The Psychology of False Messiahs and Illusory Utopias
Simon Sheppard, 2008
Many veteran nationalists have been surprised by the fervour of newer BNP members. The peculiarity is the expression of ‘ardent moderation,’ an apparent self-contradiction. Here I wish to explore that phenomenon of ‘ardent moderation,’ its origin, and the psychological mechanisms currently in play within the BNP. Then I shall discuss the present situation in a wider political context.
The BNP ‘party line’ is that under Griffin’s leadership the party will become electable and thereafter the road to national resurrection will be clear. The BNP, Griffin says, must “rid the British nationalist movement for good of the taint of Nazism.” Thus many activists, motivated by principled ideology – the most valuable members of any political movement – have become “those who seek to undo all that we have achieved.” The position is summarised by Griffin thus, of bringing –
the electable, modern, moderate, principled British National Party to another record high on our long road to the summit of power that we must scale to save our land and our people. May 2008 be our best year ever, rid of elements who have sought to hold us back, and filled with the promise of electoral breakthroughs which will see our beloved country pulled back from the brink.
I refer to the phenomenon of the phantom, as defined by the social psychologists Anthony Pratkanis and Peter Farquhar (1992, full reference in ‘Social Psychology, Religious Belief, Censorship and the Holocaust’). A phantom is –
a goal or ideal that looks real and possible; it looks as if it might be accomplished with just the right effort, just the right belief, or just the right amount of money, but in reality it can’t be obtained.
In PA (Procedural Analysis, my system of behaviour analysis) a phantom is described in game-theoretic terms as “promoting the false expectation of a payoff in the future.” Promoting a phantom is of course the same game the establishment is playing: ‘Once racism has been eradicated we shall all live in a glorious, multi-racial utopia.’
It is suggested that Griffin’s stated goal, used to justify routinely expelling activists and potential rivals, is illusory; it can never be achieved.
There are two major reasons why this is a phantom, an illusion, and each alone is sufficient.
The position is most easily illustrated by the two images below. The graph appears in a report prepared at York University ‘Demographic Trends in the UK’ by Naomi Finch with caption ‘Figure 20: Annual birth rates per thousand population by ethnic group in five year ranges’ and based on data from the Office for National Statistics.
Moreover, it should be stressed, these differential birthrates have been obvious for decades, even at the time mass immigration began. In parts of Lancashire whites are already completely unrepresented, the council fiefdoms having been carved out among the various ethnic blocs. That native Britons would be disenfranchised by sheer weight of numbers was entirely foreseeable; the offices of government must surely have known the inevitable outcome, and their actions can only be described as treasonous and criminal (even discounting “aiding and abetting a foreign invasion”). In the words of the late great Robert Frenz, “The day is rapidly coming when you will not be able to elect a White street sweeper.”
‘Wet’ nationalists are nationalists who just do not understand the enemy: they project their own notions of fair play and decency onto their opponents, just as foolish, misguided liberals think that once ethnics take control, they will treat us with as much generosity of spirit as we treat them. It just ain’t so. Contrary to what some may think, this writer is no great admirer of Hitler, but an example from modern history is appropriate.
During the debacle of the retreat from Dunkirk in 1940, Hitler, against the advice of the German High Command, allowed the British army to escape back to Britain. It would have been a simple matter at that point for German forces to annihilate (or capture, if that were feasible) almost the entire British army. Slaughtering the 338,000 professional soldiers stranded at Dunkirk would have averted any threat from Britain for a decade at least. I contend that Hitler believed that the people he was fighting had some vestige of honour and of restraint, and that his magnanimous gesture would be reciprocated by an end to the war he had never wanted from the start. This latter is historical fact, not ‘Nazi propaganda.’ It is well known that Hitler admired the British empire, and wanted to see it preserved.
Thus it could be said that Hitler was too soft. However the adversary – our adversary, as nationalists – has no honour and no restraint, only self-interest.
It is a simple matter of two opposing forces. In PA I termed it the Dynamical System, Darwin referred to it, others have used various names, such as Yin and Yang. PA is based upon the two opposing forces of masculine and feminine (not individuals, but strategies) and indeed this is how I came to nationalism: by the realisation that it is an expression of masculinity. It is men who fight to defend a territory or preserve the integrity of a tribe, and the victor invariably takes the women – who become mere spoils of war, and bear the children of the victors.
Females do not limit each others’ behaviour (the conspiracy strategy); they have, throughout our evolutionary past, relied on males to do it. This then is why nationalists are so continuously attacked and maligned: because we are the opposing force. There is no inherent limit. We are the limit.
What will happen – is happening – is that the more the establishment’s position is threatened the more desparately mendacious it will become. They will do or say anything to keep their snouts in the trough, including vote-rigging (as is already taking place). Can anyone seriously believe, after a little rational thought, that a propaganda weapon as effective as “the taint of Nazism,” played up and reinforced over decades, is not going to be used? Can we really expect that the political class and media, hand in hand, which has won power by lying, and keeps its power by lying, is suddenly going to stop using all its various techniques of deception? Here are some of the more ubiquitous Big Lies:
Mass immigration is good
The mainstream media will never give the BNP a good press. There may be the occasional reasonable article, but it will only be a carrot and a sop. Come the election, any dirt they can dig up will be heavily embellished and plastered over the front page just before the poll. In the intervening five years or so, enough new, naive nationalists will be taken in to allow the cycle to repeat.
