Merry Christmas

“THE great majority of people will go on observing forms that cannot be explained; they will keep Christmas Day with Christmas gifts and Christmas benedictions; they will continue to do it; and some day suddenly wake up and discover why.”

~G.K. Chesterton: 'Generally Speaking.'

A very Merry Christmas to all FC's supporters.

GK Chesterton on the Expulsion of the Jews from England.

Listen to GK Chesterton's The Curse of the Golden Cross here.

It may only be on BBC iplayer for a few days so go quickly.

The charming story includes a brief history of moneylending Jews and their expulsion from England. It's not often that appears uncritically on the Beeb.

No doubt the faggot head of the National Secular Society is penning a piece on "Christian hatred of Jews lead to the Holocaust" right now!

Quote of the Week: GK Chesterton - Going Against the Stream

“A dead thing can go with the stream, but only a living thing can go against it. A dead dog can be lifted on the leaping water with all the swiftness of a leaping hound; but only a live dog can swim backwards.”

G.K. ChestertonThe Everlasting Man.

Are You For or Against a Corrupt Zionist Regime?

Have a look at this great montage. Again it shows the hypocrisy of "the West" - i.e. the political and media class.

The last time I made a comparison between the (Real) IRA and the Syrian insurrectionists, and the treatment of them by the BBC (chalk and cheese) when they shoot soldiers, I had one or two dullards and/or nonces stirring up quite the hornet's nest on here.

So, just to let you know, I am not an anarchist any more than I am an Islamist (or "democrat") Arab insurrectionist. I know, I know... but you'd be amazed at what trolls, idiots and numpties will read into a post!

Of course - the rioters in Cairo were fighting against a Zionist puppet regime that had acted against the interests of the indigenous people for decades... whereas in England we have... a 'democracy.' Mwah ha ha!

The BBC treated Irish and Syrian armed gangs who shoot soldiers, policemen etc, quite differently; they also treat those who riot against governments controlled by vested interests quite differently.

As always (e.g. when dealing with Libya or Saudi Arabia ruling families, Iran or Israel's nuclear realities, Serbian or American 'war crimes') the BBC twists the news to fit a specifically British State agenda, and to pretend otherwise is ridiculous. As our state is Zionist (i.e. in the pockets of Masonic bankers/financiers and hardline pro-Israel) the litmus test seems to be whether a regime is pro-Israeli or Israel-tolerant. Of course in international diplomacy nothing is so straightforward. France, for example has gone from "bad" to "good" under Sarkozy (I wonder why) from a regime which tended to oppose Zionist wars to one which is far more in favour of them (it is highly questionable that the French people changed that much!)

That some British nationalists (still!) worship the Westminster State and are still following certain paths and herded in certain pens, thanks to years of brainwashing and State propaganda speaks volumes. The blinkers still aren't off. And so we see a "hurrah" for 'plucky' David Cameron who stands up to the Euro Beast... to defend the rights of financiers in the City of London, who in turn show little or no loyalty to the UK (always threatening to leave these shores if taxes are raised, for example)

The plastic patriots who cheered on 'Call me Dave' Cameron used to be the Imperialists, who cheered as Britain planted flags in India, Africa, and even in Calais and Gibraltar (but who would go to war if Spain or France claimed the Isle of Wight). Of course, they were too dumb to realise that eventually the Indians and Africans would return the favour and colonise us - now they want to claim as a right what their political forebears denied the Indians and Africans -- independence, nationalism and their own country run by their own kind.

The jingoism of Empire was in reality a form of multi-culturalism which celebrated money, profits and greed above all else. There was little or no altruism, no seeking what was best for "us" or "them." The British (unlike for example the Spaniards) did not even have the good grace to convert the heathens. Speaking to an Indian (Hindu) on a train recently he told me that most Christians in India are Catholic, with one small area also Methodist (after a Methodist missionary went there). The impact of Anglicanism, given that England ran India for so many years, was minimal indeed. Just imagine (and this is pure conjecture of course and not seen as the be-all and end-all) an India and Pakistan that was converted to a form of Christianity, instead of just bled dry and turned against each other as Britain sought to 'divide and rule' with Muslims and Hindus.

