This article has been
composed by three nationalists, all members of
Nationalist Alternative has published an important article. Entitled “Breaking The Bundesrepublik: The BNP, Populism And The Denazification Strategy”, it purports to be a piece commissioned by a member of the British National Party (BNP) for circulation in the German nationalist movement. The stated aim of the article is to encourage a debate that may cause the German movement to adopt a new ‘populist’ strategy based on the experience of the BNP. It was a rather bold proposition that the National Democratic Party (NPD) and let us not also forget too, the German People’s Union (DVU) - might change line.
The article has another significance. Of
itself, it is the quintessential statement of a position that has emerged
within the broad nationalist community over the last half-decade in
It is the line that encourages nationalists to adopt key elements of liberal-democratic ideology and politics, to abandon ideology and politics traditionally associated with nationalism and to take a line of least resistance towards the achievement of ‘power’. This line entails the adoption of a number of inter-related things: anti Islamism and a pro Zionist foreign policy as mobilizing and normalizing tools; a mainstreaming plan (that causes the party to purge people or ideas as might ‘jar’ with the mainstream mass); a ‘populism’ that pits common folk against the elite, but which does not challenge the state power; an electoralist method with a pseudo charismatic ‘leader’ who seeks power inside a new consensus of civic patriotism; an acceptance of the liberal democratic order in the realm of business organization and moral principles (ie. it accepts the fundamentals of capitalism and the personalist lifestyle-ism of our society ).
Nationalists have said that this line revises nationalist ideology. It must therefore kill off our politics, since essentially we are expected to merge the forces of nationalism into a new popular ‘freedom’ movement which will trick the enemy inside the fortress of state power into ceding us the governmental power - because we have received enough votes and do not challenge core liberal state ideals.
We have used elsewhere terms like ideological revisionism and political opportunism to characterize this new ‘movement’ of thought and action.
Nationalist Alternative gives a disclaimer. It says that some of this ‘line’
may not apply to
But they say they are “contributing to Australian nationalist thought and free speech” by publishing the article.
Australia First does not accept that is the effect of the article, nor can we accept that our comrades are naïve. Certainly it makes it look, disclaimer or no disclaimer, that Nationalist Alternative is willing to entertain this line.
For our part, we say that one does not engage in free speech with those inside the broad Australian movement who have operated diligently for perhaps 5 years now (maybe longer?) - to first silently and then openly and rancorously, overturn nationalist principles. To give them air, to not repudiate them openly, is to spread their poison. This also threatens Nationalist Alternative.
In Nationalist Alternative’s case, we note that the organization contains genuine persons who have conducted proper and very useful campaigns – on overseas students, internet freedom and so on. However, it is equally true that Nationalist Alternative finds itself in the awkward spot of endorsing Nationalist Autonomism, a position that places it in the vortex of community action politics and ideological-cultural politics, without it practicing the third part of the three tier method – the electoral and open mass politics. (End Note: see definition of ‘three tier method) It is in one sense, in the shadows, which can be a strength for a direct action group. The autonomist movement has considerable freedom of action, precisely because it operates only one or two of the ‘tiers’ of struggle.
As is the case in most of the European countries, this very significant and politically useful dynamic movement (which Nationalist Alternative clearly wishes to emulate), usually lines up in one way or another with one of the nationalist parties – National Democrats, Social Movement, National Front, Golden Dawn etc., which practice the three tiers method. The existence of autonomist groups outside of the parties often sharpens them and can help define them. The autonomist group then positions itself in a broad front, such that all may move forward in tandem, but all sides maintaining their organizational independence.
Unfortunately, in the Australian case, this whole notion is problematical. It is well known that the Australian nationalist movement suffered a particular ‘split’ in 2006-7. The revisionists and opportunists broke away from nationalism. They set out to take over the former Australia First Party (AFP) and when that failed, they endeavoured to split it, disintegrate it and then after severe damage was done, they constituted their own organization. This became the Australian Protectionist Party (APP) and it declared itself in solidarity with the BNP and its line. Genuine nationalists were ultimately forced to reconstitute Australia First in a new form. They placed Nationalist ideology in command of the party and have rebuilt and expanded it. They repudiated the opportunist position openly.
