This post bashing the British National Party is just awful. Below is the comment I posted.
When I first read this, considering the website it was posted on, I thought maybe the author was trying to be facetious and was actually criticizing the clownish PC preeners in the other parties. But unfortunately I do not believe that was the intent. The intent was to play more PC than thou and criticize the BNP.
I know the BNP is not American style conservatism. Conservatives in England are not necessarily real big on that whole limited government thing. Just ask Dave Lindsay. And I as a Southern conservative object to the Nationalism and the opposition to Welsh and Scottish independence. But clearly American paleocons have more reason to be sympathetic to the BNP than they do Labour or the “Conservative” Party. Does any paleo think halting the immigration onslaught and the demographic decline of England is unimportant?
I have often taken up for TAC against those who claim it is just drifting left and/or engaging in nothing more than I’m not a movement con axe grinding, but that is getting harder and harder to do. First Limbaugh gets hounded out of the NFL by a bunch of PC spouting thugs and the outrage is directed at him, and now this. If I didn’t come here knowing the background of this magazine and just read a post without context, I often would think the opinion was more Noonan and Parker than Buchanan and Fleming.
Here is the equally awful Rush Limbaugh thread I referred to. Here is my reply to that dud.
The outrage here is that Political Correctness has derailed an entirely legitimate attempt to buy a football team. We should be training our sights on the obvious Cultural Marxism on display, not on Rush. Particularly Goodell’s craven and inarticulate babbling PC fest explanation for why Rush was not welcome.
Goodell, the NFL, the owners group that dropped him, and all the PC thought slaves that protested are the villains in this story, not Rush.
What on earth is going on at AmCon? Why all the PC posturing?