We might even have no nuclear powers playing tit for tat wars with each other, and no Muslim stronghold (used by the CIA and its enemies) to "export terror" as and when needed. Or look at Japan, which was on the verge of becoming Christian thanks to missionaries from Mediterranean lands. It was Dutch and English traders who persuaded the Japanese rulers who weren't Christian (about half) that this was some kind of threat from Portugal or Spain which would then "take over" and so Christians were massacred, crucified en masse, and often mutilated by having their feet cut off. It was the money-men of Amsterdam and London who stopped Japan becoming Christian... imagine the impact in WW2? History may have been so different. It may even have impacted on China, preventing the rise of Communism... who knows?

It was money and profits that drove the British Empire, and it was (as usual!) GK Chesterton who saw the future problems this early globalism would bring. I found this interesting text/review online, about an essay on Patriotism by GKC. It is so good I would urge everyone to read it two or three times and to keep a copy for future reference:

There is, however, another enemy of Patriotism and Nationalism. It is equipped with power and wealth and a good chance of success in practical politics and it is but the disguise of cosmopolitanism. It is Imperialism, or as we would say, 'Globalism'. In Chesterton's opinion the Empire was neither for the benefit nor the glory of the English, it was for their exploitation. We had been put to work, to suffer, to bleed and to die, for the benefit of international banking and trade, that is, 'Globalism', and when we had served our purpose the assets would be stripped and lodged elsewhere. The price of such glory as we might enjoy from seeing the map painted red, was our impoverishment, our deculturation, our mongrelization, our destruction as a Nation. Chesterton presented this succinctly in 'The Flying Inn'(1904) "Did you ever hear the great destiny of Empire? It is in four acts: Victory over barbarians. Employment of barbarians. Alliance with barbarians. Conquest by barbarians. That is the great destiny of Empire."

GK Chesterton saw mass immigration into Britain decades before it happened, whilst the ideological forebears of today's plastic patriots, Westminster State worshippers to  a man, were singing God Save the King, down with the Frenchies/Krauts (delete as applicable) in short, much as most of them still do today!

They sung/sing a hymn to a Queen who has rubber stamped laws on homosexuality, abortion and divorce (and mass immigration/anti-racislism!) that have ripped this country apart. She swore to be a Christian Monarch on her accession to the throne, an oath she swore to God; but just as the wedding oaths sworn by so many, it was meaningless - as their weddings were dissolved by man, might we wonder if her monarchy should be dissolved by man? How can a Christian Monarch pass laws as she has? She even made the architect of the 1967 Abortion Law (which resulted in the deaths of millions of innocent Britons) a Lord!!! How preposterous is that? ...and we have Charles "defender of (multi-)faiths" waiting in the side-lines.

If Elizabeth II had an ounce of decency she would have stepped down as monarch, or stood firm to uphold her oath. This, I believe, is the basic argument of much of the Lawful Rebellion crowd. If the crown is void (a kind of British 'sede vacante' - vacant seat - position if you will) then when we enter the courts controlled by the crown, they have lost the authority to judge us. If we do not recognise the crown as legitimate, having broken the Coronation Oath (as usury, abortion and homosexuality to name but three, are anti-Christian), then it has no right to levy taxes on us -- for its illegal wars, its pro-queer bodies, its abortion-performing structures and for its repayments on usury debts.

But let us return to nationhood. GKC once said that the patriot loves his country, whereas an imperialist wants to invade his neighbours. I said in a recent post that WW2's very basis was flawed given that we were conned into taking part in a war that was for the freedom of Poland, but resulted in handing over the entirety of Poland to one of the very powers that had invaded it in September 1939 (but which bizarrely we did not declare war on!): the USSR.

For me, one of the faults with National Socialist Germany was that it was, at its very core imperialist. The Reich was to expand. Austria was a fascist country with a superb economic basis on which it was building structures for the Common God that were building a socially strong and confident Austria. Even Poland was nationalist and had stood up to Soviet Communism. Today it would be painted by liberals as "fascist." The sad fact is that both these countries were taken over by a Germany whose very basis was imperial growth. It was its imperialism rather than any perceived "fascism" or "socialism" that proved its downfall.

