Harry's Place

Its dealings with Christianity are shallow and superficial, lacking any constructive engagement with religious texts and instead attempting to use Christianity as a cultural identity marker to connect with white Britons in order to exclude minorities.

Talk about barking up the wrong tree.

Lee Barnes’ theology is lifted straight out of The Wicker Man.

In the woods there grew a tree
And a fine fine tree was he

And on that tree there was a limb
And on that limb there was a branch
And on that branch there was a nest
And in that nest there was an egg
And in that egg there was a bird
And from that bird a feather came
And of that feather was
A bed

And on that bed there was a girl
And on that girl there was a man
And from that man there was a seed
And from that seed there was a boy
And from that boy there was a man
And for that man there was a grave
From that grave there grew
A tree

In the Summerisle,
Summerisle, Summerisle, Summerisle wood
Summerisle wood.

If you have Spotify, you can hear that here:

http://tinyurl.com/summerisle

If you don’t, well, you should.

That video is remarkable.

God, these people are both weird and nasty.

Lee Barnes is a pseudo-pagan. He adopts pagan heritage – essentially Celtic romanticism – without regard for the Druidic tradition. If he truly understood Druidism, he could never be a Nazi.

Well let’s face it, Christianity isn’t much of a selling point these days; rather as detachable starched collars, a tad naf and distinctly dated.

This is more likely to act as a net fetter on BNP recruitment, so best to encourage it!

Dan – “If he truly understood Druidism, he could never be a Nazi.”

Isn’t it a shame that you are not there to explain to him the Truth about a religious practice we know absolutely nothing about apart from the fact that they sacrificed humans a bit because the Romans destroyed them leaving the way open for Victorian Romantics to create an utterly artificial and false narrative in their name?

Eerm..”Love thy neighbour”?

Israelinurse – “Eerm..”Love thy neighbour”?”

You just have to define your neighbour as your racial neighbour.

There is plenty of genocidal material in the Bible for Nazis to use if they want. I would suspect there is a strong influence of the Old Testament on the Nazis. They cloak it in scientific terms rather than religious ones, but the Master Race and the Chosen People seem to me to be connected concepts. Both wanted to reduce their neighbours to hewers of wood and drawers of water. Both deeply opposed all forms of intermarriage. Both were openly genocidal to some ethnic groups. Both looked forward to a Promised Land once the present owners were removed.

Of course it is a little hard for viciously anti-Semitic people to use those ideas openly. But less anti-Semitic people have done so. The Dutch Reformed Church based its support of Apartheid on the Bible and their reading of it. So do the Identity Churches, in so far as they exist as Christian groups, in the US.

SMFS: One could point out that witch-burning was a practice carried out by Christians, but frankly it has bugger all to do with Christianity. The BNP’s understanding of both Christianity and Druidism is totally warped. Druidism survived in part because some Christians chose to record pagan rites and incorporate them and freemasonry sustained some of the traditions. Glastonbury Tor is an example of how Christians have co-opted Celtic mythology. The fact is that there is nothing in Druidism – no matter what you think of it – that would endorse the BNP’s racial politics, just as there’s nothing in Christianity to support it. Lee Barnes’ interpretation is completely fucked up.

There is, by the way, little evidence that Celts engaged in systematic ritual human sacrifice.

Racist Lunatic egomaniacs using a ‘religion’ to justify their insane ‘view’ of how the humans on this planet should live their lives, nothing new is it? The BNP are nazis, just like the ones from the thirties, whom, I believe, also wanted a ‘new’ religion, did they not. Sorelian Syndicalists all.

Dan – “One could point out that witch-burning was a practice carried out by Christians, but frankly it has bugger all to do with Christianity.”

Really? Whose Bible says in Exodus 22 [18]: “Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live”?

“The BNP’s understanding of both Christianity and Druidism is totally warped. Druidism survived in part because some Christians chose to record pagan rites and incorporate them and freemasonry sustained some of the traditions. Glastonbury Tor is an example of how Christians have co-opted Celtic mythology.”

The mistake, from where I sit, is to say that Druidism survived. It did not. Some pagan sites, many of them in fact, were incorporated into Christianity. Some of those were probably linked to Druids – as with Glastonbury. But the rites and mythology? No. They replace them with Christian rites and Christian myths so that Glastonbury becomes important because of Joseph of Arimathea and the Holy Grail. Not because of anything Celtic.

“The fact is that there is nothing in Druidism – no matter what you think of it – that would endorse the BNP’s racial politics, just as there’s nothing in Christianity to support it. Lee Barnes’ interpretation is completely fucked up.”

Considering that his artificial revival of a dead tradition is about as valid as anyone else’s artificial revival of a dead tradition I don’t see how you can say that. I agree I don’t see a lot in Druidism that says much about race, but then we have no idea what the Druids believed. You may as well say Tolkein’s Elves are more valid than Michael Moorcroft’s.

“There is, by the way, little evidence that Celts engaged in systematic ritual human sacrifice.”

OK. I’ll go out on a limb and say I bet every single contemporary Roman and Greek reference to the Druids mentions human sacrifice. Every single one. Not just most of them, but all of them. Now perhaps you can argue there is a distinction between the “Celts” (a problematic group that may or may not have existed at the time much less had any connection with Druids), but if you are talking about the Druids, there is little evidence – apart from everything anyone wrote about them at the time.

Speaking as an atheist I don’t care what fairy tales you believe in; BUT, if I can’t piss on all your religions, what gives you the right to piss on the BNP vision of Christianity or “Druidism” ?

I know that John Smith didn’t get the emerald eyeglasses from an Angel and read holy books. He made it all up, it is bollocks.

Mohammod didn’t talk to an Angel in a cave and have the word of god. He made it all up.

Jesus was not the son of god, didn’t either raise the dead, heal the sick, feed the 5000 or rise from the dead. The Church fathers made it up.

Moses didn’t talk to god, he was an evil bastard who led a 20 year military campaign fighting his way across the middle east.

These people, making up a direct line line to god were all lying bastards.
So all this religion stuff is also bollocks. So as we grown ups know the whole thing is crap, why be hypocrites and just piss on the BNP’s religion.

Why not have a go at the pope, or Gordon Browns father, or the queen.

What prigs you are.

I was not aware of that verse. But I don’t see how it fits with the New Testament.

I disagree that all Druidic tradition was completely lost. There is an oral tradition that survived – eg the Book of Taliesin – and certainly some traditions were remembered or they could not be revived and re-invented. I don’t deny that neo-Druidism is different from the pre-Christian Druidic traditions. But I very much doubt that, ancient or modern, Druidic beliefs would support Lee Barnes’ viewpoint. For a start, the nation state is a modern invention.

