О сопротивлении замещению силой — видеоверсия

On Resistance to Replacement By Force - VIDEO VERSION

Источник: https://nickgriffin544956.substack.com/p/on-resistance-to-replacement-by-force-d2b

[music]

well hello and welcome to the latest edition of nick griffin beyond the pale now being astute people you'll notice that i'm wearing a suit and a tie despite being rather hot what's going on here well some of you might think nick's got something serious to say and indeed i have hence i'm very properly attired i'm not doing a normal show today instead this is going to be a lecture don't run away it's not going to be boring it's very very interesting i believe uh this is the text of a Substack i put out just a couple of days ago entitled on resistance to replacement by force and a number of people have been in touch already saying this is going pretty viral it's very, very important. It's very powerful but at eight and a half thousand words it's an awfully long read could you please put it out as a video either audio or visual? So I thought right that is what I will do so here we go. So please do leave comments as usual in the chat but I won't be joining you there today because I will simply be reading stroke narrating this uh lecture hopefully I'm broken if i do stumble forgive me I'm not probably not going to bother to edit it because he's important just to get it out there and you know everybody stumbles is one of those things the important thing is the message so hope you find it interesting let me know in the comments violence is never the answer according to virtually everyone on the right particularly when popular anger against one or other of the many evils of mass immigration spills over from words into action.

we heard it most recently over the protests in southampton over the despicable anti-white behaviour of the police towards henry novak as they mocked and handcuffed him while he bled to death we hear it every time violence achieves nothing is how many others express the same sentiment which is rather odd since every scrap of history reminds us that they the various elites who are or have at times been our masters always use violence against us at home and against those whom they deem to be their enemies abroad. The conditioning against violence is for us, not for those who rule us or for those who enforce their rules. Those in power routinely use violence or the threat of violence against us and with a rare exceptions of the all too rare elites genuinely influenced by traditional Christian teachings every concession every last shred of decency and justice which rulers are granted to their subjects has been won not by polite requests and obedience to their laws but through violence or the threat of violence all the rights we've already lost to the creeping tyranny of totalitarian liberalism were extracted from former elites by militant struggle confrontation and even martyrdom by our ancestors those few rights which still remain were not given to us of the goodness of the hearts of kings popes archbishops capitalists and politicians but because there were more of us than them because we the people organized to turn those numbers into power and used force or the threat of force sometimes implicit often explicit in order to compel them to do the decent thing rights are never granted they are taken and if each generation does not organize to secure them then sooner or later they will be taken away such is the natural eternal tension between those with formal and economic power and the rest of the population violence is never the answer say those who parrot the containment propaganda with which all citizens are brainwashed throughout their school years continually reinforced by the elite media outlets and by politicians who lecture us on the sacrosanct nature of peaceful submission while constantly threatening us with the violence of their prisons police and courts if we fail to obey their demands violence is never the answer is at the dark heart of the conditioning process whereby we the people are trained from the start of our school days to obey and submit it is one of the most ridiculous of the control myths they stuff into the minds of the children groomed through the education system to be obedient citizens it is needless to say closely related to the tale that having a lifetime ration of pencil crosses to use in elections dominated by plutocratic media outlets and social media algorithms in some way gives you a say in the running of your country but here's the plain truth violence is almost always their answer to their enemies and make no mistake they know far better than we do that we are potentially their most dangerous enemies this is true not just to the actual physical violence which the state and ruling class deploy through police patterns and soldiers guns when all other means of persuasion and control fail their courts and prisons are methods of compulsion as well their force is ritualized and legitimized by custom and often by our own agreement since it's usually directed against individuals who thoroughly deserve it but if push comes to shove the ruling regime will empty prison cells of real criminals in order to free up space for political prisoners and those who dare to resist their nation killing agenda their rule is enforced through violence violence is never the answer really let us consider a few historical examples which give the lie to this convenient elite untruth you don't have to agree with each piece of progress to see the principles at work why do we in britain have a parliamentary democracy under a constitutional monarch because we cut the head off one king chased another out of his kingdom defeated him his son and his grandson in a series of rebellions which lasted more than 50 years and we repeatedly slaughtered their supporters did the united states celebrate the 250th anniversary of writing a polite letter to king george which persuaded him of the justice of releasing the colonies from his rule and from the financial death grip of the bank of england or is the united states an independent nation because american rebels threw tea into boston harbor and then killed thousands of british soldiers and german mercenaries who were sent to crush them for that matter how did a small group of colonies on the eastern seaboard expand until they stretch from sea to shining sea by sitting down with the red indians and convincing them that they should stop butchering and scalping white settlers and that they would be far better off accepting rule from washington the abolition of slavery and the granting of votes to upper-class women before they were given to working-class men were changes advocated by peaceful argument but that was not the only method used slavery was ended on the high seas by the armed might of the british navy the pankhurst and other feminist harridans pressed their case by smashing windows burning down shops and churches burning down arsenal football ground horse whipping politicians including winston churchill and inventing the letter bomb the extreme physical force employed by the suffragettes is glossed over with the liberals who forget their terrorism and celebrate their victory and it is clear the positive work done by decent women during the first world war was far more important in winning the argument for votes for women than all the mayhem caused by the extremists but they are liberal icons nonetheless ulster stayed british in the early part of the 20th century not because the majority of her citizens desired it or voted for it but because they organized an army of a hundred thousand men smuggled smuggled in 30 000 mauser rifles and five million rounds of ammunition in one weekend and made it clear that if necessary they would fight the entire british empire in order to resist irish home rule on the other side of that fence irish independence came not from the ballot boxes packed with shin fame votes but from the rifles grenades and bombs for the irish brotherhood and the ira they never defeated the british but the level of violence the irish rebels applied and the way they kept applying it generation after generation eventually helped convince the westminster elite to grant them the freedom which more recently their descendants so carelessly gave away to brussels coming right up to date sinn fein ira now run the government of northern ireland not because of the reasonableness of their arguments but because the damage their bombs did to the city of london and because the women of their community had more babies than the prods leading to force on the streets the state of israel was born out of the genocidal violence launched with a massacre at daya yassin the arabs weren't convinced to share their land by gentle debate but by having their throats cut and their corpses thrown down wells compelling hundreds of thousands of terrified survivors to flee the zionist state was created through psychotic violence and has been sustained and expanded by it ever since did you ever hear a british politician trying to tell the idf that violence never achieves anything more mundanely the entire liberal establishment romanticizes the stonewall riots whose violence marked a key point in the long culture and legal war war for the legalization and current exalted status of homosexuality the most bestial violence becomes acceptable when the liberals agree with its aims and targets the same elite who are so often tell patriotic dissidents that violence is never the answer stood four square behind the African National Congress when Winnie Mandela's football squad militia were busy placing burning tires around the necks of Africans who refused to support their war against white minority rule.

