Thursday 30 March 2017

Some Lessons from Nationalism in Britain

Recently I was speaking with a man who is quite knowledgeable on the subject of British politics and in particular British Nationalists politics. Here I am going to point out what he told me about the good and the bad, what worked and what did not work. The talk concerned two groups, the National Front (1970's-80's) and the British National Party (1990's-2010).

The National Front came to prominence in Britain in the 1970's because of it's street marches. But like all marches the Left disagrees with they reacted violently and attacked the marches. So the National Front fought back and this attracted people to the marches that only came to fight. That lead to an attitude within the National Front that street fighting with the Left was the aim of the National Front. Others within the movement disagreed and argued that the aim was the same as any other political party, political power. And as they lived within a Democracy that they should seek to gain political power through the ballet box.

The National Front developed a number of different ideas to counter the violence from the Left. They organised clean up events where they picked up litter and sort to make a good impression on the locals, which the Left found hard to attack as they found it hard to justify to themselves attacking people picking up litter. They would organise multiple meetings on the same night so the Left could only disrupt one or two meetings as they simply didn't have the numbers to do anything more. They also organised training sessions, particularly to train people in writing newletters and newspaper articles. This training consisted of how to write, what you should write and what you should not write. These newsletters and newspapers (the parties own newspaper) was then sold to people who they door knocked. Door knocking was a way to let ordinary people see that the National Front were just normal people by physically knocking on their door and talking to them. Asking about their concerns, telling them about the concerns of the National Front and if they were interested in buying a newspaper. Regular newspaper sales allowed the National Front to gauge how much support they had in any given area.

Unfortunately, while the National Front was good at strategy they were not very good at organisation. In the 1980's it split between those who were interested in fighting the Left on the streets and those who wanted a normal political party, but without each other the two groups became too small to have any effect and by 1990 they were a spent force.

In it's place came the British National Party who sort to be a purely political party and to gain political power through the ballot box. The Party was organised to have a strong leader with a council who advised him and supported him. This structure worked well with a leader who wanted independent advice and who was interested in being only the first among equals. However the structure did not work as well when the leader was only interested in confirming his own opinion.

The British National Party were more successful than the National Front electorally as it concentrated on local councils. But as the party was a top down organisation it put everything into the hands of the leader. The concerns and opinions of the ordinary members didn't mean much in that environment. The structure was upside down, instead of having a strong broad base the party was instead like a pyramid balanced on it's tip. Everything depended on the leader and over time it also wore him down. It very much reminded me of One Nation here in Australia.

While the BNP were very organised they overreached electorally as they sort to contest too many seats and lost. What that meant was that they did not do enough work in the areas where they stood a good chance but instead spread it around without having much effect. They discouraged good local candidates by sending them out to fight battles they couldn't win and they bankrupted the party. This is true in life, business, Government and politics, do not spend money you do not have and unfortunately the BNP did. They believed they had money coming in after the election that never arrived. Today while the party still exists it is a spent force.

I support Britain remaining British without question so it is sad that people who support such an outcome have seen so much defeat and to be honest much of it self inflicted. However when I look at my own country I do not see anything comparable to either of these groups, even though things are moving in the right direction. I hope people look at this and see the things that they did well and the things that they did not do well. Seek to emulate the good and reject the bad.

One final note that was made was that a Democratic candidate should not start to campaign when the campaign begins, he should already be well known in the area. The time of the official campaign is too short a time period in which to gain prominence. Good advice there!

Upon Hope Blog - A Traditional Conservative Future
Another Article You Might Like?
What Do Traditional Conservatives Believe?