"Chesterton’s distaste for state socialism, his suspicion of monopoly capitalism, and his support for the independence from imperial domination of small nations like Poland..."

from the GK Chesterton Society's conference 2011 blurb

As nationalists, we must be nationalists! This is the basis of this rather meandering post. We must stand up for our own nation. We must not be imperialists, we do not want or need empires. We must realise that we love our nation(s), but that does not mean we must worship the state. We must disassociate worship of the Westminster State from love of nation.

This is a debate that nationalists need to have, especially in light of devolution, a monarch and state that are promoting homosexuality and abortion, the collapse of the Euro and the ongoing take-over of our lands by non-Europeans, which the state is defending to the detriment of our people!

Regardless of the permutations in the arguments that fly back and forth, the one thing that we have to realise above all else is that as nationalists today, the state that rules over us, which has promoted multi-racism, destroyed Christianity, pulled apart the family, promoted illegal Zionist wars, and pushes its twisted propaganda as news on the BBC, is not "ours" - it is not British, English or whatever - it is in the pockets of financiers with no national loyalty, it is bought and paid for by the men who rule the Lodges who wreck our lives, yet it expects our loyalty too??? We'd have to be mad!

That is the British State as it stands, that is why we owe it no loyalty. It, the Queen, her governments and the Lodges behind them all, have betrayed the peoples of these isles on every single imaginable level. The law is not only an ass, but a law that breaks almost every single moral law (from deadening usury, to sterile homosexuality, to the multi-racism that destroys, to the mass death of abortion), has to make us realise that we are living under a regime that has sold us and our children into perpetual slavery, taxation-debt and degeneracy.

That's why, when I see an anarchist bashing a police van in London, whether it is a demo over student loans, big brother or against another war -- despite the fact that he may need a "damn good wash" (copyright 1970s NF) and support more than a few dubious causes -- I see very little difference between those demonstrating against a corrupt, pro-Israeli regime in the pockets of the money-men, who treat the indigenous people like crap; and the demonstrators in Cairo.

Distributism: A Movement Whose Time Has Come

This says it all.

When usury-bankers have created a huge financial mess.

When politicians care more about their own benefits than the Common Good.

When the police let criminals rule the streets whilst building a Police State.

When media hacks make up stories and spy on people to make a quick buck.

When the family collapses under immorality, amorality, a culture of death and government tactics.

When centralisation of government and banks in Euroland results in debt and slavery.

When plurality and moral chaos replace Christianity and tradition.

It's time for Common Sense.

G.K. Chesterton Versus Richard Dawkins - GKC Wins!

What a logo!

Taken from: Blame the 1st blog

"We are machines built by DNA whose purpose is to make more copies of the same DNA…It is every living object's sole reason for living." - Richard Dawkins

"It is as if a man were asked, "What is the use of a hammer?" and answered, "To make hammers"; and when asked, "And of those hammers, what is the use?" answered, "To make hammers again". Just as such a man would be perpetually putting off the question of the ultimate use of carpentry, so...all the rest of us are by these phrases successfully putting off the question of the ultimate value of the human life." - G. K. Chesterton

-----

Inspired by a blog post from True Freethinker: G.K. Chesterton nails Richard Dawkins

Can purpose exist without God?

In order to have purpose, something must have been created with an intended purpose, thus requiring a creator; therefore, in order for the universe (and the life that exists within it) to have purpose, it must have been created with an intended purpose, thus requiring a creator (otherwise known as God). If God does not exist, then nothing created the universe, and therefore the universe and everything within it exists without purpose.

Most atheists try to avoid this dilemma by explaining that, even though God does not exist to give the universe purpose, we can still give the universe (and our lives) purpose. True, but then what is the point? If the universe ultimately has no purpose, then what is the point of giving it purpose other than to hide the fact that it has no purpose?

Still others try to be more creative. For example, biologist Richard Dawkins explains that the purpose of life is to pass our genes to the next generation. While his atheistic clergy might find this explanation satisfactory, to the rest of us, it’s rather shallow, as it implies that the purpose of life is to create more life (and the purpose of that life is to create more life, and so on and so forth until the end of time). He might as well say that we exist for the sake of existing, which is less an explanation and more an excuse.

Then again, if you’re an atheist, what else do you have but excuses?

Democracy of Tradition

Tradition is the extension of Democracy through time; it is the proxy of the dead and the enfranchisement of the unborn.

