Submitted by former prospective MP Jack Sen, essay by former MEP Andrew Brons, and notes from a UKIP insider
Long standing members of UKIP will recall the way in which Farage sought to undermine those who were in his way or competed with him. UKIP's alleged blackmail of Douglas Carswell, the manner in which the party has treated Neil Hamilton, former MEP Godfrey Bloom and....me.
There is in fact a lengthy list of such people: Alan Sked, Rodney Atkinson, Damian Hockney, Petrina Holdsworth, Richard Suchorzewski, Mike Nattrass, to name a few.
So in no way am I defending Farage's comportment during his most recent attempt to undermine his current competition, but Carswell?
As Labour seeks to rebrand itself as Old Labour, under the stewardship of Jeremy Corbyn, in turn leaving a gaping electoral vaccum directly to the left of centre that UKIP could quite easily fill, why would a party that's already made enormous grounds wresting support from said Labour Party - specifically in the North West - want to rebrand itself as Tory Party 2.0?
I'd never support Nigel Farage after the manner in which he betrayed me during my parliamentary campaign but considering how absolutely cucked (for financial reasons, not ideological ones) the man already is, why would membership support replacing him that will drive indigenous working class voters away?
Why would so many at the top support someone who shares about as much with the grass roots UKIP membership as I do with the Tory Party? Is working with Farage that excruciating UKIP brass would sacrifice the fuutre of the party to remove him?
This makes even less sense when one considers the fact that Farage himself is an establishment operative.
In my recent book, How to Get Suspended from UKIP in articles and 2 Tweets, which you can pick up here, former Member of European Parliament Andrew Brons, brilliantly argued that Farage has conspired with the establishment to decimate actual nationalism. So why now is the establishment and the mainstream media supporting Carswell's play for control of the party?
Makes one think....
Additional Notes: 'Some sympathy must be for Carswell in that he has intellect, which Farage lacks,
and is a better operator as a result of his intelligence. Still, something's certainly a miss when the same establishment that once gave Farage so much publicity, is backing his greatest adversary yet. A plant is far more valuable than a useful idiot.' UKIP Whistleblower 2
Nigel Is Convicted by His Own Words and Deeds
by Andrew Brons, former MEP
There are two sets of conspiracy theorists whose entreaties should be resisted. There are those who presume that nearly all national and international misfortunes are caused by conspiracies - usually the same one - and that all political opponents have malign, hidden motivations. There are others - who might be called the accidentalists - who sneer at the slightest hint that any group of two or more might collude to the disadvantage of others.
I prefer to be in the company of those who start with the evidence and use it to lead one to a conclusion. I cannot bear those who start with a conclusion and then belatedly seek confirming evidence.
There is something about Mr. Farage that lures us into presumptions before the evidence is present, so that temptation must be avoided. After all, the resemblances between the UKIP leader and young George Cole's character, Flash Harry, are very superficial and certainly unkind.
We must not prejudge Mr. Farage because we do not need to prejudge him. We can assess his motivations on the basis of firm evidence - evidence that flows from his own lips.
In the early 2000’s Mr. Farage announced to his colleagues and assistants that he was seeking a meeting with senior BBC functionaries. He would tell BBC representation that if they did not back him, they would get the BNP. We do not know what reception he received from the BBC, but we do know that Mr. Farage has since appeared on the network’s flagship programme, Question Time, more than any other politician.
Therefore, it stands to reason Mr. Farage was successful in at least procuring some level of cooperation.
On Good Friday 2010 Mr. Farage was a panelist on Radio 4's Any Questions. He and the other panelists were asked what was the political achievement of which they were most proud.
When it came to Mr. Farage he might have said that he was proud of having secured the election of thirteen UKIP MEPs. He might have said that he had succeeded in making the issue of Britain's membership of the European Union a major election issue. He cited neither of those achievements. He said that the achievement of which he was most proud was that he had, "prevented forever the British National Party from becoming a major political party". Ironically, only a month or so afterwards the BNP received an average vote in the 2010 General Election that was slightly higher than that won by UKIP.
When the British National Party was in an unambiguous state of fragmentation, Mr. Farage insisted that he could claim the credit for the state of that Party. Of course, it was clear to anybody the BNP’s unraveling was due to internal strife attributed to human conduct rather than anything conspiratorial, as Mr. Farage had insisted.
The explanation in this case was psychological and behavioural, rather than conspiratorial.
Still, the fact that Mr. Farage wanted to take credit for the demise of a genuinely Eurosceptic political party should be cause for alarm.
There are two related but distinct explanations for Mr. Farage's obsessive delusions about the BNP. One is that he was from the outset only a 'place man' - somebody who was not motivated in the slightest by patriotism or by any real desire to achieve Britain's exit from the European Union.
Quite another explanation is that he did not suffer from any delusions about the limitations of his effect on the BNP. However, he knew and knows which interests control the levers of power, and has always wanted to demonstrate to them, his hostility to genuine (as distinct from civic) Nationalists. In that Mr. Farage has demonstrated a clear understanding of the central motivation of the Political Establishment.
We welcome news and information on UKIP. If you have something you believe will be of interest to us, please email us confidentially. Your message and identity will never be revealed. If you'd like to discuss your concerns with UKIP or have information you feel may help us with our efforts, please don't hesitate to contact us on firstname.lastname@example.org