Returning the Land to the People and the People to the Land

In the UK, the hatred London regime treats every part of the four nations as if they were extensions of London.  The Ruling Class has its 'royal family' based in London; the Financial 'elite' have the London Stock Exchange and the City of London as their centre of operations; the UK government sits in London; the Security Services (MI5/MI6) operate from London.  London is the base of the Ruling Class in respects of politics, military, police, economics and all other aspects of control.

The impact of the London domination of the entire UK can be seen in the use of language, where the counties close to London are referred to as the Home Counties, then those further out from them are know by the pejorative term of 'the provinces' and the countries outside England are considered as colonies.  There is a saying that 'all life stops North of Watford' which sums up the Establishment view that London is the nation and that all else is just territory which belongs to the imperial hub and is populated by barbarians.

The UK is not England and England is not London.  To the Ruling Class, London is everything and the entire UK must be remodeled to imitate the Capital.  The Capitalists in charge of the country are Capitalists in the sense that they care not for humanity, only for material wealth and power, but also in the sense that they care not for any part of the nation other than the Capital city, and more specifically for its financial institutions.

Capitalism is inherently tied up with Urbanism.  A free Socialist society has to be one in which the People are Sovereign and in which there are no cities.  For England, the natural order of society is of small towns, villages and hamlets, with the Guilds organised in the towns to ensure that fair prices and wages are maintained throughout the country.  This radically differs from the London system because whereas the London regime is centralist, the towns act as local hubs, ensuring the continuation of the local culture and the protection of our natural diversity.  Cities are malignant tumours which infect the entire nation with their vile conformism and obsession with acquisition of material wealth.  Capitalism is a sickness, and like any disease, the solution is to treat the causes by isolating the centres of the infection, and treating the problem at the source.

SWPE believe that the restoration of the ancient pre-English Kingdoms as Sovereign Republics, is a vital measure to combat London rule and thus to end the power of the Ruling Class.   But, without an end to the city mentality, the restoration of authentic regions (in contrast to the artificial regions created by the London regime by the civil defence department in the 1930s) would be nothing other than a ceremonial change.  In order to break the grip of the Cosmopolitan Capitalists, we have to break up their centres of operation.

Socialism is the best possible system for the people as a whole.  City living is anti-natural and Socialism can have no part in it.  A Rural nation with everyone allocated housing and enough land to be self sufficient in food, is the foundation of a free society.  When people are free from the fear of hunger or of homelessness, then they are better able to contribute to the well being of the people as a whole.  All the cities must be broken up, with the vast majority of the land they occupy turned into agricultural land or to forest.  Towns must become places where people who have trades can live under the direction of the Guilds.  But they must not be allowed to grow into cities.  The allotment of one acre of land for every family in the towns would create a natural buffer to prevent the growth of urbanism.  Outside the towns the allocation of land could be higher to allow for the production of surplus food for times of natural hardship - providing a safety net to insure against natural catastrophes.

Returning ownership of the nation to the people, necessarily requires a reallocation of land.  Those who do not belong to the nation must be compensated generously by the purchasing of land in their home countries by the State to replace that that which they must return to the nation upon their departure.  In the name of good neighbourliness, even those who rent at the expense of the State would be granted economic aid to relocate..  The reduction in population would be most extreme in the cities, which would have the great advantage of leaving the cities largely empty of people and thus far easier to demolish and recreate as land for the people and for the benefit of the indigenous wildlife.

Cities are prisons.  They are centres of tyranny, or misery, of Ruling Class control.  The death of the City mentality will spell the rebirth of the nation.  SWPE is fully committed to fulfilling our battle cry:

Returning the land to the people and the people to the land.

A Perposial

We need a international conference to create a unified theory that determines if something is national socialist or not. This will create a unified consensus amongst different Representatives of the nations and open debate among the different stripes. We could also set different bodies of work as national socialist while creating a unified critique of the internationalists and perversions of national socialism. We could also set down the principles of national socialist theory. This will bar people who are not National Socialist from using the term and help create the foundation for a modern movement. The movement must remain flexible enough to fit differing social conditions but rigid enough to cut off perversions of the movement. Pressing issues would be: 

- International capitalism

- Imperialism

- Zionism and the Jewish Question 

- Hitlerism 

- The State 

- NazBol

- Fascism

- Scottish, Irish, and Welsh independence 

- Pure Race, anti-Semitism, and racism

- White Pride

- Feminism

- Nation People vs Nation State

- National Self-Determination and Cultral Self-Determination

Just to name a few things. 