Saturday 25 March 2017

Melbourne Traditionalists in April, 2017

On Monday the 3rd April the Melbourne Traditionalists will be meeting once again. We are in a very nice venue, with good food, drink and company. So if you are interested in getting together with us to solve the problems of the world or just to discuss said problems please get in contact with me.

uponhopeblog (at)

Guiding Principles of the Melbourne Traditionalists

1. Loyalty to the Crown of Australia

2. Loyalty to our British and Western heritage

3. Loyalty to the family, Husband and Wife, Mother and Father Father and their children

4. Opposition to Liberalism, Right Liberalism, Left Liberalism and Feminism

5. Opposition to the destruction of White Australia's, opposed to Multiculturalism, Mass Immigration and Diversity

Upon Hope Blog - A Traditional Conservative Future
Another Article You Might Like?
Destroying the Aussie Backyard

Monday 20 March 2017

How Feminism Destroys Attraction

Feminism is a branch of Liberalism and at it's most basic it believes in the exact same things that Liberalism does. But starting in the early 1800's many female Liberals came to feel that Liberalism did not pay enough attention to women. And Feminism, as a political ideology, came into being at that time and they felt that their role was to remind mainstream Liberalism that everything it believed was also true for women.

An idea that is as old as Feminism within Liberalism is Equality and Feminism has pushed this idea relentlessly. So right from the start Feminism has pushed the idea that men and women are the same. Liberals used Feminists to push this idea, to help break down the family and society, to push the idea that men and women are interchangeable. So what does any of this have to do with attraction?

The simple answer is that men and women look for things within the opposite sex that they do not find within themselves. It is not their interchangeability that men and women find attractive in the opposite sex but their differences. Their physical differences, their emotional differences, their intellectual differences, men and women are so different they even feel pain differently!

But there is one attraction that Feminism attacks even more directly and that is a man's Social Status. Women want to look up to a man, both physically at his height and socially. Women's romance books are filled with stories of women falling in love with men of greater social status, in historical romances he might be a great warrior, or explorer, a lord or a diplomat, in modern stories he might be rich or have a high status job such as a doctor. A women wants her man to be an addition to her life, to give value and to enhance her status. A man without status cannot do that.

So when a women has a job that was once done by a man, she is directly hurting everyone. A women who makes $100,000 a year for example is now after a man who can increase her social status, that means he must exceed her in some capacity. The best way to do that is for a man to earn more money than a women, so to ever get a chance in this case he must earn at least $100,000, but the greater the amount the better. That is the case for nearly every women who works, she wants a man who can increase her status.

It limits the amount of men who she can have a relationship with quite a lot. Men are attracted to a women's appearance and as a general rule the younger the better. There would be little problem if men and women married young and he made the money. However now men and women are encouraged to compete against each other. Men don't want to compete with women so as women enter a profession men start leaving. Women are encouraged to make their own money, but the more money a women makes the lonelier she may well end up being. Because she has made it that much harder for her to be attracted to a man.

Loneliness is one of the great issues of our time and it is widely ignored. It's portrayed as your problem that you are lonely, if you were smarter or better looking then you wouldn't be in this mess. But you didn't design this mess they did. Liberalism and it's handmaiden Feminism. They want a society where everyone is an Autonomous Individual and they are succeeding in that. A society were people do not have any bonds to any other person, including in relationships. They want loneliness, they designed it this way, making men and women not attracted to each other is by design.

They never build, they only destroy.

Upon Hope Blog - A Traditional Conservative Future
Another Article You Might Like?
What Do Liberals Want?

Friday 17 March 2017

What Do Women Want?

This is a companion piece to why do men like pretty women? but as men and women are different so is the question. Today I read a very good post by The Radical One entitled A woman needs a mans masculinity, random rant, actually I think it's much better than a rant even if the last paragraph is a bit harsh. It decided me that I should write this.

The first point to make is that women are individuals, so different women will have individual tastes and desires, but like most things this idea can be taken too far. A women is still a women she is not just a random amount of random things. She will conform, as men do, to particular traits, in a women's case to what most people would think of as feminine traits.

Before we go into that I think I need to take a step back and to look at the three human roles, the role of children, the role of women and the role of men. Each has a particular role that they play within human society, today we are told that everyone is interchangeable, however people know that is not true, the way they live their life in direct contradiction to that idea proves that they know it is not true.