I could give many more examples, but that should be enough. so let's leave the final word on the verdict of history to the communist theorist who was such a strong influence on the 68 generation and their protégés who now run every institution in our society chairman mal all political power comes out of the barrel of a gun actually as we will see there are other sources of power but that is what the left the people who rule us believed force in all its forms determines relations between nations and governments but also the balance of power between governments and their subjects can you name any government that changed its fundamental direction any oppressive system which reformed any rights won by any oppressed people or group without the use of force with the exception of sweden granting independence to norway and the mutually agreed velvet divorce between the czech republic and slovakia the answer is no now before various fools and low-level touts start screaming fed post let me make one thing very clear i am not calling for the use of violence not against either our oppressors or against any of their pet minorities far from it in exploring this question in depth we should start at the very top if anyone really believes that violence is never the answer yet claims to be a christian let them consider jesus face with a stinking corruption of the money changers and the sanhedrin's hangers on in the temple he didn't waste time debating the problem christ didn't try to convince them to mend their ways with kindly words he sat down and spent several hours braiding a cat of nine tails a ferocious whip then he rushed in throw over the temples and drove the crooks and hypocrites from the house of god with the lash an act of premeditated calculated morally inspired cold rage i'm not however going to argue that the violent example of our lord gives us the right to turn to violence whenever we feel that our rights or the boundaries of fairness have been trampled upon far from it a proper understanding of the problems of oppression resistance and violence tells us that physical violence must always be a last resort it should also tell us that even under a ruling elite which has empowered the invasion of our country and turned us into second class citizens in our own land.

