The Battle to Influence Populism We Are Not Alone, And We Don't have Much Time  Follow Nick On Substack Follow Nick on X By Nick Griffin November 2025 It is time for a word of clarification. In talking about nationalist ideas, I am not using the phrase as code for Nazism. I have pointed out often enough in the past that an obsession with Hitler and Germany nearly a hundred years ago has been encouraged by almost every agent provocateur or turncoat in the history of the nationalist movement. If you need an example, take a look at the career of the late and unlamented Ray Hill (far right on photo above, leading a BM march in 1981), who - paid and guided by the Zionist-Marxist Gerry Gable - spent years pushing stiff right arm salutes and political necrophilia as he destabilised first the National Front, then the British Movement and then the British National Party (before my time, I hasten to add). There’s a reason for this. In fact, there are several. The first is that the far-left and the political Judaists know that Nazi slogans, images and references serve to isolate those who use them from the wider population. This is a kiss of death not only in electoral politics, but also for efforts to work with normal people in all other ventures too. The next is that the ‘threat’ of the Hollywood nonsense they spread is their stock-in-trade. Bodies like Searchlight, Hope Not Hate, the ADL, Southern Poverty Law Center and the Campaign Against Anti-Semitism are, in essence, protection rackets. They use the threat of fascists and racists in order to gouge donations out of their supporters and benefactors, and there’s no more powerful threat than the ultimate demon, a 21st-century Hitler. (The presence of two Stateside bodies in that list, by the way, is a reminder that much of what I am writing about Britain and Farage applies also to the USA and Trump). This goes beyond the specific problem of highly demonised National Socialism. While nationalism is a universal belief system with certain common core principles, the way in which those principles are developed and expressed must reflect the unique spirit and identity of each individual nation. This is what Mussolini understood when he told Mosley that “fascism is not for export” and warned the hugely talented but impatient English aristocrat not to adopt the black shirt or the Roman salute. Finally, it is an unavoidable fact that all of the ‘old’ nationalisms were developed in very different times to those which coming generations face. They were produced by - and for - a time of growing populations; in which technologies we take for granted were at most unlikely science fiction; when class warfare was an internal thing between different sections of individual nations, rather than a struggle for basic human values between We The People and a global elite operating on behalf of Mammon and Lucifer. Knives and Gunfights The old forms of nationalism were also developed at a time when the great enemy was a materialist ideology - Communism. As such, it was logical and effective that the antidotes should also be an ideology, fascism, which was primarily materialistic in turn. In the 21st century, by contrast, the enemies of our people are the Islamism of the occupiers, the atheism of the cultural Marxists, and the transhuman Luciferianism of the globalists. All three are religions, to try to oppose them with an ideology is to take a knife to a gunfight. When you were up against an ideology, you had to fight it with an alternative ideology. When the enemy is armed with religious faith, your ideas still have to provide the answers to the material problems of the masses, but they must also be based in religious faith. In the nations which once constituted Christendom, that can only be Christianity, hence the nationalism of the 21st century must be rooted in Christianity. Not the abominable heresy misnamed ‘Christian-Zionism’, but our traditional faith, which created not just our great cathedrals but also the ideas of individual responsibility, inquiry and the rule of law, which underpinned everything worthwhile which emerged out the age which is now passing. Share That’s only the briefest glimpse of why ideas which came out of the 1930s are hopelessly out-of-dated and unsuitable as guides for the times to come. Those who insist on staying a hundred years in the past will remain isolated, irrelevant and without influence as a result. Any attempt by neo-Nazi sects to promote their ideas in UK populist circles will be short-lived and end in total failure. Bigger Dangers There are, however, several newer and more ‘saleable’ ideas whose adherents could make a serious effort to influence populism. Britain, the USA, France and Germany have already seen supposed nationalists who have sold the pass on homosexuality, thereby betraying the commitment to family values and natalism - central tenets of genuine nationalism. In the Anglosphere at least, this phenomenon goes hand-in-hand with a growing fascination with the Neo-Reactionary and Neo-Feudalist ‘ideals’ of Curtis Yarvin (aka Mencius Moldbug) and Nick Land. Meet the new false guru, same as the old false guru. Curtis Yarvin. When people who call themselves ‘nationalists’ will even give such a creature the time of day, you know that they are fake, whatever else they say. You have been warned! Their overblown, pseudo-intellectual drivel centres on replacing democracy with ‘gov-corps’ techno-fascism. This should automatically repel populist movements, whose supposed raison d’etre is electoral revolt by the people against the tyranny of the