Tradition may be defined as the extension of the franchise. Tradition means giving votes to the most obscure of all classes, our ancestors. It is the democracy of the dead. Tradition refuses to submit to the small and arrogant oligarchy of those who merely happen to be walking about. All democrats object to men being disqualified by the accident of birth; tradition objects to their being disqualified by the accident of death. Democracy tells us not to neglect a good man's opinion, even if he is our groom; tradition asks us not to neglect a good man's opinion, even if he is our father. I, at any rate, cannot separate the two ideas of democracy and tradition.

G.K. Chesterton

Extremists in Media Land: Not the Cocaine Snorters!

Buttering my toast this morning*, I was watching the newspaper review on BBC News 24. They referred to a political party called True Finns, who seem to be growing in support, and who seem to be Eurosceptic.

That all sounds fine and groovy.

The funny thing was that the talking head doing the reviews said words to the effect** of 'they claim not be nationalistic, but then they are opposed to more immigration into Finland.'

Right: Opposing immigration is "extremist" yet snorting cocaine is fine and dandy -- welcome to the media world.

What struck me here is that this was mentioned (to the Asiatic presenter) as something quite sinister, and I think the word "extreme" even made its way into the banter.

Pardon me! Since when is it extreme to oppose the EU or immigration?

Imagine our grandparents being asked these questions:

1. Do you think it would be extreme to keep Britain as it is, with its wealth of native cultures, and its addition of European cultures? Or would it be extreme to bring over many millions of Asians and Africans?
2. Do you think it would be extreme to keep Europe as a bloc of trading, friendly nations with peace treaties and suchlike to ensure security and peace, all in the framework of Christian traditions? or would it be extreme to have a single European currency, central European bank, unelected European Commission deciding laws, and a Human Rights legislation handing out new laws against Christians and promoting homosexuality?

Imagine our parents being asked those questions... or us! And that is the problem with media-land. The lefty, drugged-up, homosexualist mindset reigns supreme and so, in their cosy little bubble surrounded by the same people, who went to the same schools, who got the same degrees, who snort the same cocaine, being opposed to immigration (note: not hating anything non-European or non-White) is "extremist"!

This is the same reason why these media-heads consider Christians and their hatred of homosexuality (loving the sinner, hating the sin etc. etc.) "extremist" because they cannot countenance anything else.

The mindset of the Marxists who have infiltrated local government, schools and the media is made to seem "mainstream" whereas those who are Traditional (in politics, religion, morals etc.) are made out as the "New Nazis."

Our streets are awash with drugs, immigration has delivered chaos and gun crime, homosexuality and its promotion is creating a sexual laissez faire society with the concurrent amorality in all spheres... and these people wonder why our society is crumbling?

Their "truths" born out of the cultural, sexual, political, religious and moral maelstrom that was the 60s, are separate from the rest of history - and yet we are told to believe in all their PC claptrap as if it were the Gospel Truth. Not even all men alive today believe in it, just those men (and wymmin) who own, run, staff and are bribed by the oligarchs' structures of power (banks, media and political parties).

Bear this in mind dear reader:

We are getting a referendum-vote on the AV voting system in the UK in May, which even its chief promoter (the Lib Dems' Nick Clegg) said was a "miserable little compromise," yet 'we' were never (in the 50s, 60s, 70s etc.) given a referendum on the decision to let in millions of non-whites which changed our millennia-old society almost overnight, which destroyed whole communities, which changed our religious identity, and so much more (let's not even dissect street crime, gun crime, drug crime etc.).

Ask yourself this:

• Which is of more importance to us as the peoples of these isles? Which has more impact on our lives, on our communities, on our children? Which has more impact on the safety of the elderly?
• Which is of more importance to the Bilderberg/Rothschild marionette traitors in parliament? Or the cocaine-using sexual degenerates in the media?

To answer these questions gives the answer to our present malaise.

Tradition means giving votes to the most obscure of all classes, our ancestors. It is the democracy of the dead. Tradition refuses to submit to the small and arrogant oligarchy of those who merely happen to be walking about. All democrats object to men being disqualified by the accident of birth; tradition objects to their being disqualified by the accident of death. Democracy tells us not to neglect a good man's opinion, even if he is our groom; tradition asks us not to neglect a good man's opinion, even if he is our father.

