(This article first appeared in the Common Cause Report of June 1982. Many things have changed in the past 34 years but the National Union of Teachers and the BBC are still the same).
The disturbance which took place during the eve-of-conference disco dance of the National Union of Teachers at Scarborough drew little publicity and will certainly not go down in the annals of this 250,000 strong union. Yet it is of more than passing significance. The incident occurred when the dance was drawing to its close. Instead of the dreamy strains of the last waltz, the dancers were treated to a rousing patriotic march, whereupon a group of young teachers stormed up to the disc jockey and demanded that he cut off the offending tune. He refused. The march continued amid uproar. For a great many people it will be unnecessary to mention that the controversial piece of music was none other than Sir Edward Elgar’s Pomp and Circumstance March in D – Land of Hope and Glory. This piece of music, dating from the early years of the century, seems to have an exceptional capacity for inducing choler in holders of progressive views. Only recently a clergyman was writing to The Guardian to propose that it should be removed from the programme of the last night of the Albert Hall Proms. In the case of the teachers, however, the significant point is not the fact that a few be-jeaned left-wingers seemed about to start a fight but rather in the comments made by the union’s official spokesman. “It was totally tactless to spoil everything by playing Land of Hope and Glory”, he said. Then he added: “Teachers couldn’t have been more put out if he’d rounded off with God Save the Queen.” It must surely be accounted some sort of milestone when the official spokesman for 250,000 school teachers considers it would be offensive to play the national anthem. Quite plainly, though John Booth was described as public affairs spokesman for the National Union of Teachers, he was not expressing the views of the membership or any substantial part of it. (Mr John Booth has stated that he was not personally involved in the incident and would not find the playing of God Save the Queen offensive).
There are a large number of organisations representing teachers – from associations for headmasters, headmistresses and schoolmasters, to teachers in commerce, domestic science and polytechnics – but the National Union of Teachers is by far the biggest and most influential. It has long been subject to penetration by Communists, Trotskyists and others of the far left. The purpose is straightforward. Having established themselves in official positions, no matter how minor, they then reach out to take their places in pressure groups – the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament, the Anti-Apartheid Movement and the like – where presenting themselves as representing the teaching profession rather than as members of the Socialist Workers’ Party, the Militant Tendency and the like, they propound arguments and pursue ends which have nothing to do with teaching. But there is another aspect, often overlooked. Teachers enjoy a great deal of independence in carrying out their classroom tasks and the opportunities for free indoctrination are not insignificant. Newspapers have from time to time reported cases of children being encouraged to introduce bias into essays on such subjects as the police, race relations and unemployment. If such professional misconduct leads to protests by parents, the existence of an active left wing in positions of power in the union serves to protect the offending teacher. The attitudes of left-wing-dominated education authorities – like the Inner London Education Authority – serve to compound the problem. A booklet sponsored by the ILEA for use in schools with black pupils contains these lines, in which “babylon” is the code word for police.
Babylon’s patrolling the streetAlways spitting at a nigger’s feet...
The day will come when we’ll be strong
To fight the babylon back
Rise up you niggers . . . . .
Much of what has been said about schools can be fairly applied to centres of education, the polytechnics especially. Most students are doubtless little affected by the experience; some may even react against it; but nobody can complete his education without being influenced in some way. What does seem to happen in many instances is that young people enter adult life with half-understood notions that Marxism is somehow an answer to “capitalist exploitation”. Since the process of infiltrating the teaching profession has been going on for many years, it is hardly surprising that the effects have come to be felt in places far removed from the classroom, in the Press, radio and television, in the civil service, local government, the health service. It helps to explain why television drama is dominated by plays, written by Marxists, which attack the liberal democratic state. Challenged about this, BBC’s Head of Plays, answered: “Where are plays of equal power, passion and conviction which express another point of view?” It is a question that cannot be answered by an outsider without access to the BBC’s files: but it may be noted that “power, passion and conviction” is open to a variety of interpretations, as the response to the public performance of simulated homosexual rape on the stage of the National Theatre in “Romans in Britain” demonstrated. Richard Clutterbuck, who teaches international politics at Exeter University, says in his book The Media and Political Violence: “Some authors and producers avowedly use their access to the media in order to make way for political change and depart from dramatic truth, i.e. present false propaganda, with this intent. The BBC should be less naive than it sometimes is in making available prime television time for dishonest propaganda in the guise of drama documentaries.”
