Blog

Pete reminisces and ponders the benefits of living in a high trust Society...Not so very long ago, Britain used to be a homeland. We didn't have anti-ramming barriers or armed police. You never saw the police carrying guns except in London, and only very occasionally. It was a good country where mums could be "stay at home" mums - because fathers could afford to make the mortgage payments and put food on the table. We didn't have high fences around schools. You could buy a good sized home on an ordinary wage. You didn't need a bullshit degree and a massive student loan to find good, secure work. The only time we heard about rampaging machete gangs was in lawless Africa. Stabbings were rare, rather than a daily occurrence. Nobody had heard of grooming gangs. We had communities that came together to maintain civilized standards of behaviour where policing was by mutual consent not diktat imposition. We had national unity. We had ourselves a high-trust society. Immigration changed all of that. The left say we're blaming immigrants but we're not. We blame Labour and the Tories for running a decades long open borders experiment which they now shamelessly admit (!); but correctly assigning blame doesn't put any of this right. Building more houses doesn't put it right. Putting more police on the streets doesn't put it right. What we had was more than the sum of its parts. What we had was the product of a homogenous society. We had immigration, but in manageable numbers. It wasn't wanted or needed but it was inflicted on us anyway.&nbsp; It could have been managed and integrated but the regime took the brakes off. Now they tell us it can't be undone and we have to simply adapt to it. We simply have to adapt to the idea that an imported predator might rape our daughters.That occasional machete rampages and bombs are just "part and parcel of living in a big city". That it's normal for entire districts to wave foreign flags and speak foreign languages. In fact, it's now racist even to notice it. The problem for the regime that rules us is that we do notice it, and there is, in fact, something we can do about it. We don't have to tolerate Britain being a flop house for the third world. We don't have to tolerate becoming a minority in our own country. We don't have to tolerate living in a low-trust dystopia where we have to compete with newly arriving foreigners for what were once "basics" like shelter and healthcare. Remigration is workable, necessary and desirable. There are no downsides to it. We do not have to accept the half-measures on offer from regime politicians, nor do we have to accept the cowardice of supposedly insurgent parties. We can once again have a homeland. All we have to do is to vote and require our elected representatives to vote for it.Discuss at...<a href="https://x.com/FUDdaily/" target="_blank" rel="noopener" data-mce-href="https://x.com/FUDdaily/">https://x.com/FUDdaily/https://x.com/FUDdaily/status/1863410558201958674</a>