Nationalist Alternative’s choices for political-party alliances (if they consider they are ‘obliged’ to make them by the general dictates of the autonomist strategy) come down to building arrangements with either AFP or APP. Hence it is necessary for Nationalist Alternative to examine its trajectory.
From the position of Australia First, there is not the slightest intention of using such an in-tandem-alliance (if it were ultimately constituted) to acquire organizational leverage over the NA comrades. Quite the contrary. That could hardly serve our advance in a united front, or represent the three tiers method in motion. We cannot speak for APP, whose mercurial qualities we have long observed and hence we would expect only chicanery on their part. Backstabbers and plotters seldom change their colours and it is well known they conceive Nationalist Alternative as a useful conduit, whereby they can talk nationalism when it suits them - and practice opportunist politics the remainder of the time.
Some people may say that the article was indicative of a foot in both camps. We do not say that to be unnecessarily disrespectful. That is the intelligence we have picked up. The opportunists are ‘nice people’ who have attempted to cultivate contacts with various groups including Nationalist Alternative and the fair-minded tone of Nationalist Alternative is such that a ruthless break with their falsity could be difficult to perform.
For our part, we will critique this piece. In doing so, we trust it will become simpler for Nationalist Alternative to repudiate the false ideology and practice of the Australian traitors to nationalism and uphold their own integrity and the quality of their commitment.
We shall not deal with every part of the article, only those bits that have relevance to our case.
The Red Herring Of Nazism
The author says at different points:
“Here I shall be advocating a broad range of strategies denazification, radical right-wing populism, an acceptance of liberal democracy, the use of certain safe national symbols, a new nationalism, which are used, with great success, by the British National Party”.
The line of the “…. BNP (and the
Danish Peoples Party, the Swiss People’s Party, the Dutch Freedom Party and
other radical right-wing populist European parties of that type) will work in
the circumstances of
The author correctly equates the BNP with these other parties. They are certainly not nationalist parties as he seems to agree and the open honesty is refreshing. That is an important concession.
It is not a question of whether a line will apparently work. It is a question of who follows the line and what they want from it. Are the leaders of these forces – and much of their clientele – people who advance a nationalist agenda? Why should leadership be surrendered to them? Simply because it seems they can amass a larger political audience? And what is the quality of this audience?
Significantly, the author gives the red herring of Nazism as the reason to pass them the leadership.
It is put that the modern German nationalist movement is, in open and other ways, tainted by Nazism. This ‘Nazism’ is defined very broadly – as certain symbols (and not swastikas either) which are employed in demonstrations, as arguments about the legitimacy of the German State deriving as it did from the partition and occupation of the country in 1945, as opposition to Israeli state policies and Zionism , as the public image of intolerance of immigrants. It is put that these are the things that drive the public away, the very things the successful BNP has ‘repudiated’, the things the German movement must dump. The movement does not wish to be seen as “Nazi”, so it must change.
But are the things under examination indicative of Nazism? We do not accept that as we shall explain
Rather, it seems that a strawman-Nazism has been built and it is sought to knock it down. The trouble is that the edifice falls with it.
What Replaces The ‘Nazism’?
The author writes:
“This article proposes a new German nationalism. The elements of this nationalism are: populism; anti-Islamism and an attack on the Left for letting immigration and totalitarian Islam get out of hand; nostalgia for the good old days of culture, morals and fashions of the 1950s and 1960s, and the German economic miracle; a championing of such past German liberal democratic figures as Stresemann, Adenauer and the men of the Reichsbanner Schwarze-Rot-Geld; and definitely no references, especially visual references, to the Third Reich and German National Socialism.”
Again, the false references to Nazism.