We are. At the time of this lecture, nowhere near that point. Let us move the discussion on from indoctrination and containment propaganda by doing away with the loaded term violence. Things will become much clearer if we instead use the neutral term force. Next, let us recognize that when it comes to human relationships, whether oppressing a people, securing rights or suppressing wrongdoing, there are two different categories of force physical force and moral force they are of course related in a savage world without rules or concern for consequences moral force would account for nothing in the diseased and dangerous world which exists in the brains of nietzschean's might is right a moral force is some sort of weakness strangely this individualistic anti-nationalist poison invariably infects the brains of the physically weakest and most mentally delicate specimens giving credence to the syphilitic nature or more accurately the works edited by his equally disturbed sister is a vice of soft-handed intellectuals so let's recognize simply that moral force exists and matters and moves swiftly on good governments use moral force custom beliefs and institutions whose power rests largely on tradition and consent to nudge their subjects into conformity with commonly agreed values in a healthy society with a monocultural base such moral power is enough to maintain order and good behavior among the vast majority of the population the dual nature of the obligations and restrictions on state and government are mirrored by those which apply to individuals local communities and the nation the state is ultimately subordinate to the nation no government may place itself above the nation the collective will of the majority informed by loyalty to the legacy of the past and tempered by the interests of those who are still to be born in a good state run for the current and future generations of the people who created it and based on the customs and morality of their ancestors citizens freely give the right to self-defense over to it the right to declare and wage war becomes a matter for the head rather than the body of the nation when a state goes bad there comes a time when the people can and should and must take back their right to self-defense similarly with war there can come a time when the state and its allies are so perverse so wicked and so dangerous to the nation that it becomes necessary to seek to turn its wars into a civil war in which the nation overthrows the tyranny which if left in charge would bring all to ruin in a normal and healthy society however such drastic measures are wholly unnecessary physical force may properly be used for the state although in practice it rarely is it is generally deployed with near unanimous popular support only against those who break tradition and accepted moral norms in a state whose laws grow from the people and tradition only those who refuse to comply become outlaws elite use of physical force beyond those traditional boundaries turns the state itself into the outlaw our ancestors groaned under and fought to end such evil in past centuries the two-tier anarcho-tyranny which is a noted feature of late stage liberalism is an example from our own times this is not a matter of moral force good physical force bad there are times and places for each whether in an argument between two individuals two communities a people in their government or two states there is invariably the option of using moral force or physical force the question of which should be used and when was developed most fully in the traditional christian doctrine of the just war as we will see the theory set out for the church fathers is every bit as valid for nationalists and traditionalists up against the repressive forces of the liberal state and the violence of its favoured client-to-client minorities as it is in the case of quarrels between nations christian just war theory developed as an attempt to reconcile the christian commitment to peace with the reality that governments may sometimes need to use force to protect the innocent and preserve or restore justice it was part of the broader church effort to house train the dark age warlords a feat without which high medieval europe could not have been created the theory was shaped primarily by augustine of hippo and thomas aquinas according to their traditional theory a war must satisfy several criteria before it can be considered considered morally justified first there must be a just cause such as self-defense against aggression or the protection of innocent people from grave harm second the war must be declared by a legitimate authority typically a recognized government rather than private individuals or groups third those waging war must possess right intention the aim should be the restoration of peace and justice not revenge conquest or economic gain additional criteria were developed over time war should be a last resort undertaken only after peaceful alternatives such as negotiation and diplomacy have been seriously attempted there must be a reasonable chance of success since launching a hopeless conflict that causes suffering without achieving its goals would be immoral finally the expected good achieved by the war must be proportional to the harm it will cause the church fathers were far too worldly wise to believe the old lies about war itself being glorious just war theory also places moral limits on conduct during war just in bellow combatants must distinguish between military targets and non-combatants and force must be used proportionately to the military objective deliberate attacks on civilians are morally unacceptable in summary traditional christian just war theory holds that war is never a positive good in itself but may be morally permissible under strict conditions a just war legitimate authority right intention last resort probability of success proportionality and respect for non-competence are the key criteria that must be met for a war to be considered just within the true christian tradition just war theory is not generally taught in state approved education systems for one thing it's rather too complicated if it dumbed down modern brains more important is the fact that an appreciation of what constitutes a just war rapidly produces the understanding that the vast majority of the wars waged by successive elites in our name and with our blood and taxes are thoroughly unjust and thus illegitimate, which is why they are always preceded, sustained and excused by warmongering propaganda and fictitious atrocity stories.

The most important contribution to ideas on the subject in recent times is on resistance to evil by force, in which even ill in sought to provide moral support for the anti-bolshevik struggle after the russian revolution as the white russians called for armed resistance to lenin's coup d'etat and the depraved brutality of bolshevism ilian set out to answer the question that had become particularly urgent in the aftermath of revolution and civil war what is the moral duty of a christian when confronted by real evil his work was largely written in response to the christian pacifism of leo tolstoy whose interpretation of the gospel emphasized non-resistance to evil and rejection of all violence while alien admired the moral seriousness and sincerity of this position he asserted that it failed to reckon adequately with the reality of evil and the obligation that human beings owe to one another evil alien maintains can be real deliberate destructive and implacable some individuals and movements consciously seek domination cruelty and the destruction of moral order in such circumstances he argues appeals to conscience persuasion and personal example may prove insufficient a person who encounters evil cannot always overcome it through passive endurance alone a person who refuses to resist an aggressor may keep his own hands clean but in doing so he leaves the innocent undefended christian love in aliens view is not merely a matter of refusing to do harm it also requires the active protection of others under certain circumstances therefore resistance to evil may require coercion and even physical force yet alien is careful not to portray violence as something good in itself force remains a tragic necessity rather than a positive moral achievement the soldier police officer judge or citizen who acts to restrain evil does not escape moral burden simply because his cause is just the use of force inevitably involves suffering guilt and spiritual danger but it remains in the face of genuine evil a moral necessity this understanding extends to political authority he now argues that the state exists in part to restrain evil and preserve the conditions necessary for moral and social life courts police armies and other institutes institutions of coercion perform an indispensable function a society which renounced all forms of force would not become a realm of universal peace rather it would leave itself vulnerable to those without scruples or compassion the existence of lawful lawful authority is therefore justified not by a desire for domination but for the need to defend justice and protect the innocent themes of conscience sacrifice responsibility and moral burden occupy a central place in aliens argument the defender of justice appears not as a triumphant hero but as a tragic figure who accepts painful duties for the sake of protecting others on resistance to evil by force is an attempt to grapple with a profound moral dilemma alien sought to explain how a christian could remain faithful the demands of love while acknowledging the existence of genuine evil in the world his answer was that love sometimes requires resistance and that resistance may sometimes require force such force is never pure never desirable for its own sake and never free from moral cost yet in a fallen world he believed a refusal to oppose evil can itself become a form of moral failure Thus, far from force never being the answer, in a fallen world in which evil is rampant, force is very often the answer.