Basics of Strasserism

The Factory Fellowship 

The Owner is to be paid solely through stock in order for them to be kept responsible to the factory.

The Workers are to be paid by stock and wages 

Part of the profits if the industry goes to the State.

Workers are paid according to their achievements in the industry

The Workers and owners are to come to an agreement on how the business is to be ran

If the Workers and the Owners can not come to an agreement the state must step in to settle it.

This does away with private ownership of the means of production and divides industry into the hands of the workers and leaders. 

Autarky:

The State is to have a monopoly on international trade

The move from the gold standard to a national currency

Focus solely on national issues 

Guilds

Handicraft enterprises, small shops, and also the liberal professions, will therefore be incorporated into guilds.

The State will require a tax from each guild

The guild is able to grant the title master to skilled members of the trade.

No one may start up a profession without this title 

The Guild can regulate the number of acolytes that each guildsman can take on

Federationism

A federation of European nations that maintain autonomy should be formed to create a unified Europe 

Vocational Estates are basically a form of worker's control over the state by giving each trade a house in a senate/parliamentary body. 

 Avoidance of mandatory drafting and militarism 

 The diversity of human beings

No nation is better than the other

Equal rights for all human beings are mandatory

Each nation has its own characteristics 

Each nation has different needs  

Immigration and national minorities:

Persons of different racial origin from the majority may be described as foreigners. 

Groups of persons of various racial stamps may be deemed to constitute national minorities.

Persons belonging to different stocks may be incorporated into the main body of the nation by assimilation.

Democracy: A thought about England

Before I speak this is just a brief thought so it won't be in depth. 

In Gaddafi's "Green Book" he dedicates a large part to the issue of Democracy. He ends with concluding that Democracy is best approached by creating a centralised body of councils being local, regional, and national in which in the local a face-to-face approach is taken and the rest a body of elected, but with drawable, officials controls that sphere. It is obvious how this approach would be taken up by US nationalistic Socialists since with very little modifications we have that very system. But the British Isle is Germanic and has its own organic approach to democracy. The Manifesto for the National Anarchists provides a solution for Liberal Democracy: 

      "In the past, the political process involved small groups of chieftains, warriors and holy men, each of whom would get together at regular intervals to discuss the needs and aspirations of their respective communities; particularly in relation to security and wellbeing. Politics has always been open to abuse, of course, but the Anglo-Saxon (Germanic) tradition of the Witenagemot - also known as the Witan - was one of the more decentralised examples of how our ancestors would exert a form of political authority that had been channelled up from the grassroots. Those involved felt a sense of duty and responsibility to their people, quite unlike the politicians of today with their noses firmly stuck in the trough." 

This coming from my own out look on the political world the British Isles can turn to this institution by having Representatives from the ceremonial counties of England that can be withdrawn. This position in my opinion should have qualifications and not be paid by the state. The Witenagemot elects the Leader of the nation and advices the leader in policy and law. This places the organic concept into the modern world through a form of democracy called Caesarean through which power is transferred directly from the people to an absolute ruler who is responsible to them and whose acts were confirmed by plebiscite. The Leader thus also maintains popular sovereignty through the presence of the the Witenagemot. This creates an organic Socialist political policy. 

A Socialist View of Sexuality

 

Sexuality has become an issue which has gained much attention.  Nationalists expend a lot of effort campaigning against homosexuality and specifically against gay marriage and legal rights for those who live together in stable relationships which can be viewed as comparable with heterosexuals.  This focus has led many Nationalist organisations to flounder when leading activists have turned out to be homosexuals.  In Socialist circles, the obsession with sexuality has taken the form of pushing for affirmative action to place homosexuals in prominent places in society.  SWPE takes a third position on the issue of sexuality.  In a nutshell, we neither seek to promote homosexuality, nor to condemn homosexuals.  Our position is that sexuality must be left to the individual, with the only condition being that the individual must be a consenting adult.

