Friday, 22 December 2006

A Mongrel Race?


It has been said that the British are a mongrel race, that has neither the right nor the racial heritage needed to proclaim itself the land of a distinct people and that we have always had mass immigration throughout our history . Nothing could be further from the truth.
Why is it important to establish the argument for a distinct people in the case of Britain and its history? It is important because without knowledge of our cultural and racial origins we are at risk of being demoralised when we are told that our people have no historical, cultural or racial core. It is true that Europe and Britain were settled long ago by Caucasian European tribes. It is true that as with all ancient formations of nations, the settling of lands, warfare and border disputes were indeed the norm. One cannot imagine that, as those Caucasian tribes struggled to settle and claim Britain , anything less than sporadic warfare and land disputes could have taken place. Such are the birth pains of any new nation in the ancient days when the un-tilled lands first felt the feet of the early British tribes. BUT – these tribes were all of common racial stock! So, why are we continually being told we are a "mongrel" nation made up of every hue and colour and creed under the sun? Because as I said a country and people with no sense of history, culture and self are divided and therefore easy pickings for the greedy politicians and their lickspittle sycophants that we have in power in Britain today
It is said that the early British who settled this land were a disparate bunch of peoples who had nothing in common. The conclusions drawn from this argument will be that as Britain was settled by a variety of peoples (having nothing in common) that the peoples surely have no right to claim a natural racial ownership over the land or even to lay claim to the title," The British People".
If you cannot lay claim to the right of being a people then you cannot defend the collective self from the argument that any and all foreign races should be allowed to cross the borders and subsequently to lay claim to the land even to the point of eradicating the culture of the British race. After all if a people are not recognised as a people, but only as a rag tag group of individuals with no common collective core, no rights to being known as a people then how can they insist that they have a unique culture to preserve and to protect?
So we see the insidious nature of the argument which states that Britain is predominantly populated not by a people (the descendants of our forefathers who settled the land in ancient days), but by a myriad of races, having no common, ancient racial origin, which simply happened to have formed, in that which is now known as Britain.


Actually the forefathers of the British race had everything in common as far as a common racial origin. Now some may argue against these conclusions, however those who would argue would most likely be the same individuals who would argue that the Swedes, the Norwegians and the Danes are very different in racial origin. This argument would be wrong and it would be to ignore the fact that these current nations were simply different parts of the same, huge Viking entity which once roamed the area as a whole tribe, but then split into nations over border warfare and disputes. It will amaze you when you realise just how much of a common racial bloodline the people who formed the British 'race' actually had. Let us look at the racial pattern we have set down for ourselves in history and you will see that we were once great Caucasian tribes.
Britain was formed by the Caucasian race.It only takes a knowledge of history, (an untwisted account of history, one that is not tainted or twisted in word in order to present a false impression with which to demoralise a people), in order to quickly see that the facts of history lay out a very clear road map as to the common racial roots of those who formed Britain.

Early settlers

So, who were the people who settled and created that which is now known as Britain and what did they have in common? What brought them together as a people? First off, the Celts were a tribe from the North of Europe. They were a northern tribe of Caucasians.
Now let us look at the Normans. They were Vikings by race which means that they originated from a Northern European area thus they were a Northern tribe of Caucasians in origin. It is true that they mixed with the French in bloodline, but to argue that the French are not a distinct people just because the Vikings are a part of the French is as absurd as it is to argue that the British race does not exist just because we have had an influxes of settlers over the last two millenia. Let us look at the Danes. They were Vikings by race and thus a Northern European tribe. Let us look at the Picts. They were they were a Viking race (yes that does mean that they were at one time a Northern European tribe in origin) which intermarried with and were absorbed by the Scots who were speakers of the Irish (Gaelic) language.
Let us look at the Saxons, the Jutes, the Angles, all people of northern or Germanic origin. Are you seeing the pattern? The Celtic peoples such as the Gaels, the Britons and the Belgae were much noted for being tall, blonde or red haired and blue eyed or light of eye. They were known for their tattooing. Picts or 'painted men' were known for their ferociousness in battle!