vote for the way we were

Pete North (<a href="https://www.northernvariant.co.uk/" data-mce-href="https://www.northernvariant.co.uk/">https://www.northernvariant.co.uk/</a>) has been on a well documented journey in search of his political home... and has arrived... Part of the reason I joined the @Homeland_Party is because politics needs a "nasty party". Somebody needs to say the things that can't be said. Everyone else will be measured in their rhetoric, but the time for speaking euphemistically is over. The results are in. Diversity does not make us stronger. There is no "melting pot", and multiculturalism is an abject failure. Foreigners are not coming to these lands to become part of the whole and they do not share our values. They are here to exploit Britain. Just this evening, Lee Anderson of Reform tweeted "Over the last 6 years only 500,000 out of net non-EU migration of 3,100,000 came from main work applicants (16%) Rest are dependants, students, family, asylum &amp; humanitarian". We are entitled to find this appalling. We are entitled to object. But Anderson is just another whinger. He can say these things on licence, but Reform's policy is whatever Farage says it is, and he's ruled out mass deportations. Reform talks about deporting illegal immigrants but that does not speak to the millions who've come here as colonisers who, sooner or later, make us a minority in our own country. We need a party that will explicitly say that these people, whether they're here legally or not, are not welcome. They are not needed they are not wanted, and they must be deported. Britain is no a flop house for the third world. It is our homeland. As much as anything, Britain cannot sustain a perpetual influx of welfare dependents. It will collapse our social solidarity systems. It has already destroyed housing. Those most in need are now in competition with foreigners with no blood connection to this country. If it's racist to put British people first, I'm entirely comfortable with such labels. As far as I'm concerned, if you're running scared of being called racist by people who consciously ignore the&nbsp; consequences of mass immigration, you're complicit, and you're accountable. The rapes, the machete gangs, the murders... it's as much on you as it is our political class. This "open borders experiment", as the prime minister puts it, thrives on our silence. When it comes down to it, immigration policy necessarily has to be racist. I don't need any lectures from progressives. I'm perfectly well aware that not all foreigners are rapists. I'm well&nbsp; aware that not all Pakistani men are predators. But public policy isn't made on an individual basis. Policy is made on aggregates and averages. The bottom line is that a first world, high trust, liberal society cannot survive if the people are replaced with third world people with backward superstitions and primitive social attitudes. I've long said that xenophobia is instinct plus experience. Nobody wants to be xenophobic but when you live at the sharp end of multiculturalism, it becomes a survival instinct. Our cities particularly are no longer safe for women. The rise in homophobic incidents and the surge of immigration is hardly coincidental. All the values progressives pretend to care about are threatened by mass immigration. Foreigners don't just step off the plane and become British liberals. They bring their tribal baggage and third world ideas and conflicts with them. If then I have to join the "nasty party" and say things which are objectively racist, I will. The problem for lefties is that much of the "racism" on this platform happens to be more or less accurate. There's a reason the Home Office is concealing data regarding ethnicity and crime. We're already seeing our cities devolve into violent slums where the police can't keep order if they assert their authority. There's a reason the police are hesitant to charge the thugs who attack a female police office in Manchester Airport. They're afraid of a Muslim backlash. We don't have to tolerate this. We don't have to tolerate the violence. We don't have to tolerate the sectarianism. We don't have to tolerate the welfare larceny. We don't have to tolerate becoming a third world country. We are within our rights to reassert Britain as our homeland and remove those who should not be here. We do not owe a living to anyone who rocks up with their hand out. We are entitled to exclude foreigners from our National Health Service. We are entitled to reserve homes for British people. We are entitled to a homeland in which we are free to live by our values. So go ahead, call me whatever names you want. It's better than being snivelling coward. Debate on X with @FUDdaily...<a data-mce-href="https://x.com/FUDdaily/status/1863047792849031541" href="https://x.com/FUDdaily/status/1863047792849031541" target="_blank" rel="noopener">https://x.com/FUDdaily/status/1863047792849031541 </a>