The strawman-demon of Nazism is replaced in
this new system of thought with the ideology of German subservience to the politics
of post 1945 consumer capitalism and the imperialism of the
Certainly, on one level, the
morals and norms of 1950’s and 1960’s
Now it is a fact that the German
regime relies upon the images of fascism and the defeat of fascism, to prove
its moral power and value. But who said that the rehabilitation of fascism is a
project which should be undertaken and further, actually is one which undermines
that order? Even if the rehabilitation of fascism was the goal of the German
nationalists, could they calculate upon it having that result? It is rather the
delegitimisation of the order that relies upon its
construction of fascism, which is the point of the German nationalists. The German nationalists look at how the
regime’s immorality and illegitimacy rests upon a tendentious ‘virtue’. The
German nationalists and major intellectuals, such as Horst Mahler and the New
Right Thule group, have relativised the sins of fascism against the sins of the
New World Order imperialism and its earlier manifestation in American
imperialism. They have attacked the liberal-democratic ‘myth’ that it was
fascism and then Marxism which were of themselves so
evil – that they justify the creation of a global system of pure evil. If there
are any forces in
The article agrees that the German state was also imposed by terror over its citizens. To develop an amnesia over a fact is to concede to the historical validity of the state. Indeed, this is what the article precisely suggests should be done. In our view, this is defeat before the fight is fought. If the state is legitimate, it cannot be fought.
Every ‘revolutionary’ system
of thought must delegitimize its opponent. Could the (obnoxious) IRA have gone
to war (sic) if it failed to accept its Army Council was nothing other than the
legitimate government of
Buying The Historical Basis Of The Regime
The acceptance of the legitimacy of the German state runs all through the article.
Once accepted, the argument is then put that the Eastern strategy of the
NPD and other nationalists (which has seen nationalism take root in the former
East German areas) should be repudiated. It is precisely here that German
nationalism has achieved the greatest success, winning seats in State
parliaments, council seats and in establishing wide social-cultural networks.
It might be held that this success was due to two things: a
recognition of the poverty of Marxist-Leninist ideology to represent
working class interests, but an appreciation of its paradox – that it was
The article says:
“Nationalism has to have, of course, a positive component. What should that component be in German nationalism? The answer is: nostalgia for the good old days of the West German Bundesrepublik an equivalent of the nostalgia, called Ost Nostalgie, or Ostalgie”
Once the Eastern strategy is decried, we read:
“Imagine the tremendous shock it would cause if German nationalists were
to declare that liberal democratic bores of
The liberal democrats (even
in the days of the
The trick? There were no Moslems in these liberal utopias of
yesteryear and liberals will see that and wish to ‘return’ to their golden age.
Big deal! Yet, we recall it was these very liberals in the “good old days” who
brought in the Turkish guest workers and who opened
Can this proposed new line get any worse?
And Now, The Garbage Society Is Good!
Unfortunately, yes it does get worse! The article says:
“Many Far Right populist groups attack Islamic immigration, not on
racial grounds (although, of course, they in reality oppose Islamic immigration
on racial and cultural grounds), but on the basis that Muslims do not respect
Western liberal values, the values of a free society. They thereby manage to
borrow the language of Western liberalism and use it against the Western
liberal democratic politicians who have brought millions of Muslims into
Yes, but do these populists (sic) really oppose Islamic immigration on any sort of ethnic preference grounds? Have you deceived yourself? And then:
“A populist agitator could easily stir up the passions of the German
people by painting a picture of a future
Yes, yes. It is necessary to
divide one’s enemies. If a feminist abortionist dislikes Moslems, well and good,
but we may have reservations about her own peculiar ethos. We can understand
why nudists might object to them, even if we do not embrace (sic) nudism. The
homosexual lobby may have objections too against public lewdness being targeted
by fundamentalist moralists. Let alone most folks who enjoy some alcohol in
their lives who would find the Koran’s ethos difficult in the extreme. And of
course, the subtle and sometimes sexual way European women dress (which does
follow to some extent at least in the Indo European tradition) could not please
a devout Moslem, given he publicly wraps his partner in a sheet. If
However, defending Western liberal values has a real down-side. Certainly, we may be able to take occasional advantage of liberal discontent with the practises of an alien group. We could write a book about the tactics involved in mobilizing liberals, but we prefer to paste in a few lines from elsewhere:
“Imagine you want to get
elected MP for
We stand on that. In other words, the ‘populist technique’ has serious limitations. It could only create a party of contradictions.