“I bet every single contemporary Roman and Greek reference to the Druids mentions human sacrifice.”

It’s a bit like the stories of Iraqis ripping babies out of incubators. The irony is that the claims came from conquering armies who committed acts of genocide and rape. Archeological evidence to support this is scant. Not that this matters at all. The fact is that human sacrifices or not, there is nothing to support Lee Barnes’ racialism in Celtic pagan beliefs, either in the few sources that have survived or in the neo-pagan orders that have sprung up in recent decades.

Is Dan onto something?

Are the anti-BNP forces desperate and in despair?

The emergence of a body called ‘United Pagans, Druids and Wiccans against the BNP’ might be enough to turn the tide.

Will some union funding be available? Will the Taffy Ayatollah of Canterbury bless such a venture?

Those damn Roman imperialist bigots!

“Moses didn’t talk to god, he was an evil bastard who led a 20 year military campaign fighting his way across the middle east.”

40 year. For God’s sake, 40 years!! It is the most known “fact” of the journey through the desert, apart from the parting of the waters.

BTW, the Amalekites attacked us first and unprovoked.

(if you are going to take scripture as historical fact, then you will have to take it as it is written).

Errrr sorry to interrupt your ‘Hate In’ chaps, but ODIN is a NORSE and ANGLO-SAXON god not a Keltic god.

So attacking my ‘Druidism’ and ‘Celtic romanticism’ on the basis of my article about the Norse Northern Path of Odinism that has nothing to do with Keltic Druidism or Celtic romanticism is a bit … well, thick really isnt it.

If you are going to have a go lads at least give well aimed kicks.

If the so called ‘ Druidic experts’ on this site are unable to differentiate between Druidism and Odinism, then that alone tells us all we need to know about how much these ‘experts’ know about Odinism and Drudism.

As for the Druids and nationalism – seeing as the modern Druid movement yearns to be so inclusive, it makes you wonder why the Druids fought those pesky Romans that invaded Britain so long ago if ‘nationalism and nations’ did not exist and the Druids did not care their country or culture.

Perhaps the Druids thought Britain was not an Island then, but perhaps a boat, or a whale or something.

Ding Ding – Round 2.

Let the ‘Hate In’ re-commence.

40 year. For God’s sake, 40 years!! It is the most known “fact” of the journey through the desert, apart from the parting of the waters.

And after a full 40 years of wandering all over the Middle East, he finally chose the one place without any oil.

Some leader.

On the button Doc – go tell it on the mountain!

“Some leader”

I would like to see what you would be able to accomplish in his place if you stuttered like Moses.

SMFS: the Romans made up stories about the Celts/Druids out of whole cloth. Their concept of history was hardly scientific at the best of times, but especially when writing about “barbarians”. It was straight Ministry of Propaganda stuff.

“And after a full 40 years of wandering all over the Middle East, he finally chose the one place without any oil”

Don’t forget he was an evil Jewish bastard. He had a long-term cunning plan to commit genocide against the native Arabs and steal all their oil.

“This is more likely to act as a net fetter on BNP recruitment, so best to encourage it!” – Nick (ex South Africa).

The Bishops in England and Wales (Anglican and Roman Catholic) publicly condemn the B.N.P. and, further more, have made it plain that the ‘movement’s’ declared political platform flatly contradicts Jesus’s explict teachings as revealed in the Gospels. The General Synod of the Church of England (Anglican) have recently confirmed that membership of the B.N.P. is incompatible with church membership – including in this all clergy.

If people tempted by the B.N.P. turn up at a church and learn the error of their thinking, good.

The BNP in its essence is divisive, elitist, exclusive and flavoured with more than a pinch of hatred.
Christianity in its essence is inclusive, egalitarian, universal and forgiving.
The parables are full of instances in which Jesus brings the socially rejected -lepers, prostitutes, poor -back into the circle of society with the accent on the message that all are equal in the eyes of god.
No, the BNP is not Christian and it is merely using Christianity as an electioneering tactic.
As for this apparant new found romance with Norse/Anglo Saxon religion -as far as I remember the Vikings,the Angles and the Saxons were all invaders of Britain, i.e. foreigners. Does this mean that as far as the BNP are concerned some foreigners ARE acceptable?

Because, as everyone knows, Jesus looked a lot like Robert Plant.

Good post as ever Seismic!

Dude, is that Lee Barnes???

Eerm..”Love thy neighbour”?

Jesus said did, didn’t he?

“Errrr sorry to interrupt your ‘Hate In’ chaps, but ODIN is a NORSE and ANGLO-SAXON god not a Keltic god.”

So, that means Odin is as foreign as Jesus. Your paganism is simply an attempt to build some kind of ideological lineage to ancient times.

“it makes you wonder why the Druids fought those pesky Romans that invaded Britain so long ago if ‘nationalism and nations’ did not exist and the Druids did not care their country or culture.”

Seeing that Druids – the priestly class – were largely exempt from military service in Celtic Britain, it’s a bit hard to argue that they fought the Romans. The Celts fought the Romans because they were violent occupiers, not because they had a love of a nation. The Celts themselves were a pretty diverse bunch who came in successive waves to the British Isles.

Lee, you dunce, the concept of nationhood was born out of the Enlightenment. You are performing the typical Nazi tactic of moulding folklore and ancient religions into your dogmatic, racist and exclusive ideology. The fact is that your beliefs have no basis in Christian, Norse, Celtic or any other tradition or faith, they are rooted well and truly in the modern era.

Lee Barnes – your thoughts about Odinism as a shared European racial heritage and your willingness to distance yourself from more traditional Anglo-Saxon forms of worship suggests to me a penchant for pan-European multiculturalism, which chimes strangely with your party’s anti-European stance:
http://www.archive.org/stream/BnpAnti-euLeaflet/Anti-euroLeaflet_djvu.txt

I don’t think you’ve thought this whole BNP thing through properly, and how it jars with your beliefs, especially your party’s opportunistic alliance with liberalism’s “pimp sister” Christianity.

Why don’t you take a step back from all the hatred and pretending, and spend some time travelling?

If you fancied moving to Norway to explore your Odinist beliefs, I’m sure no-one would get in your way. Maybe you should show similar tolerance to those who seek to move to the UK.

Remember “do unto others as you would have done to you”…

So, that means Odin is as foreign as Jesus.

That’s the crux of the matter really.

Crikey Dan,

Are you ‘ The Rainman of Modern Druidism’ as you seem a bit …. odd, you know.