GK Chesterton, Orthodoxy

* yes - I'm living the dream! It''s that rock n roll lifestyle again.
** Come on! It was 5.45am and I wasn't taking notes!

London's Burning: Agent Provocateurs on the Streets

Right: Caption suggestions:

1. Sarge, sarge? Is this the right way to do it?
2. Mum - Can I drop my washing off next week?
3. Argghhh! Keep that magnet away from me!
4. Ok ya. So back to uni for Pimms?
   

The riots in London at the "anti-cuts" rally bring forward a number of interesting aspects for nationalists:

• The state is behind much of the fracas. This is well documented, and the blog GriffinWatch has brought together some of the evidence.
• This is in response to the previous police state tactic of kettling, leading to perfectly law-abiding people having to urinate in the street and not being allowed to go about their perfectly lawful business (even people not in the demonstrations!). The police are out to prove that if not allowed harsh tactics, trouble ensues.
• The state-led violence is used to silence and arrest genuine protesters.
• Meanwhile the media go out of their way to disassociate the socialists etc. from the violence. Nationalists remember how left-wing (state led?) violence against NF marches in the 70s was used by the same media to paint nationalists as 'violent.'

The secret state and the media (the same media that paints US/NATO action against the Libyan army in support of a rebel army as a "no fly zone") have been playing out the game, and we sheep just baa.

Re. the London riots one is reminded of GK Chesterton's book "The Man Who Was Thursday." Seems like nothing has changed in the seedy world of the anarchists!

Osborne: Target the Bankers before the Dole Bums

The Chancellor of 'our' government, George Osborne, is targeting dole bums.

Right: Nat Rothschild is No. 2, George Osborne is No. 7 in Bullingdon Club pose. How worrying for everyone that Osborne is wearing the most foppish attire of them all!

As soon as I heard this it reminded me of one of the best books I have read delineating a Nationalist worldview. It was written by the Irish pro-lifer Justin Barrett, and is called The National Way Forward.

Albeit, from an Irish perspective, the book tackled many political problems we face across many states and nations in Europe.

One of the key things that stuck in my mind was how Barrett explained how the government (of Ireland -- but this is true of the UK, USA etc.) was in hock to the international bankers and financiers, yet instead of tackling usury debt they would go for the small fry -- i.e. dole bums.

No one denies that there are dole bums, this subclass do exist, in Ireland, Britain and elsewhere, but the point is that whilst it is wrong for anyone to live on what was supposed to be a 'safety net' for the working man, the real criminals are the bankers.

Billions, if not trillions, are poured into the endless black hole of the national debt (regardless of credit crunch, crashes etc.) but the government will never act against the real criminals, because they are the same breed, they went to the same schools, they leave office to work for them, the bankers pay their political office costs, etc.

Now, in the shadow of a crisis created wholly and solely by the banks, George Osborne, pal of the Rothschilds, targets... dole bums.

By all means target them, Mr. Osborne: but do not do it to take our eyes from the truth.

The New Unhappy Lords, with their "bright dead alien eyes" have delivered us into penury, into debt slavery, and thrown hundreds of thousands of working men onto the dole in Ireland, Britain, America etc. etc.

George Osborne will end his time in government four, nine or however many years from now and walk into a job with one of the bankers that have caused this mess, because whilst in office he has been their poodle.

Rather than protect the workingmen of this country, by making us self-sufficient and free of usury-debt, Mr. Osborne continues our slavery, continues raising taxes and slashing services to pay off his banking buddies.

They are the real criminals!

They have given us into the hands of the new unhappy lords,
Lords without anger and honour, who dare not carry their swords.
They fight by shuffling papers; they have bright dead alien eyes;
They look at our labour and laughter as a tired man looks at flies.
from The Secret People by GK Chesterton.

Lepanto by GK Chesterton

The Neo-Cons and dullards flying Israeli flags at anti-Mosque demos on both sides of the Atlantic would do well to get acquainted with GKC's Lepanto.

The forces who finally stopped the expansion of the Ottoman Empire were primarily led by Spain and her satellites/allies, the same forces who expelled the Jews from Spain and led the Inquisition to ensure the 'converted' ones who stayed behind did not continue their Talmudic practices.