I am not saying that participating in elections is completely futile, but only a fool relies on winning a badly rigged game.
Is Griffin a Psychopath?
I now know from personal experience that Nick Griffin is a liar and a charlatan. This is no great revelation, but the evidence is now so blatant that it demands comment. The following is from Griffin’s New Year’s Message on the BNP website:
Due to disaffection within the BNP I was given a list of addresses (how it came to me I will not say), who were among the people mailed around 40,000 free copies of the Don’t Be Sheeple newspaper. I did indeed set up the Spearhead website. Everything else however is pure fantasy, wrong both in substance and in fact. I will further point out the misspelling of my name and that the Don’t Be Sheeple was cleared by lawyers. These are not innocent errors: Griffin has a law degree and such misspelling is a Searchlight trick.
Rather than being drawn into a point-by-point refutation of the above and the other personal attacks and false accusations Griffin has made against me, I would like to discuss the nature of the psychopath. The term is used here in its more general sense to describe someone with a mental disorder: the common-or-garden variety of psychopath, not the extreme case who has already found his way to a secure hospital. I am sure I have met several in my time, but the most memorable, providing the model for my working definition, is an individual with a grudge who broke into my flat in Hull and stole a computer I had spent weeks building. His name was Darren Davis and the grudge concerned that computer and a possible working arrangement which had been floated as an idea but never came to fruition.
The syndrome was that Davis simply had to feel that he had come out on top. This could have been due to subconscious inadequacy, or an inflated ego. The key point is that if you engage in battle with someone who will stop at nothing, where laws, respect, honesty and decency will be cast aside as secondary to winning at all costs, when with the power of obsession they simply have to get the better of you, it is better to retire gracefully and ‘lose.’ One can readily imagine where such an ongoing vendetta might lead.
Another story about Darren Davis involved a flat he had rented above a shop on Chanterlands Avenue. There was some dispute with the landlord, and when he moved out Davis utterly destroyed the flat, removing everything that could be, and much that shouldn’t. Light switches, fittings, doors, built-in cabinets, cable and pipe, all were removed, leaving the flat a ruined shell. I spoke to the landlord and confirmed this. The police, as in my case with the stolen computer, were completely ineffectual.
Griffin’s attacks against me appear not to have been tempered in any way by the fact, evident to all, that the Don’t Be Sheeple contained not a word of criticism of him or the BNP. It has been stated twice that “Griffin will destroy the BNP rather than relinquish control of it.” These observations are consistent with my working definition of a psychopath.
Finally, interesting comparisons might be made between Nick Griffin and the late L. Ron Hubbard.
Concluding Thoughts and Tentative Predictions
A seasoned political observer (somewhat surprisingly, still a BNP member) has ventured that the situation will not change until the establishment has lost faith in itself. This may be near at hand, with what appears to be a coming economic meltdown. Gordon Brown’s habitual indecision does not indicate confidence, and few even in his own party continue to have confidence in him.
It must now be obvious to anyone not in a thrall to quasi-religious dogma that Griffin’s strategy has failed. According to that strategy, membership and electoral gains will increase; the BNP’s financial strategy relies on the former. However BNP membership must certainly now be falling and what electoral gains have been achieved have been modest. In my view skirting around the problem by negating core policies, playing clever with the electorate, and trying to play the opposition at its own game, adopting its language (“We’re not racist”) was always doomed to fail.
If by failing the BNP had succeeded in exposing the corrupt system for what it is (e.g. by making the government ban the BNP as a political party, thus forcing it to show its true, anti-democratic colours) that in itself would have been an achievement. However the BNP in its current form could not achieve even that.
If ideology is divorced from reality, reality will always ultimately prevail. Unless the BNP can be restored to a truly nationalist party it will be, ideologically and politically speaking, in the wrong place at the wrong time when the denouement comes. For example, just as the more perceptive of our people are becoming aware of the malevolent influence of Jews – and perhaps even, despite the media blackout, that Israeli nuclear missiles are pointing in our direction – Griffin has determinedly steered the party away from criticism of them. Indeed he has tried to convince organised Jewry that the BNP is no threat, convincing no-one and further alienating nationalists who know better. (Whether the BNP should be a physical threat to Jewry is another matter, but it should certainly be a threat to their criminality and power.)
Whether it is a severe, US-style Depression, or race wars break out, or a massive Muslim or Israeli attack takes place, or whatever form the current regime’s inevitable downfall takes, when it happens the BNP as presently constituted is likely to be dismissed as an ineffectual irrelevance.
An alternative scenario, one in accord with the ‘two opposing forces’ model mentioned above and upon which, in fact, our legislature is based, is that the necessary changes will take place within the existing political system. However unlikely this seems, it is more probable than the BNP as it now stands gaining power.