When faced with real evil, it's refusal to use force, which is impermissible. Knowing the intended audience of this essay, I take it for a given that you already understand that there have been few things in history more evil than systematic and sustained effort to impose policies and conditions which are ethnocidal arguably even genocidal on the english the other home nations and all the other peoples of european descent who now make up no more than eight percent of the world's population this would be evil if done to any of the divinely ordained separate nations or peoples of humanity it is doubly so since the targets have over so many centuries reduced the highest expressions of religious and political thought architecture music art culture technology law and decency ever seen on god's earth we're not merely entitled to defend our people we are duty-bound and morally compelled to do so since decades have tried to do so through appeals to reason and fairness have manifestly failed a poisonous cocktail of greed ideology racial hatred religious bigotry power mania and jealousy in an internet connected network of elite groups together with many failings of our own has marked our people for for dispossession replacement and elimination force is required in response the only question is what sort of force politics being in itself a form of warfare this question can only be answered properly by reference to just war theory we've already seen that there are six principal requirements for a just war and understood that they are every bit as applicable to tensions and conflicts within nations as well as between them let us look briefly at each in turn and decide whether whether the threshold has been crossed in the great replacement first there must be a just cause we hold it as self-evident that securing a future for our kinsfolk does indeed qualify second the war must be declared by a legitimate authority typically recognized government rather than private individuals or groups equally clearly this is not the case however taken literally it would make resistance to the most monstrous and brutal tyranny impossible a tyrant might be elected supported by the leaders of the mainstream churches backed by the whole of the plutocratic media and funded by the richest corporations in strictly legal terms he and his supporters would form the only legitimate authority but once his regime starts robbing and oppressing people is it necessary to wait until it begins torturing to death or until one of the bought and paid for bishops finally finds the courage to speak out before taking steps to end the tyranny of course not and when the rebellion in question fits with the liberal agenda our masters certainly have no such scruples just check out the terrorist activities of the communist bomber nelson mandela and his necklace happy wife think of their support for the totally illegal and extremely neo-nazi coup in maidan ukraine the legitimate authority in our case is not provided by the voice of a pope or a bishop or a high profile political opponent of the regime as nationalists we understand that that tradition gives voices and moral votes to the dead of our folk and enfranchises the unborn of the nation too despite decades of delicate deliberate dumbing down and de-racination of our education system despite years of liberal brainwashing we and growing millions know what freedom really means and which freedoms must never be relinquished we know who are our people who we're prepared to accept as permanent guests and who should be on the first plane out we know the difference between legitimate free enterprise and corporate looting we know the difference between tolerance of the odd and the essentially harmless and surrender to foul and dangerous perversions we know this from what we feel in our own bones but also by giving due consideration to the writings and examples of past heroes of our people's long struggle against oppression and looting by previous elites every bit as wicked albeit in sometimes different ways to that under whose heel our folks suffer in our own time the great william cobbett for example wrote in his epic and indispensable rural rights the people have the right to insist upon measures necessary to distort to restore the greatness and happiness of my country and if our rulers show not that disposition it will be my bounden duty to endeavor to arrive them from the positions of power we know in short that the time has come for resistance we do not need anyone's permission to organize for resistance and to begin its goodly and godly work third those waging wars must possess right intention the aim must be the restoration of peace and justice not revenge conquest or economic gain now we have to face the truth here there are some among the indigenous would be resistance who have already been driven mad by the injustice of what has been done to our people and by the fear what is yet to come repression has already begun the familiar cycle of alienation hatred violence and more repression there are some out there people who parrot what we say or preach hatred and impossible solutions because such sound bites get them hits and make them money the vast majority of our people on our wavelength however are motivated by completely legitimate grievances and genuine fears and aspirations right intention is indeed all present and correct the road to hell however is paved with good intentions and even when these conditions are met it is still not enough war and in internal affairs physical force short of war must be a last resort it must only be undertaken after peaceful alternatives such as negotiation or diplomacy have been seriously attempted among the alternatives open to a people in a legitimate struggle against unjust governments moreover are various moral force tactics which are not available in the case of clashes between nations do not be confused with this by this word moral yes moral force does include rational argument works of thomas paine for example played a major role in the success of the american revolution against king george but not as much as the muskets of the militias it takes in all sorts of things including appeals to the better nature of the rulers and their enforcers mass prayer hunger strikes having extra babies and protests which remain peaceful even in the face of brutal provocation and repression one of the best examples of this is also in our native tradition of resistance to tyranny shelley's mask of anarchy was written in 1819 in direct response to the peterloo massacre where cavalry charged a peaceful crowd in manchester demanding parliamentary reform killing around 18 people and injuring hundreds the poem includes a call to passive resistance which predated for example gandhi by more than a century stand ye calm and resolute like a forest close and mute with folded arms and steady eyes and little fear and less surprise look at them look upon them as they slay till their rage has passed away then they will return with shame to the place from which they came and the blood thus shed will speak in hot blushes on their cheek every woman in the land will point at them as they stand they will hardly dare to greet their acquaintance in the street and the boldest will turn pale when they hear the people tell of the meeting and the route and the trampling and the shout and the cry of liberty ye are many they are few the poet concluded echoing the position of Etienne de Boitier as he sought to galvanize the French against absolute monarchy passive resistance is however only one form of moral force it's the softest safetest Safest, the one which applying the principles of just war theory to strife within the nation must be utilised first.