So what are the roles?

The role of children is to grow, learn and develop.

The role of women is to nurture children as well as men and to be the intermediate between children and men.

The role of men is to protect, provide and to be the intermediate between women and children and the rest of the world.

If I may put it another way, think of a circle with three rings, the inner ring is made up of children, the next ring is made up of women and the outer ring is made up of men. Each ring in the circle strengthens the others while maintaining it's own integrity.

All of that means that women have a natural role to play and the closer she is to fulfilling that role the happier everyone will be. Today that simple fact is often ignored, even rejected. As Traditionalists we should never do that.

Men and women are different in both their physical bodies and in their internal life. As a man I don't like my emotions, they are powerful and can be overwhelming. They seem such an unnatural part of life, unwanted and intrusive. But for a women such thoughts are bizarre, for women emotions are a constant companion. As a man I want things to make sense, for things to be rational. But women are used to things not making sense and rational thinking can seem reptilian, cold, brutal and uncaring. I am not saying that women are mentally unstable or unintelligent, I am saying they are emotional. That they are constantly in flux, changing and rarely staying still in their thinking. But what women want from men are constant, even though each individual women has her preferences.

Women seek three things from a man.

1. height and build

2. social status

3. Strength and stability

Now you may have noticed there are actually five things listed, women are looking for a combination of those things, effectively making them one. Lets look at each in more detail.

Height and Build

Women are not as interested in a mans looks as men are in women's, within reason of course. But height is one thing that most women will not compromise on. Height is important because she wants to look up to a man, to feel that he can protect her. The human male is one of the tallest creatures on Earth and animals rarely attack creatures taller than them. His build goes along with his height, women are attracted to muscle over fat, the male is hard and the female is soft. Opposites attract.

Social Status

Most men think that women are attracted to money, but money is merely a symbol of a man's social status. Some women will give up anything for a man with money, but most women will not. Because what most women want is a provider, a man who has the ability to protect her and to provide for her. A man of high social status is a good bet to be able to do both of those things. A man's ability to protect and provide is important in the abstract and in the practical. A man who is fit and a hard worker has social status just as a rich man does because they are both providers, even though they are not equal.

Strength and Stability

A mans physical strength is important because a women is attracted to his strength compared to her. But she is also interested in his mental strength. Mental strength is his intelligence, his fortitude and his mental endurance. She wants to make sure he can provide her with stability. Now this stability comes in two forms, one is in material things, the second is in his ability to keep her stable. As I wrote earlier women are in a constant flux, but a mans emotional strength can provide the balance that she requires. Instead of her emotions being likes waves upon the ocean, with nothing to stop them from becoming bigger and rougher, a man with strength and stability is like a coastline, the waves crash onto the shore and stop. They have found there limit, but a man must be strong enough to be able to handle these waves constantly crashing into him. Men don't even know this is a thing, women do and they seek that in us even though we don't know we posse it.

This is why women test men, often they don't even know they are doing it. They need reassurance that we are quite literally their rock.

That is also why a man's sense of humour is so important to a women. It is a way for her to test that you have the strength to endure her.

And the final part of his strength and stability is his leadership, women want to look up to a man, she wants to be able to trust that he can deal with the world. It is his job to lead the way and to guide her, to protect and provide for her, these are all signs of his leadership. Leadership means that the man leads and that the women follows and she follows because she looks up to him. But no one looks up to a bully or a tyrant, leadership is a hard road and thats another reason why it's the man's job, she has enough to worry about already.

Life at it's best is glorious, but glory is fleeting. Life at it's worst is unbearably painful, but life can get better. Men and women are better together than apart and only together can they build the future, in fact only a men and a women together can build the future.

Upon Hope Blog - A Traditional Conservative Future
Another Article You Might Like?
Why Isn't Conservatism Advancing?

