against issues purely at a local level, without regard to any context, even though they improve their situation in the immediate term, their long-term prospects are actually worse. If, instead of putting your bin out by the kerb, you instead chose the more immediate option of throwing it over the garden fence, in the short-term you might be better off, but in the long-term the area will turn into landfill. Localist politics is short-term politics, and that’s why it always results in a worse situation overall even though to begin with it harbours the illusion of success.

Comprehensive Policy

The Nationalist Agenda must be comprehensive and deal with end results. It cannot get bogged down in methods. This is why the Twenty Demands are the results we want to see for our national community. How to get there will be something that ebbs and flows like water throughout the struggle of the Party. It must recognise that issues like uncontrollable immigration, inflation, poverty, are merely symptoms of a deep-seated, systemic political problem, rather than the problems in and of themselves. Only through large-scale, irreversible systemic change will these twisted symptoms disappear.

Why the National Rebirth Party will succeed where others have failed

The NRP will succeed for three key reasons:

Firstly, because we are prepared to admit the failure of what has already come to pass, and therefore are not condemned to repeat it.

Secondly, because we recognise that victory is built upon sacrifice, and therefore that localised sacrifices will be necessary in order to achieve a strategic, national victory.

Thirdly, because we believe in our own ability to succeed. The single biggest reason why the goals of nationalism have become so low and pitiful is not because of ignorance, but because, until now, those in positions of influence did not even believe themselves to be capable of succeeding. And if they did not believe in themselves, nobody else would believe in them either, and rightly so.

Our people already have the tools and the will to achieve their victory. Our task is to prove it.

Post Author

Leave a comment

5 2 votes
Article Rating
Notify of
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Our traditional enemies and their fellow travellers have escalatory dominance. Our people, for now, are the super majority. Given these facts, a national strategy can win. A toehold or ladder win I’ll take but our enemies will just come in and redistrict that local area the next day.

Your demands are s***
Unless you are a Chad reactionary like myself I don’t want to hear about you whining about foreigners non-whites should have no political power at all even in the home countries and should be under the Boot Hill of the white man until that day comes it doesn’t matter whether or not Britain is white
I only want to hear from Anglo nationalists who want more land for the Anglo not people who whine that does some Curry muncher in his homeland

What are you on about? More land? It’s here. I squatted for many years whilst working. It’s easy to take land or council houses. The hard part is to hold it. Not because of the laws. But of the dedication. I say.

Ducter here so I’ll tell what I see and have seen for 15 years amongst our people, blue collars with a trade not a “job”.
Working on sites all across the country from Brighton to Bristol to Aberdeen etc.

Everybody is right wing and knows the problem with mass immigration. Not just African. Let’s talk how pols and ukrainians are now 90% of the chippies aye. Or sparkys. (Very few in my trade somehow). They all are conscious of who rapes whom.

But, like many, they cannot trust anyone to truly voice or carry their concerns.They hear Piss Morgan and that’s very strong public right wing figure alright.

Bare in mind, most people are family dads.
Politics never answered their needs and they know voting is bullshit anyway.
So, what do they do? They keep to their own and reproduce whilst unknowingly waiting for the right trigger.Strong families.

Some mates from Scotland (hardcore unionists, Rangers from Bridgeton), have their Britain First card too. And yet would rather have a paky as a neighbour than an Irish catholic (hilarious but true).

Oh, I am French, living in Uk for 24 years. Try me

White men wake up!

Would love your thoughts, please comment.x