Odinism is the indigenous religion of Northern Europe and the religion of the Anglo-Saxons, of whom I am one.

You may not know it Dan, but this country we live in is called Britain and its in Europe. Britain was also colonised by Anglo-Saxons who brought their religion with them from Europe.

Therefore if you are suggesting the Anglo-Saxons are not indigenous British and are foreign, which means you are a fucking racist idiot, after having been here for over 1300 years then that also means their indigenous god, Odin, is also indigenous to this Island.

If the Anglo-Saxons are not indigenous British after 1300 years of continual occupation, then what does that make those who are immigrants and have been here about 50 years.

I guess that the Liberal Fascists who deny us our identity, religion, traditions and heritage want to be hypcrites as well as fascist idiots.

If you are really saying the Druids welcomed the Romans into Britain as they welcomed Roman ‘enrichment’ and that the Druids, as leaders of Keltic society, never fought the Druids then basically The History of Dan The Man invalidates everything that history teaches us about Boudica, the battle of Anglesey, Cunobelinus, Caratacus etc etc – in fact according to Dans rather odd history of Britain the Druids did not exist as a nation and a people and the Romans were welcomed with open arms into Britain as ‘enrichers’ whose ‘diversity’ was adored by the Druids and Kelts.

So Dan also asserts the Kelts were not ‘nationalists’ – though he adduces no evidence of that, whilst history tells the opposite.

I would have thought that fighting an occupying army is a pretty ‘nationalist’ thing to do.

The idea that before ‘the enlightenment’ the indigenous people of Europe were unaware of the concept of ‘nations’ is about as farsical as one would expect from an idiot,

I think the very fact that Britain is an ISLAND would have made the Druids aware of the fact it was a nation, in fact as most of the commentaries tell us the Druids of Europe came to the island of Britain to learn from British Druids.

Therefore they knew Britain was an island and that the British Druids were an elite within European Druidism.

Carthage was seen as a nation by the Carthaginians.

Israel was seen as a nation by Jews in the Roman Empire.

Greece was seen as a nation by the early Greeks.

The Persians were a nation that saw themselves as a nation before they created the Persian empire.

The spartans saw themselves as a nation.

Dan makes the fundamental mistake of conflating nationalism solely with geography – nationalism is a fusion of ethnicity and geography.

Nation does not just refer to a geogrpahic area, it also relates to a sense of ethnic communality also rooted in a geo-specific area.

The concept of nationhood and ethnic community existed before the enlightenment you dolt.

The English word “nation” is derived from the Latin term natio (nātĭō, stem nātiōn-), meaning;
The action of being born; birth; or
The goddess personifying birth; or
A breed, stock, kind, species, race; or
A tribe, or (rhetorically, any) set of people (contemptuous); or
A nation or people.
As an example of how the word nation was employed in classical Latin, consider the following quote from Cicero’s Philippics Against Mark Antony in 44 BC. Cicero contrasts the external, inferior nationes (”races of people”) with the Roman civitas (”community”).:

“Omnes nationes servitutem ferre possunt: nostra civitas non potest.”
(”All races are able to bear enslavement, but our community cannot.”)

The Druids, as the ruling elite, were the generals of the wars fought against the Romans as they controlled the Keltic society.

To say the Druids did not wage war is like saying Tony Blair and the Labour government were not responsible for the war in Iraq, and that only the soldiers and generals they ordered to fight are responsible for the war in Iraq.

They gave the orders, the soldiers simply obeyed. The same as the Druids did.

Therefore the Druids, as the political and social power in Keltic socity, ordered, controlled and directed the war against the Romans.

Just as Tony Blair and the Labour government did in Iraq.

Dan, you are an idiot.

Israelinurse – “Eerm..”Love thy neighbour”?”

You just have to define your neighbour as your racial neighbour.

I love my neighbour I just don’t want him living in my bloody house…

Israelinurse – “…as far as I remember the Vikings, the Angles and the Saxons were all invaders of Britain, i.e. foreigners. Does this mean that as far as the BNP are concerned some foreigners ARE acceptable?”

Nope, Britain as a nation, for Nationalists, didn’t exist until the Act of Union in 1707.

I know that John Smith didn’t get the emerald eyeglasses from an Angel and read holy books. He made it all up, it is bollocks.

Moses didn’t talk to god, he was an evil bastard who led a 20 year military campaign fighting his way across the middle east.

All are liars, but only Moses was evil? Hmm….

So, that means Odin is as foreign as Jesus.

That’s the crux of the matter really.

Yes it is – if you are a liberal fascist idiot who sees the Anglo-Saxons who have lived in Britain for over 1300 years as ‘foreign’.

Yet these liberal fascists who call the Anglo-Saxons who ahve lived here for 1300 years, and their tribal god ODIN, will call the BNP fascists for saying that anyone who has lived here for less than 50 years and who holds a naturalised British citizens passport based on Jus Solis ( and with Lex sangunius right of return status to their ancestral homelands ) as ‘foreign’.

It must be great to be a hypcritical idiot and be able to hold two fundamentally opposing views at the same time.

O.K. -now I understand. So basically only the BNP have the exclusive priviledge of deciding when ‘British’ history began and who, according to their ancestory, is ‘British’.
Angles, Saxons and Vikings -fine.
All the rest -not.
How interesting it would be to do some genetic testing on all these so-called ‘pure’ Brits!

“Fabian from Israel

40 year. For God’s sake, 40 years!! It is the most known “fact” of the journey through the desert, apart from the parting of the waters.”

I gave them 20 off the general hacking, slashing, slaying and conquest to raise a generation. A generation is typically 20 years, so 40-20=20.

That Brent Cheetham guy cheered me up a bit, saying how farcical all this kind of stuff is. I heard what to me is the authentic British voice – the one that takes the piss out of grand solemn pronouncements. And those dudes in the Iron Guard wearing those weird costumes – can anyone imagine a Brit pratting around wearing clothes like that in all seriousness, except for stag nights or as part of a Sealed Knot society i.e. when everyone knows you’re playing a game.

Maybe you should show similar tolerance to those who seek to move to the UK.

But wouldn’t tolerance presuppose tolerance on your part for those who don’t share this Utopian vision?

Just saying…

Being called “odd” by Lee Barnes is an honour.

“if you are suggesting the Anglo-Saxons are not indigenous British and are foreign, which means you are a fucking racist idiot”

Anyone born in Britain is indigenous to Britain, in my mind. But you are the one pushing the argument that Christianity is some foreign imposition. On that basis, Norse mythology – which you call “Odinism”, which itself is something of a Nazi construct – is also a foreign imposition.

