By Andrew Brons.
When Nationalists are persecuted by the state by being prosecuted in a blatantly political trial, their fellow Nationalists have every right to protest outside the court and elsewhere as we did in 2006 in Leeds. We were then saying that the laws should not be on the statute book, at least in that form, and/or the prosecution ought not to proceed.
However, those who demonstrate outside a court, seeking to persuade the jury to give a guilty verdict or to persuade a judge to impose a severe sentence are sending a dangerous, if perhaps unintended, message. They are saying that it is right for politicians, powerful or powerless, to influence judicial decisions to convict and punish severely those of whom we disapprove. Any influence might be minimal, when the parties are miniscule and not exactly on the cusp of power. However, it is saying:
“If we were in power in the state, we would use our authority to tell the court what its verdict ought to be and what ought to be the appropriate sentence.” States in which that happens do not observe the rule of law or the independence of the judiciary. Political organisations that attempt, however vainly, to influence courts to convict and punish severely, are revealing rather more than they should about themselves.
There might be those who say that I am naïve if I think that political influence is never brought on prosecutors and judges in sensitive political trials. The prosecutions of Nick Griffin, Mark Collett and John Tyndall in 2004 followed a special week-end meeting of the National Executive of the Labour Party that considered ways of ‘dealing with’ the threat posed by the BNP. I can assure you that I am not naïve.
The trial and sentencing of the perpetrators of the gruesome murder of Lee Rigby undoubtedly aroused passions among the population at large and among Nationalists in particular. Furthermore, there was little doubt about the guilt of the accused or the aggravating features of the crime. Indeed, there were photographs to prove both.
Should this trial therefore be the exception to the rule that politicians should not campaign for guilty verdicts and severe sentences? No, it must be observed in cases like this as in any other. I am sure that the murderers will seek leave to appeal against conviction and they will appeal against sentence. They might try, however vainly, to argue that the whole life sentence and the minimum forty-five years sentence were influenced by public opinion and the demonstrations outside.
Worse than that, Nationalists will have earned a reputation for believing that the judiciary should be a pawn in the hands of politicians. In the case of one particular politician, we could say that we had already arrived at that conclusion.
3
You are right in what you say Andrew, but this seems to be happening because the judicial system isn’t functioning how it should. That in turn creates a belief in people that if they don’t apply pressure, the case will be concluded with a too lenient sentence, and let’s face it, that is an all too regular outcome these days.
Once nationalism holds sway in our political system, the judiciary, police force, and CPS, can all be depoliticised, and return to a point where political interference is kept to an absolute minimum. All three of these bodies can produce a legal system once they are cleared of the malign influence of freemasonry, in particular the destructive nature of Common Purpose, and their direction is aimed squarely at the fairness of a democratic system.
I must admit that I did not consider the important issue that Andrew raises, having initially supported such a demonstration. Having thought it over, I now back his view.
I agree with Andrew’s article, but would in some ways go further, and question the desirability of such activities at all. If flag waving, drum banging and the chanting of slogans were effective means of winning support, the nationalist movement would have been in power long ago!
It is of course much more exciting to go on such an activity than to leaflet or canvass a target ward, but the only real successes that nationalists have ever obtained have been through engagement in unexciting but electorally rewarding work at local level.
It is in many ways a reflection upon the political failure of British nationalism that it is back on the streets. As a mutual friend of Andrew’s and mine once thoughtfully observed, political parties, like people, end up on the streets only when they have nowhere else to go.
I completely agree with you. The fact that the ‘old party’ has gone back to the streets is a sign of their utter irrelevance and impotence. There is another crucial point here and that is a party that does too many street demonstrations (a few carefully-organised ones are fine) will, over time, just look like a street gang and not a proper political party.
‘As a mutual friend of Andrew’s and mine once thoughtfully observed, political parties, like people, end up on the streets only when they have nowhere else to go.’
My sentiments entirely. However, we have tried the ‘ballot box’ and for whatever unexplainable reasons, this has failed. I was there at one of the first demonstrations, at the start of the trial and I don’t think we were there to influence either the judge or the jury, but simply in solidarity that such an outrage could unfold in a supposed civilised country in 2013. Had we had the luxury of a functioning ‘representative democracy’ or perhaps access to referenda like the Swiss, we would not need recourse to such ‘primitive’ methods. And as for this misguided idea that somehow we must support a blatantly malfunctioning judiciary ,and a jury system that ensures’ the most expensive form of ‘injustice” possible? . Direct action like that of the Ukrainians seems to have borne fruit.
(Party Member) Bearing in mind the above comments, I hope all members contact Head Office for a supply of our excellent leaflets. They are provided more or less at cost and get a good response. The Enoch Powell one in particular!
I agree with Adrian Davies.