Christians then fully understood that those opposed to Christianity had to be stopped or Christianity would be destroyed.

Sad to say that most Christians, especially in America, no longer realise that Judaism is directly opposed to Christianity.

That is why the "useful idiots" of the West are being used in Zionist conflicts.

GKC as Superhero? You Better Believe it!

As a lover of all things Chestertonian, I had to laugh when I saw this image:


I think GKC would have loved it! It pokes fun at the great man and doesn't seek to minimise his girth! And the glasses outside the mask. What a hero!

Anything that makes people look twice and maybe dip a toe into the world of GKC (plus Distributism and the Chesterbelloc) can't be bad at all.

For those interested in Gilbert magazine click here

Last Week's Quote: G.K. Chesterton on Charity

"It is true that there is a thing crudely called charity, which means charity to the deserving poor, but charity to the deserving is not charity at all, but justice."

~G.K. Chesterton, in Heretics

Should We Ostracise the Dead?

This is a pretty good history programme put out by the BBC, showing how the lives of the living and the dead were inextricably linked in the Medieval world:

Inside the Medieval Mind

This whole era and the beliefs of our forefathers has been pretty much whitewashed (like the Saxon, Norman and Tudor church walls which were covered in murals of the dead, judgement etc.) out of history betwixt the standardised 1066-Elizabeth I quick chapters.

The whole idea of "RIP" for the dead, comes from the belief of the dead having to undergo cleansing before they can become Saints - i.e. go to heaven, where they 'rest in peace'. So we would pray that the dead could indeed, rest in peace.

I always find it obscene today when any manner of scumbag becomes all but cannonised by the vicar/minister/priest at their funeral. Remember the funeral of Stephen Gately when the priest announced to all that a degenerate homosexual was in heaven?

And the idea that a child molester can recant on his deathbed and go instantly to heaven without having to "do time" for his crimes is not an idea of justice that I can recognise.

Anyhoo, the programme (maybe it'll be on you tube for overseas viewers) will (should!) be of interest to many, for I think the idea that we have a constant companionship with our forefathers, gives us a broader idea of history and that we shouldn't be concerned merely with our time, but conscious of the past, and mindful of the future too - what we leave to our children for them to pass on.

I believe we, as a society, nation and continent, have lost the central compass of knowing right from wrong that comes essentially from Christianity. I know many nationalists who argue that they can get their right and wrong without Christianity and some do so - and some are better than many Christians. But the fact is that without a solid, steady, guiding set of principles in matters of morality and suchlike, then we have chaos, where each person or set of people can set the agenda.

Look where we are today when the 'Pink Mafia' has asserted pressure on various governments to change laws and so it is "legal" for homosexuals to marry in all but name. And which next erroneous pressure group will hold sway? Which next whim, fancy or fad will push us into another illegal war or questionable "law" to undermine family life?

We have no standards. We have no accepted norms. We have no civilisation affirming truth. All is up for removal or erratic change according to the whim of pressure groups, media moguls and other primarily Masonic forces.

Of course we all like individual liberty, to be free, to have our own property ("the Englishman's home is his castle" had its roots in Magna Carta, a document enacted in the heart of Medieval England), to be free of government snoopers etc., but when you look at what liberalism (with a small l) has 'achieved' since the ideals of uber-liberalism were unleashed by various Masonic forces and taken up by various Marxist sects, it is no wonder that we live in a land where the traditions of the many are destroyed on the whim and demand of the few.

Even 20, 40 or 60 (never mind 200, 400 or 600) years ago our people were opposed to homosexuality, abortion on demand, mass immigration, race-mixing etc. etc. But after decades of media brain-washing and political party stitch-ups, most of us just 'accept' these evil changes for a quiet life.

GK Chesterton said that democracy ostracises the dead, and of course we all know that "democracy" is cleverly controlled by media moguls, political parties and hidden rulers so that we choose between poisons, just putting a mark on a piece of paper every 4 or 5 years.

The modern man seeks more affinity to MTV, brands of clothing, TV soap operas, facebook, and many other fads than they do to their dead kith and kin, to the ideals and norms of their forefathers.

