Sunday, 31 July 2016

European Outlook # 32 August 2016


The Chilcot Inquiry

Sir John Chilcot's long awaited inquiry into the 2003 invasion of Iraq did not find Tony Blair guilty of war crimes but his reputation is nevertheless in tatters. The war cost the lives of 3,777 American and Coalition troops, including 179 Britons. The Lancet report estimated Iraqi deaths at 654,965.


Tony Blair is reported to be worth $60 million. As a retired prime minister with a wife and family he should be a happy and contented man. But torment is written on his face. He tries to justify his rush to war and only apologises for trusting the evidence presented to him. He insists that he believed that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction. He may even be telling the truth but he is nevertheless guilty of waging an aggressive war - a crime that men were hanged for at Nuremberg. Some people think that he is a gifted actor who actually feels no remorse. But he has the haunted expression of a condemned man. He will probably escape justice on earth but as a Christian he must expect to face a higher court. 




The Rise of Populism

The vote by the British people to leave the European Union was motivated by many things. It was a protest against austerity, a rejection of rule from London, a chance to kick the Establishment, and a fear of uncontrolled immigration. A potent mixture of populism and nationalism.

Ukip avoided prosecution by only campaigning against European immigration; a cowardly tactic pioneered by the Daily Mail. Their propaganda stirred 
up hatred against hard-working people but it will not stop immigration. If Poles and Lithuanians are not available we will simply import more Africans and Asians. 

Their backup position was sovereignty. They said that we would be independent outside of the EU. But our armed forces are still under Nato command, we import half of our food and fuel, and many of our industries are foreign owned. We are about to find out if we can go-it-alone. 


Britain is a union of four distinct nations held together by economic necessity and mutual advantage. A United Kingdom that succeeded because its member states were loyal to a central authority. Unfortunately separatism has now emerged. The Scottish Nationalist Party runs Scotland, Plaid Cymru sits of the Welsh Senate, and the government of Northern Ireland is shared between the Democratic Unionist Party and Sinn Fein. Ukip have won support throughout the country and European federalism has suffered a setback but it's early days yet and nobody knows what the future holds.


Apart from the obvious risks there will be many unexpected consequences of the referendum. For some time meetings of the London Forum have been stewarded by young Polish activists who may now be denied the right to live and work in this country. The far-right pretend to believe in European solidarity but their insular nationalist policies are spiteful and divisive. They should be ashamed of themselves. 


The Fluoride Debate

Most countries have stopped adding fluoride to their water supplies in order to prevent tooth decay. In the UK its use is decided by local authorities and only 10% of the population receives artificially fluoridated water. Fluoride occurs naturally in some areas and fluoride toothpaste is available for those wanting to protect their teeth.

Fluoride is seldom mentioned nowadays but it used to be a constant theme of right wing propaganda. The John Birch Society was convinced that it was being added to water supplies in order to drug the population and make them amenable to communist control. An American chemist called Charles Perkins wrote in 1954: “The real reason behind water fluoridation is not to benefit children’s teeth. If this were the real reason there are plenty of ways in which it could be done that are much easier, cheaper, and far more effective. The real purpose behind water fluoridation is to reduce the resistance of the masses to domination and control and loss of liberty.” This paranoid fantasy crossed the Atlantic and it was taken up by our own patriotic movements.


Experts for and against fluoridation were marshalled but the principle argument of the water purists was one of mass medication without consent. They considered the addition of fluoride to be a violation of human rights and warned that governments could add all sorts of toxic chemicals to the water supply if we let them. This ‘libertarian’ argument has been adopted by the Green Party.

It's not only anarchists who see the State as an enemy of the people. Various right wing groups accuse the government of polluting our minds with Marxist propaganda and our bodies with unwanted medication. Some of them refuse to watch television and only drink bottled water for fear of contamination. In America armed groups are preparing to defend themselves against the State and in Britain old men and women who took lots of drugs in their youth are sympathetic.

When I started writing this article I thought that the anti-fluoride lobby was over-reacting but while researching the subject I watched Dr Paul Connett’s excellent YouTube video “The Truth about Fluoride.” This presentation convinced me that fluoride is a dangerous chemical that should not be added to drinking water. But I doubt that it’s part of a diabolical conspiracy.



