.

“While revolutionaries as individuals can be murdered, you cannot kill ideas.”

• Thomas Sankara

Thomas Sankara (1949 – 1987) has variously been described as a revolutionary, a progressive nationalist, a Marxist, and a pan-Africanist. He was the former President of Burkina Faso (from 1983 until his assassination in 1987) and in that short period of time he promoted land redistribution, a move towards food self-sufficiency, health initiatives, women’s rights & environmental initiatives. We feel that he represents a worthy ‘Point of Reference’ for National Liberals.
Picture Credit: https://ordaf.org/somurgecilige-direnen-devrimci-burkina-fasonun-lideri-thomas-sankara/

IT’S PROBABLY fair to say that many of those who National Liberals regard as a ‘Point of Reference’ hail from many years ago.

• Land Redistribution and Food Self-Sufficiency: Sankara confiscated land from feudal landlords and redistributed it to peasants, greatly increasing agricultural productivity. His Grow What You Eat and Eat What You Grow campaign led to a dramatic rise in food production. Indeed, Burkina Faso became nearly self-sufficient in staple foods by 1986.
  . 
• Vaccination and Health Initiatives: In one of the most successful public health campaigns in Africa, Sankara’s government vaccinated between two – three million children against meningitis, yellow fever, and measles in just a few weeks.
• Women’s Rights: Sankara was a tireless advocate for gender equality. He outlawed forced marriages and female genital mutilation (FGM), promoted female education, appointed women to prominent government positions, and encouraged women to work outside the home and join the military. He famously declared, “The revolution and women’s liberation go together. We do not talk of women’s emancipation as an act of charity or out of a surge of human compassion. It is a basic necessity for the revolution to triumph.
• Environmental Initiatives: Recognising the looming threat of desertification, Sankara launched a massive tree-planting programme, creating “green belts” to combat the desert and conserve the environment. (It’s thought that around ten million trees were planted during this initiative.)
• Infrastructure and Public Works: The government built railways, schools, health clinics, and water reservoirs, largely through mass mobilisation and voluntary labour. It’s said that Sankara wanted to build a railroad to develop a rare-earth metal mine in Burkina Faso. However, the World Bank refused to loan the money. Therefore, he got a pick and shovel and started building the railroad by hand himself!
• Anti-Corruption Measures: Sankara led by example, reducing his own salary, banning government limousines, and selling off the fleet of Mercedes cars for more modest Renault 5s. Civil servants were required to swear an oath of honesty, and government waste was drastically reduced. In particular, he curtailed the traditional powers of tribal chiefs, who were seen by many as corrupt. 

OUR ATTENTION has been drawn to an online petition which may be of interest to our readers.

.

We believe that consumers must be able to choose what payment method they want to use.

The petition – Stop Discriminating Against Cash Users At Self-Checkouts– calls on UK supermarkets to stop limiting cash payments at self-checkouts, ensuring that all customers, such as the elderly and people with disabilities, have equal access to payment options.

.

As National Liberals we believe that consumers must be able to choose what payment method they want to use.

.

Therefore, we have absolutely no problem if someone wants to live their life paying by card.  However, we feel that consumers must always be allowed the option to pay by cash.

.

We realise that many people believe that paying by card is quick & easy.  However, we remain wary of the intentions of large corporations who may use card payment schemes as an excuse to get rid of workers.

.

We feel that these corporations have a moral & social responsibility to their customers, the local community & their workforce.

.

The petition reads:

.

We, the undersigned, are calling on UK supermarkets to stop limiting access to cash payments at self-checkouts.

.

More and more stores are installing banks of card-only self-checkouts, with just one or two accepting cash – or none at all.

.

This creates a two-tier system that unfairly penalises:

•  Older people who rely on cash 

•  People with disabilities or mental health conditions who need to budget manually

•  Those on Universal Credit or without full access to banking

•  Anyone who prefers cash for budgeting, privacy, or safety

Hilaire Belloc (left) and G.K. Chesterton (right) were the main advocates of the alternative economic idea known as distributism. They were opposed to capitalism – where property & assets are in the hands of a few – and socialism and communism – where property & assets are in the hands of the state (and party bosses). Distributism stands in favour of property and productive assets being in the hands of the many.
(Picture Credits: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hilaire_Belloc#/media/File:Hilaire_Belloc_(side_view,_1910).jpg & https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G._K._Chesterton#/media/File:Gilbert_Chesterton.jpg Fair Use)

DISTRIBUTISM is an economic philosophy and doctrine. It advocates for a more widespread distribution of property and productive assets among individuals. It stands in opposition to capitalism – where property & assets are in the hands of a few – and socialism and communism – where property & assets are in the hands of the state (and party bosses).

• G.K. Chesterton (1874 – 1936) was an English writer and philosopher. He provided a passionate defence of distributism, arguing for the preservation of small property and the importance of family, community, and tradition.