“I guess that the Liberal Fascists who deny us our identity, religion, traditions and heritage want to be hypcrites as well as fascist idiots.”

How are you being denied the right to practice whatever faith you want? You aren’t, of course. The problem you have is that so few people agree with you. And you perceive your sense of alienation as oppression. It’s not. You can believe in Odin or whatever you want. Us liberals aren’t stopping you.

“I would have thought that fighting an occupying army is a pretty ‘nationalist’ thing to do.”

But more likely it was due to the violent imposition of a new oppressor, rather than a defence of a nation that did not exist. Nation is a product of modernity – advances in communication and the establishment of a vernacular language, centralisation of power, industrialisation, creation of common myths and symbols, etc. If anything, nation is rooted in liberalism.

You confuse etymology with definition, you conflate nation with race and you project onto the past the values of the present. But this typical of far-right conceptualisation of the nation state. The good thing is that you are, at least, honest about your opinions and are willing to defend them, unlike Nick Griffin who hides his true beliefs behind a veneer of respectability.

How interesting it would be to do some genetic testing on all these so-called ‘pure’ Brits!

Nation is a product of modernity – advances in communication and the establishment of a vernacular language, centralisation of power, industrialisation, creation of common myths and symbols, etc. If anything, nation is rooted in liberalism.

Do you have any evidence for this somewhat bizarre statement?

Errrr sorry to interrupt your ‘Hate In’ chaps, but ODIN is a NORSE and ANGLO-SAXON god not a Keltic god.

Well, when it comes to pagan gods the Keltic, Slavic, Scandinavian Greek, Roman and Germanic were all pretty much the same; it was only the names that differed, but the myths spouted by them all were very similar in both tone and substance. And the transition from pagansim to Christianity was far more seamless than we think, and helps explain the persistence of numerous festivals, ostensibly Christian, but festivals that retain strong pagan influences.

Even ‘revealed’ religions are never as novel and innovative as we believe and often display elements of the earlier cults they replaced/absorbed.

What is strange about the BNP’s sudden embrace of Christiaity is this; two thirds of Christians these days are are non-white.

“Do you have any evidence for this somewhat bizarre statement?”

Read Benedict Anderson’s “Imagined Communities” or Ernest Gellner’s “Nations and Nationalism” or Eric Hobsbawm’s “Nations and Nationalism Since 1780″. They have different ideas of how the concept of the nation came about, but there’s no doubt in their minds that it is a modern phenomenon.

Yes it is – if you are a liberal fascist idiot who sees the Anglo-Saxons who have lived in Britain for over 1300 years as ‘foreign’.

I’m a “liberal fascist idiot”.

LOL!

If we’re really going to get into a pissing match over genealogy then its your Anglo-saxons Ancestors, Lee Barnes, who are the recent invaders compared to my own Pictish ancestors. Fuck off back to Germany, Lee Barnes. Or should I say, Lee Saxe-Coburg-Gotha?

But in any case, if you’re born here, and you have loyalty to this country, then you’re British. Full stop. End of Story. That is all its takes.

Evidence is not the same as theory dude. Why is Sparta not a nation? The Incas? The Aztecs? The Monomatapa? The Jews?

I think you are wrong but who knows?

Anyway isn’t Hobsbawm the communist who thought twenty million deaths were an acceptable start to a marxist paradise?

No racism on HARRYS PLACE ?

If we’re really going to get into a pissing match over genealogy then its your Anglo-saxons Ancestors, Lee Barnes, who are the recent invaders compared to my own Pictish ancestors. Fuck off back to Germany, Lee Barnes. Or should I say, Lee Saxe-Coburg-Gotha?

ENUFF SAID.

Stuart: There are differences between the nation state and empire and culture. Empires tend to be fairly diverse and for much of history had ill-defined borders. Cultures tend to span countries or are concentrated on a certain region. The nation may sometimes be contiguous with empire and/or culture, but not necessarily. The Celts were and still are a broad culture that spans a number of modern nations. Ultra-nationalists may like to associate blood with nation, but I think their concept of nationhood is driven by racialist ideology rather than empirical evidence.

I guess we have to differ here but I firmly believe the nation existed well before modern times and that it is an extension of the idea of a tribe, which is also an extension of the family.

Actually Dan, the definition of Nation encompassing blood and inheritance and ethnicity is the very definition of nation of nationalism.

This definition was used as long as Cicero in 44 BC.

It is not the nationalists who are trying to change the meaning of nationalism, it is the liberals who are trying to change the definition of nations and nationalism.

The empirical evidence is that the definition of nation and nationalism used by nationalists is unchanged for over 2000 years, whilst the fiction of liberal nationalism that refutes blood, ethnicity, race and inheritance is a relic of 20th century universalist marxist failed ideology.

Get the time line right Dan – please at least get that right.

Seismic Shock wrote: “The BNP’s version of Christianity is incredibly warped and racist, characterised by alliances with Christian identity movements rather than any mainstream Christian groups. The BNP itself is still a Nazi organisation. Its political philosophy is based off fascist interpretations of paradise. Its dealings with Christianity are shallow and superficial, lacking any constructive engagement with religious texts and instead attempting to use Christianity as a cultural identity marker to connect with white Britons in order to exclude minorities.”

that’s true but we should remember, that the same fact applied for the NSDAP but that did not stop the majority of Protestants (both mainline and free church) in Germany to – often enthusiastically -support the Nazis; their shared anti-semitism and anti-communism was far stronger

I see that once again in the absence of an ability to argue as regards logic,seismic shock retorts to Ad Hominom attacks on me and the BNP with the usual asinine perjoratives nazi / racist etc

This marxist-leninist ‘Terrorism of the Word’ where one does not debate with an opponent,one either shouts at them in a rude and childish wayor silences them with No Pltform policies, is why our democracy is rotting at the roots.

The Labour government ignores our views such as millions marching on the streets against the war in Iraq, because you also support censorship and ignore the BNP.

You set the example on No Platform that allows the state to ignore anyone else it pleases.

You began the rot of our democracy and sustain it with your facile No Platform policy and childish terrorism of the word.

Then you complain when democracy dies.

The Labour government are in the process of passing a law that will allow discrimination against White British people on the basis of their
race and sex, they have invaded Iraq and Afghanistan, created a
politicised police force, eroded the right and ability of people to
peacefully protest, criminalised free speech and given civil servants
and local councils the power to spy on private citizens, imposed internment without trial and intercept every phone call, e mail and text message sent in our country.

They have even put tracker bugs in wheelie bins !

I and The BNP opposed all these actions by the Labour government.