A Psychological Trick: It’s All Your Fault
The attack made upon the German nationalists extends to their psychological makeup:
“All of this is obvious, but the German nationalist lives in a world of cognitive dissonance, i.e., an unwillingness to see the facts as they are). Most of the problem lies in the fact that the German nationalist today is unable, or unwilling, to recognize the political realities of the present, and work with them and adapt them to his purpose.”
It is put out that the German nationalists are in fact – sectarian. They move in a limited world. They cannot get out of it and proclaim it ‘normal’, when it is the liberal world that is normal.
The Gramscian model would have us reject that. To contest hegemony, it is necessary to develop alternative ideology and alternative reality. It is necessary to create zones of power where the writ of the state does not run. (the autonomists would have to concede to our definitions).
So, if the German nationalists practice the principle that Nationalist Alternative was supposedly based upon – they live in a state of cognitive dissonance!?!?
So their still-failure to become a truly mass movement is the fault of the Germans’ psychology?
This attack was atrocious and inaccurate, as the strength of the German movement belies. It was part of the subtle ‘trick’ inherent in the article – to load failure (sic) onto the methods employed. The German nationalist movement is still in the margins, albeit with signs of real growth.
Talking Nationalism To Defeat Nationalism: BNP Opportunism In Practice
The BNP remains the model for the change. To build the new freedom populist
movement consensus, the article admonishes us to accept that the BNP is really
a nationalist organization, led by a super-smart nationalist called Nick
“Like Wilders, Nick Griffin frequently makes pro-Israel, and pro-Jewish,
statements, and is always denouncing Nazis, i.e., any Westerner who criticises Jews and
Sadly, there are many nationalists, in
Perhaps he will become even
more like Wilders and advocate war for Zionism? He has already condoned Zionist
The reality is that more and
more nationalists understand
Explaining Why The Enemy Continue To Attack The BNP As ‘Nazi’ ‘Racist’ etc
As a proof that the revisionists / opportunists of the BNP are really an enemy of state power, it is said that the enemy forces continue to attack them. Yes, conceded, the enemy attacks the party in public.
The article, after viewing the ‘changes’ in BNP, asks:
“Does this mean then that the BNP which was founded as
a neo-fascist party has gone liberal democratic? Has it gone over to the
enemy? The answer is: no. The British establishment politicians, journalists,
academics, intellectuals hate and fear the BNP. The BNP has not given up its
racialist and nationalist views…… The enemies of the BNP understand that the
use of Churchill imagery, the Zionism, the apparent support for
There could be another strategy in motion:
1. The BNP is attacked this way to maintain the liberal democratic
mobilization against all forms of ‘racism’ and ‘fascism’ within
2. The BNP is attacked this
way to cause it to be a ‘honey trap’ for people in
3. The BNP is attacked this way to ensure that the leadership, playing the respectability” game, can be induced to further liberalise in the hope of really entering the mainstream.
4. The processes of liberalisation bring new members into the party who are, in fact, in various ways influenced by liberal democracy.
5. The party then has factions which have different views on the direction of the party and the party as a structure is neutralised.
Could this be the game?
Certainly, if we may give another example, we may refer to the history of Australian communism from the period after 1963-4. The Communist Party of Australia (CPA) remained in existence, but only as a party that stated its desire to “mainstream” itself (the CPA’s phrase!). As a communist phenomenon it was dead; as a force for social liberalisation, it was of assistance to the globalising (or to be more correct for that time: ‘internationalising’) liberal capitalist class. It set the agendas for the new feminist, homosexual, cultural-relativist and other movements, but it did not challenge state power; rather, it sought to ‘reform’ it. It allowed itself to be split, with the harder Marxists seceding, in order that it might better infiltrate mainstream parties and movements with its softer and more ‘mainstream’ elements (something that in our case, we don’t have time for). It watered down every aspect of its ideology and politics, so it presented a lily livered caricature of its former self. This strategy had been tried by others and finally, in 1990, they called it a day - and just dissolved themselves.