In recent British history, the best example of it being utilized by serious numbers of people in coordinated support of a specific and just cause was the campaign by Kondythus Iyath Cum Raig The Welsh Language Society in the 1960s for recognition, legal status and media outlets for the oldest living Indigenous time in Britain. out of a welsh speaking population numbering well under a million more than 5 000 campaigners the majority young idealists were arrested for acts of non-violent direct action including non-payment of the bbc tv license fee sit-ins the painting over of english only road signs and the sabotage of radio and tv transmitters large numbers willingly went to prison their calls and actions were supported by the vast majority of their compatriots and in the end successive westminster governments have reluctantly agreed to their demands there were a handful of welsh nationalists who attempted to emulate the ira with the free wales army and the movement for the defense of wales they mainly confined themselves to using explosive stolen quarries to blow up water pipelines to protest at the destruction of welsh communities to make reservoirs to supply water to england two mac members were killed trying to bomb the railway line carrying the royal train to the investiture of charles as prince of wales in 1969 later a small group of welsh hardliners ran a campaign of arson attacks on holiday homes owned by english outsiders overwhelmingly however the campaign for the welsh language while militant was always peaceful and it worked Welsh is today by far the most widely spoken of the Celtic languages in very marked contrast to the plight of Irish Gaelic whose champions sought to protect it and advance their broader nationalist cause through violence in the end Westminster governments found it easier to give way to the peacefully expressed demands of the Welsh than to the extreme violence of the Irish the latter encouraged a dangerous tendency to settle scores by bullets and bombs and also had a drastically radicalizing effect on the protestant minority on the island of ireland thus ended the original republican dream of uniting orange and green and set the scene for two bloody and sordid civil wars while british and english nationalists now see clearly that our people are on the same slippery slope to minority status as welsh speakers their response apart from a few recent outbursts of low-level rioting has been neither to use moral or physical force up until now the struggle against the great replacement the system's grotesque failure over the muslim grooming gangs and the second class citizens citizen status of which that is just a part has been confined to a minority of citizens changing how they vote it's all very polite in english and frankly it has become pathetic when first attempted by the national front then the british national party there was the excuse that electoral insurgency hadn't really been attempted before furthermore the scale of non-white immigration was small enough that its large-scale reversal was still possible if a government had been elected on a repatriation ticket it would have been relatively easily albeit even then costly to achieve The BNP, in addition, made a genuine and sustained effort to develop various forms of extra parliamentary influence and power.