Monday 13 March 2017

Islam and the West

The issue of Islam is growing each and every year or maybe I should say the problems of Islam are growing each year. When I think back to the 1980's I don't remember people talking about Islam or Muslims, except as something that existed in the Middle East. But a problem in the West? I don't remember people talking about it at all. How times change, today it seems that the issue of Islam is everywhere you turn and growing bigger all the time.

Most Muslim immigration began in most of the West with seemingly secular Turks. Turkey had made a great effort to be more Western and secular and it seemed that it had worked, that Turks were lapsed Muslims. Sort of like lapsed Catholics, except Muslims, they might go through the motions but outside of that they were secular. It was proof that progress worked, that people, all people, were becoming less religion, less superstitious, more secular, more modern.

But in the Middle East something different was going on. It wasn't in plain view and most Muslim Governments made great efforts to keep it out of view. They believed, just like the West that religion was backwards and a sign of the past. They also wanted to be secular and modern, they wanted to be Westerners. However the thing that was being kept out of sight was a religious revival, a rejection of the West and of secularism. And the thing that pushed this revival was the constant failings of political Islam, the fall of the greatest of all Muslim states, the Ottoman Empire, the carving up of nearly the entire Muslim world by the European Empires and the greatest failure of all, the creation of Israel.

Israel was so hurtful because it seemed as if finally things had turned in favour of the Muslim world. But instead here was a Jewish state in it's midst, but worst of all was that it was European. These Jews looked European and everything that they did was European. They were alien in a way Jews who lived in the Middle East were not. But the hatred of the foreign Jews would in time spread to the local ones and when that happened it seems that the Muslims forgot why they hated Israel, because it was European and alien, and instead it became because they were Jews.

Over time the complete and utter failure of ever effort to destroy Israel pushed the Muslims to find a new answer to the problem. They found that answer, not in politics or modernism but in Islam.

Armies had not defeated Israel.

Politics had not defeated Israel.

Technology had not defeated Israel.

What is more powerful than Israel....God is, so they turned to God to defeat Israel. Today this idea is called Islamism.

Islamism is a fusion of a political ideology and Islam and it is the extreme end of Muslim thought. It pushes the idea that Muslims can only triumph in this world by returning to an earlier and in their eyes purer Islam. To put their faith in God, not in the world, instead to reject the world, it's sinfulness, it's hopelessness. To reject the modern world, except in those things that allow it to fight and to defeat it's enemies.

And as all of this is going on the West decides that it will allow Mass Immigration without restrictions on people's Race, Ethnicity or their Religion. That meant that Muslims could come to the West and with them came these ideas and with these ideas came men who wanted to strike out against the enemies of Muslims. This all happened as far back as the 1960's, that's 50 years ago!

For half a century the West has had to live with Islamic terrorism and every decade it has gotten worse. Because while most Muslims who arrived in the West came with the best of intentions, that was not true of all. Things became even more complex as there were now Muslims born in the West who could not reconcile Islam with their Western lifestyles. The so called home grown terrorists.

But of course like nearly everything to do with Mass Immigration it is a lie. This problem and it is a problem, was imported. We have little common history, the people are not of European origin as the people of the West are, their religion is an alien philosophy, it is not our faith. Their way of life is not ours, nor their customs or their often quite strange clothing. It is alien and in many cases hostile.

Islamism adds a new and dangerous dimension to our lives, each day we may be killed or injured because our own Governments have brought in this alien philosophy. Why do we even have to deal with this issue? Why are our lives put in danger? So that Liberals can feel good about themselves....what a pitiful answer!

The burka, the niqab are all alien and to be quite frank offensive to West sensibilities. Ohhh some say they love it, but they are Liberals and Liberals are great destroyers. When there is a terrorist attack we are told that Islam is the religion of peace, that our objecting makes us racist, haters and Islamophobes. As if we have no to right to our own country or to our own life.