Attacks in state media upon anyone may or may not prove a case. It depends upon the facts at hand. The plausible agenda is the one given.
Sneaking Up On The Enemy
Ever since we nationalists
entered the political arena as a definable trend in
This party can sneak up on the state power and win an election. The article tells us the sneaky populists can legislate away – the regime itself: It can change the German Constitution which operates to prevent the formation of a new regime:
“Eventually, die Rechte obtains the necessary two-thirds majority in the Bundestag and Bundesrat to amend the German constitution, with or without the support of the other political parties. It is then that the MPs quietly, and without any fanfare, vote to amend Article 21 of the German constitution..”
Our question is: why would the populists, these liberals who have joined the party, want to do that?
The article seems to be telling us that nationalists will operate as a faction inside this mass movement, but somehow they will be the ones pulling the strings.
“So, to summarize, the defining characteristics of the German constitution? A three-party dictatorship; Militant democracy, which uses police state measures to repress anti-democratic groups who are deemed Communist or Neo-Nazi. Aside from this, there are other characteristics, not specifically mentioned in the text of the constitution itself. These are the substantive values, to use Schmitt’s term, of the Bundesrepublik . The values are: Zionism and philo-Semitism; a strange doctrine of German post-war guilt, which harps on endlessly about German atrocities, real or alleged, in World War Two; and a callous dismissal of the atrocities wrought upon Germany by the victors – the deliberate mass starvation of millions of Germans in the Allied occupied zone, and in the German POW camps, in the three years after the German surrender; the ethnic cleansing and murder of millions of Germans from the East; the deaths of one to two million German POWs in the Soviet Union.”
Again, if that is the German Constitution, and allowing that the German nationalists have played populist and liberal and recruited in droves such people who have no trouble with all that, why would these very same folks wish to subvert their very own order?
How could such a faction operate inside some liberal/populist party? How could it conceal itself? How much deep-entryism a la the 1940’s model of Trotskyism in the social-democratic movement, would the nationalists have to do? How ‘deep’ in do they have to go? Would the populists tolerate them lurking about, ready to stage their intra-party coup d’etat? Or would they just purge them long before?
These questions share answers and they cannot favour the model for success offered here.
Intervention Against The Revolution: Winning Again By Stealth.
It is suggested by the article that the success of the German nationalists will not be received well in the New World Order camp. We concur. The article says:
“What will it look like once the nationalists take over? It will be
almost identical to that of
This scenario may or may not be a little fantastic and phrased here a little bit wildly, but we shall take it in one way as correct. Intervention against a nationalist state may be carried out in various ways and military threats would be likely. The article has also warned us:
“Germans do not want war, which is one of the reasons why they do not vote for German nationalists in large numbers – their current policies will entail another fratricidal war between European states their white populations, with Washington and Tel Aviv being the only beneficiaries.”
However, we are led to believe that by dropping these supposedly threatening policies and installing a liberal regime which looks benign means that the New World Order forces will not intervene.
Well, maybe they wouldn’t intervene because they are in fact – not threatened by such a possibility. After all, the Austrian Freedom Party (one faction of it at least) served in a coalition government with the Christian Democrats. There was no intervention. But then, there was no intervention because the Freedom ministers had sold out their principles long before.
The success of the German nationalists in the face of intervention would rest upon the connection their movement would have with nationalist movements in other lands - which could not only oppose war, but grow stronger in solidarity with a victorious example of nationalism and challenge their own governments with renewed vitality. Was that why the NPD worked so closely with the European National Front? Is that why nationalists build co-ordination structures and alliances with nationalist parties in other lands?
The German nationalists
already oppose all elements of ‘Islamification’ in
their country. That is a simple fact. The German nationalists oppose the entry
In fact, the German nationalists seem to favour ‘Neither Islam, Nor Israel’.
So, again we witness the sleight of hand. The article talks of the populist parties and their pro Zionism:
“Their stance attempts to make the accusation of anti-Semitism a non-issue, effectively neutralising the damage it does to nationalism in those countries with populations taught from birth that certain ideas/events are absolute and never to be questioned.”