The crucial point here is the naivety of the BBC. How can it come about that a national institution, established by royal charter, and enjoined to avoid bias and partisanship, allows itself to be used for subversive ends? The BBC itself cannot be naive; it is those employed by it, who accept responsibility on its behalf, who are entrusted with decision making powers – it is they who are naive. They, like others in other branches of the media, have absorbed the woolly, progressive sub-Marxist notions of their generation. They wish to be thought tolerant and liberal minded. They are afraid of being accused of censorship and suppression. They fail to perceive that those who level such accusations are not, like themselves, well-meaning, but rather are concerned, as Richard Clutterbuck says, with changing society. Such people would never gain popular support if they appeared in their true colours. They must cloak their purposes and exploit the freedom of the liberal society in order to seek to destroy it. The problem, then, is one of innocence in the face of conspiracy. It is not a new problem. It is a problem that must be solved anew by each generation. It has its roots in the cataclysmic events which took place at the beginning of the century.
It is now almost impossible, to share the feelings and illusions of those who lived through the year of Revolution, 1917, which began with the fall of the Czar, moved on to the formation of a moderate democratically based provisional government and reached a climax with the Bolshevik takeover toward the close of the year. Trotsky, in his History of the Russian Revolution, argues that it was a time when popular will became the decisive factor in events: “At those crucial moments when the old order becomes no longer endurable to the masses, they break over the barriers excluding them from the political arena, sweep aside their traditional representatives, and create by their own interference the initial groundwork for a new regime. . . The history of a revolution is for us first of all a history of the forcible entrance of the masses into the realm of ruleship over their own destiny.”
If Trotsky really believed this romanticised picture of the masses then it is not at all surprising that he was outmanoeuvred by the cunning, practical Stalin in the power struggle that followed the death of Lenin.
Lenin himself was more realistic. He held the masses in contempt. The skill of the revolutionary, he wrote in 1920, “lies in correctly gauging the conditions and the moment when the vanguard of the proletariat can successfully seize power. . .”
The vanguard of the proletariat is of course the Communist party, elite, self –appointed to act on behalf of the masses. In preparation for that moment when power can be seized, the party should resort to “stratagems, artifices, illegal methods, evasions and subterfuges. . . “
There has recently been an attempt in the American movie Reds to recapture something of the mood and spirit of 1917. The film makes use of the reminiscences of contemporaries still surviving and these are joined to a biographical account of John Reed, the young American journalist who wrote the story of the Bolshevik coup in Ten Days That Shook The World. The film trivialises events and offers few insights. Reed’s book, for all its shortcomings, helps us to get closer to events. The son of a United States Marshal who – in Hollywood movie fashion – rode out to arrest the bad guys, Reed viewed the events of 1917 as a simple struggle between the good guys and the bad guys. But he wrote before the corruption of partisan self-censorship had set in and he not only tells us what the Bolsheviks said and did but also what the others said and did. There were many who perceived in Lenin and the Bolsheviks a threat to Russia’s fledgling liberties. But while they were dimly aware that something was going on, they failed fatally, to dispel the cloud of rhetoric behind which the Bolsheviks advanced their plans to seize power. It was a time when the worst that could be imagined was a return to life under the ramshackle tyranny of a Czar. When it was too late a delegate stood up in the Petrograd Soviet and cried: “At this moment . . . the question of power is being settled by a military plot organised by one of the revolutionary parties. . . “And then reaching for the flatulent call to action proclaimed throughout the ages by every innocent about to be crushed, he cried out: “The first question must be a peaceful settlement of the crisis.”
The tactics of deceit and calumny advocated by Lenin and for long the preserve of the orthodox Communist party in Britain and now commonplace in all the groups of the far left. Moderate and responsible leaders in the trade union movement and political parties must be vilified and the rank-and-file confidence in them undermined. Any attempt to fight back must be received with strident complaints about censorship and oppression. Any organisation must be joined solely in order to use it or destroy it. And of course in no circumstances must ones’ country be defended. The moment when the country is under threat is the time to go over to revolutionary defeatism. No wonder the militant teachers took offence at the playing of the Pomp and Circumstance March, for the first line echoes the sentiment of John Bright the radical MP who said that Britain gave the idea of Parliamentary democracy to the world: Land of Hope and Glory, Mother of the free,
What the Papers Say – A Review of the Patriotic Press
European Socialist Action
Editor Robert Edwards - www.europeanaction.com – Issue 57, Autumn 2015
Bring the genuine refugees into Europe and look after them until such a time that Syria is saved and the secular state of al-Assad is restored by its allies, Russia and Iran.
