My Life

My Life - Oswald MosleyTelevision is now possibly a more powerful political force than the Press, yet it cutsboth ways, it both advertises and reveals. A smooth personality providing acomfortable and successful emblem of the affluent society may become a disasterwhen things go wrong, and the people suddenly require a completely different image.Nothing could be so stable and enduringly effective as the pervading influence of aparty which makes always available to the people in their daily lives trusted friendswho speak for the local party. Yet in practice all this is easier said than done, becausethe genius of the English people is improvisation under the spur of crisis rather thanorganisation before the necessity becomes evident. The English can do such thingsmuch quicker than most people, but they need stimulus. The most we can hope forbefore crisis is to get enough work done by volunteers to make most people aware ofan idea worthy of allegiance. First comes the idea— always.How far had you got with the aim of creating a party when you withdrew to write thebook, the reader may justly enquire? My answer is, further than I could have expectedin the absence of a national crisis. I have already given reasons produced from historicexperience and statistical analysis to show that a new party can never becomeeffective as a mass movement winning power before crisis comes. Until then, a newmovement can only be a powerhouse for new ideas. Union Movement has been not somuch a party as an apostle of national renaissance. The work has been done bydedicated men and women throughout the country with the character to endurethrough any adversity. They have made it possible for new ideas to live, and as aresult many people are aware that other policies exist and that they can turn to them intime of crisis. During conditions of the affluent society this is the limit of theachievement. Serious ideas and serious men are not taken seriously until the timesbecome serious. Then things happen very quickly.Branches on their own initiative fight local elections, and the party occasionallyintervenes in parliamentary elections. In this way ideas can be brought before thepeople, but, of course, there can be no hope of success until these ideas are needed.Nevertheless, results are interesting. In the General Election of 1966 I polled 4-6 percent of the vote recorded in a prosperous constituency where there was no particularissue, like coloured immigration. The average vote of our few candidates was 3-78per cent. Parliamentary general elections tend to give a new movement a lower votethan local elections or parliamentary by-elections, for the obvious reason that graverissues are involved; throwing away a vote as a demonstration is then a more seriousmatter.What did our votes mean in terms of political reality? Our average vote of 3-78 percent exceeded by nearly i per cent the percentage swing between the two main partiesof 2-7 per cent. Our voters are not floaters, they go for us at all costs. It used to besaid that the Bonapartist army knew what they fought for, and loved what they knew.It may with justice be said of our voters that they know what they vote for and lovewhat they know. They have not only seen and heard us, but have withstood for yearsthe storm of abuse from the powerful organs of opinion. This vote also considerablyexceeds votes achieved in normal conditions on the Continent by new parties which incrisis have obtained power very quickly. For instance, the National Socialist Party inGermany obtained only 2-8 per cent of the votes recorded in 1928, but won powerwith over 40 per cent five years later in conditions of widespread unemployment andnational crisis. Our vote of 3-8 per cent in 1966 thus exceeded their vote of 1928, and387 of 424