We were busy with but not wholly taken in by the fig leaf of parliamentary democracy. All over Europe, the genuinely nationalists and conceptually radical parties of those days have been broken. primarily by the co-option of their anti-immigration message by politicians who have no intention of delivering on their pre-election tough talk the idea of repatriation has been rebranded as remigration it is a militant demand but militant demands militant slogans are not false neither moral nor physical they are a wish list supporting politicians who say they will deport millions is not force millions of votes are to be fair an example of moral force but the uk elite's contemptuous response to the brexit vote the largest democratic mandate in british history 17.4 million voters is a very clear illustration of the grave limitations of electoral efforts in isolation it is true that defund the bbc has developed some popular headway in recent years the number of uk households paying the bbc tv license fee has declined significantly there's a combination of license fee evasion households declaring they don't need a license the rise of streaming and living cost pressures every time the bbc is caught out with some particularly nasty example of liberal propaganda memes circulate calling for a widespread refusal to pay the license fee in response but there's never been any clear evidence of this making much of a difference the total potential lost income was well over 1.1 billion pounds per year by 2025 forcing the bbc to cut spending by hundreds of millions and warn of managed decline without stronger enforcement which incidentally would only make the tax even more unpopular given the fact that the tv license fee is extremely unpopular already and that there is some public experience of successive resistance to its collection a serious boycott of the blatantly anti-indigenous bbc would not take many more twists of the collective radicalization screw to make feasible this is one very soft but for the powers that be potentially very expensive avenue a factory determining the effectiveness of the indigenous of the inevitable indigenous resistance movement will be the extent to which is decentralized leadership develops the skill of spotting and exploiting such opportunities these will differ from time to time and place to place but in a society as complex as ours they will always be present lawfare is another field pregnant with possibilities several pro-life and nationalist campaign groups have recently shown that it is possible through the courts to use equality legislation to stop for example woke councils flying rainbow flags and to win financial payouts from institutions who refuse facilities to patriots or rather patriots smart enough to present their objectives to the prism of protected characteristics which are already recognized by the state rather than whiteness or self-defeating extremism the issuing of pre-action protocol letters for judicial review has been described as being a legal riot even the basic initial defense to such a letter before action will cost a council or similar establishment organization thousands of pounds nowadays these can be written by ai and may be brought by ordinary citizens without any risk of cost if they discontinue the action before it gets to court to cost the oppressive state that sort of money by smashing windows would leave protesters exposed to massive fines and potential prison sentences to do it by initiating what is essentially a vexatious list legal procedure is for now at least completely free of any uncomfortable consequences there's great potential too for the mass use of official complaint procedures freedom of information request and data subject access access requests the widespread simultaneous use of such procedures to clog the system and overwhelm its operatives is only a matter of organization and will moral force is not only a matter of passive resistance though passive resistance is one form of moral force it is also organizing boycotting sending to coventry building the capacity to block the streets turn off the electricity hacking their systems removing the physical apparatus of surveillance the withholding of taxes and essential work fuel blockades disruption by drones and all the other examples which human ingenuity can devise all these are mass actions for moral objectives without the use of violence counter power the development of community based organizations which in some way mirror the powers of the state or any of its institutions or allies is another example this can range from small businesses and local community patrols security patrols right up to the establishment of separate legal systems these days muslim sharia courts and the very similar bet deen rabbinical courts among jews are the best known examples of alternative legal systems mainly dealing with civil matters such as divorce operating parallel to those of the state the most impressive example of the creation of alternative and alternative legal system as a weapon in national liberation struggle was the dialed courts also known as shin fein arbitration courts these were set up after irish nationalists won a landslide victory in the uk's general election of 1918 despite shin fame winning an overwhelming mandate for immediate independence the british government refused to accept it shin frame responded by setting up an irish parliament the doyle despite westminster declaring declaring this illegal the new institution promptly gave itself tax-raising powers and established a legal system alongside a military two of the most basic attributes of statehood the new legal system was based on ireland's ancient braille laws augmented by custom and common sense rather than british statute and english common law despite disruption by the british army and occupation police force including the arrest of illegal judges these courts were soon handling around 70 percent percent of civil cases in nationalist areas of ireland at the same time the dial moved to create an irish taxation system parallel to that imposed by the occupation forces in july 1919 the minister of finance michael collins announced the creation of a national loan intended to raise a quarter of a million pounds to fund at home and among the u.s diaspora buying 390 000 pounds worth of republican bonds these were redeemed by The government, after the illegal counterpower initiatives of the Irish rebels became the institutions for the Irish Free State with signing of a treaty with Britain which ended centuries of often ruthless British rule.

