Thanks for your reply. Hitler exploited "the traditional popular view that it is important to protect your nation and your race" in favor of a perverted transmogrification of the nation and a perverted reconceptualization of the race, as unreal (though similarly based in "science") as Marxist classes. He pretended to espouse traditionalist values in the service of a socialist revolution augmented by the Fueherprinzip. (I don't know if the Fuehrerprinzip was copied from the Bolsheviks or the Italian Fascists. It certainly developed a long history under Stalin and Mao, and was interestingly updated by the Ba'athists.) Hitler's dislike of degenerate art could be characterized as Leftist and Progressive, more than Rightist. The Bolsheviks attacked and uprooted degenerate art. Just because Hitler said degenerate art was Jewish and Bolshevik doesn't make it so and doesn't make him a Rightist.

Who are the real Rightists--an excellent question. I have my doubts about the BNP because of their socialist bent and their failure to appeal to the classical and Christian foundations of Western civilization. They are a good popular party and they try to fill a gaping hole in the British political field, but they take their stand on too shallow a foundation. They also perhaps disregard the federative principle in nation-formation. For example, they emphasize the Teutonic and Celtic element at the expense of potential allies in the defense of British tradition. The Saxons invaded 1500 years ago. There have been a few newcomers since then who have fused pretty solidly on to the British-Saxon stem. Why not include Huguenots and Flemings and even Indians who would risk their lives to keep Britain British? I don't think the BNP is necessarily wrong to oppose Welsh and Scottish independence, however. The English, Welsh, and Scots have lived together, shared self-rule and self-defense, for hundreds of years. They have mixed. There could be adjustments in the terms of their cooperation, but it would be tremendous waste of human and cultural capital to sever them altogether. There is an abstractness to asserting national rights, that in its extremes becomes Hitlerian, where nations have mixed for so long they have largely fused. (That is one reason immigration must be controlled. Whom do you want to fuse with?) A true Rightist will try to preserve what is good. The Parliamentarians in the 1640's and the American revolutionaries in the 1770's sought to preserve their traditional rights as Englishmen.

The revolutionary and centralizing cast of French government seems calculated to oppress constituent nationalities like the Bretons as well as individuals. At the same time, the Bretons have been part of France for hundreds of years. Independence appears wasteful and destructive, though the terms of cooperation and cohabitation may need adjusting. If no adjustment is allowed, you have to seek independence, as our forefathers did from Britain.

We and our contemporaries are shot through with liberalism, so it is difficult to identify a political grouping in which liberal principles, which are an appropriate tail on a conservative dog, do not wag the dog. One hears news of popular parties in Denmark, Austria, and Sweden that wish to protect their nations from excessive inappropriate immigration. That is certainly a plank in a real Right platform. The Constitution Party in the U.S. may be a candidate. My idea of sound Right thinking is quite well satisfied by Lawrence Auster's View from the Right website. The Brussels Journal seems to me to be classical liberal in its basic orientation, with a laudable awareness that even classical liberalism is not an adequate foundation for a people, but a tool for bringing greater prosperity and liberty to a people. Thus the things that make up a people (its history, identity, racial composition, religion, culture genrally, habits, traditions, tastes, etc.) are primary, and classical liberalism provides general principles that can aid in the development of that people. It is acknowledged that classical liberalism cannot replace the real identity of a people without destroying the people as a people. The Brussels Journal community thus includes some real Rightists and many potential real Rightists.