ISIS/Daesh is being pummelled by Russian and Syrian air forces. The United States does not like this. Why? American attempts at targeting ISIS/Daesh have done nothing. Empty warehouses were attacked by US aircraft after the terrorist occupants were warned. Large caches of valuable arms intended for Kurdish freedom fighters overshot their targets and ended up in the hands of ISIS/Daesh. US drones murder civilians, often complete wedding parties. Recently a hospital in Afghanistan was almost destroyed by US planes even while the occupants were calling for the Americans to stop.
It is not al-Assad who is the ‘butcher’. It is the Americans and their allies. And someone claimed my anti-Americanism is “out of date”. Far from it chum.
The Friends of Mosley – www.oswaldmosley.com – Issue 69, November 2015
If there is one element of our society that needs reinforcing it is the Probation and Allied Support Services.
In 2011 we saw 3914 persons charged or cautioned following the riots in and around our capital city and major centres. With grandiose talk of a rehabilitation revolution the vital anger management and associated remedies have not taken hold. No less than 1593 people directly connected with the previous turmoil have reoffended. Murder, rape, GBH, burglary are all back on the radar.
This at least underlines the stark fact that some of them were career criminals and not just low life opportunists.
The British Views-Letter – www.candour.org.uk – Issue 862 December 2015
November 11 2015, Remembrance Day, was also the 50th Anniversary of the defiant blast that was the Unilateral Declaration of Independence (UDI) by the white people of Rhodesia.
Forgotten by the cretinous masses of today Rhodesia was the White Man’s Alamo in Africa. A call to duty that some answered with incredible courage, but too few. The white people of Rhodesia were just too old fashioned to be of interest to the ‘cool’ generation of the ‘happening’ 60s.
In the United States of America a similar scenario was unfolding with even more aggressive Zionist pressure. The Confederate States who a century before came under fratricidal assault as a result of the efforts of our eternal enemies, were once again assaulted by carpetbaggers and scallywags. Brave, so brave, Rhodesia resisted, as did the Southern states and their supporters.
Neither could withstand the pressure of the Traditional Enemy with the power of their purse and their useful political stooges to command. In the case of Rhodesia this included socialist Prime Minister Harold Wilson and Conservative Prime Minister and fellow betrayer Margaret Thatcher. (Candour, issue 862, December 2015)
The League of St George – www.leaguestgeorge.com – Issue 105, Winter 2015
The Swiss-based Anne Frank Fund, which controls the copyright of the ‘holocaust memoir’ The Diary of Anne Frank has admitted the book was largely written by her father, Otto Frank, after her death in February 1945.
The admission comes as the copyright period of 70 years comes to an end this year 2015, seventy years after Anne frank died from typhus. By admitting that Otto Frank co-authored the bestselling book, the fund hopes to extend their control of the copyright (and the lucrative royalties it generates) until 2050, seventy years after Otto Frank’s death in 1980.
Editor Bernard Franklyn – www.theflameuk.com – Issue 33, 2016)
Labour, Liberal and Conservative politicians, govern by deceit, they give unconvincing reasons why they should do something, but ensure that the public doesn’t hear the many sound reasons why they shouldn’t. Nationalists have been trying to prove this to the public for nearly a hundred years. The establishment, thought-police won’t tolerate free-thinkers. Those who go along with the government-organised mass murder through illegal wars are applauded. Throughout history every nation has fought to defend its borders. This is essential, as well as being common sense. But for the past sixty years, any Europeans that have wanted to defend their country against alien invasions have been labelled dangerous extremists. In our once sensible and patriotic country, such treacherous government nonsense would have been met with a forceful opposition. (Muslims are not our enemy, although many are taking advantage of conditions that have been created by Zionist politicians.)