The UK isn’t France flag waving and demonstrations put off voters, we haven’t had the same type of revolutions as France. They are purely designed for some egos. People in the UK want strong polices promoted by soft imagery. The only street politics that matters is that of fighting elections. Some stunts that other parties are using such as mock executions are comical nothing else. The failure of patriotism centres around tactics, personalities and marketing but actually very little to do with lack of support for policies.
I agree wholeheartedly here. Your last sentence in particular is 100% correct.
I think the idea of trying to make political gains and party/org/group promotion out of some events can have the opposite and sometimes a negative effect in the minds of the voting public.
I think the Lee Rigby Killers Sentencing Demo could have been a lot more dignified. No party/org banners, no megaphones, no rival chanting and no bare bum would have shown patriots in a much better light.
Members of the public or even ex and current service personnel would be disinclined to stand amongst a noisy rabble who will have been perceived to have hijacked the occasion.
Andrew makes some sensible and valid points in his article.
Totally agree with Andrew, very well said.
If the BNP had had this sort of astute intelligence at its helm, it really could have gone places.
It expelled all those people!
I attended the Leeds demo, not in an attempt to influence judge or jury – but to support you know who! Not that I would bother to do so again as far as you know who is concerned! Jus thinking out aloud you understand.
We attended in the mistaken belief that we were supporting two individuals we regarded as Brothers, how mistaken we were. Hindsight is a wonderful thing.
Street demos were effectively over after the NF’s public relations disaster at Lewisham (even though we were the innocent party).
I recently witnessed the NF demonstrating outside Wakefield Cathedral against the immigrant centre on Love Lane, I am 100% in agreement with their opposition but the Demo was nothing short of embarrassing, howling into a loudspeaker and disrupting shoppers is not the way to win converts.
So true, but the atmosphere at Leeds in 2006 was something I will always remember, especially the pub at lunchtime and the reds being arrested for being stupid.
Regarding those two individuals at the Leeds trial one was naïve with a bit of an ego when younger and the other spent decades sabotaging nationalist parties long before entering another party in question. They can’t be judged the same. As people one maybe worth investing due to his age, the other is a disgrace and beyond repair or hope.
The ballot box has never been properly explored a nationalist party at its prime fell 200 plus seats of a full slate at the last general election. Many winnable wards in Stoke, Barking, and many other places where never contested at local level.
The ratio success per seat for the BNP was higher in 2006 than UKIP last May – they just stood far more candidates hence more victories. If the BNP had stood a full slate in Barking in 2006 the council would of fallen from Labour with 80% of seats going BNP the same could be said for a few other councils though more like 50% of seats switching notably Stoke and North West Leicestershire – both areas lacked candidates.
The reason why the ballot hasn’t worked is through a lack of candidates, but when one considers that such parties have a history of flag waving, silly demos and statements by leaders that put off the public its no surprise when people fear standing.
If a party or movement is losing support they must ride it out and take a few years of poor results. In 2005 I got hammered yet in 2007 I polled nearly 25% which wouldn’t have happened if I had not stood in 2005 and built the required ground work.
Turning to demos and gimmicks will never work. UKIP spent years getting hammered by the BNP at local election level and in most parliamentary seats, but look where they are now. They never resulted to demos of cheap gimmicks. They took poor results on the chin.
A party can never be successful for ever the period last for about 10 years then they decline and renew. Nationalists walk away when the going gets tough and blame the electorate it happened in the early 1980s and now post 2010 when the BNP became stale.
Lastly, direct action as some call it never works unless within a society with a history of such success. To win the hearts and minds of the voters movements need to be victims and not aggressors especially in passive Britain.
I have to disagree with your argument that Nationalists should have stood more candidates. One of the issues has been that nationalist parties have overlooked quality in favour of standing in more seats, leading to certain candidates being elected who were clearly unsuitable and unqualified for elected office and therefore doing the Cause a disservice. Other people who were elected had potential, but were offered very little in the way of support from the central party. There were of course others who were excellent Councillors, despite the lack of support.
If and when nationalists start to get elected again, it is vital that support is provided.
That happens in all parties. I agree on the lack or support but that is a structural problem and not a lack of candidates. If a previous party had not been run by a clown and had a better image more people would have been willing to stand. In fact the candidate pool would have doubled.It’s not about just standing anyone, its about making a party respectable in brand and image that decent people can stand without fear of the backlash.
There also has to be a balance between quality and quantity, Out of the people who were elected in another party 90% either finished their term of office or quit from falling out with a clown. Those who were not suitable were in a minority.
Very informative comment by Paul, based on his election experience.
Regarding the Leeds trial I also agree with his opinion of the younger defendant: what a waste of talent.
Well said, Paul. The trouble with demos is that they tend to attract a larger proportion of people into a party who are less likely to engage in the political long-haul.
UKIP is a deeply-flawed party and I am sure its flaws (particularly its economic approach) are becoming more apparent as the media starts to turn the spotlight on them but at least it looks like a political party!
We need to create a moderate nationalist party that looks like a serious party that people can trust.