coming home

Guest blog from the incomparable <a data-mce-href="https://x.com/KingBobIIV" href="https://x.com/KingBobIIV">@KingBobIIV@x.xom</a> Image chosen by AI - we're still experimenting... Wokery, 1984 and the death spiral of British comedy..Yesterday, I had a brief spat on X with<a data-mce-href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Pie" href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Pie" title=" Tom Walker, aka Johnathan Pie" target="_blank" rel="noopener"> Tom Walker,</a> better known for his character "Jonathan Pie." His stand-up is basically a piss-take of people who take the piss out of the "woke." Desperate to claw back the word they once wore proudly, they seem entirely incapable of seeing that they’re now the joke. The "woke" are the 2024 human embodiment of every joke since The Goons and Monty Python about the perpetually offended, virtue-signalling left. We just have a new word for them, but they’re the same arseholes.In early 1936, <a data-mce-href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Orwell" href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Orwell" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Orwell </a>immersed himself in the living conditions of the working class in Northern England, particularly in Lancashire and Yorkshire. He stayed in various lodging houses, including one above a tripe shop in Wigan, to closely observe and document the daily lives of miners and their families. This first hand experience formed the basis for the first part of his book, providing a vivid account of the hardships faced by the working class during that era. It’s an extraordinary book, and one many people overlook when they think of him—it could have been written today. Orwell critiques the socialist movement of his time, expressing concern that its advocates often alienate the general public.&nbsp;He describes a stereotypical image of socialists as: "Every fruit-juice drinker, nudist, sandal-wearer, sex-maniac, Quaker, 'Nature Cure' quack, pacifist, and feminist in England," lecturing the poor, hardworking miners and their families for not eating more Ryvita and orange juice. "The ordinary human being would sooner starve than live on brown bread and raw carrots." He knew and pointed out then that the socialist movement was a massive embarrassment, made up of a small, but, very vocal group of people who didn’t fit into a class—the “middle class.” Not quite rich enough to have any standing in society, not poor enough to get any sympathy. It was always thus.&nbsp; The middle class don’t seem to understand why we scrotes and the wealthy get on. Historically, the rich create and provide us work and jobs, and they generally leave us the fuck alone. Should they have to mix with us, they’re usually more aligned with us and our humour and moral compass. And we do the shit stuff for them that they need doing, and we usually just get on with it. The middle class have no connection to anything. They all have a massive superiority complex. They’ve left their family homes, towns, and people, fucked off to university, and have little connection to anyone or anything anymore—unlike the rich and the poor, who could live generations in the same place, know everyone and everything, and still call the shop that closed down 50 years ago “The Old Woolworths,” and everyone knows where they mean.It's no surprise after that experience that ten years later, Orwell wrote 1984. Sadly, as many have said before me, instead of this prophetic book becoming a warning, it’s instead become the modern-day left’s instruction manual. I suggest it should be reprinted and named A Modern Person’s Guide to Being an Unbearable Woke Wanker.&nbsp;So, what is “woke”? They like to think it’s somehow a badge of honour and pride. Being “woke,” they feel, gives them, to quote Blur, "a sense of enormous well-being." They feel massively superior, and they all think they’re the cleverest people in the room. In 1936, however, their numbers were small. Access to university education in the United Kingdom was limited to a small segment of the population. Only about 11,000 people attended university annually. Whilst they were loud, obnoxious, and rowdy, they were few and could be ignored. By 1996, the Age Participation Index (API), which measures the proportion of young people entering higher education for the first time by age 21, noted that around 33.1% of the UK population were going to university—around 835,000 people per year.&nbsp;At first, this move upwards, out of the working class to aspiring middle class and academia, was celebrated. Our best comedians all met at university: Monty Python, The Goodies, Beyond the Fringe, The League of Gentlemen, Mitchell and Webb, and The Mighty Boosh were all created at places like Cambridge’s Footlights Club. Were it not for university, there would have been no Peter Cook and Dudley Moore, Jonathan Miller, or Alan Bennett. No Graham Chapman, John Cleese, Eric Idle, Michael Palin, or Terry Jones. <span style="font-family: inherit; font-size: calc(18px * var(--body-fontSize, 1)); font-weight: inherit; font-style: var(--body-fontStyle, normal); background-color: rgba(249,250,251,var(--tw-bg-opacity));" data-mce-style="font-family: inherit; font-size: calc(18px * var(--body-fontSize, 1)); font-weight: inherit; font-style: var(--body-fontStyle, normal); background-color: rgba(249,250,251,var(--tw-bg-opacity));">The list is endless.&nbsp;But all these people still had one foot firmly in the working-class camp. They could balance their connection to the majority of people who were working-class and those who were becoming more liberal-curious, moving away from traditional Christian Britain and towards more humanistic pursuits and attitudes. At the time, it was all pretty balanced, and everyone could coexist. It wasn’t unusual for a family to sit down together and watch Jim Davidson and Only Fools and Horses, and then switch over to Victoria Wood, The Mighty Boosh, or Spaced. Comedy wasn’t owned by anyone, and everyone was welcome to enjoy it.I myself was a massive raging lefty. Having grown up with an Irish Catholic mum and a Cornish Christian dad, who was ex-forces, my rebellion was to pull away from anything remotely attached to it. The ’90s saw a massive explosion of this. Music was great, TV and film were great, the world felt great, and nobody cared about skin colour or sexual leanings. It wasn’t talked about. I dressed like Neneh Cherry, had a perm and a bomber jacket, and my Hi-Tec high tops, and I’d Buffalo Stance myself into a frenzy. “Cultural appropriation” didn’t exist. ...But this