Anti-homosexuals fall into two camps (no pun intended).  Firstly there are those who have religious convictions that homosexuality is evil and forbidden by their God.  Then there are those who oppose homosexuality because it leads to a reduction in the reproduction of the racial gene pool.

The first camp is one which it is pointless to argue with.  We could argue that homosexuals exist throughout nature - who hasn't seen a male dog hump another male dog?  Arguing with people who have 'faith' that what their priests tell them is the absolute truth, can only succeed if the entire faith can be demolished.  As Socialists, we respect the right of people to hold their own views, so we would not seek to undermine people's faith in the supernatural.  In a free Socialist society, the oppression of others is a freedom we cannot indulge.  We do not wish to overthrow one despotism only to become despots ourselves, so with religious people - so long as they do not threaten the freedom of the people by calling for people to be murdered for having opinions or lifestyles which differ from their own - our position is to leave them to their own beliefs.

The second camp is one we can demolish quite readily.  If nature has divided people into those who breed and those who do not, then perhaps it is a form of natural selection which promotes some genes over others.  If this is so, then there is nothing unnatural about those who practice homosexuality.

The idea that homosexuals are weak is nonsense.  Look at the heroic soldiers of Sparta who were the most courageous soldiers of the time, and amongst the bravest of all time.  Did their homosexuality make them a threat to the nation as a whole?  No.  The soldiers of Sparta were brave men who served their people well.  Spartan men were required to marry.  Some practiced homosexuality, some did not.  Spartan women were equally noted for their courage, making the people of Sparta notable regardless of gender or sexuality.  All of us can learn from them.

In the broader political sense, homosexuality has been used as an excuse to persecute people for their political beliefs.  There is a dubious work written for reasons which serve a bigoted agenda.  The Pink Swastika uses the homosexuality of leading members of the NSDAP to justify attacking homosexuals in general and all who have views which can be described as Nationalist, Socialist or National Socialist.

The Pink Swastika book is glorified at http://gaynazis.com/ and reproduced in full at http://www.defendthefamily.com/pfrc/books/pinkswastika/html/the_pinkswastika_4th_edition_-_final.htm.  The hysterical agenda of the authors is not hard to see, but the book is not without merit as it does highlight the hypocrisy of modern activists who idolise the NSDAP era and propose the mass murder of people who happen to not be heterosexual.

Ernst Rohm was a homosexual.  He was also a Revolutionary Socialist.  His sexuality was use as an excuse by Hitler to destroy the Socialist Revolution and replace National Socialism with Imperial Capitalism.

Rohm was a genuine revolutionary.  He wanted to force revolutionary change through the army - replacing the Capitalist Wehrmacht with the Revolutionary Socialist SA.  The head of the NSDAP, Adolf Hitler, had Rohm murdered along with other one hundred Revolutionary Socialists in the infamous Night of the Long Knives of 1934.  The SA had over 2 million members and dwarfed the reactionary army.  Hitler's purge of the SA and the simultaneous murder of the great Revolutionary Socialist, Gregor Strasser, ended the Socialist NSDAP and replaced it with a party which served the Capitalist Ruling Class.  The excuse for murdering Rohm and the many others (most of whom were not homosexual) was sexuality.  A Socialist view of sexuality would not have allowed for homosexuals to be persecuted simply because they were not heterosexual.

Dr Paul Joseph Goebbels, who was himself a Revolutionary Socialist, spoke in the dying days of the Second World War of the murder of Ernst Rohm thus,

"I point out to the Führer at length that in 1934 we unfortunately failed to reform the Wehrmacht when we had an opportunity of doing so. What Röhm wanted was, of course, right in itself but in practice it could not be carried through by a homosexual and an anarchist. Had Roehm been an upright solid personality, in all probability some hundred generals rather than some hundred SA leaders would have been shot on 30 June. The whole course of events was profoundly tragic and today we are feeling its effects. In that year the time was ripe to revolutionise the Reichswehr. As things were the Führer was unable to seize the opportunity. It is questionable whether today we can ever make good what we missed doing at that time. I am very doubtful of it. Nevertheless the attempt must be made."