Zionism is not anti semitism.
The criticism of
obvious point is that the new line is one which seeks out
German Left is generally anti Zionist. Hundreds of thousands of Germans have
opposed the military adventures of Europe in
The line of ‘Neither Islam, Nor
The NPD Should Be Emulated By The BNP: Not The Other Way Around
What is truly odd about this
entire critique of German nationalism by the offending article is that it does not recognise the concrete fact: the
NPD has deeper roots in German soil than the BNP has in
One media report said recently:
“…. that rightwing
organizations, such as the National Democratic Party of Germany (NPD), are
increasingly targeting the younger generation. According to a recent opinion
poll, 4.9 percent of all 15-year old boys and 2.6 percent of all girls of that
age are already involved with a far-right group.”
The NPD has mobilised in increasing numbers, German youth in the Young National Democrats and affiliated structures.
It was also said:
"The NPD is seen as a revolutionary protest party, which offers activities that are hugely attractive for young people."
Is this what the populists are supposed to be doing too, albeit in some way or other?
Within the past seven years the NPD has increased the number of seats it holds on German municipal councils from a few dozen to more than 300 now. The NPD holds more council seats than the BNP.
Perhaps it should be the BNP which copies the NPD?
Recently, a new anti Islamic
party was mooted in
The skin crawls that this wrecking operation is the sort of thing that any nationalist organization would even wish to have a debate about.
The fact is that a real
number was done on the NPD in the period from 1983-95. This was the time of the
Republikaner, a party with a populist type agenda,
which competed directly with the German nationalists on the basis of its
so-called moderation. The Republikaner may even go
over to the new anti Islamist party. It is commonly agreed that the Republikaner were a set-up by the Christian-Social party in
So the NPD has been aware of ‘the game’. It has also in the last year or so, moved to limit the impact of the faked up anti Islamist groups by directly competing with them on public concerns over Islamism on German soil, whilst still maintaining their correct overall position.
The NPD’s three tier strategy, its cadre training, its strict adherence to nationalist ideology, its courage under fire, its political strategy of building local bases of people’s power – all this shows health in the party.
And the NPD, like the
freedom populists, has allies across
Conclusion: Uphold Nationalist Principles!
It is inevitable that nationalist principles come under attack. Liberal democratic capitalist states attack and seek to demobilize their challengers.
In this case, a populist
temptation has come before our friends in Nationalist Alternative. If
Nationalist Alternative seeks to uphold nationalism, then it must fight against
the Zionization of the nationalist movement, against false
populism, against the cult of the BNP which has been introduced into
At the moment, the opportunist current seems strong in some countries.
But it is weak in others. Yet, even in
Australia First says plainly that there is no way forward other than to apply more adroitly than ever our nationalist ideals. There is no treat as a reward for capitulation to the enemy; there is no trick that can build a true movement of identity, independence and freedom, of Australian nationalism.
We do not accept that the article was really about the German movement. It reminds us a little of the Russo-Chinese dispute over the sanctity (sic) of communism. When the Russians denounced the Albanians and the Chinese lambasted the Yugoslavs, each was criticizing the other. We cannot escape the idea that this article was a new phase of the Australian war in which Nationalist Alternative expressed some doubts over general line.
We do not have free debate inside a nationalist party over our very reason for being. That is suicide. We are here to wage a struggle and to do it well. Our real criticism is that Nationalist Alternative chose to have a debate with itself.Debate over!
End note: Three tiers method: integrates: electoral work at all levels, particularly local level ; community action (demonstrations, meetings, leaflet drives, petitions, action in schools, universities, unions and other associations and campaigns that incite community attention, that extends the impact of the organization and the psychological reach of its propaganda ; ideological and cultural work (forums and other events and publications that improve the ideological expression of the movement and campaigns, publications and other work tailored to the idea of the cultural defense of the national identity.
The three tiers method holds that a nationalist party cannot practice less than all three methods in tandem.