was in the old days when only men had a penis.BBC Radio 4 was epic for new comedy. We’d moved on from Hancock’s Half Hour and The Goon Show and were experiencing things like Little Britain, The Boosh, and The Now Show. Everyone could take the piss out of everyone equally.By the late ’90s and early 2000s, though, the woke was growing. Although it wasn’t called that then, people started to notice. Clare in the Community first aired on BBC Radio 4 on 26 November 2004, and it was fucking hilarious. By this time, I was working and started to see my language and the language of others being policed. Every industry became obsessed with “stats” and running training courses on appropriate behaviour in the workplace.I hadn’t gone to university because I, like a lot of working-class school leavers in the mid-’90s, slipped through many gaps. Both my parents worked, so I wasn’t poor enough to get a grant, but they were too poor to pay for me to go. While I stayed home for four years, working my arse off all week and getting hammered all weekend, all my mates went off to university and came back calling “Preemark” “Primos,” “Sainsbury’s” “Saino’s,” and they’d developed use of their “t’s” and started lecturing me about the things I said and did. Already insecure because they’d gone to university and I hadn’t, I immediately fell into line and hopped on board the progressive train. To prove it, I made sure I, too, checked people’s wrong-think and lectured them about anything they’d said that could be vaguely misconstrued as racist, misogynistic, or homophobic. (We didn’t have trannies then—they were still just plain old perverts in those days.)If you’ve never listened to Clare in the Community, I strongly suggest you do. It’s probably more relevant now than it ever was. Clare is an upper-middle-class socialist who becomes a social worker in one of the shittest, poorest, most culturally diverse, crime-ridden areas of London. She spends every episode lecturing her colleagues and downtrodden beta male husband about their fruity opinions, self-identifying into what she thinks a working-class person is, whilst employing an Eastern European maid and nanny, and having one son she refuses to allow to play with anything that enforces his gender role. As such, she’s forever tying herself up in knots—because, of course, they all do. And this is what leads me back to modern-day woke people like Jonathan Pie.The percentage of young people attending university is now on a massive decline. The ship has sailed, the shop has shut, everyone has gone home, yet the woke are still battling on with their agenda. Instead of realising nobody finds them funny or interesting and reflecting on why that is, they’re all choosing to “blame” the audience for being thick, racist, bigots, or fascists. Which is just even funnier.Over the past decade, British television comedy has experienced a notable decline in both production and viewership. The BBC’s original comedy programming decreased by over 40% from 2010 to 2019, dropping from 225 hours to 132 hours.In a 2022 interview on Rob Brydon’s podcast, Stewart Lee described Ricky Gervais’s After Life as "one of the worst things that's ever been made by a human." In a 2024 interview promoting his show Basic Lee, Lee elaborated further, suggesting that Gervais appears as a "frightened man" who uses stand-up comedy as a "defensive wall."However, Ricky Gervais’s international popularity is evidenced by the global adaptations of his work, successful international tours, high-profile hosting engagements, and widespread critical acclaim. His ability to connect with diverse audiences underscores his status as a prominent figure in global entertainment.He’s a working-class boy done good, and what people love about him more than anything is that he doesn’t give a fuck what you think. He doesn’t care if he offends anyone. They’d love to cancel him, but they can’t. Sadly, they seem to have been able to cancel Peter Kay. While the British people love his politically neutral comedy, he’s clearly been deemed too white and British for the woke overlords in the British media machine.The sad thing about Pie’s character is that, if he dropped the woke shit, had a really good think, and took on board the thousands of people in his comments saying, “I used to think you were funny,” he could be funny again. He's clearly talented. And I don't think he's a bad bloke, I think he means well - just perhaps a bit of a coward? I can't imagine it's hard to break ranks from the establishment - look what they did to @Glinner? The Jonathan Pie character still has legs—they’re just in a woke plaster cast. Being proud to be woke now just means you’re someone with no moral compass or values, you can’t think for yourself, and you’re pro-establishment.There’s nothing rebellious, interesting, or controversial about that. It’s more controversial now to be a conservative, Christian, anti-government person who genuinely sees everyone as equals—for good or bad. This catastrophiocally ienpt and dishonest Labour government is overflowing with material for piss-takes. Pie could create a "Department of Contradictions" headed up by Diane Abbott, where they decide what the rules of #wrongspeak are.&nbsp;For example: &nbsp; “Safety for women from men… unless the man is wearing a bra, then punch a TERF” or: “Down with the patriarchy, unless it’s a Muslim man forcing his wife to stay at home, have babies, not work or drive, marry a cousin she’s never met, and have no access to money—because women’s rights, unless it’s cultural… yeah? Yeah? Am I right??” It's the epitome of 1984, and none of them can see it. "To know and not to know, to be conscious of complete truthfulness while telling carefully constructed lies, to hold simultaneously two opinions which cancelled out, knowing them to be contradictory and believing in both of them…" From 1984: "War is Peace," "Freedom is Slavery," and "Ignorance is Strength." In 2024: "Queers for Palestine," "Transwomen are Women," and "Be Kind." SAME PEOPLE Try challenging any of them on it, and it’s clear they can’t defend their positions. All they have is, “You’re a moron,” or, “You can’t spell.” (I know—I’m severely dyslexic… but “be kind,” yeah?) We only have to look at the Trump win recently to realise wokery has had its day. It’s done. Comedians like Pie remind me of a book I read a few years ago about a lad called Teruo Nakamura. He was a “holdout” found in 1974, living alone in the jungles of Morotai, Indonesia, for 30 years with no idea the war had ended.&nbsp; Come over to the dark side Mr Pie - the water is warm and we still laugh xx

