"English Defence League is a bigger threat than the BNP," says MP for Dagenham and Rainham

Jon Cruddas, MP for Dagenham and Rainham, wrote in the Observer on October 10th 2010 that the "English Defence League is a bigger threat than the BNP."

Aside from the general hysterical tone you would expect to hear from a weak minded liberal opposing anything that might actually represent a population-opinion uprising, his comments are somewhat accurate and inaccurate.

Cruddas goes on to state, "The EDL is a much bigger threat than the BNP, consumed by infighting and debt since its crushing defeat in May’s local elections. It also poses the biggest danger to community cohesion in Britain today. Its provocative marches, "flash demos" and pickets are designed to whip up divisions between communities and provoke a violent reaction from young British Muslims."

The game here is quite obvious.

Firstly, it is a generally considered opinion amongst the more experienced figures of nationalist politics that the EDL certainly have all the traits of being a state-sponsored organisation. Understand, however, that there is a difference between state-sponsored and state-led; the latter being that the organisation is run by the state at the very highest ladder of its leadership, and the more likely former scenario where the organisation is merely helped along by the state. Initial injections of cash, favourable media press and general organisational skills reflecting a more mature entity are all signs of state-sponsoring to some degree, especially for a group as embryonic as the EDL.

Secondly, what is the general objective of this group?

1. To attract the more militant recruit
2. To increase intelligence on these individuals accordingly
3. To allow them the opportunity to provoke real skirmishes between the white and Muslim communities.
4. Finally, upon the inevitable war with Iran, to act fairly by stamping down on the militant tendencies of both communities, but mainly to prove fairness to the Muslim community and at the same time present to the general public a negative stereotype of both sides as trouble causers. To some extent the stereotype will 'brush off' on the BNP, but for a change the BNP is not the real target here.

The EDL is, therefore, certainly a bigger threat in terms of the inevitable carnage on the streets of Britain that will occur when the militant members of the Muslim community actually respond.

When this happens Jon Cruddas will be the first to condemn the situation. He will use it as another weak excuse to bash genuinely concerned Briton’s over the head with every Marxist inspired anti-white word he and the rest of his treacherous gang can think of, when in truth the whole situation has been somewhat engineered to provide a green light for the invasion of Iran.

It would be foolish to suppose that the EDL are wholly ‘misdirected’ and that all their supporters are equally the same. They do represent a growing feeling of anger levied against the Islamification of Britain. If the nationalist movement is to succeed it must make contact with the voting population to a greater extent than just contesting elections. Community politics is the key and this is where the EDL will fall short, whereas on the other hand, as the BNP moves into more sophisticated political ground and finely tunes its community politics we will find ourselves more ready to capitalise in real political terms on the disintegrating situation.

The standard recruit to the EDL is not interested in BNP community politics but the quick fix demonstration. The latter does not solve anything and only real community politics can make a difference. It is the harder and longer road but it remains the right road.