Note: the following conclusions were written while the NF was a 'rising' movement. This was before Margaret Thatcher announced that she was concerned that Britons were feeling "swamped" by immigrants in their own land, before the resultant slump in NF voting support in 1979, and the era of splits. In 1980, Tyndall left the NF with his call for 'leadership', and thence his years in the wilderness. And the NF went on to purge Webster and rebuild, only to split again in 1986, and blow itself apart again and again. But that is beyond the scope of the present text. The reader may, from these conclusions, assess what was lost by the 'Right parties', some little time after these lines were composed. Opportunity, if lost, is difficult to regain!

From 1960 to 1963 Britain experienced an upsurge in neo-fascist activity, the racial issue being its driving force. The 1950’s, years not to the favour of the Right were seen as years which redefined certain concepts for the Right. This period, 1960-3, was perhaps an explosive time where the emphasis was experimental; the 1950's being recalled as times of reflection without action. The early 1960's put pay to the grey eminence of Sir Oswald Mosley; thence forward no neo-fascist movement would have to grow in his shadow. Indeed, despite certain minor spasms of activity, his Union Movement continued to decline into the 1970's. The undoubted ideological clarity and 'responsible' image of UM failed to avert this process.

It was noted that 1967-8 saw a regroupment on the Right, a synthesis not only of forces, but ideas. From this time two movements were in competition, the National Front and the British Movement. Despite its schisms, and the formation of breakaway parties, the NF has outstripped all its opponents. The BM, burdened with the neo-nazi label, and a lack of real perspectives has collected militants, but little substance, Jordan’s dynamism' being of small effect. The NF’s rapid growth in 1973 and 1974 (and now 1976 and 1977) demands a statement of factors to its advantage, in fact to any racial-nationalist movement.

Firstly, the issue of race and immigration. Assimilation of Britain’s coloureds has not occurred. The dynamics of racial tensions cannot be understated, once a party is strong enough to organisationally exploit it. Chapter Three has argued that racial issues appears in the daily lives of people. The enforced multi-racial policies of the governments have compounded the problem by opening the possibility that racial-nationalist may appear as champions of freedom or the 'British way of life'. Rightly or wrongly, 'identity-politics' animates many Britons--and perhaps immigrants also. Many Britons fear dispossession in their homeland and the destruction of British culture. Continued immigration, with governmental compliance, or connivance, has only intensified the situation as the violent summer of 1976 may have indicated. Chapter Three has also attempted to demonstrate the disarming 'rationality' of the 'Right parties' , something they have fought for and part-achieved. The racial question, in particular remains the main motive force of the Extreme Right.

Secondly, economic difficulties and social crisis. Britain’s economic difficulties, as Mosley pointed out have roots far back in the century. Structural changes in the 1950's, the drift into a technological society has occurred gradually, and with heavy opposition. Structural unemployment has grown worse since the late 1960's. Though the exact nature of Britain’s economic woes are an economist’s subject, let it be said that a nation with three day work weeks forced to borrow heavily from the I.M.F cannot be judged economically 'healthy'. These factors which contribute to youth unemployment and inflation are to the advantage of a

Thirdly, the Left. That communists and Extreme Left elements have infiltrated' social institutions, the media, government parties and trade unions is likely. However, the Left has more capacity for disruption rather than redeeming revolution. The Left suffers from severe factionalism; however this does not preclude it being cited like a bogey force, or engaging in violent protest. Its ability to attract coloured immigrants has intensified since 1974, and became prominent in 1976. This could add ammunition to racial-nationalist propaganda. A party which demands order and social solidarity has about itself a certain appeal.

Fourthly, the troubles of Westminster government. The two party system has been under heavy pressure since the early 1970's. Separatist-nationalist parties should not be underestimated for their role of challenging the two-party idea in British government. A party preaching the solidarity of the whole of Britain under strong leadership (howsoever a new British constitutional arrangement is constructed) could come into popular favour. Britain’s electoral system which is unfavourable to third parties could therefore be subverted in this fashion.

Over the years the Extreme Right has shed the labels of the past; the shadows of 1930’s British and continental fascism have, despite campaigns waged by the Left, begun to cast less colour on the British Right. The public, the nationalist parties’ adherents, and their leaders, have come to regard the early fascisms as unrelated to their existences. Unlike the Italian Social Movement and the German National Democratic Party, British neo-fascists have not had to debate / refute / condemn the times when their country endured particular forms of fascism (and dictatorship). This comes close to Bardeche’s vision of a youthful, "innocent" fascism ready to "revive the Spartan order". In particular, the creed of the National Front rivals Mosley’s clarity of expression to formulate a seemingly coherent creed rooted in the problems of the present.

The signs were present in 1975 that the purged NF would become the premier organisation in the British Right scene. Indeed the arrival of the Malawi Asians in 1976 established it firmly such that, in 1977, it would be the third party in British politics. The other neo-fascist parties are probably fated to merge into the Front. Governments concerned with national affairs may find this new politics difficult to be met head on and otherwise to present a united front along with their 'Oppositions'.But it will certainly be opposed as the establishment in Britain has always done in respect of any form of popular challenge.