The medieval idea that we are inextricably linked to the dead, to our forefathers is exhilarating. Far from being morbid, it exhorts us to live well and do well, that we do so in the knowledge that - like them - we will be judged for our actions and our deeds, and that we are just one more generation of our kinsfolk to file through this world, to be followed by the generation we leave behind.

It reminds of our duty, not only to do what is best because we should be mindful of doing right as opposed to wrong, but because our forefathers look on.

In today's world the itinerary seems to be based around self-fulfillment and self-interest, greed and degeneracy bring down even organisations built on mostly sound principles (one only needs to look at the history of Nationalism in the 70s, 80s, 90s and the 21st Century to see that this so).

We would do well to remember that all our forefathers thought differently and acted differently.

Maybe then we would look beyond short-term material gain, fame and the fawning words of sycophants, and fight for what is right.

Personally I believe that much that is wrong in this world, from the banking swindle, to the mass immigration that destroys whole peoples; from the millions killed in the abortuaries to the drugs epidemics in our communities -- these and much more have their roots in our loss of our Christian heritage.

Perhaps I am crying over spilt milk and we will never get those days back. But that doesn't mean we should accept them being airbrushed out of our history, nor that we should accept the evils washing over us all at an ever growing rate.

My Family and Other Animals, or Marmite-Gate II

As any parent will tell you, bringing up children involves far more than that.

One of the many "offshoots" of all the stresses and strains of bringing up children to know right from wrong, especially in this topsy turvey world (in which, as GK Chesterton said, the traditionalist is the revolutionary), is the menagerie of animals they plead for.

I am not a pushover in this regard, but I also believe in rewarding good behaviour and achievements and thus, over the years, we have had quite a roll call of animals.

So it was this year, our little band grew by one more and we bought a rabbit.

But what to call him?

There were many suggestions from the obvious (Benjamin Bunny) to the more obscure and extreme (Leon Degrelle - I'm not saying who voted for that one).

Finally we all turned to the youngest sprog to make the final decision.

It was destiny! The name was meant to be, because without a moment's hesitation (it is claimed to be something to do with the little bunny's colouring) the name was announced as we all stood agog:

Marmite.

I just hope we don't get a letter through the post from Unilever. Mind you, Gen. Degrelle isn't bad for a back-up...

Euthanasia and Murder by G.K. Chesterton

Euthanasia and Murder

There is no law against a man biting off his own nose, unless it be a law of nature; nor even any police regulation against his hanging himself up by the hair or whiskers to talk to his friends and family in greater discomfort. There are penalties for suicide but, though I have no suicidal habits myself, I fancy they must be rather hard to apply; since they could only be sharpened into the legal and logical paradox of hanging a man to cure him of wanting to be hanged.

The majestic legislative mind of man does not commonly concentrate specially on forbidding things that nobody would normally want to do. Most probably, there never would have been any laws at all, except against things that men do quite naturally and even passionately want to do. Men punished murder precisely because there are such a large number of persons whom it would seem quite natural, and almost necessary, to murder. Men forbade theft because it is so utterly obvious that any fool could see it, that some property is in the wrong hands, and that anybody might think it would be better applied in his own hands; any fool could see it, any fool could say it, and the law was made because any fool might do it. There was a third commandment, against stealing not only our neighbor's ass, but our neighbor's wife, on which it would now be indelicate to dwell, because all the fools have done it.

Now about this, the Modern Mind has passed through two stages, and I do not know which is worse; for the Modern Mind is rather a weak mind. In the nineteenth century, roughly speaking, all respectable people seemed to suppose that nobody could be tempted to murder or theft or adultery, if he was really respectable. They thought these temptations only came to a curious remote tribe of monsters, called the Criminal Class. We were solemnly told that every criminal must be a lunatic; when in fact there is hardly a healthy or sane man who gets through forty-eight hours without some temptation to commit some such crime.

Then suddenly the Modern Mind discovered this and (not being a very strong mind) instantly slumped into the opposite extreme. Like most moderately intelligent people, I read detective stories in preference to modern novels; but even in detective stories I find this queer rudimentary reason creeping up. Even in crime stories there is now some comprehension of crime; that is, of the fact that we are all criminals. And now the whole weakness is working the other way; many recent murder stories are actually justifications of murder. The moment a refined respectable gentleman realizes that he might want to kill somebody, he jumps to the conclusion that this person ought to be killed. The fact that Aunt Jane is obviously a nuisance, that Uncle William is becoming a terrible bore, that Cousin Hildebrand stands between us and the really sensible family solution, is beginning to look more and more like a real reason for doing them in. That is why, in my own country, some are proposing what is called Euthanasia; at present only a proposal for killing those who are a nuisance to themselves; but soon to be applied progressively to those who are a nuisance to other people. As it applies by hypothesis to an almost moribund or partially paralyzed person, the decision will presumably rest with the other people.

