The Way Forward and why I support the BDP – by Sam Swerling

sam-swerling-small (2)I left the Conservative party in 2005 after a long period of membership. I had been a Westminster City Councillor, Hertsmere Borough Councillor and Chairman of the Monday Club.

I had become disillusioned with the lack of principle, poor leadership and indifference towards internal debate. I had always been a Tory nationalist and decided to carry my beliefs forward.

My career has been in the law – a solicitor and university law lecturer for over forty years.

After five years with another party (BNP) I left because of internal division. What was needed then is needed today – indeed ever more so – the construction of a doctrine of national preference for our people, our foods and services, very much along the lines advocated by the Front National in France.

National preference would follow the ideals of our own Imperial Preference of earlier years and Commonwealth Preference.

Finance capitalism, governed by the principles of laissez-faire liberalism, has produced no benefit for our people and been very largely responsible for unbalanced budgets and crisis-ridden deficits, as at present. Our people deserve better governance and release from crippling austerity measures.

The launch of the British Democratic Party offers new hope and a wonderful opportunity for a truly nationalist party, both responsible and reasonable in its approach, to take the lead in establishing a better type of politics in Britain. Our task is to sell our programme and convince any doubters of its essential integrity.

The mainstream parties and the entire political class have shown themselves not only to be thoroughly incompetent and corrupt (viz, the expenses scandal) but also entirely unmindful of the needs and aspirations of our own people.

At the very least we would offer a constructive debate on economic management, eschewing the failed doctrines of international finance-capitalism, laissez-faire liberalism and unfettered globalism, so beloved by the disciples of Friedman, Hayek, etc.

Instead, we would revisit the work of Keynes, Galbraith, Joseph Chamberlain, Robert Skidelsky and others for the inspiration behind our policies. This would mean protecting the home market, instituting economic nationalism and making manufacturing industry the focus of our concerns.

Private enterprise freed from burdensome regulation, small business capitalism and employer-employee partnerships (as seen in John Lewis) would be developed. We would break up monopolistic practices, both public and private, cartels and restrictive practices.

This is beyond the reach of the Lib/Lab/Con alliance. They have neither the vision, energy or personnel to achieve it. This would be our successful way forward.

The immigration disaster confronting our country would be tackled head-on. A moratorium on all further entry for at least three years and the introduction of a principle of reciprocity whereby entry into Britain (by say, Romanians and Bulgarians) would be limited to the numbers of Britons seeking to enter those countries. The nonsense of free movement of labour would be firmly rejected, EU or no EU! Moreover, we would encourage a wide debate on the EU’s future and specifically Britain’s place within it, with a predisposition to leave following a vote in a referendum.

British nationalist principles would inform all our policies, whether social welfare, health, education, housing, science and technology. Britain first and Britain pre-eminent in honour of our history and our achievements as a great people.

 

Sam Swerling

Bookmark the permalink.

10 Comments

  1. Quote: We would break up monopolistic practices, both public and private, cartels and restrictive practices. Unquote.
    Too right. Start with the banks. They’re choking the life out of Britain.

  2. Excellent summary of what is needed to get this country back on track. The Front National has made remarakable progress along these lines and so should we – although we are currently hamstrung by frustrating internal divisions among nationalists and denied electoral representation by the archaic and undemocratic First Past the Post electoral system. Our priority must be to concentrate on working out a strategy to overcome these internal divisions and face the uncomfortable and unavoidable realities of fighting elections under the unfair FPTP.

  3. Well said Sam! I am very glad to hear that Sam is involved with this. I have worked together with him campaigning against Maasticht and in the anti-EU movement generally, especially during the 90’s. He is a ‘safe pair of hands’ for sure and his knowledge and expertise will be an asset to the steering committee of the BDP.

  4. Tim Morgan’s report on the probability nay certainty that the era of fast growth is over deserves wide circulation.

    Everything depends on recovery and rapid growth for the ruling parties to maintain the touching belief in them which still largely dominates British politics. Most of the population still think things will soon be back to normal. The politicians keep saying so!

    http://www.tullettprebon.com/strategyinsights/about_timmorgan.aspx

  5. Excellent article, Sam. One of the areas of policy nationalists have neglected in the past has been the economy which is politically stupid because it is always one of the main issues that people vote on if not the MAIN issue and this applies even in the best of economic times let alone now when the world has been in a economic crisis since 2008. This is the principle policy grounds UKIP should have attacked by the BNP on but wasn’t and therefore UKIP have been able to present themselves as a more respectable nationalist party when they aren’t nationalists but simply Right-wing Tory eurosceptics. UKIP has an addiction to failed ultra-liberal globalist economics. That is their greatest policy flaw and will do nothing to rectify our country’s economic decline so it is right that our party takes a NATIONALIST approach to the economy with the result being we oppose unfettered globalism but DO support free enterprise working within national limits.

  6. I agree with most of the points made in this article, but I believe the notion that we need to grow our manufacturing industry is an oversimplification. Our main economic priorities should be to reverse our trade imbalance and start paying off our national debt. Increased exports don’t necessarily have to be manufactured goods, they can be virtual goods, intellectual property and exported services.

    We have lost most of our low value manufacturing industry due to high labour costs here. However the general trend in China where most of those jobs went, is towards automation. Major Chinese manufacturers are investing heavily in automation and have plans to greatly reduce their workforce in the coming decade. Low value manufacturing will become ever lower value manufacturing as a result, but China likely intends it’s workforce to progress into high value manufacturing and engineering – jobs we have been able to retain thus far.

    We could bring back low value manufacturing here, but they would be automated factories that don’t provide a lot of jobs. In reality, our high end manufacturing and engineering industries are going to be facing tough competiton in the years ahead and we need to find ways to remain competitive in this sector. Not having an economy that relies of ever growing house prices would be a great help for all export industries, as they wont have to pay such high wages.

    A higher education system focused on educating our people with the skills needed for export industries would help, rather than screwing students for money and awarding useless degrees. I’m sure that the strategy of attracting more foreign students for short term gain wont pay off long term for our country either.

  7. I agree. We need to focus on high tech manufacturing as Germany, Japan and South Korea do so successfully. We then build service industries around them. Our country does need a manufacturing base. If our new party can demonstrate we have good policies in order to achieve this then we should be able to gain votes from UKIP in particular who believe in the Thatcherite nonsense that Britain doesn’t need manufacturing!

  8. As David Cameron said ” we are all in this together “. He is right. There is very little actual major difference between them ! They are in effect a PACT OF FAILURE. To despair at how things are and then vote for the same , is ridiculous ! To REALLY change things for the better, in an act of REAL hope for a better Britain, Join the British Democratic Party today.

  9. Have just read Sam’s book and am about to write to him. I don’t entirely agree with him but the Tory Nationalist viewpoint is one that needs putting across.

Leave a Reply

Your e-mail address will not be published. Required fields are marked *