Remind me again who the ‘fascists’ are.

Idiots.

Lee: We’re not going to agree on this one, and I doubt we’ll ever agree on anything. I find your ideology odious, frankly. But how does your Odinism fit in with the BNP’s trend towards Christian identity politics and defence of “Christian heritage”?

Christianity in its essence is inclusive, egalitarian, universal and forgiving

Which presumably explains Savonarola, the Spanish Inquisition and the immense wealth of the Church.

The odious little neonazi freak (and genetic German!) Lee Barnes accusing others of racism? LOL!

This thread is about whether the B.N.P. can embrace Christianity with any degree of plausibility. I think not. So too, with rather more authority, do the Bishops.

All the descriptions of paganism I have seen are modern in origin and are the product of late nineteenth century Romanticism and its late flowering of dead headedness, Symbolism. I do not know who fired the starting gun on modern interpretations of ‘our pagan roots’ but the executive producer was Wagner. Hence the ’swords and sorcery’ imagery Paganism summons up today; big blokes wearing fur with big swords looking to get a bit tasty with the opposition, sometimes accompanied by a maiden or two in flowing robes and an obligatory head band. Much of this is apparent in the art of numerous obscure and forgotten 19th century Germanic academicians (beloved of the Furher). You get a lot of an echo of this kind of stuff in contemporary heavy metal bands (e.g. “Iron Maiden”); not that any of these great bands or their numerous followers are in any way tainted by Nazism.

The ‘pagan moment’ arose because of anxieties about rapid industrialisation and consequent disruption to ‘traditional’ societies and ruling elites; interestingly, William Morris took this concern in a somewhat different direction; whilst encouraging the ‘aesthetic’, emphasising himself the importance of social responsibility and utility in art and design. The notion of paganism as a product of late Romanticism was brilliantly explored in the 1980s at Beyreuth by Pierre Boulez and Patrice Cheréau, who re-invented the Ring Cycle as metaphor: Rhine dammed by Krupps and Wotan as a Junker plutocrat. The German audience hated it.

As to this island’s long history, I shuddered reading some of the above. I shall restrict myself to this. Recently, I looked into a burial cyst (stone coffin) estimated to be not less than 4000 years old. Nearby a huge earth and stone settlement dates from a similar time period. Exposed rocks around the district show curious ‘Cup and Ring’ designs, of similar age, some of great beauty and not a little mystery. No one knows what these were for or if they signify anything. These pre date Celtic Britain quite comfortably and we know precisely nothing (reliable; conjecture reigns supreme as always) about who these presumably numerous ‘Ancient Britons’ were or what their lives were like.

What matters now to us today is not who or where people are from, but the governance and laws of the state. Stick to that. The rest is pure wind.

“All the descriptions of paganism I have seen are modern in origin and are the product of late nineteenth century Romanticism and its late flowering of dead headedness, Symbolism”

There’s a lot more to modern European paganism than this, but no doubt it is not the same as ancient beliefs. But neither is contemporary Christianity the same as the faith practiced by the first Christians. And although Druidism has a broken lineage, it has survived in fragments of folklore. All religious/spiritual belief adapts to changing circumstances and will continue to change.

“Why is Sparta not a nation? The Incas? The Aztecs? The Monomatapa? The Jews?”

The Jews are a nation.

“But neither is contemporary Christianity the same as the faith practiced by the first Christians. And although Druidism has a broken lineage, it has survived in fragments of folklore. All religious/spiritual belief adapts to changing circumstances and will continue to change.” – Dan.

The Faith is entirely the same. The practices have changed but western Christians use a form of service centred on the Nicene Creed, itself dating from 325 AD.

“The Jews are a nation.”

Not according to Dan…

Well, he is talking nonsense, then.

“You get a lot of an echo of this kind of stuff in contemporary heavy metal bands”

And among Dungeons and Dragons geeks.

PS. Larkers -
It’s a huge subject, but my understanding is that the concept of “pre-Celtic Britain” is rather dodgy. For one thing, even the concept of “Celticness” is highly debatable. There may not be all that much point in talking about a “Celtic Britain” as such – the people living here at that time (say, 1500 BC until the Romans arrived) may well not have considered themselves belonging to any superset, let alone a “Celtic” one. There is no evidence that they did. But specifically, there is very little concrete and reliable evidence as to the transition between the “Pre-Celtic” and the “Celtic”. There was really Neolithic, Bronze Age and Roman Britain. “Celticness” seems to have been invented retrospectively.

PS. Larkers -
It’s a huge subject, but my understanding is that the concept of “pre-Celtic Britain” is rather dodgy. For one thing, even the concept of “Celticness” is highly debatable. There may not be all that much point in talking about a “Celtic Britain” as such – the people living here at that time (say, 1500 BC until the Romans arrived) may well not have considered themselves belonging to any superset, let alone a “Celtic” one. There is no evidence that they did. But specifically, there is very little concrete and reliable evidence as to the transition between the “Pre-Celtic” and the “Celtic”. There was really Neolithic, Bronze Age and Roman Britain. “Celticness” seems to have been invented retrospectively.

The fact that nation may have been defined a long time ago and national feelings may have been felt by some a long time ago does not mean that nations have existed everywhere for all time. For most of the last thousand years, people in Europe have defined themselves firstly by religion, then by local (eg village, town, county, region) identity. Other than England and Portugal, by 1500 it is very difficult to find any evidence of national feelings anywhere; even in those cases it’s not much before then. Finding anyone who identified themselves as ‘German’ before the mid-eighteenth century or as ‘Italian’ before the mid-nineteenth is all but impossible. References to ‘Germany’ or ‘Italy’ before those times are usually as geographical expressions and include peoples we would certainly not identify as either today. Even by the start of the twentieth century the difference between ‘Serb’ and ‘Croat’ was by no means clear, and for some it still isn’t.

There are also peoples, such as the Ruthenes and the Upper Silesians, who think of themselves as distinct but do not think they belong to a particular nation. This is, in fact, true of most ethnic groups in the world; there are about 3000 ethnic groups, but only 400 or so countries or autonomy/independence movements.

Spartans thought of themselves as Greeks; that’s why they fought at Thermopylae.

Remind me again who the ‘fascists’ are.

It’s you, and Christ you come across as a thickie. Really, really thick. Thick thick thick. A stupid, racist man.

“This marxist-leninist ‘Terrorism of the Word’ where one does not debate with an opponent,one either shouts at them in a rude and childish wayor silences them with No Pltform policies, is why our democracy is rotting at the roots.

“The Labour government ignores our views such as millions marching on the streets against the war in Iraq, because you also support censorship and ignore the BNP.”