elites, but this cannot be guaranteed. This strain of diseased ideology has gained the sympathetic interest of extraordinarily wealthy men such as Palentir boss Peter Thiel, while Elon Musk and Vice President Vance also flirt with their ideas. While there is still little chance that this anti-human poison will appeal to older populists, there is a real danger that the next generation will be susceptible. As AI obliterates swathes of white-collar professions, a career in local or national government with rapidly expanding populist parties will become attractive to more and more university-educated young men. Their generation is so outnumbered by older voters that democracy effectively means gerontocracy - rule by the elderly. This makes them potentially vulnerable to ideas which provide intellectual justification for a turning away from people power and towards technocracy and capitalist corporatism. Sadly, we haven’t heard the last of Yarvin and Land. Leave a comment The applied selfishness of Ayn Rand is another aspect of capitalist-conservative thought which could have some resonance among populists. Atlas Shrugged is now rather dated in the technology and society in which it is set, but the self-serving socialist ‘mouchers’ she portrays could all be ministers in the Starmer regime or bureaucrats overseeing the looting and collapse of New York. Rand’s ideas won’t be attractive to the grass-roots, since the rocket fuel of populist support is the growing unease of European populations who see demographic change undermining all their old certainties. This also makes them tend towards tribalism, which makes Rand’s Objectivist hyper-individualism drastically out of kilter with the spirit of the times. Among the populists’ bright young things, however, it could be a different matter. Rand’s musings, pernicious though they are, do at least have the advantage of being written in readable English, unlike the tortured, pretentious jargon of the Neo-Reactionaries. Her ideas are still backed by well-funded, CIA-front foundations, established to promote capitalist ideals during the Cold War. As such they can readily be activated for a campaign to ensure that the rising force in Old World politics keeps within Atlanticist bounds and doesn’t even think of challenging the hegemony of Washington and Wall Street. Civic nationalism is another problem, not least because its tendency to take the path not of principle but of least resistance aligns very closely with populism. Farage, Meloni, Marine and pretty much all the others are themselves all civnats, so attempts to create a coherent civnat ideology for populist parties would be perfectly logical. Whether ‘logical’ translates into ‘feasible’ is, fortunately for us, far from certain. The central ‘idea’ of civic nationalism - that every featherless biped on the planet is at heart a law-abiding, ideal citizen, needing only to breath our healing air and salute our magic flag to fit in perfectly with our high-trust society - is so ridiculous that it betrays a complete lack of the logic, rationality and backbone needed to create a coherent set of ideas. The populists’ and civnats’ parallel addiction to free trade and anti-national institutions such as NATO also make it very difficult for them to develop a coherent set of principles. That, however, need not stop them trying. Hence it is unlikely that the ideological vacuum in populist movements like Reform will last forever. Window of Opportunity Any one of the interest groups mentioned here wouldn’t even notice the £25,000 start-up cost of the proposal I outlined earlier in this series. [This, in short, is to cover the cost of printing a slender but controversial (and thus unusually attractive) and powerful book, backed up by online educational efforts. And delivering this material to every Reform councillor and prospective parliamentary candidate.] We need to beat them to the punch. The current window of opportunity is unlikely to stay open for very long. We need to articulate - and inject into populism - a comprehensive, principled, coherent and ideologically sound set of ethnonationalist principles and ideals, healthily and deeply rooted in our own native soil and traditions. So you might like to get yourself a big glass jar and start filling it with spare loose change and the occasional fiver, because at some point I’m going to have to ask you to chip in towards that twenty five grand. As to the precise ideals which will be the basis of this operation, I will be setting them out here on Substack, so that they can be discussed and, where necessary, clarified and refined. While it is not possible for any sort of committee to draft effective ideas, it is very beneficial to have feedback and input from an extended group of constructive critics. What I will say in closing this section is that the populist parties of the entire white world are open to the same sort of operation. The 21st-century ideas to be developed here could easily become a starting point for similar operations in other countries. Subject, of course, to them picking up on the nationalist generalities, rather than the English/British specifics. Our focus, however, must be on Britain and the British peoples, and especially on England, since Reform is but a right-wing version of the left-wing fake nationalisms which provide safety-valve alternatives in Wales and Scotland. We have to do it, because there is no-one to do it other than us. There are no white knights in shining armour. No political wizards with magic wands. There is only us. Us alone. And that will be enough.