Of course some British forefathers were shorter and some were taller and some were fair while some were pale and some a snowy white. Some had brunette hair and some white blonde or golden hues. We speak in general terms of the physical descriptions of the Viking races. Remember that Denmark and Sweden and Norway are all simply Viking tribes which broke apart as warfare and disputes broke out amongst them. They do not look identical and neither do you or i.
Now, what pattern do we see in the forefathers of the British? We see that the people who settled Britain had a great deal in common when it comes to racial bloodlines
Yes the Romans were in Britain just as they were once in France . It was in 55 and 54 BC, after Rome had conquered Gaul or as we call it now France that Gaius Julius Caesar decided that he needed to deploy troops to Britain to crush the British resistance. Is France not French because Rome was there? Is Britain not British because Rome was there? Of course this argument is ludicrous.Caesar was driven back from Britain when he met with fierce resistance from the free British peoples.
After coming up against the fierce inhabitants of Britain a disgruntled Caesar decided it was best to return his troops to Gaul. Between 54BC and AD 43 trade links developed between Britain and Rome , but then Rome just had to try again and in AD 43 the Roman Emperor Claudius invaded Britain. He was met with a ferocious resistance by the indigenous British and could only conquer lowland England.The British were such a fierce people, such a proud people that even the might and glory of ancient Rome knew itself to be in serious peril when up against the British people. In AD 60 the Roman Suetonius Paulinus was campaigning in North Wales against the Druids, when a major anti Roman uprising was started by Boudicca who openly rebelled when her daughters were raped by roman occupiers.
The major Roman settlements were destroyed in Britain before the uprising was defeated. Rome was now more certain than ever that Britons could be a terribly proud and fierce people when stirred, and if truth be told Rome never could conquer all of Britain. Highland scotland was never conquered by Rome and the areas of Britain which were conquered never would stay conquered. The British never did accept defeat. They simply would not stay down.In AD 409 the Imperial occupation of Britain came to an end.
Let us look at what the British took for themselves culturally from the days of the Roman occupation and we shall see how ancient Greece became an important part of the British people's culture. Whilst Roman empirical forces occupied warlike Britain , or shall we say "attempted" to occupy it? Remember that even the forces of the Roman Empire could never occupy or hold of all Britain . Many of the British incorporated much of the philosophical and educational ideology of Rome into their own lives.
Now let us remember that much of Roman civilisation, culture, literature and art came almost entirely from ancient Greece. For example, no Roman of good family could have called himself truly cultured unless he was able to speak fluently in the Greek language and had a good knowledge of all Greek literature.
The Celts likewise had made a strong impact in the collective Roman mind.
We have already established the racial bloodline from where the British originated and all of this talk about the Romans and the Greeks is in regards to CULTURAL influences on the ancient British, not racial. It is also important to remember that the British ALREADY had their own arts and ideologies in place.They simply added, via ancient Rome, some of the best that ancient Greece had to offer by way of literature and philosophy, to their own vast Northern European, Celtic and Germanic based storehouse of knowledge.
The Church became a major influence in Rome which became predominantly Christian by the year AD 200, and this added to the influence of the church as a major force in Britain.
It was not until Elizabeth the First promoted and created the Church of England that the hold of Rome was lessened in matters of the Church in a permanent way in Britain. So we see that the racial heritage of Britain was culturally influenced by the old ways, by the philosophy and art of ancient Greece, by way of the Roman occupation which ended in Rome leaving Britain, but most of all by the legends and lore and culture of the ancient Northern European Caucasians from where the blood of the ancient British sprang.

So yes – we have had waves of immigration over the centuries but in relatively small numbers, most who were assimilated into our culture and ALL were from the same racial stock
What we have had since 1948 with the arrival of the SS Windrush is an open door policy allowing people of any colour and culture to settle irrespective of numbers or culture or beliefs – nobody knows how many immigrants, illegal or otherwise are currently in our land. However the effects of this can be seen daily on our streets and in our schools and in our communities with race ghettos springing up and spates of anti-white attacks on our people –on our sons, and on our daughters, on our neighbours and on our friends. Taxes have increased to tyrannical levels and our freedom of speech is under direct threat from a government too cowardly to attack the problems but quite happy to betray their own people for the price of a vote.
But we are the descendants of these proud and ancient British people, they never rolled over – why should we?