The Fight for a National Party for Europe
A re-appraisal by Robert Edwards
Sir Oswald Mosley’s greatest post-war achievement was most definitely the formation of an embryonic
all-European party comprising the leaderships of several parties from Britain, Germany, Belgium and Italy. This achievement
was brought about through Mosley’s faith and belief in the essential oneness of Europe and the friendships he had formed
throughout the continent and beyond in what became known as the post-fascist era. These friendships were forged by common
goals and a mutual respect for each other’s countries.
The National Party of Europe, as it became, was launched
at the Conference of Venice on March 1, 1962. The principal signatories being the aristocratic Adolf von Thadden of the Reichspartei
(later a leader of the NPD), Giovanni Lanfre of the post-fascist Movemiento Socialiste Italiano and Jean Thiriart of Jeune
Europe and author of some of the most radical works on the National Communitarian State … and, of course, Oswald Mosley
of Union Movement. Their hopes and aspirations were high, being attended by seasoned and experienced exponents of the European
idea. Their declaration at this conference included regular liaison between the parties and an intention to change the names
of their parties to the NATIONAL PARTY OF EUROPE.
An important principle was to accept a common policy under a centralised
leadership, meeting as equals in the interests of common action.
To emphasise the post-fascist aspect, the declaration
stated that a European government would be elected by a free vote every four years with a parliament given the power to censure
a government at any time by a two-thirds majority. Meanwhile, a government would be given the powers of action necessary in
a fast moving age.
A common European policy on defence, foreign affairs and economics was an essential component.
Its democratic credentials were impeccable despite the label of “neo-fascist” applied by a hostile press. The
spectre of a fascist bogeyman was raised again by the scribbling toadies of the Establishment, made darker and more sinister
by the broader continental dimensions of the enterprise. Today’s “European Union” seems a mere shadow of
the Declaration of Venice with its lack of true conviction and a muddled thinking on the role of Europe today … and
with America taking the lead on matters that should be within the domain of Europe and independent of this volatile superpower
across the Atlantic.
But despite the old hate propaganda spewed out by a manipulated internationalist press, the principles
of progress, solidarity and unity became the underlying motivation for a truly European party in the service of all Europeans,
guarding their regional customs and protecting the civil rights of individuals in the service of all.
What went wrong?
Why is there no party representing ALL Europeans today … instead of the same old gangs playing the same old game of
going on the make and trying to get out of a fractured “union” whatever they can at the expense of the others?
The existence of such a truly European party was too much of a challenge to the old order that dark and sinister forces sought
to cripple it from the beginning.
Mosley’s biographer, Robert Skidelsky, touched on the events after the Declaration
of Venice by stating, “This event [the Declaration of Venice] temporarily activated the old Jewish-communist alliance.
Violence was switched on again”.
The Sunday Telegraph let the cat out of the bag in August of 1962, reporting,
“The Jews are planning a nation-wide campaign against Sir Oswald Mosley’s Union Movement”. The Yellow Star
Movement and the newly revived 62 Group, both led by gangsters, unleashed a wave of violence, which, on one occasion put Mosley’s
life seriously at risk as he walked to address a meeting on July 31 at Ridley Road in East London.
For years he had addressed
perfectly peaceful meetings in Trafalgar Square in the heart of London, drawing large audiences that went there to listen
to a great orator. Even the Home Secretary at the time, Henry Brook, stated, “… the Union Movement … has
been holding meetings and there has been no disorder”. This, shortly before Mosley was banned from Trafalgar Square
in the face of Jewish and communist violence for which the explanation of one newspaper was, “Mosley is himself a provocation”
… as if the mere presence of this great and controversial figure justified the undemocratic methods of thugs and gangsters.
Robert Skidelsky made the reason for the violent attacks of 1962 quite clear in his biography of Mosley. He wrote, “The
Venice meeting and the scare of a European “fascist revival” was the precipitating cause”. He also cited
Colin Jordan’s National Socialist Movement meeting in Trafalgar Square in July 1962 with its provocative “Free
Britain from Jewish Control” banner as a contributory factor to the ban on Mosley. With or without the idiotic Jordan
meeting (for which Jordan was arrested) it was obvious that Mosley was the main target of these attacks and the Declaration
of Venice the event that got their backs up.
The press, along with television coverage, demonised Mosley in a way that
led the ill-informed to believe he had just appeared out of the woodwork to cause trouble … when, in fact, the very
opposite was true.
With halls and most outdoor venues barred to him, Mosley was even more restricted in putting his European
ideas across. Sir Hugh Carleton-Greene, in control of the BBC, said that Mosley “would appear only over my dead body”.
Eventually, in 1968, he did just that.
Meanwhile, violent repression was the method used to silence a man with a great
idea … an idea well before its time. If these ideas had held sway forty years ago then Europe would have achieved a
position in the world putting America in its place, instead of giving it carte blanche to do as it pleases today.
fact is, the National Party of Europe was a reality insofar that Europeans from different countries came together in the spirit
of solidarity and declared an agreement on the key issues that today seem to divide and render asunder the old mainstream
Mosley’s autobiography, My Life, contains the entire transcript of the European Declaration of Venice
in chapter 23, The Post-War European Idea. An entire blueprint for a renewal of a party and a continent is laid out for those
who possess the intelligence, the courage and the vision. He included it in his autobiography for a very obvious purpose.
To relegate Mosley to someone to blather about as a relic of the past would be to misunderstand his motives and aims because
the call to action is eternal.
In his chapter on the post-war European idea, he wrote, “Nothing in the end can
prevent the victory of the Europeans, who will come from all countries and from all parties to the final achievement. The
work of Venice was done and nothing can alter or reduce the reality of the fact. What has been done before will one day be
done again, on a broader front and in a greater way”.
For Mosley, Venice remained “a massive achievement”
because it proved that the will is there and so the act can be repeated.
That a new European party needs to be formed
is made abundantly clear by the intransigence of all other existing parties. Their moral bankruptcy is obvious. The aim of
the new ACTION will be to promote this European idea ... and to stir our comrades into action once more.
As in Mosley’s
day, we are up against very powerful vested interests that profit from division. We face the threat of persecution and physical
violence, along with misrepresentation by the media and our enemies on the far-Left.
It is the same now as it was then.
To reminisce about days gone by, the “good old days” as some would have it, is more appropriate in an old people’s
home where the tales become woollier or perhaps more coloured with age. Mosley called it, “blowing the froth off the
beer”. We must live in the reality of today and tomorrow.
Union Movement fell into a significant decline after
the orchestrated campaign of violence of the early 1960s. This was not due to a lack of spirit on the part of the rank and
file but more a realisation on Mosley’s part that being deprived of the means of free speech through traditional channels
he had to decide to leave party politics and to propagate his ideas as an individual. This he did in 1966, leaving a small
Directorate of Union Movement to act in an administrative capacity.
He remained the “Leader” in the eyes
of those of us who had supported him and to those who continued to do so through the Directorate and the later formed Action
Society. A new National Party of Europe would be our first duty. His legacy is the European idea as envisaged at Venice those
forty-odd years ago and is as relevant now as it will be in the future. With that legacy we have the foundations on which
to build … but who has the will to act?
This site is maintained by Robert Edwards