Jack Sen interview, part 1.
This is a useful antidote to the UKIP cheer leading of the "work within the system" types at VDARE.
There's much of interest. We see a description of the disgraceful episode in which a predominantly White English audience berated Griffin for championing their own rights; the typical "lower than omega" behavior often described here. More important is this description, by Sen, of what the UKIP is really about (emphasis added):
Much like the Labour Party, UKIP relies upon societal discord to peddle its policies and candidates. Although people on the ground, with a genuine love of country, are buying into the ‘Take Back Britain’ message UKIP is peddling, I am not convinced the people running the party care one bit about this country.
If UKIP were to come to power, they’d push a domestic agenda similar to Margaret Thatcher’s, highlighted by deregulation, privatisation, crony capitalism, and the implementation of policies that for all intents and purposes prey upon the disenfranchised, albeit nostalgically portrayed working man. I recognized that quite early on and it’s part of why I started to have issues with the party.
UKIP’s intentions to privatize the National Health Service, frack our beloved English countryside, sell us out to their cronies in the City (equivalent of Wall Street), cut taxes for the wealthiest Britons, kill ‘mansion’ and inheritance taxes while reducing public sector expenditure, never sat right with me. This is even before I recognised how cosy with Jewish organisations UKIP were.
I suppose a fair comparison would be to your Republican party, who appeal to working class Whites to get elected but systematically oppose their interests once in office.
The comparison with the GOP is key. Just as "appealing to the center" and attachment to Big Business Interests destroyed the Republican Party as a vehicle for genuine conservatism, so is "mainstreaming" destroying nationalism as a vehicle for promoting the racial interests of the indigenous population. We see the same fraud, the same dishonesty, the same instrumental use of sociocultural issues to attract middle-class and working-class Whites to support predatory capitalism, and we see the same cynical leaders who could care less about race and civilization. And, finally, the infiltration of Jewish interests, to finish it all off.
All of this is not a "bug" of mainstreaming; it is instead a key feature. What mainstreaming does is break down the barrier between tactics and ideology, between means and ends. If you portray yourselves as aracial conservatives, peddling some sort of watered down cultural and constitutional patriotism, then you will not only attract "moderate" mainstream voters, but you will also attract "moderate" leaders and political candidates. You will attract big money supporters who want to make the "facade of moderation" become actualized as core party ideology. In summary, instead of tricking more moderate voters to support a radical party, you end up tricking more radical voters to support a moderate party. Sen's experience is that the core UKIP voters seem farther to the "right" on race and immigration than is UKIP leadership. Sound familiar? Thus, GOP voters oppose amnesty and mass immigration, while the leading GOP candidates and the party machine embrace immigrants, legal and illegal alike.
When you mainstream, means become ends, and the original ends are lost; the leadership forget, or pretend to forget, what those original ends actually were. In America, we end up with Hispanic Jeb and his illegals who invade "out of love," in the UK, we end up with "far-Right nationalists" who think that brown and black "commonwealth immigrants" are A-OK. It's a big joke and the joke's on us.