Had Ernst Rohm succeeded in merging the army into the SA and pushing the Socialist Revolution onwards, the Capitalist takeover of the NSDAP would have been thwarted and most likely, the Capitalist Hitler would have been replaced by the true Socialist Strasser.  Those who argue that Homosexuals cannot be anything but a negative influence, need to look at how the removal of men of honour on the grounds of sexuality wrecked the Socialist Revolution in Germany.

Sexuality must be left to the individual so long as the individual is a consenting adult

The persecution of homosexuals is an abhorence. So is the promotion of homosexuality.

The SWPE view of the sexuality of the individual is a very straight forward view.  We do not judge people by the sexual choices, so long as the choices do not hurt others (except if this is by consent!) - we don't care what people get up in their sexual relationships.  We welcome all good Socialists into our ranks and see sexuality as a non issue. 

Revolutionary Feminism

Liberal Feminism: Women begging men for rights while maintaining within the Capitalist system. These are typically Feminists that will be seen on the news and the most popular branch. It reduces women to just another cog. It is also the branch that "Radical" feminism comes from and the form that hates LGBTQP members and Islamic women.

Revolutionary Feminism: this branch empowers women to take up the gun for themselves and to organise others to fight the patriarchal system in capitalist society. It fights for women's rights, it fights for the victims of rape (female and male), the right for women to choose their own path in life. Most in this branch is Marxist and Anarchist but some are Nationalist and nationalists need a stronger presence in this as most Nationalists fall into reaction on the subject of feminism. This branch can become National Feminism and promote women's role in our culture's history. In the US women fought in the Revolutionary and Civil wars and were even spies. In ancient Europe our Ancestors had Warrior goddesses and our Women can pull from that to carve her place in out society. In Judaism they have Judith, Ruth, and much more as examples of strong women of virtue. Nationalists can not fall into the trap of Liberal Reaction and support the oppression of women we must form a Revolutionary feminism and empower our women to liberation. In the words of Mao the Chinese Marxist and Patriot,"Women hold up half of the sky." 

Long Live the National Liberation! 

LGBTQP Rights

(Note: Since I am American the statistics used is American not British)

I don't have a stance about Homosexual marriage as to me love and marriage doesn't always correlate. But I focus myself more on the main civil-rights issues.

The Williams Institute finds that gay and bisexual men earn 10 percent to 32 percent less than similarly qualified heterosexual men, in a meta-analysis of 12 studies examining earnings and sexual orientation in the United States. This is true even when controlling for education, race, occupation, and years of work experience. 

Hate crimes committed against gays, lesbians, bisexuals, and/or transgendered individuals constitute the third-highest category of hate crimes reported to the FBI -- 14% of all hate crimes reported nationally, according to the Human Rights Campaign. And while violent crime rates have been declining generally, the National Coalition of Anti-Violence Programs reports that the number of actual or suspected anti-gay murders is on the rise: from 14 in 1997 to 33 in 1998 and 28 in 1999.

The National Gay and Lesbian Task Force Policy Institute, has found after 21 different local surveys between 1980 and 1991, found widespread discrimination across the country against gay men and lesbians. According to the report, as many as 44 percent of respondents in some cities reported employment discrimination as a result of their sexual orientation. Thirty-two percent reported discrimination in renting a housing unit. The study also said that gay men and lesbians reported discrimination in public restaurants and in receiving health services, obtaining insurance and in education. 

These are more important issues plaguing the LG community than the liberal focus on marriage and this isn't even looking at the pay gap for trans women or issues concerning pansexuals just homosexuality. 