I’m going to ignore your poor grasp of the English language and cut straight to the bullshit (although one would feel that an English nationalist would at least be able to write in his own language correctly.)

The people who marched in London against the invasion of Iraq were hardly BNP types, were they? Many, if not most of them ere Muslims, a religious group the BNP hates with a passion. The march was organised by the Socialist Workers’ Party, a far-left organisation which the BNP no doubt hates as much as Muslims. Thirdly, the speakers were largely far-left. Indeed, one speaker called for a Marxist revolution to overthrow Tony Blair and impose communism on the people. Now, unless I’m very much mistaken, this is all very anti-democratic communism, so claiming that the Labour government’s invasion of Iraq after a communist/Islamic anti-war march was somehow undemocratic shows just how ignorant and stupid you really are.

“You began the rot of our democracy and sustain it with your facile No Platform policy and childish terrorism of the word.”

There’s nothing undemocratic about not giving a platform to far-right dunderheads like the BNP.

“The Labour government are in the process of passing a law that will allow discrimination against White British people on the basis of their
race and sex.”

No, that’s a figment of your imagination. By the way, I find it odd that you feel to include he word “White”, especally seeing as how you included a capital letter. It’s a clear sign that the BNP haven’t changed their stripes; you’re still the same old neo-Nazi, white supremacist arseholes.

“Remind me again who the ‘fascists’ are.”

The British Nazi Party (BNP.)

“Yes it is – if you are a liberal fascist idiot who sees the Anglo-Saxons who have lived in Britain for over 1300 years as ‘foreign’.”

You can’t be a “liberal fascist”. It’s a contradiction in terms.

Funny; I’ve seen a video of Nick Griffin claiming that the British are descended from Paleolithic hunter-gatherers and NOT Anglo-Saxons. Indeed, he said that only Angles came to Britain, and that the Saxons never came here. So, whilst Griffin tries to claim that the British are in fact Paleolithic hunter-gatherers from Iberia, you are peddling this nonsense about how you’re an “Anglo-Saxon” and that “Odinism” (a Nazi constuct) is your “indigenous religion”. In reality, you’re ancestors were dancing around rocks in Stonehenge and praying to the Sun and Moon – Odin has nothing to do with your heritage.

You claim that the Anglo-Saxons are indigenous to Britain because they have been here for “1300 years” (actually, it’s more like 1,700.) What rot. The Angles, Saxons and Jutes were invaders from what is now northern Germany and southern Scandinavia – they were not indigenous to Britain and never will be.

All you’re pseudo-historical claptrap is irrelevant anyway. Being British means having a British passport. End. Of. Story.

No, that’s a figment of your imagination

Read Harman’s latest Bill, because you seem to be ignorant of her proposals, which she is putting forward quite seriously.

The Anglo-Saxons are as indigenous as one can be. After all, the Celts were invaders too.

Shutting up the BNP is completely undemocratic, whatever you think of their policies (which I detest, and certainly the complaint posted above by the resident BNP fan about the government refusing to listen to the assorted mob on the issue of Iraq is utterly silly). It is typically hypocritical of the church to say that you can’t be a Christian if you vote BNP. Talk about Christian charitableness and inclusiveness, my foot.

Christianity isd a false doctrine that does more harm than good. I don’t like the BNP, but if they’re against Christianity, that’s a point in their favour.

Lee Barnes

Yes you are a foreigner you bastard offspring of genocidal Angles and Saxons and Jutes.

You killed my people, raped my foremothers, destroyed our cities and poisoned our wells.

On my father’s side I am a Celt who were not indigenous they had come as warriors but melded with my Mother’s culture.

My Mother’s family are the old ones the dark ones, they came here in the late paleolithic to an island unihabitted after the last glaciers.

My people are the indigenous ones, the ones of stone and spear and song, powerfull song which we yet know if we listen hard enough we can learn to sing again.

Your people came with their chariots and their horses and your twisted power of the runes with your shadow amulet the Swastika from central Asia, as refugees fleeing, as always your neighbours the mongols and turks.

With your demented Hyperborean masters, driving you and their racial superiority unable to reconcile themselves to the fact that they were dying as their race had died on Alpha centauri and that we were not them and they could not live on this earth.

They took you and shaped you believing that in your flesh they could seed themselves to be born again, allways desperate to prevent you their hosts from loving and marrying and living peaceably with their neighbours, lest their germline be corrupted and their pupae whithin be lost.

You are but agar plates for Hyperborean spawn. You have degenerated so far from the people who first became the Hyperborean’s slaves that you have lost the power you once had and that they gave you.

You can no longer weild the sickening cross or take our name with your runepower.

But our blood runs older and slower deep whithin Prydein’s veins.

Our mothers, that you raped, are calling to us with their song, we feel the threnody of the bloodebt beat they teach us.

Do not go into the sacred grove, let not oak or yew touch your skin.

You have no power left. You will be driven from our lands with your alien’s spawn chewing at your entrails.

Yggdrasil was an Elm and has died of blight and your hermaphrodite God Odin is now become a tranny prostitute on the Bois de Boulogne.

I don’t know how Lee Barnes can be so dogmatically pagan. There has never been a book or a single doctrine or a “source of truth”. Druidism, Asatruar and other pagan traditions were based on folklore and wisdom that was transmitted verbally down the ages, fragments of which survive today and their interpretations are used as the basis of neo-pagan beliefs. Only people like Lee Barnes claim that they are followers of an authentic pagan belief unchanged for centuries and millennia. Most neo-pagans are interested in the worship and attunement with the elements of nature rather than worrying over how to get the most authentic ritual or the exact nature of the pantheon. The modern Astruar do not consider their faith an exact replica of the ancient way of life because they recognise that some of the old practices are not appropriate or applicable to modern life. And they tend not to be racist or sexist. As such, Lee Barnes’ “Odinism” is nothing more than Nazi racialist myth rather than spiritual belief. I can find nothing relating to spiritual faith in the BNP, only the incorporation of religion into their extreme form of identity politics; paganism and Christianity are just there to prop up their racial nationalism, not to explore man’s spirituality.

“Other than England and Portugal, by 1500 it is very difficult to find any evidence of national feelings anywhere; …” hasan prishtina.

Here that identity has, perhaps uniquely, been exhibited in law. Common Law and the right to a jury trial have been a crucial shaping influence in national identity.