It all began, of course, with stealing our neighbor's wife as well as his ass; because she was more of an ass than the ass. If we want to know how this allowance for exception ruins or replaces the rule, the best example is divorce. Those who first urged it, urged it quite honestly as an extreme exception. They did really mean to apply it only to somebody married to a homicidal maniac. It has come to mean that a leading literary man told me on a platform in New York that no man could remain married to a woman who said, "Right-O." I thought he might have avoided being married to a woman who said, "Right-O." It has come to the point when a man advertises his desire to be divorced from a woman, only because he has forgotten her name. How jolly it will be when the sanctity of human life has reached the same stage as the sanctity of marriage! When men do not even remember whom they have murdered, as this gentleman could not remember whom he had married. Is it not time we reasserted the principle, known to primitive men, that the things we desire to do are the things we may be restrained in doing; and it is because we are all criminals that we had better be discouraged from crime?

(From The American Review, Feb. 1937)

Last Week's Quote: G.K. Chesterton on the Missing Link

"The evolutionists seem to know everything about the missing link except that it is missing."

G.K. Chesterton.

Last Week's Quote: G.K. Chesterton on Thieves and Property

One for our politicians:

"Thieves respect property. They merely wish the property to become their property that they may more perfectly respect it."

G.K. Chesterton
The Man Who Was Thursday.

Happy All Souls Day: the Day of the Dead.

Today is All Souls Day when Christians - Anglicans and Catholics and some Protestants - remember the dead that have gone on before them by praying for them.

Orthodox ("Eastern") Christians have their own days when they pray for the dead.

All Souls Day follows All Saints Day (1st November) and whilst All Saints Day helps remind us that the Church comprises of the Communion of Saints, All Souls Day helps remind us that we have our failings and it is efficacious to pray for the souls of the dead so that they may (as Christians have asked for their deceased family and friends for millennia) finally Rest in Peace - i.e. enter Heaven.

Following the Hollywood antics of Hallowe'en, it is right to remember the feasts of our forefathers throughout Europe and to not forget our dead ancestors on All Souls Day.

It also reminds me of when GK Chesterton wrote, in Orthodoxy, that democracy disenfranchises our ancestors:

"Tradition means giving a vote to most obscure of all classes, our ancestors. It is the democracy of the dead."

Chesterton goes on to say:

"Tradition refuses to submit to the small and arrogant oligarchy of those who merely happen to be walking about. All democrats object to men being disqualified by the accident of birth; tradition objects to their being disqualified by the accident of death. Democracy tells us not to neglect a good man's opinion, even if he is our groom; tradition asks us not to neglect a good man's opinion, even if he is our father."

Which is why we should always remember, in an age of seemingly endless automatons, TV-braindead, multi-culti morons, mammon worshippers and reds of every shade (blood red Marxist to homo-pink), that the weight of history and the strength of our forefathers is for Tradition (aka Faith, Family, Nation).

Link:

BBC on All Souls Day
Wikipedia on All Souls Day

The Deluge by G. K. Chesterton

Though giant rains put out the sun,
Here stand I for a sign.
Though earth be filled with waters dark,
My cup is filled with wine.
Tell to the trembling priests that here
Under the deluge rod,
One nameless, tattered, broken man
Stood up, and drank to God.

Sun has been where the rain is now,
Bees in the heat to hum,
Haply a humming maiden came,
Now let the deluge come:
Brown of aureole, green of garb,
Straight as a golden rod,
Drink to the throne of thunder now!
Drink to the wrath of God.

High in the wreck I held the cup,
I clutched my rusty sword,
I cocked my tattered feather
To the glory of the Lord.
Not undone were the heaven and earth,
This hollow world thrown up,
Before one man had stood up straight,
And drained it like a cup.