Thursday, 22 March 2012

BNP members rate Robin Tilbrook above Nick Griffin

A number of articles based on the findings of a new study of the 'far-right' by Matthew Goodwin, of the University of Nottingham, and Jocelyn Evans, of Salford University, appeared in the press recently.

An example was an article entitled: Far right hardcore 'willing to prepare for armed conflict' in the Guardian.

The study behind this report, which can be found here, focuses primarily on the BNP & UKIP. These two thoroughly unpleasant parties have much in common with one another, and both are virulently hostile towards the English Democrats.

Although the document has been published by the equally unsavoury and misnamed far-left group 'Hope not Hate', the research carried out by the two academics who authored it appears to be factual and unbiased.

One particular gem in this publication which led me to write this article can be found on page 21 of the document in table 8 under the heading: Views towards political leaders.

The results in this table reveals that the BNP respondents gave Nick Griffin a 6.5 out of 10 rating for competent leadership, however they rated Robin Tilbrook of the English Democrats higher with a score of 7.3, making him the most highly regarded of all political leaders among BNP members!

UKIP, for all their many faults, at least ranked their own leader above all other, with Nigel Farage achieving a score of 7 with the next highest leader - Alex Salmond - getting 4.3.

I have only been an English Democrats member for almost a year now so I am still fairly new but I think I can safely say that I agree with the BNP respondents on the subject of Robin Tilbrook's competence as a party leader.

Robin puts a huge amount of his own money into the party rather than taking it out. He does well when interviewed by the media, and I think the chances of him launching a murder plot hoax against senior English Democrats officials in the run up to an important election are somewhere around the zero mark.

BNP members should take heart that the English Democrats welcome genuine converts to the Cause who has seen the light and leave the BNP. I am a prime example of that.

Life is too short to waste time propping up a corrupt regime which compromises any good people in it and turns bad people worse. Getting out of the BNP was one of the best things I ever did, and I hope that many more good nationalists will experience the relief I felt once I was out.


Jay Lee said...

How the hell did the 'researchers' (ie Government propagandists) get "over 2000" members of 'far right' parties to speak to them in the first place? I don't believe their 'research' is genuine, but rather the usual invented multi-culti garbage.

What is NOT invented however, (although admittedly the article is a few months old) is the declining circulation of the craprags that call themselves 'newspapers', ESPECIALLY The Guardian. See at:

The entire Left revolves around The Guardian, and their problems are no doubt probably now even worse, so have yourself an extra bowl of shadenfreude cornflakes tomorrow morning.

The EDs need to have their own monthly newspaper, like the BNPs 'VoF'. It gives a reason/excuse to knock on peoples' doors OUTSIDE of an election. By trying to sell the newspaper on the doorstep using a simple YES/NO/POSSIBLE column, a council ward list of those who will vote, or may vote, ED in the next council election can be built up. This greatly saves time when the actual election comes around. At the moment, with manpower short, when an election does come around, it's a mad scramble to get a ward canvassed. Wouldn't it be much easier to "whip in" with a solid list of one's available voters already done!
I know that such a newspaper is costly, but it should be a matter of priority once the GLA is over. I think the EDs should steer clear of any internal party magazine, similar to 'Identity'. This is just an all singing-all dancing black hole of money wastefulness. A simple internal newsletter (like the old 'British Nationalist') would suffice.
The EDs need to understand that a party such as ours should revolve around its newspaper, in the same way as the Left revolves around The Guardian. Branches should be forced to take a certain quantity each month, and demoted from Branch status if they do not. Trotsky talked about "perpetual revolution", we need to think along the lines of a "perpetual election", and a monthly newspaper ('The Crusader', or some other similar title) being the way of getting into peoples' minds.

And on that note I must dash, I'm off leafletting my ward with two other ex-BNP members, lol.

Anonymous said...

I was amazed to see four copies of the Morning Star on the counter of my local co-op in the back of beyond in what would be called Middle England if it weren't too far north. I thought that the Morning Star had faded years ago and who on earth reads it locally? Must be teachers at the local secondary school I assume. Teachers are usually avid readers of the Guardian so you know why our children have no idea about their history or identity any more. However, even a close relative, ex-teacher and Guardian reader was aghast to see how rapidly Shepherds Bush and Hammersmith were turning into everywhere east of Istanbul and south of Cairo. Obviously, he does not understand how influential his daily paper has been in bringing about England's rapid demise. And I suppose Guardian readers still think they have the highest IQs. Well, they might but there is abstract intelligence and practical intelligence as evidenced by the blue rather than the white collar brigade. Practically intelligent people live in the real world. Those with abstract intelligence seem to live on that middle class do-gooder planet called Zog.

daithikent said...

...Jay Lee, very interesting. You reminded me of my time in the LPYS and a certain 'entryist tendency' of the British Labour Party of the 1980s. The Paper worked very well on 'different levels'.