I sometimes think the best weapon the B.N.P. have are those who insist on denying an English identity fearful of establishing a claim of superiority; in fact this has created a sense of loss of self esteem and purpose especially among the white working class which can quite easily be exploited as the B.N.P. have discovered. Fortunately the B.N.P. have blown the gaff on themselves more times than I can recall, and had it not been for the sterling work of the anti-democratic left, have long ceased to be a menace.

Identity politics are a fool’s game. Once our ancestor’s hid disabled children away from view. Exploring why we no longer think that a fit and right thing to do is more profitable than seeking to discover why it was ever done in the first place. Politics ought to be progressive, to extend more to a greater number of people; to remove those obstacles which have come about through prejudice or mere ‘custom’. It is in the nature of the B.N.P. to be reactionary and it cannot be otherwise. Its ‘beliefs’ can only be defined through prejudice and dislike; it embraces only that which is rejectionist and narrow. As such it is the anti-thesis of Christianity and, really, it does not take an exceptional mind to see this.

“It’s a huge subject, but my understanding is that the concept of “pre-Celtic Britain” is rather dodgy. For one thing, even the concept of “Celticness” is highly debatable. There may not be all that much point in talking about a “Celtic Britain” as such – the people living here at that time (say, 1500 BC until the Romans arrived) may well not have considered themselves belonging to any superset, let alone a “Celtic” one. There is no evidence that they did. But specifically, there is very little concrete and reliable evidence as to the transition between the “Pre-Celtic” and the “Celtic”. There was really Neolithic, Bronze Age and Roman Britain. “Celticness” seems to have been invented retrospectively.” – Someone.

This sounds right. Of course conjecture as soon as it gets into print becomes “history”. History is never completely about the past and I have seen a few changes of emphasis and at times complete re-interpretations to meet contemporary needs as when the U.K. joined the Common Market in the 1970s. Even the idea of ‘invasion’ seems now to be in dispute. The numbers of people were so small that all our ideas are falsified; less like D-day, more like ‘Lost’.
There was also no single polity to ‘invade’ still less occupy. Moreover, waves of ‘invaders’ do not an invasion, as 21st century people understand the term, make.

Still, this is very much ‘off topic’, but I think the B.N.P.s claim to be a Christian organisation sank before it reached dry land.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/top-stories/2009/05/04/bnp-deputy-defends-slur-on-sentamu-115875-21330641/

‘ambitious African’, hey? Fnar-fnar…must be racism!

What Metta said at 4.13 with knobs on.

Larkers/Someone

I am all in favour of deconstructing pure race fantasies especially those who seek to establish a nation on such science-fiction foundations, however I think we can go to far in deconstructing history and pre-history into little more than ‘lost’ bands of people with no overarching ethnic and cultural coherence.

Estimates vary somewhat but the figure for the population in britain 150 BC is between 3-4 million, hardly the cast of lost.

As there are 5 non-English indigenous languages of Britain spoken today (one of which has reversed its decline and is now growing again) and a distinct language (even when recentlly exctinct and revived) is allways prima facie evidence of a distinct ethnic group sharing a common culture.

If we abdicate the responsibilituy of attempting a reasonably accurately knowable past, even if this leads to contentious claims by those who claim to be the legitimate descendents of this or that group, with this or that right to land (its allways about land) we allow the space to be filled by racist fantasists like Lee Barnes or the equally barking British Israelite.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Israelism

While earlier ideas of a shared celtic homeland and culture (Hallstatt) is no longer accepted,and the La Tene culture which was gaulish was found only in South Eastern Britain, there was a clear celtic British geo-political tribal structure sharing many cultural and religious aspects as well as for the most part a common language that the Romans (in adopting the Celtic term) called British.

We can get a pretty good picture of Britains pre-historical and proto-historical past from;

-Archeology,

-Roman texts

-genetics

As you say it is a huge topic but I have taken these three topics (and wiki references) to show that we can build a reasonable accurate picture of Britain’s past peoples

- Roman Texts
-
‘The Roman historian Tacitus described the Britons as being descended from people who had arrived from the continent (which at that time was dominated by the Celts), comparing the Caledonians in modern-day Scotland to their Germanic neighbours, the Silures of southern Wales to Iberian settlers and the inhabitants of south east Britannia to Gaulish tribes.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Iron_Age

Julius Caesar, made two expeditions to Britain in 55 and 54 BC as an offshoot of his conquest of Gaul, believing the Britons had been helping the Gallic resistance. ……

Caesar had conquered no territory and had left behind no troops, but had established clients on the island and had brought Britain into Rome’s sphere of political influence. Augustus planned invasions in 34, 27 and 25 BC, but circumstances were never favourable,[6] and the relationship between Britain and Rome settled into one of diplomacy and trade. Strabo, writing late in Augustus’s reign, claims that taxes on trade brought in more annual revenue than any conquest could.[7] Likewise, archaeology shows an increase in imported luxury goods

Rome appears to have encouraged a balance of power in southern Britain, supporting two powerful kingdoms: the Catuvellauni, ruled by the descendants of Tasciovanus, and the Atrebates, ruled by the descendants of Commius.[

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_Britain
-Genetics
According to Tacitus's biography of Agricola, the Silures usually had a dark complexion and curly hair. Due to their appearance, Tacitus hinted that they may have crossed over from Spain at an earlier date.
Genetic studies carried out by the University College London, Oxford University and the University of California have suggested that most Welsh and Irish Celts share in part (Y-chromosomes, mtDNA) with the Basque people who originated in northern Iberia during the Paleolithic. "But it is still unclear whether the link is specific to the Celts and the Basques, or whether they are both simply the closest surviving relatives of the early population of Europe" [1] [2]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silures

Oppenheimer who disputes the Anglo-Saxon wipeout theory ( though he accepts that Celtic/Iberian gene types are consistently lower in England) believes the vast majority of the British genetically speaking are of paleaolithic origins with later admixtures of indo-european farmers, celtic elites and Angles and Saxons.

He stresses a strong Viking contribution to the genetic profile of Britain greater than the Anglo-saxon inheritance.

He states there is clear evidence of an earlier pre-roman ‘nordic’ incursion into Scotland .

Curiously this would fit with Tacitu’s observations, so perhaps his writings were not all Roman Imperialist propaganda!

Archeology.

This is probably one of the most important archeological sites in Britain

‘The oldest known site of human habitation around Chepstow is at Thornwell, near the modern motorway junction, where archaeological investigations in advance of recent housing development revealed continuous human occupation from the Mesolithic period of around 5000 BC until the end of the Roman period, about 400 AD’

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chepstow

Continuously inhabited from 5000 BC to the end of the Roman period.

My peeps don’t like moving house to often.