While the struggle raged, the unofficial Irish state also collected taxes in nationalist areas. In many cases, these were paid voluntarily. But when citizens were less than enthusiastic, the arm wing of the revolution, the Irish Republican Army encouraged contributions in a way which the British forces and Protestant minority with some justification regarded as a protection racket. In modern times, by far the most effective use of counterpower ideas and structure is by the Muslim Brotherhood Decades of generous support by assorted oil shakes has given the followers of saeed kutba whose 1964 manifesto milestones should be read by all european ethno-nationalists a marked advantage but all the money would have done them little good if kutba hadn't laid out a practical and fast-sighted plan for how to lose it use it wherever they operate the brotherhood systematically create parallel structures which steadily marginalize and replace the state in many aspects of everyday life on the other side of the suny shir divide hezbollah's rise to become the biggest non-state military force in the world also owes a great deal to the moral force of many of its counter power initiatives schools and benefit systems come well before guns and rockets the former are hugely important in their own right in winning hearts and minds but they are also precursors to the latter helping to supply the highly motivated young men who would use them it is ironic that the self-proclaimed white master race theorists and grouplets which infest the internet are so woefully far behind these supposedly inferior rackets in their organization and ability to contest for serious power this unfounded superiority complex is one of the many old comfort blankets which will not survive the realities of the coming hard times looking ahead to the future of indigenous communities in britain and elsewhere in the west these shrinking majorities soon to become the largest minorities in a society of minorities are liable to find themselves still playing the lion's share of the taxes while suffering under an alien dominated legal system which treats them as second-class citizens creeping islamization and galloping liberal degeneracy alike will make the legal educational and social structures of the country increasingly foreign and uncomfortable to the indigenous community this will take place in an overall atmosphere of increasing tribalization and a shift from class to identity politics as such circumstances develop and become even more widely understood as justice and oppression the establishment of our own parallel institutions is inevitable The question is to what extent this trend takes place purely organically and thus slowly or whether a serious nationalist movement arises with the vision and popular support needed to set up counterpower initiatives as part of a deliberate and systematic exercise in Indigenous resistance.

the extension of just war theory to the indigenous struggle tells us clearly that a move to physical force nationalism while such efforts in moral power have not even yet been made let alone stopped by repression and violence by the elite or their various plausibly deniable leftist or minority enforcers would be illegitimate nor have we exhausted the conditions which must be met before the indigenous struggle can turn to physical force there must furthermore be a reasonable chance of success since launching a hopeless conflict which causes suffering without achieving its goals would be immoral next the expected good achieved by the war must be proportional to the harm it will cause finally there is one more problem with physical force by non-state actors which has rarely if ever been addressed by the theorists who cover the subject but which often emerges as a concern among first-hand participants both sides of the old divide in the troubles in northern ireland and among men who were involved in italy's year of lead this is the fact that the moment the leaders of any struggle unleash physical force and violence men of violence begin to come to the top how could it end up any other way violent men genuine psychopaths ruthless criminals and plain old bullies these are always going to be more ruthless when it comes to using violence more ready to escalate it and less inclined to bother about its consequences including its impact on innocence caught in the crossfire their growing involvement adds to the collateral damage it spurs on cycles of revenge and tit-for-tat violence the use of physical force by one side radicalizes people on the other side as well it leaves the antagonist antagonists even more bitter making peace and reconciliation ever harder to achieve thus we see that the use of moral force is an absolute sorry thus we see that the use of physical force is an absolute last resort that does not mean that is never justified on the contrary the same moral considerations which so seriously restrict the use of physical force mean that once all the alternatives are exhausted and all the conditions are met it becomes not merely permissible but obligatory to refuse to wage a just war is as immoral as waging an unjust one this is every bit as true of struggles against evil within our own government system as it is against the wickedness of foreign ones all this used to be very widely understood particularly in the english -speaking world centuries of struggle against kings barons popes and the greed of the already far too rich have produced a long tradition of passion for freedom fairness and the rule of a law which stood above even the mightiest an understanding that sometimes it was necessary for good men to fight for them for centuries the idea that a man could not keep a handgun and rifle in his home and defend himself and his family with the former and in extremis freedom of the latter would have been understood immediately as a mark of tyranny concepts such as an englishman's home is his castle continue to inform the law as well as popular sentiment until even more recently it is only in recent decades that such ideals have been forgotten by deliberately dumbed down population denied denied knowledge of its identity and force-fed anodyne liberal platitudes instead of the fine example of our ancestors and their long and sometimes bitter struggle for freedom.

A proper understanding both of the just war theory developed by the Christian by the greatest of the church fathers of traditional European Christianity and of the history of our peoples thus confirms that under the right circumstances at some point in the future those struggling for indigenous rights and against the ongoing ethnic side of the peoples who built the historic nations of christendom may well be wholly entitled to turn to physical force to go in short to war against the tyrants and traitors of our own elite and their various imported allies and clients but not yet if the malign forces pushing for civil war between our communities and the muslims manage to spark such a conflict the use of defensive force could become a regrettable necessity all too easily and quickly but the prospect of an offensive war against tyranny and occupation is a very different matter anyone suggesting it is either a fool a fed or a containment agent seeking to distract our people from the myriad of constructive moral force initiatives with which they need to get busy if successfully making our national community strong enough quickly enough such moral force organization might even prevent the alienation fear and war which is otherwise very likely to spring from the rapid demographic shift of our people from overwhelming majority to largest minority status it could make us confident and secure enough to navigate this change while simultaneously making our community self-evidently so cohesive and formidable that none of the others we dare to risk incurring our wrath even if that does not happen and our masters multi-racial experiment ends the way enoch powell predicted then there is a very fortunate coincidence everything done to strengthen our people by and for the application of moral force also better equips them to use physical force more effectively in the event that it becomes a legitimate necessity to look at it another way we're caught between two extremes each of them thoroughly unpalatable the first is to continue as we are with many people doing nothing while even the supposedly awake minority pin their hopes on a painless solution being imposed by some political savior this cowardly combination of avoidance and fantasy is a slippery slope to surrender and subjugation at the other end of the spectrum is civil war as predicted by professor betts and desired by all sorts of people who should know better.