Islam has no place in the West, it's home is elsewhere. To the Patriots of each and every Western country the presence of Islam provokes the same reaction as the presence of Israel does in Muslims. An alien people with an alien philosophy and all in the wrong place.

Upon Hope Blog - A Traditional Conservative Future
Another Article You Might Like?
Taxes, Budgets and the Economy

Saturday 11 March 2017

Happy Fourth Birthday Upon Hope!

Here we are at another milestone, this blog was started four years ago today. I'd been thinking about starting a blog for around six months and then I just decided I needed to do it and to stop thinking about it. Whats good about blogging is that it's yours, you can write more or less, what you want when you want, your the master of your own destiny in a sense. But that means that your also responsible for all of the foggy thinking, bad writing and for the lack of posts. Of course like anything you do it does tend to get better over time, although looking back at early posts I think most are good and a few are very good.

There are however things you cannot control, the amount of visitors to the blog for example. That is one of the biggest reasons that most blogs stop is because they lack an audience. And it's hard to get an audience, although some manage to get big visitor numbers quickly that's not normal. Normally the numbers creep up slowly and in my experience they occasionally fall. Strangely there often seems to be no rhyme or reason for the numbers going up or down. For example one of the great mysteries I have here are my Russian visitors, other countries sometimes do the same thing, but they tend to arrive and disappear in a big group. As if someone has linked to an article of mine, but I never get a particular article going up, nor do I get a URL that has sent them, quite strange.

I have had 104,327 visitors since I started, 38,000 in the last year.

My most clicked on article is What do Traditional Conservatives believe? which has been clicked on 4, 616 times. My least clicked on article is Australian suicide bomber? which has been clicked on 31 times.

Over the past year the percentage of my visitors has hardly changed from last year, around 45% are Americans, around 15% are Australian and the remaining 40% come from the rest of the world. No other country has more than 10%, Russia is around 8%.

Here are some graphs that Blogger gives me.

Graph of Blogger page views
You can see three big spikes, from left to right the first is from March 2015, the second which is the biggest is from July 2016 and the third spike is last month, February 2017. My worst month in the past year was June 2016 when I had a dismal 1,890 visitors. I say dismal because thats worse than any month from the year before. But my best was the very next month, July 2016 when I had the best month ever with 5,575 visitors, around 3000 of them Russians. The graph seems to end on a downward trend, but that is for the first 10 days of this month only.

Below are the top 10 posts followed by how many clicks they have received.

What do Traditional Conservatives believe? 4616

Free-Trade Versus Protectionism 2990

Why Don't the Poor Marry? 2459

Why Do Conservatives Believe in Different Social Classes? 2277

Feminism, Why We Are Not Feminists 1760

What is More Important, the Past, the Present or the Future? 1699

Housewives, Good For the Economy and Society 1217

The Discrimination of Anti-Discrimination 1121

The Balanced Society 1109

The Problems of Monarchy 926

Now if you look at this list and the one on the front face of the blog you'll find they are different. I believe the one on the front page is weighed, meaning the more recent the numbers the greater the weight it carries so it goes up in importance.

Okay I still don't know the difference between a "Referring URL" and a "Referring Site".

Referring URLs

Referring Sites

Search Keywords

upon hope
free trade vs protectionism
free trade versus protectionism
traditional conservatism
upon hope blog
protectionism vs free trade
conclusion of multiculturalism
free trade and protectionism

Here is a map of the top 10 countries to have visited the blog in the last four years.

Pageviews by Countries

Graph of most popular countries among blog viewers
United States
United Kingdom
The United States and Australia are in the same position as last year. Russia and the United Kingdom have swapped places as have Germany and France. Canada and the Ukraine are in the same positions and China and the Netherlands have swapped places.

I hoped for a bigger and better year this year and got it so here's hoping for another year that's bigger and better!

And finally if no one read what I wrote I would give up, so thank you for coming along and making it worthwhile!

Mark Moncrieff

Upon Hope Blog - A Traditional Conservative Future
Another Article You Might Like?