• Hilaire Belloc (1870 – 1953) was a prolific historian and essayist, Belloc critiqued both capitalist and socialist systems for their dehumanising effects, advocating instead for a society of owners rather than wage slaves.

• Widespread Property Ownership. The core of distributist thought is that productive property (land, tools, businesses) should be owned by as many people as possible, rather than concentrated in the hands of a few or the state.

• Support for Small Businesses and Cooperatives. Distributists oppose monopolies and oligopolies (a market structure where a few firms control prices and output). Instead, they support a vibrant economy made up of small businesses, family farms, and worker-owned cooperatives.

• Family and Localism. The family is seen as the natural and fundamental unit of society. Policies and practices should support family stability and enable families to own property and earn a living.

• Subsidiarity. Decisions should be made at the most local level possible. Here, communities are empowered – rather than distant authorities or centralised corporations.

• Harmony with Nature. Distributism encourages stewardship of the environment and responsible land use, often aligning with agrarian or ecological principles.

• Ethics in Economics. Economic actions are viewed through a moral lens. Here, the focus is on justice, human dignity, and the common good (as opposed to outright greed).

• Worker Cooperatives. Enterprises owned and managed by their employees, sharing profits and decision-making.

• Credit Unions. Financial institutions owned by members, providing community-oriented financial services.

• Community Land Trusts. Organizations that acquire and steward land for the benefit of local residents, ensuring affordable housing and local enterprise.

• Smallholder Agriculture. Support for family farms and local food systems as opposed to industrial agribusiness.

• Versus Capitalism. While capitalism values private property, in practice it tends to concentrate ownership and create wage dependency. Distributism seeks to decentralise ownership and encourage economic self-sufficiency.

• Versus Socialism. Socialism often involves state ownership or control of productive assets. Distributism, by contrast, insists that property and productive assets should remain in private hands but be widely distributed.

.

TWO DAYS AGO, Nations without States – NwS – held a very successful conference, in Slough, Berkshire.

Some of the speakers & delegates – representing different nations and peoples – at a recent ‘Self-Determination & Peace’ conference. Nations & peoples are rooted in positive aspects – such as ancestry, heritage and ethnicity. Therefore, self-determinists reject negative aspects, like colonialism, imperialism & forced migration (which are ultimately driven by capitalism) as well as all forms of hatred. True self-determinists are motivated by love & not hate.

The ‘Self-Determination & Peace’ conference was jointly organised with the New World Human Rights Watch & the Mustaqbill Foundation.

.

.

REJOINING THE EU? NOT IF YOU CARE ABOUT BRITAIN’S WORKING CLASS

.

THE EU WAS never built for workers. It was designed by bankers, for bankers, with a rulebook written in the language of capital. Those pushing for a return to Brussels’ embrace, whether through Starmer’s “reset” or eventual ‘rejoin’, have conveniently forgotten that the loudest and most principled opposition to the European project once came from the democratic socialist tradition. Brexit Was a Working-Class Revolt Against the EU’s Neoliberal Empire.

.

THE WORKING CLASS VOTED OUT FOR A REASON

.

It wasn’t xenophobia or nostalgia that drove Brexit. It wasn’t racist pensioners or backward northerners who delivered Brexit, despite what metropolitan liberals claim. It was lived experience. The towns and cities that bore the brunt of deindustrialisation, where steelworks shut, pits closed, and factories vanished, voted Leave. These weren’t mindless protest votes. They were a clear-eyed rejection of a system that had gutted their communities while enriching London and Brussels.

.

For decades, the EU promised prosperity. What it delivered was stagnation, cheap labour undercutting wages, and a political class that told former engineers and miners to become coders or delivery drivers. These weren’t ignorant votes. They were calculated rejections of a system that had failed ordinary people for decades.

..

These communities understood what too many Remainers still refuse to admit: the EU helped write the script for Britain’s managed decline.

.

THE EU’S IRON CAGE OF NEOLIBERALISM

.

EU Fiscal Policy Of Austerity

.

Let’s be blunt: EU membership makes genuine socialist policy impossible. Its treaties and directives enshrine neoliberalism as constitutional law. Its core directives are designed to prevent exactly what Britain’s working class needs:

•  State aid rules make industrial revival through public ownership nearly impossible.

•  Competition law prevents governments from prioritising local and national businesses over multinationals

•  Fiscal rules like the Maastricht criteria force austerity, even in recession. Reducing public spending to 3% of GDP for government deficits and 60% of GDP for public debt. Set in the Stability and Growth Pact and enshrined in the EU Treaties

•  Free movement creates a race to the bottom for wages in many sectors, particularly the lower end

This isn’t theoretical. When French railway workers protested against privatisation, they were told EU rules required it. When Greece elected a left-wing government promising to end austerity, the EU crushed them. When Italy tried to rescue failing banks, EU state aid rules hampered them.