"and they were singing, 'Bye, Bye, Mr Jonathan Pie...'

Soul selling for beginners Don't look so surprised Ed, but your insane pursuit of net zero has enabled the destruction of British farming and the acquisition of farmland by the new best globalist friends of Keith and his pantomime administration... Thanks to David Atherton for the lead... "... A farmer spots " how @Keir_Starmer 's new best buddies at BlackRock are going to screw you over in 7 steps."1. They will start buying up small plots of agricultural land at double the normal price. They will issue a directive to all of their energy companies simultaneously to aggressively acquire plots for carbon capture. These third parties will start bidding against each other and force the value of agricultural land up."2. Initially farmers won't believe their luck - "these city folks are mad! if they want to buy an acre for £50K, who am I to say no to these fools" is what you'll hear down the pub."3. These crazy prices will set record high comparisons for agricultural land. When a farmer dies, their farm will be valued using these new metrics and the next generation will discover the farm they thought was worth £3M is worth £9M and they don't have anything close to the money needed to cover the tax."4. In swoops a BlackRock subsidiary with a "Agri Debt Finance Tax Relief" product to lend them 20% the "value" of their farm so they can pay the taxes."5. The debt will come with conditions (a covenant) that the farm has to adopt and maintain certain practices. It has to use certain BlackRock owned fertilisers, software, machinery and labour solutions that get the farm ready to interface with a larger conglomerate."6. When a farm cannot make its debt payments, it is sold at auction. BlackRock subsidiaries are instructed NOT to buy these farms at auction. They have a special arrangement to buy the unsold farms at a rate that covers the unpaid debt plus outstanding fees and taxes to government... basically what the farm was originally worth."7. A BlackRock subsidiary then takes over the farm, consolidates it with a massive group of farms and uses illegal immigrant labour to staff the farm (which will be another government program they institute to deal with the immigration crisis). The government will literally pay for the labour costs as part of this plan making the farms wildly profitable and making small family farms unable to compete."&nbsp;<a data-mce-href="https://thefarmingforum.co.uk/index.php?threads/blackrock.418740/" href="https://thefarmingforum.co.uk/index.php?threads/blackrock.418740/">thefarmingforum.co.uk/index.php?thre…</a>