Five Questions Answered – Michael Walsh



Michael Walsh is the editor of Renegade Tribune - renegadetribune.com

I asked him to answer the five questions that I first asked in Nation Revisited in 2011. He referred me to his many books and articles for the answers. I have therefore used the following quotations.

Who are you?

Michael Walsh was born Michael McLaughlin in Liverpool at the end of WW2. He served in the Merchant Navy until the age of 24 and joined Colin Jordan’s British Movement in 1968. He led the movement from 1975 until 1983 when it was shut down by legal action. He served several prison sentences during this time for political offences. He is a writer, poet, broadcaster and political activist. (A synopsis of the introduction to The Rise and Fall of the Sunwheel).

What do you believe in?

“Humanity is now making its biggest change in 2,000 years. The past was built on piracy, enslavement and territorial gain through conflict. The future will be built on pragmatic peaceful co-existence. If it were otherwise then there simply is no future for mankind. The midwife to the New World is National Socialism. “(Superpowers Come and Go).

If you could direct government policy what would you do?

“When co-operating Europeans use their information channels to remind our folk that they are the majority and successfully turn the tables on race-renegades then their fury will be unleashed. Our German kin in 1933 gave us the beacon, which they passed to us by example. Follow the light of the beacon. Arriba Europa!”  (Better to Live One Day as a Lion).

What are you proud of and what do you regret?

“As a career option the former British Seaman is philosophical about life as a race-loving political activist. If you want a white knuckle ride and you’re big enough to face down the combined forces of conservatism and their race-hating Communist defenders, go for it.” (Rebels Don’t Sleep).

How would you like to be remembered?

“Compiling Heroes of the Reich has been for me a revelation. The history of European conflict is marked by a willingness to honour one’s fallen foe. Today there is an absence of nobility in the hearts and minds of victors. This then is the opportunity to salute the fallen foe. In doing so I hope to be something of a vanguard in the pursuit of justice and honour.” (Heroes of the Reich).

The views of guest writers to European Outlook and Nation Revisited are entirely their own, and so are those of websites listed as links. We support free speech as enshrined in the UN Declaration of Human Rights and the European Convention on Human Rights.


The Race Soul

The idea that races have a folk memory, or soul, is widely believed in nationalist circles. It seems to have originated with Jean Baptiste Lamark 1744-1829 with his book Heritability of Acquired Characteristics. He preceded Darwin with his theory that generations pass on information. This was taken up by Carl Jung 1875-1961 who suggested that fears and phobias are inherited in his book The Collective Unconscious. Alfred Rosenberg 1893-1946 enshrined the concept in Nazi doctrine with The Myth of the Twentieth Century. And the Scottish professor Raymond Bamford floated the idea in the pages of Combat in the sixties. Few of its readers would have understood Bamford’s esoteric discourse but the editor, John Bean, wrote: “I felt there was some sense in what he wrote, even if you had to dig deep to see what it was.”


There are two possible explanations for the Race Soul. It could be evolutionary, like the thick white coats of Polar bears that protects them from the cold and makes them invisible to their prey. Or it could a metaphysical thing – like the soul itself which cannot be located by physicians.

Scientists may doubt the existence of the soul but every culture and religion has recognised a life force; a spark or spirit that separates the living from the dead. In the Christian tradition Thomas Aquinas wrote that all creatures have a soul but only humans have an immortal soul.

The Russians are said to have a racial memory of invasion that has moulded their national identity. And it’s even possible that the European referendum was influenced by ancestry. London supported the EU but the east of England voted against it. Was this a repeat of Londinium's loyalty to the Empire and Boadicea's rebellion against it?

We acquired a tolerance for cow’s milk after thousands of years of dairy farming but most of our development was influenced by geography, climate and technology, and our traditions were passed down in folk tales and fairy stories. The settlers who repopulated the British Isles as the glaciers retreated at the end of the Ice Age were not driven by instinct or inspired by heroic literature. They were following herds of reindeer on which they depended for food. As always the simplest answer is probably the right one. If you hear the sound of galloping hooves think horses rather than unicorns.