We also have the co-point of the LGBTQP pride by the Liberal class and our activists focus on marriage and ignoring the more important aspects of our struggle. 

http://www.civilrights.org/resources/civilrights101/sexualorientation.html

http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/lgbt/news/2012/04/16/11494/the-gay-and-transgender-wage-gap/

National Zionism and Bundism - Not Contradictory but Complimentary: A reply

The Jewish Bundist Movement was originally formed in 1897 it formed around the same year of the World Zionist Congress who according to the original Bund was aiding in the spread of anti-Semitic propaganda. This has caused a huge split between Zionism, who is seen as an enemy to the Jewish world, and the Bundists, who was fighting for Jewish culture. This leads me to my reply to this post on our blog

http://socialistworkerspartyengland.blogspot.com/2014/10/national-zionism-and-bundism-not.html     

At first glance I can see how the SWPE's NatZionism could be complementary since in Jewish tradition they can't return to Palestine till the coming of the Messiah. They can employ Bundism for the time being and during the Messianic age employ NatZionism. But the issue comes to the very nature of Zionism itself which from the very birth has always been antagonistic to the Jewish religion itself while Bundism was not and fostered unity amongst Judaism in general. This antagonism will exist even with the NatZionist theory as long as they reject the Yiddish language, doikayat, and the Jewish culture as the heart of the Jewish people there can be no co-existence between the Bund and any form of Zionism. 

I don't really see it as a middle way between assimilation and Zionism and it sure isn't anything like multiculturalism. If anything it is a fourth-way which allows Jews to exist within society and contribute. The early Jewish Labour Bund wanted to create their own society that didn't effect the non-Jewish society. They wanted to segregate Jews from the rest of society in my opinion this is more desirable than effecting the autonomy of a whole civilisation of people as Zionism has done. It will on,y require the creation of Autonomist Jewish Communes like the early Zionist Kibbutzim. 

Here are some links so that the readers can learn more about the Bundist movement: 

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bundism

http://www.bundism.net

http://bundist-movement.org

National Zionism and Bundism - Not Contradictory but Complimentary

SWPE believes that every people has a right to live according to their own traditions, culture and ethnic predisposition.  This applies to the Jewish people as much as to every other.  The 'Jewish Question' is one which has plagued humanity for such a long time that it has become an obsession for Jews and non-Jews alike.

SWPE does not support the concept of Assimilation for any people into any other.  We oppose 'multi-culturalism' because we understand that it is the long-term objective of the global Ruling Class to destroy all vestiges of culture, sovereignty, nationhood and identity, which differentiate the peoples of the world.  We fully support global diversity and oppose the liberal Capitalist drive to create a world of slaves whose purpose is solely to create wealth for the self-appointed Masters.

The Jewish role in global Capitalism, especially Banking, has led many people to accuse the Jewish people as a whole of having an agenda to enslave non-Jews.  We do not accept this over-simple generalisation of the Jewish nation.  There are certainly Jewish elements in the Ruling Financial Oligarchy but there are also many non-Jews who exploit Jews and non-Jews in equal measure.  The religious Jews who believe in a Master Race ideology give credence to anti-Jewish propagandists, but the extent of influence of the supremacists in general Jewry is grossly exaggerated by many 'anti-Semites.'

SWPE support the concept of a Jewish State.  This is why we have a part of our ideology which we have chosen to call National Zionism.  It is Zionist insofar as it supports the right of the Jewish people to live amongst their own kind.  It is National Zionist because it opposes all imperialist tendencies, whether they are concerned with the financial exploitation of others, or as is the case with Israel and Palestine, with the theft of land which belongs to other people.

Historical support for Zionism from within Socialist circles include the following, which we gratefully quote from the site http://research.calvin.edu/german-propaganda-archive/gercke.htm (full written permission was obtained from the author Randall Bytwerk and can be seen on request):

Solving the Jewish Question 

by Dr. Achim Gercke

All proposals that include a permanent presence, a permanent regulation of the Jews in Germany, do not solve the Jewish Question, for they do not eliminate the Jews from Germany (denn sie lösen die Juden nicht von Deutschland). And that is what we want to do. If the Jews are able to exploit their host peoples forever, they will remain a constant source of the open, destructive flame of Bolshevism, making it easy to repeatedly kindle it again, not to mention the political uncertainties resulting from disunity within the people and the danger to racial unity. Let us swear off such thinking forever, whether it results from poor thinking or evil intentions. To summarize, the state can and must focus on systematical elimination, on emigration.