We've already examined the various considerations which make choosing this route immoral and illegitimate. Among these looms large the fact that for Britain and several other northwest European countries, such a conflict is already not winnable. The demographics are already too skewed against us. The migrant communities are too large and well embedded for mass deportations. We cannot realistically get rid of them. but equally however high our casualties may be in the early stages while they're better organized and quicker to ruthless violence than our people there is in the end no way in which they can conquer let alone get rid of us those currently pushing for such a conflict don't care about any of this they're not eager for conflict because they think we can or even should win they want mayhem and hatred because these things advance their own agendas on which list the effective destruction of europe her peoples and christianity is a prominent objective the result of this clash of civilizations will not be victory for either party but eventual exhaustion we've seen it before most recently in northern ireland where 30 years of bloody communal conflict eventually ended in a sordid peace deal in which the men of violence were bought or helped to kill each other off the very worst of the sectarian killers were given comfortable and very well-paid positions in government even the hardest of hardliners on both sides understood that they were never going to get rid of the other side so the two communities in the end agreed to stay on their side of the peace wars and generally mind their own business in an old britain context this will mean balkanization and institutionalized tribalism given that this is where we will end up anyway sensible people will search for ways to reach this position peacefully through organizations negotiations from position of strength and de facto separation separation rather than through bloodshed of course this is far from ideal we should be able to enjoy absolute majority status in our own land forever that is or rather was our birthright but it was sold off or given away long ago true we were never asked it was wholly wrong and we will never accept it but none of that changes the fact that we are where we are the map of the road ahead already shows various unmovable obstacles you can wish for a howl at the moon and remain a powerless observer or you can try to navigate the roadmap with resourceful realism and force the powers that be to grant concessions which put our people in a better position to make and in due course obtain the next demand this is the middle way between the two extremes between abject surrender and unwinnable war the genuinely moderate but also radical option is to organize for the effective exercise of moral force so as to secure for the indigenous peoples of our islands and indeed other nations of european origin the recognition rights and resources to ensure that no one even thinks of trying to deprive us of our place under the sun to say this is not to underestimate the amount of work this will involve or the amount of resistance that our efforts will face but we have no choice our backs already against the wall the dangers our people face are not some distant theoretical threat we're already under extreme pressure powerful vested interests and lobbies are pushing us to accept misedulation and second-class status we're already the victims of both moral and physical force either consciously aiming for or the very least tending towards our dispossession if we do not develop the ability to counter those pressures with appropriate force of our own then dispossession will become subjection and our eventual elimination as distinct peoples and living cultures but we will not be replaced not because our enemies can be convinced of the errors of their ways not even because for the time being at least some of them have found a use for our young men as canon fodder once again we will not be replaced simply because we are going to resist replacement and because our resistance while moral and legitimate will involve irresistible force and i'll leave you to think about that and also to look at this very fine rendition of kipling's brilliant poem if by amelia one of the worst examples of unintended blowback in recent political history in britain i'll leave you there until this time next week do please join me again and until you do do remember that freedom is never free because the tree of liberty must be watered from time to time with the blood of martyrs and tyrants

if you can keep your head when all about you losing theirs and blaming it on you if you can trust yourself when all men doubt you but make allowance for their doubting too if you can wait and not be tired by waiting or being lied about don't deal in lies or being hated don't give way to hating and yet don't look too good nor talk too wise if you can dream and not make dreams your master if you can think and not make thoughts your aim if you can meet with triumph and disaster and treat those two imposters just the same if you can bear to hear the truth you've spoken twisted by knaves to make a trap for fools or watch the things you gave your life too broken and stoop and build them up with worn out tools if you can make one heap of all your winnings and risk it on one turn off pitch and toss and lose and start again at your beginnings and never breathe a word about your loss if you can force your heart and nerve and sinew to save your turn long after they are gone and so hold on when there is nothing in you except the will which says to them hold on if you can talk with crowds and keep your virtue or walk with kings nor lose the common touch if neither foes nor loving friends can hurt you if all men count with you but none too much if you can fill the unforgiving minute with sixty seconds worth of distance run yours is the earth and everything that's in it and which is more you'll be a man my son yours is the earth and everything that's in it