Soul selling for beginners

In which Pete sets out his political philosophy and accepts the slings and arrows of outrageous manipulation by a self appointed coercive cancel squad and happily defenestrates himself from the overton window, to remain honest to his principles...."... Today I've had my first mention in Hope Not Hate material. Ten years ago I'd have been mortified, but now it's almost a badge of honour. Hope Not Hate are cranks who think that even stating basic biological facts is far right extremism. The reason I'm on the HNH radar, though, is because I've joined the @Homeland_Party, which in their view is a fascist party. But of course, outside of its proper historical context, the word fascist is meaningless. Now it just means anyone who far leftists don't like, and that's anyone even vaguely right wing. They probably think Suella Braverman is a fascist. I've ended up on the far right because I'm entirely open about my views and I've stopped caring what anybody thinks. Back when I campaigned against RAF Linton on Ouse being used as a migrant dumping ground, I was subject to all the usual smears and I learned first hand how they weave bogus biographies of people they don't like. Not strictly libellous, but crammed with context-free innuendo. As such, if they say someone is a fascist, I simply don't believe them and I'll be my own judge. &nbsp; It's true that I've not been shy about my opinions about mass immigration. Even as a moderate I held the view for twenty years that multiculturalism does not work, and I've made my thoughts known about Pakistani culture having grown up in Bradford. Nothing gets the left clucking and reaching for the report button like telling the truth. I was aware of mass grooming before we even had a word for it. It was largely accepted as normal. Ironically, because the left have had all my accounts on various platforms suspended, HNH don't have access to much of the really juicy material. When I see potted biographies written about me I really have to laugh. The sum total of my sins is writing blogs and appearing at a protest in the village when I spoke to Sam Melia, not having the first idea who he was, having never really heard of Patriotic Alternative. It's only really since Brexit I've taken a harder line on immigration. In the run up to the referendum, I favoured staying in the EEA and keeping freedom of movement, not least because I had a suspicion that EU workers would be replaced by third worlders. It was actually a Ben Judah piece in the New Statesman that turned me against FoM, when he detailed his undercover experience of London's black market in low wage labour. In fact, left wing Brexiters did more to persuade me that FoM had to end - because fundamentally, it is a neoliberal policy. It has nothing to do with individual freedoms and everything to do with free movement of capital. It allowed corporate parasites to bid for government contracts, then acquire cheaper EU workers so they could skim more profits. It's only really in the last four or five years I've become an immigration hard liner. I was a Ukip supporting civic nationalist who believed integration was possible. But that, ultimately is an obsolete concept when there is nothing discernibly British in some cities for new arrivals to integrate into. Being that they arrive and immediately resume their own customs and culture makes them colonisers, not immigrants. I have come to regard integration as largely fictional. It only really happens in elite circles. I should also point out that the complete lack of political will to stop the boats has also hardened my stance. We have been systematically lied to as elites pretend economic migrants are refugees. I object to being gaslit. Still, though, I am more of less the same centre-right conservative I have always been. There just isn't a centre right party I can join. The Tory party is a liberal party and Reform is a substance free, vacuous populist party. I take the view that the unprecedented levels of immigration from culturally incompatible countries is an existential danger that threatens to undermine Britain as a high-trust liberal democracy. As such, we are within our rights to insist these latest waves of immigration are reversed. We were never asked and it was done in defiance of the electorate who repeatedly voted for less immigration. I do not regard this as an extreme position, and it isn't fascist. The people who regard it as fascist ultimately do not believe in the concept of borders and nations, and do not recognise any real concept of citizenship. It's based on happy-clappy hippie claptrap infused with communism. The left is intellectually bankrupt. As to being far right, I am far right relative to where the establishment parties are, but I have always been far right relative to where far left organisations like Hope Not Hate are - because virtually everyone is now if they favour even basic border controls. That said, I haven't exactly taken any real care to avoid being called far right. I have employed some, shall we say, robust rhetoric. I describe low IQ, low skill sub-Saharan immigration as "garbage immigration", largely because it's an accurate, if not