Let us assume from the outset that we all wish for much better government of our country before its ongoing demise becomes irreversible.  The question then arises as to how this can be accomplished, given the present state of our political institutions and all those agencies which influence public and private attitudes and behaviour and the exercise of educated choice.   We are led to believe - especially by those in office - that the ‘electoral process’ is the only way to change the direction and priorities of the government.  Elections, they claim, allow us to choose between different political factions and thereby put those people into office most likely to represent our best interests.  This, they insist, is what makes Britain a ‘democratic’ country and so superior to all the autocracies and ‘banana republics’ of this world...   It is this naïve perception which holds the British people in thrall to what is in fact a profoundly undemocratic and untrustworthy ‘Establishment’ pursuing an agenda that long since parted company with the national interest.
The ‘democratic choice’ is in fact spurious, since there is no discernible difference between the leading contenders for office on those issues absolutely central to the survival of our race and nation.  In particular, the main contenders for office show no sign of commitment to a self-governing Britain and exclusive occupation of our ancestral homeland.   Instead they seek to distract and beguile the voting public with opaque and dishonest promises of  less taxation and bureaucracy , improved prosperity and security, better social services, etc,etc. , none of which are ever going to be achievable in a multi-racial Britain governed by the European Union.

So our ‘democracy’ is actually a compound of the following features:

·    Ostensibly opposing political factions which are at bottom
a renegade coalition with no commitment to the preservation of
our race and nation.
·    An ‘Establishment’ and legalistic network designed to maintain the status quo, preclude real democratic choice and curtail civil liberties.
·    A mass media complex for the most part supportive of the status quo and hostile to any political movement likely to curtail its own power and influence.
·    A few nationalistic , that is to say patriotic movements with insufficient resources and popular support to make a significant impact upon the governance of Britain within the foreseeable future, and denied proper representation in the mass media.. 
·    A rapidly increasing immigrant population which is already submerging the patriotic votes in many constituencies.
·   Impending EU legislation designed to curtail and even criminalise opposition to multiracialism and nationalistic electioneering.
·    A huge expansion of the public sector, giving its employees a vested interest in preserving the status quo.

Thus , with the best will in the world, one must advise the most fervent patriots that so long as all their efforts are confined to a fraudulent electoral process there is no realistic likelihood of liberating Britain from a fundamentally traitorous Establishment.  All credit to those few stalwarts who manage to win through at local elections ;  but given it will take at least two or three hundred nationalist seats in Parliament to make any substantial impact on government policies and priorities, the prospects of nationalist leverage at Westminster are at best remote. .  
Meanwhile, parties like the BNP will afford little more than a rather frail platform for patriotic protest and grievances, easily infiltrated, sidelined and contained by officialdom and the media.   In short, therefore, you can abandon all hope of national salvation via the electoral process.  

In this political impasse we are therefore reminded of the von Clausewitz dictum that ‘war is the continuation of politics by other means’ Thus, deprived of the electoral means we are driven into a state of war with the present regime.   Precisely how that war is to be fought should be exercising more and more genuine patriots these days.  They should be devising strategies and tactics calculated to generate massive resistance to perfidious legislation and subvert all the machinations of a fundamentally treacherous government.   While exploiting elections to maintain public awareness of the patriotic presence, they should not delude themselves and potential recruits that this is the only mode of political action available.  That would be a betrayal and playing the enemy’s game according to his rules.
One way or another we have to make Britain ungovernable by a traitorous Establishment.  The traitors may have contrived to make themselves the lawmakers, but getting their perfidious laws implemented is quite another matter when patriots become sufficiently numerous, engaged, resourceful and organised to frustrate them.
Needless to say this rallying call to British patriots will provoke the usual ‘anti-fascist’ denunciations in the mass media; and officialdom will certainly do everything it can by way of legalistic entrapment and victimisation to intimidate and harass the patriotic activists.   Scargill-type confrontations with officialdom are obviously ill-advised and counter-productive.   It won’t be the visible part of the patriotic ‘iceberg’ (i.e. electioneering) which sinks this traitorous regime, but the massive impact of covert patriotism.    Indeed, the sheer momentum of the regime will only increase the devastation it suffers when encountering the mostly invisible resistance of mobilised patriots.   While enough passive resistance alone could be enough to frustrate a deeply unpopular legislature, there also needs to be legal harassment of prominent traitors in all divisions and at all levels of our society.   Short of criminal violence to persons and property such individuals should be incapacitated as agents of a traitorous regime...  The overall aim is to cause the maximum damage to the regime without exposing oneself to official persecution...   In all of this community support is of paramount importance, so activists must conduct their resistance campaign without seriously inconveniencing or putting at risk the local community.  More than this, the tactics must be seen to protect and support the most vulnerable and needy in the local populace.    There should in other words be a ‘patriotic presence’ in every locality, to which people can turn when neglected, or when persecuted by officialdom, aliens or criminal elements.  The knowledge that competent support can be called up at short notice raises public morale and engenders willing cooperation with the nationalist movement.  It will also discourage those officious agents of the regime otherwise apt to harass local people in one way or another.  The example and morale of these patriot-dominated areas will be infectious, inspiring similar action in other neighbourhoods and thereby, among other things, aiding the election of local nationalists and attracting favourable publicity.   Like the loyalist stalwarts in Ulster we should be making our local communities unassailable by aliens, infiltrators and renegade officials    .
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        
Let us hope there are still enough genuine patriots able and willing to be worthy of those illustrious ancestors who rallied to the nation’s defence at critical junctures in our history.

F Kimbal Johnson
June 2008

BPP Comment: Many thanks to Frank for this thought provoking article. Some of the points raised are not BPP official policy but we hope this article will provoke studied and serious debate about the differing strategies which will ensure power for White Nationalism.