Morgoth

lee Barnes has given me a germ of a genre fuck Sci fi /fantasy noiry detective novel Oi must admit

Lee Barnes is now accusing Harry’s Place of censorship:

http://leejohnbarnes.blogspot.com/2009/05/harrys-place-censorship-again.html

Barnes hasn’t bothered to reproduce the comment which he claims was banned, but instead just rants, which is revealing.

Freedom of speech is a basic value of liberalism. But, as clearly shown above, Barnes considers liberalism as part of a ‘death age’ which much be replaced by his ‘new religion.’

He certainly is very confused – for Barnes, liberalism is useful sometimes but must be replaced, ditto Christianity. Barnes’ Odinistic ideas of shared European racial heritage fly totally in the face of English nationalism and the supremacy of Anglo-Saxon deities.

Perhaps Lee Barnes has never stopped to think before of the contradictions in his thinking. Let’s hope he keeps reading this thread, and reconsiders.

I think Morgoth and Metta have played way too much Dungeons and Dragons…

Just an addendum, but, in my Welsh studies, I came across a theory that Welsh shares an a syntatical feature with semitic languages, namely the placing of the verb before the subject. Since the evidence from ancient continental celtic (not including the later Breton, whose development is influenced by post-Roman British refugees from Anglo-Saxon colonizing) is that this linguistic feature is uniquely British, one idea is that Celtic wrapped itself around the syntax of the pre-existing inhabitants, those stone and bronze age peoples who built the henges etc.

Anyhow, just thought folks might find that interesting.

Anyhow, the following is my haepenny worth on the Christianization of the ancient Britons and English.

The Anglo-Saxons became Christian for a reason, as did the Britons, Irish and Scots. Virtually all we know about pre-Christian British, Irish or Anglo-Saxon religion is from Christian sources: it was monks who wrote down these traditions whence we deduce much of what these pagan beliefs were. Although Christianity did away with, or assimilated aspects of, pagan culture, it also recorded it for posterity.

Beowulf, the Mabinogion, the Tain, all the accounts or traditions of the pre-Christian pagan peoples of Britain and England, were written down by monks who introduced the Roman alphabet and writing to these peoples. Before Christianity, there is no English history, because no English were writing and recording it. The first accounts are by celtic Britons, Gildas, Nennius and such. The first English historian is Bede (7th century). It was Christian monks who composed the Anglo-Saxon Chronicles: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anglo-Saxon_Chronicle#Composition.

The ancient Britons and English became Christian because they wanted to become civilized.

Metta, you got me quite wrong, I am afraid. Far from “deconstructing”, my intention was to re-establish concrete facts in the face of reality-deconstructing myths.
The pre-history of this island gains no credibility from becoming hostage to cod-Celtic fantasisers. Indeed, it becomes a silly game of Dungeons and Dragons, Swords and Sandals and Sorcery. Only serious archaeology can tell us whether there were nations here, or tribes, or roving bands of hunter-gatherers or (semi-)settled villagers.
I am no professional archaeologists, but have read a bit of serious archaeology on this subject. Let me assure you that there was no coherent entity around 1000-500 BC (which is what I was talking about, not 150 BC). Nor did I ever mention “Lost”.
A language in and of itself is insufficient evidence for a nation, all the more so as there were no written languages in Britain at the time. That is why we know so little about the supposed Celts, despite the great deal of serious research. Professional archaeologists still don’t know for sure where they came from, ultimately. Professional maps show a fuzzy “Celtic” region extending all across central Europe but even into eastern Turkey.
The survival of languages X and Y over 2000 years later is very difficult to relate with certainty to what was happening to those illiterate tribes at the time, and the experts don’t try to.
My point was to emphasise the huge and genuine ignorance that still exists about those people in the 1st and 2nd millenia BC.

“I came across a theory that Welsh shares an a syntatical feature with semitic languages, namely the placing of the verb before the subject”

This is a highly bizarre and unlikely theory, since in Semitic languages (well, Hebrew anyway) the verb can come either before or more often AFTER the noun it relates to.

Placing a verb before the subject does happen in classical Hebrew: bereshit bara eloh!m et hashamayim v’et ha’aretz. It also happens in Maori and (to some extent) in Albanian and (less so) in Dutch. Make of this what you will.

BTW -if you’re a Dungeons & Dragons freak you’re liable to get a lower score on your psychological profile from the IDF psychologists.

I think Morgoth and Metta have played way too much Dungeons and Dragons…

There’s no such thing as too much Dungeons and Dragons.

This has to be the most erudite and original comments thread for a very long time. Far more enlightening and entertaining than the usual name-calling over Israel/Palestine.

For my part, if Odinism means I can get to behave like Kirk Douglas in “The Vikings” (and run off with Janet Leigh), then I’m all for it!

Someone

sorry I was merging you into larkers.

I think the word nation has an older pedigree than the nation state after all the United Kingdom of Great Britain is a multi nation state.

just explaining the title of this country already will lead you down the path of realising that there were four nations in existence for over the last 100o years.

Of course pre-history gets murkier but the new genetics is essential to incorporate in understanding this.

Curiously the DNA map of human history looks very like an evolutionary linguistic one.

Sure whole populations change language but they never do so without some migration of a new elite class

2500 years ago the Greeks imported their tin from the “White Hill of Ictis”, in the ‘Cassiterides’. Nowadays it is St Michael’s Mount, Cornwall.

http://www.roman-britain.org/places/ictis.htm

“What passes for Christianity in this country today can only be described as superstitious sociology; a bland doctrine of welfare-mongering with guilt, humility and self-abasement as its cardinal principles. We can only have contempt for a Church which, in the name of Christianity, facilitates the Islamic occupation of whole neighbourhoods, condones homosexuality, promotes multi-racialism and will forgive everything.”

You have a problem with that? I don’t. I don’t care for the warped ideology of Paganism or Odinism either, but the man’s views on Christianity are spot on.

As for “our race is our religion”- his issue is that he prefers white Anglo’s to black Africans or the invading Muslim proletariat. He must have forgotten that being called “racist” is far worse than being a pedophile. Well, if Africa is for the Africans he might not be the only racist on the globe. Black on white racism may not exist in Nullabour Britain or on Harry’s Place, but the reality bites.

The “nation is our church” – what problem do you have with that? Is it wrong being a nationalist? And then there are those who see Nazi’s behind every bush: if they can’t win an argument by reason they shout you down. One poster above even invoked the BNP-man’s ‘German genealogy”- wow, what could be a greater crime in Britain today!

The BNP in its essence is divisive, elitist, exclusive and flavoured with more than a pinch of hatred. — Israelnurse

Just like the Western Left.