The Fascist's Lament: Paul Golding's Pragmatic Critique of Far-Right 'Self-Destruction'

In a candid and revealing assessment that offers a window into the strategic thinking of the far-right, Paul Golding, a figure openly identified as fascist, has voiced profound concerns not about the ideology itself, but about the seemingly, "inexhaustible capacity for self-destruction", within far-right politics in Britain. His critique is a testament to a pragmatic, almost cynical, view of political effectiveness, lamenting the failures of movements due to perceived tactical missteps and poor public image rather than a rejection of their core tenets.

Golding pulls no punches in his analysis, expressing a deep frustration with the historical inability of the British far-right to translate its ambitions into tangible political power or widespread support. "It is sometimes said that the right wing of politics is its own worst enemy", he begins, painting a picture of consistent futility. He highlights the stark contrast with European counterparts like the Front National in France or the Freedom Party in Austria, which have achieved, "dizzy success", compared to what he describes as, "a laughing stock for decades", in the UK.

His most pointed criticism is reserved for the British National Party (BNP), once considered the UK's most successful, "patriotic party". Golding attributes its eventual collapse not to internal ideological schisms, but to a, "religious commitment to repeating the same obvious mistakes over and over again". He lambasts the party's failure to "root out idiots who bought the party into disrepute," specifically citing the tolerance — and even promotion — of, "individuals with decades of Nazi or racist baggage".

For Golding, the problem was one of public perception and strategic negligence. He recalls a particular incident as emblematic: "When a few morons burned a gollywog teddy at a BNP event, they were not expelled". This, he argues, allowed the, "few bad apples", to "spoil the bunch", leading to a, "toxic public image", and ultimately destroying, "any chances of becoming a mass movement". His emphasis is clearly on the consequences of such behaviours for the party's political viability, not on the inherent wrongness of the actions themselves.

Beyond the formal political party structure, Golding extends his critique to street-level movements like the English Defence League (EDL). Here, his disdain is directed at, "alcohol and a tolerance of hooligan and moronic behaviour". He paints a vivid, unflattering picture: "Scenes of drunken hooligans carrying Stella cans in their hands slurring their football chants gave the impression that the only people who make a stand against militant Islam are inebriate morons".

For Golding, both the BNP and EDL serve as cautionary tales, "monolithic examples of how not to go about saving your country". He believes they, "literally snatched defeat from the jaws of victory", allowing, "fringe elements and their antics", to define the entire movement in the media as, "racists and fascists", or, "rowdy, messy, rabble-like".

The lesson Golding draws from these failures is clear and, from his perspective, imperative for any future far-right movement. He asserts that a new, "patriotic", movement must, "rigorously enforce discipline and eradicate any remaining traces of extremism or bad behaviour". His motivation is purely pragmatic: to avoid the, "self-made political ghetto with no hope of success", and instead build a movement capable of achieving widespread support.

Paul Golding's assessment offers a chilling insight into the strategic calculations of some within the far-right. His concern isn't the inherent nature of the extremism or the racism, but its tactical clumsiness and the severe damage it inflicts on public image and political aspirations. For him, the path to, "saving the country", lies not in tempering the underlying ideology, but in presenting it with a disciplined facade, purged of the overt behaviours that have historically led to self-sabotage and public ridicule.