politically correct term. I make no effort to avoid being called racist because I do not care about the opinions of people who go around calling people racist - because it's always people who have no intention of debating the issues in good faith. As to joining the Homeland Party, I had a reasonable idea of who I was dealing with. I've read the wikipedia/HNH biographies of the people involved, but those pages are written by the same sort of people who smear me, and there is always missing context. I decided to make my own mind up about these people by going to meet them at the Homeland Party conference. I went out of curiosity, not least to discern whether this was a new entity or whether it was just another attempt to resuscitate the BNP, which I categorically would not have joined. I did note a whiff of the old blood and soil nationalism, but I got more of an impression that this was an entirely new organisation, speaking to a far younger demographic of well turned out chaps. As is typical for fringe politics, there was a certain autistic eccentricity to it, but nothing especially malign. Only one of the executive team has any past link to the BNP, and there is no real association with Patriotic Alternative - which very much is linked to neo-Nazism, and nothing I would have anything to do with. Having spent some time with the top team, I was reasonably convinced they are serious people. In many respects they're not nearly as right wing as me, but certainly more doctrinal in their approach to nationalism. What turns a lot of people off is that the party defines itself explicitly as a nationalist party, and nationalism is something of a dirty word in British politics because of its past associations. Often nationalism is conflated with fascist imperialism, but Homeland is not an imperialist party. It is not supremacist in nature either. It simply does not qualify as a fascist party. For me, the hop to nationalism was not a big leap. Just recently I set about writing a centre-right manifesto as a thoughy exercise, and settled on an adapted version of&nbsp; American National Conservatism, which is centred on national sovereignty and pits itself against liberal internationalism. This is not very far from Ben Habib's politics which he recently described as "nation-ism". But then I got to asking myself why the disambiguation when we're essentially talking about the same thing? As such, the real difference between Homeland and Reform is that Homeland has an explicit nationalist philosophy, whereas Reform is a party for nationalists, but in substance is a populist party. The key difference is in approach to immigration policy where Reform stops far short of anything radical because it still craves broadcast media respectability. Homeland doesn't see the point in putting on a pretense, and will openly advocate for remigration. In this, Farage believes remigration is too radical, but he's behind the times. Donald Trump has pledged to deport millions while several EU member states are dipping their toes in remigration policy. It is an inevitability. I concluded we need a party that will nudge the Overton Window in that direction - and that Reform is far too cautious, not least because it still cares what the likes of Hope Not Hate say about them. I'm not willing to play the game by rules defined by our political enemies. As such, it is likely that my name will appear regularly in HNH tract, but that goes with the territory. The function of it is to discourage others from putting their heads above the parapet. That might have worked were they more sparing about who they call far right, but they've jumped the shark with their antics. I simply regard it at free publicity now. Anyone who wants to know what I think about things, and how I arrived at my current politics, can easily find out for themselves. My old blogs are still online and my current essays can be found on my Substack. Good faith actors will find I am ever ready to debate them. If you take their word for it then you've suspended your critical faculties. As a member of Homeland, I'm rubbing shoulders with people from different political backgrounds, some with views I profoundly disagree with, but we focus on areas where we do agree, and we are all agreed that mass immigration is an existential threat, and that remigration is urgently required for our national survival. There is disagreement as to how far it needs to go, but we'll cross that bridge when we come to it. I'm not a puriticnical ethno-nationalist. Never was, never will be. But politics is always about alliances and coalitions, and I find no answers in mealy-mouthed civic nationalism as espoused by Farage/Robinson. It's an intellectual cop out. "British values" are intrinsically linked to British culture, which is a product of the British people and British history. Should we become a minority in our own homeland, those values (which are not universal) are threatened along with everything that makes British society what it is. Being that the alternative to nationalism is civil disorder, Lebanonisation, and low grade civil war, I must put my reservations aside. If that means people call me names, I can live with it.

