Nick Griffen's Long March

Macrobius Commentary on the interview with Nick Griffen,
Nick Griffen's Long March at Chronicles Magazine


First, let me congratulate Mr. Griffin on his electoral victories. To have run, as a non-traitor, and gotten actual Britons to vote for him is indeed an accomplishment.

However, I must ask, as practical politics, is being better than the Conservative Party and Labor really setting the bar very high? What has Mr. Griffen to offer us in the way of substantive politics? He is successful, I suppose, because unlike his predecessors in similar organizations he offers more in the way of Democracy, so as to appeal to the popular electorate. Oddly, this has resulted in more votes. Well that proves his superiority in politics then.

I see a visible sigh of relief on the American Right -- see, here is how Pat Buchanan should have fought his campaign. He might have 5 or 10% of the populist right, then. We *can* win in a Liberal Democracy after all.

What Mr. Griffen offers us, for his votes and popularity, is essentially the 2nd Klan. Now if he were to offer us the first, I would prick up my ears -- but of course I know that would never happen south of the Scottish border.

Like the second Klan, we have a nationalist and scaled back version of Wilsonian propaganda -- Birth of a Nation, with its less than subtle pro- Lincoln propaganda, woven into a bit of fear mongering. Potent stuff, and good for marches, but where, really, does it leave Western Culture? Is this our Cultural Revolution, vaunted on these pages?

The second Klan appealed to the Anglo-German rural population, notably in Indiana. Like the Middle American Radicals, they got a bit hot under the sheet where immigrants were concerned, and barked a bit about conservative social values. But did they really stop White Liberals? It wouldn't do, you know.

I suggest that Mr. Griffen's successes do teach us a lesson: they teach us that converting Socialism to Nationalism is a small step, and remains a permanent possibility among Saxon Peasantry, even urban fellaheen. It is bred into the Anglo-Saxon race, as also its continental cousins.

Mr. Griffen has told us that he hates Muslims and Britain is Christian and Christians have cheered. What he has not told us is what sect of Christianity will rule the roost when he has his revolution. You cannot re-found a nation on a coalition of sects that hate each others guts and only unite in the face of a common enemy. Until you show a solution to the National Religion issue, any talk of One Nation is smoke and puffery.

And we have heard Mr. Griffen on Muslims. Where does he stand on the Jews? Even as the second Klan he streches the limits of our credulity -- and I am criticizing him from the Right here, not carping on Political Correctness. Must our relief at seeing someone slapped down for PC and get up again rather than suffer the dreary Parliamentary attainder, whether from the European Parliament or its model the British -- must that relief and even good will towards the victim go so far as to endorse his absurdities?

Britain's problem is that they need a War of Independence to free them from Parliament. What Mr. Griffen suggests is that Americans, rather than dumping tea in the bay, try petitioning King Anthony to let them have a few seats of representation. Is Britain, after 400 years of Parliamentary rule, culminating in Empire and Democracy, better off than in Elizabeth R's time? In 50 years, the verdict will be in. Mr. Griffen knows that and we know that. We made our choice 200 years ago -- and we got our own problems for it.

As for Mr. Griffen's substantive proposal, that traitors should cease to be elected and non-traitors inherit their despotic rule, it is no better than proposing the MARs inherit the Managerial State? What elsc can Demagoguery do besides recapitulate Larceny?