Europeans must take back control of Europe. Every White patriot who is determined, honest and articulate should start broadcasting this message, with the intent of building up a political group that can depose a politician from one of the main parties. We cannot allow ourselves to be ruled by our enemies any longer. Spread the truth and it will set us free! We now believe that we can win.
Heritage and Destiny
Editor Mark Cotterill – www.heritageanddestiny.com – Issue 70, February 2016
This is hardly the first time we have seen the phenomenon of a phoney White saviour. The average person does not want to take risks or get their hands dirty. They want to believe that the racial struggle can be won by someone else, while they sit back and watch it on television.
1968 & 1972: George Corley Wallace was the great White hope.1980: Ronald Wilson Reagan was going to save White America.
1992: H Ross Perot: “Secretly he is one of is, don’t you know”.
1996 & 2000: Patrick J Buchanan: “The Jews know that he is on to them, and think that he is the next Hitler!”
But Wallace turned out to be just another toothless political huckster; Reagan gave amnesty to 10 million illegal aliens and enshrined the Holocaust as the national religion; Perot turned out to be full of hot air; Buchanan named a mentally-challenged Negro woman as his vice presidential running mate and then publically purged all the White Nationalists from his campaign.
Then along came wacky Ron Paul: some White people hoped that he and his goofball libertarian theories would be the ultimate salvation of the White race. And so now it’s Donald Trump. No doubt in the 2020 election there will be another political gas-bag who will be touted as the great White hope.
Reality check: There is no quick and painless remedy to the existential crisis that confronts us as a Race. Certainly, supporting any of the political contenders who are an integral part and parcel of the Old Order is not the way forward.
In the end, White people will have to collectively embrace National Socialism – and nothing else – or they will become extinct as the dodo bird and the dinosaur. White revolution is the only solution, not voting for a Jewish-endorsed Candidate A or a Jewish-endorsed Candidate B.
National Socialism – Povl H Riis Knudsen
National Socialism: A Left Wing Movement (1984) and National Socialism: The Biological World View (1987), are now published as a joint volume.
Professor Povl H Riis-Knudsen was born in Denmark in 1950. He helped to revive National Socialism in Denmark and throughout the world but was expelled from the Danish National Socialist Movement for marrying a Palestinian woman, who he describes as a white Arabian. His approach to National Socialism is uncompromising. He dismisses Francis Parker Yockey’s views on race, the inclusive message of the Christian religion, and existing National Socialist groups.
National Socialism – The Biological World View argues that National Socialism had its basis in the laws of nature and is in effect the culmination of the search for truth as the founding principle of life. National Socialism – A Left Wing Movement argues that the revolutionary nature of National Socialism sets it apart from the reactionary ways of the right.
On right and left: The right wing is mostly a pitiful conglomerate of people with very unclear ideas. They realize that something is wrong. But they refuse to leave the Old Order. Instead they cling to it with all their might and wish to revert to the situation as it was 75 or 100 years ago, thinking that this will solve all their problems.
On Christianity: The father of most of our problems is to be found in that very Christian idea, whose equalitarian philosophy and alien and unnatural teachings have robbed our people of its soul, but which they continue to praise as the very shield against the decline they see all around them. For National Socialism there is only one true deity: the inscrutable creative power that is manifested everywhere in nature.
On Race: For National Socialism difference is part of the natural order and we want to maintain this order with all its differences between races, peoples and individuals. We have absolutely no wish to make a Negro tribe practise our religion, eat our food, or use our laws. We want other people to find their own way into the future. Of course, we should be glad to cooperate with them if that is mutually beneficial, but we shall not disturb them.
On Practical politics: To try to imitate Hitler’s style today would be political suicide. As a matter of fact it has been the end of every group which has tried it so far.
Our worst enemies are not the Jews or the Communists, but the very people who while calling themselves National Socialists deface the fundamental concepts of the National Socialist philosophy through their behaviour, thus confirming the distorted impression of our idea conveyed to the public by our enemy. Indeed, we can feel no loyalty toward such people and no friendship. On the contrary, we have to rid ourselves of any connection with them whatsoever, and go out of our way to show people that they do not belong to us.
Professor Povl H Riis-Knudsen runs the Danish publishing firm Nordland Forrlag. His works are available from - www.amazon.com and can be read on the Aryan Unity website – www.aryanunity.com
Our sister blog is posted on http://europeanoutlook.blogspot.co.uk