The passing scene

I've no doubt that, since you're reading this, you, like me, will probably be watching Panorama on BBC 1, next Monday, 10 October, at 8.30 pm.

Mr Griffin and his henchmen are hoping that, especially if you're a member of the British National Party, you don't watch the programme.  He'd like BNP members to stick their fingers in their ears, shut their eyes and chant "La, la, la, not listening, la, la, la".  Well, ignorance is bliss, so they say.

There can be no doubt that the BBC, as an institution, is, like the rest of the Establishment, inimical to the BNP.  That has been proved on many occasions.  Does that mean that we, as nationalists, should have nothing to do with the BBC, or indeed the rest of the, similarly hostile, 'mainstream' media?  Of course it doesn't.  Why, Mr Griffin chose to appear on the BBC Question Time programme, did he not?

For a politician to complain about media hostility is very much like a ship's captain complaining about the weather.  Storms and squalls go with the territory and should be faced philosophically.  The state of the mass media is always a reflection of the state of the society, the audience, it serves. 

Our aim as a political party is to change society radically for the better.  As we gradually achieve that aim, the media too, as a part of society, will change.  But to expect fairness from the media of an unfair society is simply naive.  In any case the BBC treats the BNP no less fairly than the BNP treats its own members, employees, donors and creditors.  The BBC abides by its charter in the same way that our chairman abides by the BNP's constitution: by paying lip service to the letter while flouting the spirit.  People who live in glass houses may indeed choose to throw stones.  Whether it is wise for them to do so, however, is another matter entirely.

It has been said that our enemies are closer to the truth in their estimation of us than we are ourselves.  As John Tyndall once said: they, the media, do not believe their own propaganda about the supposed benefits of a multiracial society.  They too live in it so this fact need not surprise us too much.  They live the lie of "celebrating diversity", like the rest of the Establishment, because their careers, their power, privilege and prestige, depend upon them toeing the line, just as that of the Nomenklatura depended upon their toeing the Communist Party line, in the last years of the Soviet Union.

If our enemies criticize us for our political beliefs and are willing to engage in debate with us, we should welcome such criticism.  Let truth and falsehood grapple, as Milton said.  Truth will prevail, as it always does in the end.

Of course, our enemies, who are not fools, know this too.  That is why they usually seek ways to avoid debating the issues with us, preferring instead to focus on personalities and their baggage, their past indiscretions, faults and failings, as they did with Mr Griffin on Question Time in 2009.

That is why we, as a party, need not only to be whiter than white, but also to be seen to be so.  It can be no defence for us, nor should it be, that those who accuse our party of corruption and wrongdoing are themselves guilty of corruption and wrongdoing.  That may make them hypocrites, it cannot exonerate us.

Our message to the British people should be one of reformation and renewal.  The BNP is either a moral crusade for a new and better society and way of life, or it is a cranky cult of personality: it cannot be both. 

It is far more damaging and demoralizing for the leadership of a radical party such as ours to be found lacking in ethics than it is for the leadership of the failed parties of the Establishment.  For their leaders to be exposed as greedy, dishonest, lying charlatans comes as no great surprise to anyone, and merely confirms electors in their low opinion of politicians in general as "in it for what they can get out of it".

We are, or should be, different.  Certainly, we used to be.  I believe, no, I know, we can be again.