.

The EU is neoliberalism carved into constitutional stone, designed specifically to be beyond the reach of democratic change. It isn’t a neutral platform. It’s a fortress of market orthodoxy, purpose-built to prevent the kind of democratic economic planning Britain now desperately needs.

.

BRITAIN NEEDS INDUSTRIAL STRATEGY, NOT FREE TRADE

 

Nationalisation of the coal industry, January 1947

.

.

After decades of allowing the market to decide everything, Britain’s industrial base has been hollowed out. Nine of the ten poorest regions in Northern Europe are in the UK, a damning indictment of both EU membership and domestic policy failure.

.

What Britain needs isn’t Starmer’s craven crawl back to Brussels. It needs:

.

1.  A sovereign industrial strategy that rebuilds manufacturing in former industrial heartlands

.

2.  Public ownership of key utilities water, energy, and rail, without EU competition rules standing in the way

3.  Local and regional investment controlled by democratically accountable bodies, not distant EU commissioner

4.  Training and apprenticeships for British youth instead of importing skilled workers

5.  Immigration policies that serve national needs without undermining wages

6.  Migration policies that protect wages and integrate new arrivals fairly

.

7.  Skills and training for British youth, not endless reliance on imported labour

.

8.  Rebuilding manufacturing in the Midlands and North

.

None of this is possible inside the EU’s institutional straitjacket. EU rules are designed to prioritise cross-border capital flows over workers’ interests. Rules that prevent member states from doing precisely what Britain must now do.

.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=781TJAZ9Hq4

.

Before Brexit became a culture war, the strongest EU critics came from the socialist Left. Tony Benn warned that the EU transferred power “from those you can elect to those you cannot remove.” Jeremy Corbyn voted against every EU treaty that came before Parliament. Peter Shore condemned the “bankers’ Europe” being built at democracy’s expense.

.

BUILDING SOMETHING BETTER

.

Leaving the EU wasn’t a leap into the unknown. It was a refusal to be ruled by a system that had already failed us.

.

What comes next should not be isolationist, but independent. Not reactionary, but regenerative. Not protectionism, but strategic trade. Not xenophobia, but a migration system that serves the British working class rather than undermining it.

.

Remaining outside the EU’s restrictive framework gives Britain the freedom to:

.

•  New manufacturing hubs in our former industrial heartland

.

•  A national investment strategy directed at levelling up beyond Westminster’s PR gimmicks

.

•  Implement regional development without Brussels approval

.

•  Protect strategic industries without violating competition law

.

•  Design trade deals that benefit workers, not just corporations

.

•  A second city built in the North to break the gravitational pull of London

.

•  Energy, transport, and infrastructure projects that create real jobs and renew pride in place

.

These ambitions are not just necessary, they’re now possible. But only outside the EU. We have the freedom to build an economy that works for the many, not the few, exactly what the establishment fears most.

.

THE GREEN CASE FOR MADE IN BRITAIN

.

Robber Barons Tariffs

.

There’s another powerful reason to rebuild our manufacturing base: the planet cannot sustain the insanity of global supply chains that ship everyday items thousands of miles for marginal cost savings.

.

The EU’s model of borderless trade isn’t just economically unsustainable, it’s environmentally catastrophic. Every plastic toy manufactured in Asia, every piece of furniture from Eastern Europe, every vegetable grown in Spain that could be grown here carries a carbon footprint that’s killing our future.

.

Brexit gives us the opportunity to build a genuinely green industrial strategy:

.

•  Localised production that slashes transport emissions and shipping pollution

.

•  Shorter supply chains that reduce vulnerability to global disruptions

.

•  Circular economy initiatives free from restrictive EU procurement rules

.

•  Strategic manufacturing of essential goods like medical supplies, energy components, and food

.

•  Regional specialisation based on local skills and resources rather than global race-to-the-bottom competition

.

We cannot be a nation of shopkeepers if the nation doesn’t make the goods to sell. The EU’s borderless market has turned Britain into a consumption economy dependent on imports and financial services, neither of which provides secure, well-paid jobs for working-class communities.

.

If Trump’s trade wars have taught us anything, it’s that a country needs not only to be sustainable but to sustain itself. Nations that cannot produce essential goods become subordinate to those that can. The globalist monster feeds on dependency, which is precisely what the EU’s model creates.

.

True environmental sustainability cannot be achieved through consumer guilt trips and carbon offsets. It requires fundamental restructuring of how and where we produce the things we need. Making what we use, close to where we use it, isn’t just common sense, it’s the only path to genuine sustainability.

.

BREXIT WAS JUST THE START:

THE CASE FOR A SOVEREIGN, SOCIALIST BRITAIN

.