If we destroy any organizational cooperation of the Jews and expel the dangerous, subversive Jewish agitators who show any signs of conspiratorial activities, the Jews will still have the synagogue, the rabbi, to shield them. If we support Zionist plans and attempt an international solution by establishing a homeland for the Jews, we will be able to solve the Jewish Question not only in Germany, but in Europe and the entire world. The entire world has an interest in such a solution, on eliminating this source of disorder, which constantly proceeds from Bolshevism. We must establish that clearly.

Perhaps the Jews will be able to become a nation, a people. That would require that Jewish workers, craftsmen, and settlers would develop from the Jewish population. If we regulate this plan, they we will create new foundations for such a settlement. Scattering the Jews to the four winds does not solve the Jewish Question, but rather makes it worse. A systematic program of settlement, therefore, is the best solution.

Plans and programs must have a goal pointing to the future. They may not be focused only on a temporarily unpleasant situation. A better future demands the systematic solution of the Jewish Question, not the organization of the Jews.

We must build our state without the Jews. They can be only stateless foreigners among us, with no legal permanent standing. Only so will Ahasver [the legendary wandering Jew] be forced to take up his walking stick again, and then turn it into axes and spades.

The End of Jewish Migration

by Dr. Johann von Leers

The only imaginable, positive solution that will finally resolve the Jewish problem in Europe and at the same time provide the real possibility of becoming a people, of becoming rooted to land, and even perhaps allowing its less valuable elements to be influenced by the more valuable elements, is a healthy region outside Europe. The Dutchman von Dinghene, in his book Vollzionismus, has proposed the island of Madagascar, but one could also imagine certain other suitable African or South American regions. On the one hand, such a settlement area must give the Jewish people a space where they can work productively, within the framework of providing space for peoples who now lack space. On the other hand, in those countries where the Jews are being separated from the Gentile population, the Jews will lose a large number of jobs. They must today be trained in work groups, receiving education in practical skills and agriculture so that they will be prepared to settle in this area. Those major Western European colonial powers, who are always worked up about the Jewish Question and its effects in Eastern and Central Europe, without however really seeing the connections, would perform a work not only of humanity, but also statesmanlike wisdom that would bring peace to the world and the solution of one of its most serious problems were they to make such a settlement area available. That would not only relieve Europe of the Jewish problem, but also enable Jewry to become a people.

Of course, there is a danger that such a Jewish settlement area would become a world-famous El Dorado of criminality, given the deep moral decay of a large part of Jewry. There will have to be a force to provide just and honest supervision. This would also be possible, and details could be worked out. The danger may not hinder a broad solution of the Jewish Question by resettling Jewry to an appropriate settlement area outside of Europe. We propose this to the world: Give Ahasver a homeland, as far as possible from us, but sufficient and attractive. If he makes of it a garden he may keep it, and will be protected. If, however, he makes of it a den of thieves, then one will keep him there. However, we must attempt a decent solution to this question. Those Jews who for centuries have recognized the battle of the Jewish Question are called to contribute to a real solution, those Jews who recognize that the dream of Jewish world domination has failed, and who are therefore ready to become a people among peoples. Those peoples among whom the question burns the hottest because of the Jewish masses among them area also called, particularly the major Western European colonial powers with vast possessions, for it cannot be permitted that a decent solution be prevented by cheap humanitarian slogans. With a single blow the Jewish question, which has always surfaced, can be resolved.

The above historical justifications of Zionism are arguments we applaud and share.  However, there is another alternative to Assimilation which we need to give our attention to.  This alternative is Bundism.  At first glance, Bundism seems to be a half-way house between Assimilation and Zionism, and therefore a step back towards multi-culturalism.  This, it is not.  SWPE believes that Bundism offers an immediate solution to our woes, whereas National Zionism offers a long-term and final solution to the woes of Jews and non-Jews.  A new writer for SWPE will highlight this important area of discussion in depth.  It is no exaggeration to state that a synthesis of National Zionism and Bundism may be the long sought after peaceful and just solution to the Jewish Question.