Personal Statement




The European referendum brought out the worst in both camps. Those of us who wanted to remain in the EU relied on economic arguments and our opponents responded with crude slogans about immigration and sovereignty. We dismissed them as 'Little Englanders' and they called us 'traitors'. A gratuitous insult from reckless gamblers who have devalued the pound.

I have campaigned for genuine independence and against non-European immigration for more than fifty years. I resent being called a traitor by people who support parties committed to 'diversity, I will not be lectured to by petty nationalists who read the Daily Mail, and I am not impressed by so-called patriots who are endangering the integrity of the United Kingdom.

Those of us who love Britain and Europe are not traitors. We are 48% and you have not heard the last of us.


Europe for the Europeans

(I wrote this article for Action No 200 following the European referendum of June 1975. Immigration from Europe was insignificant in those days but the non-white population was growing. In 1945 they numbered in the low thousands; by 1970 they numbered 1.4 million, and in 1972 we took in 80,000 Asians expelled from Uganda by Idi Amin. The measures proposed 41 years ago would now be even harder to achieve but we still need to stop the Third World invasion).



The economic problems of divided Europe will be solved by political union. A self-contained economy will be outside the commodity speculation that has caused steep rises in world prices under the present system. Sweated imports from the East will be excluded and the massive bargaining power of 300 million European customers will ensure fair prices for such imports as might still be required.

But such a Europe will still be doomed to collapse and failure unless the growing problem of non-European immigration is tackled.

There are now millions of African, Asian and Caribbean migrants in Britain, France, Germany, Holland and other European countries. These people have been cruelly exploited as cheap labour without regard to their long-term welfare or that of native Europeans. Already the inevitable tensions of this multiracial situation have been expressed in violence and death.

Only the warped theoreticians of the race relations industry would deny that the assimilation of these immigrants is impossible. Britons and other Europeans who have been the victims of large-scale immigrant settlement know that this policy is socially destructive and bound to end in disaster.

We are told by apologetic politicians of the old parties that it is now too late to reverse the flood, that ‘there are too many here now’. This of course is nonsense. There are plenty of historical precedents for mass repatriation of whole populations, and in the past 30 years.

Thirteen million refugees from East Europe were taken in by West Germany after the last world war. More than half a million Asians have been exchanged by India, Pakistan and Bangladesh after their mutual conflict. Over a million ‘pieds noirs’ were repatriated to France after that country abandoned Algeria. Nearly one million Portuguese have been brought home from Africa, and as I write are arriving in Lisbon at the rate of two thousand a day.

Indeed an entirely new state has been created in this way: the State of Israel. Over three million Jews have been repatriated to that homeland, and this has been hailed as an historic achievement. Russia, which bans its Jews going to Israel, is universally condemned for ‘barbaric’ behaviour.  If it is not only possible but considered a very good thing that millions of Jews should go to Israel, why does not the same standard apply to repatriation to their homelands of Europe’s immigrants?

Clearly that is both possible and essential now that they are unwanted in a Europe facing unemployment and depression. Europe on a full productive economy will have both the technology and financial capacity to launch a great programme of humane repatriation, coupled with aid to the developing nations who would benefit from the return of their skilled workers.

If this is not done they will remain as an unwanted alien minority and we shall experience the same inter-racial strife that now threatens the United States.

Alexander Morana

Hello Bill, I would like to thank you for the insightful article in this month's blog.

The photos of mine are of a 16th century replica Spanish ship and a Viking ship, built in 2010.
Could the Brit-exit be the beginning of a process towards the 4th option - Eurasian block - from the Atlantic to the Urals and including Vladivostok and the China Sea?

Bill Baillie


Thanks Alex. I am not familiar with Alexander Dugin's Fourth Political Theory but the Europe of the future must include Britain and Russia. Our continent is dominated by America but changing patterns of world trade and demographics will change all that. It's our duty as Europeans to defend our culture and identity. The British people have voted to leave the EU but what does that prove? If we held a referendum amongst the lemmings gathered on a Swedish cliff they would all vote to jump. It's 1,540 years since the fall of the Roman Empire in the West. It will not make much difference if we have to wait a few years longer for its reinstatement.













Nation Revisited

Our sister blog is posted on http://nationrevisited.blogspot.co.uk