Badges of honour

I'm not as furious at Labour as I was at the Tories. Labour is just doing what envious, low ability, economically illiterate quarterwits do. Almost everything they're doing was predictable, and predicted. Everything they're doing is entirely in character, and nobody should be the least bit surprised that taxes are killing jobs and destroying entire industries. That a court is sitting to decide what a woman is, and we're now basically debating euthanasia, is really just the icing on the cake. This is why we put up with Tory governments so often and for so long. We all knew this was coming though. All Tory governments reach the end of their useful life, when the material difference between criminal incompetence and raging psychopathy is marginal. Some of us assumed Starmer would be more of a crashing bore than a tinpot dictator, but he's got carried away with the idea that he has some kind of mandate. What makes Starmer especially incompetent is that his world stopped turning in 2016. That the liberal postwar international rules based order is collapsing around him bypassed him completely, and he's still labouring under the illusion that Britain leads on the "world stage" and that all will follow. Like all insular remainers, it escapes him that far right populism is rising (and winning) in Europe, nation states are reasserting their borders, and EU economies are flatlining thanks to green energy policies and Net Zero ideology. Liberal progressives inhabit a world of their own where reality never intrudes. In some respects it's like having a foreigner in control. Starmer has no feel for governing and no affinity with the British people, most of whom he regards ars far right. It is similarly lost on him that the working class whom Labour claim to represent absolutely despise him. Starmer is not just alien to this country, he is alien to this planet. This is man who presses for more war in Europe while further dismantling our own armed forces. Knowing that Labour would be this awful, I could at least console myself with the notion that the electorate will soon do to Labour what they've done to the Tories, and that Labour would be the last gasp of a dying regime. But then the Tories went and fucked that up by electing Olukemi Badenough as their leader. It seems likely that the Tories could win by default in 2029, but will do nothing to dismantle the many impediments to vaguely sane, functioning government. I thus resign myself to the fact that is to be no British renaissance any time soon. Starmer will again shackle us to the corpse of EU neoliberalism while the Tories will pointlessly grumble from the sidelines, and the rest of us will have to adapt to colder homes, intermittent power supply, shrinking pay, fewer jobs, rising violent crime, failing institutions, and a moribund economy. This would be easier to swallow were it external influences creating these conditions but all of it is entirely self-inflicted because the entire establishment is in thrall to the same death-cult ideology. The sad part is that it wouldn't take all that much to fix things. We saw during Covid what government can do and how quickly it can be done when there is the resolve and the political will, but that political will only seems to exist when there's an opportunity to meddle in our lives and restrict our freedoms and choices. What we need is a complete clear out of the entire political apparatus but our electoral system, and politics more generally doesn't allow for interlopers. We've seen in Reform how the closer a party gets to real power, the more it becomes what it seeks to replace. It seems that with a political solution so remote, there is only decline and fall to look forward to. I can see why Peter Hitchens is telling young people to abandon ship. It's only out of some misguided optimism that i persist with politics at all. I've long maintained that a degree of self-delusion is necessary to function in politics or one would simply resign from it all in despair. Writing about politics these days feels more like charting the decline that political activism. It's not even funny anymore. The destruction inflicted upon us by our political class is beyond anything our mortal enemies could achieve with an armada of tanks.

The WOTE.uk Federation 2025

Blog: the Revolution starts here...

vote for the way we were

coming home

"and they were singing, 'Bye, Bye, Mr Jonathan Pie...'

Soul selling for beginners

Badges of honour

Standing in the ruins