Friday, December 16, 2011

Blessed England, Blessed Europe

“This blessed plot, this earth, this realm, this England…” – Shakespeare

I saw two Londons the other day. The first London was in a short documentary following a movie made in 1940. An American photo journalist gave Americans a close-up view of Londoners going about their daily lives despite the fact that every night the Germans destroyed their buildings and killed thousands of their people in air raids. Still, in spite of doom, the Londoners remained undaunted. The American journalist concluded that “London will survive.”

I saw the second London in a recent news report from a London newspaper:

Carol singers raising money for a cancer charity in Trafalgar Square were attacked by protesters during a night of disorder that saw 139 arrests.

Shops were attacked, passers-by threatened and car windows smashed during a demonstration in central London against the election result in the Democratic Republic of Congo…

Masked teenage boys ‘stormed’ the singers, throwing bottles of water and hot drinks into the crowd. A woman in her 40s, said to be undergoing treatment for breast cancer, was pulled to the ground. A youth attempted to set light to the Christmas tree, an annual gift from the city of Oslo since 1947, one witness said.

The obvious question is, “Why did the Londoners of 1940 stand firm against megatons of German bombs while the Londoners of 2011 cannot even prevent a few black punks from terrorizing their people?” The answer is quite simple: The Londoners of 1940 might have loosened their ties to the past prior to World War II, but they hadn’t yet made a complete break with their heroic past. Hence they had the spiritual reserves to survive as a people. But the modern Londoners, like all modern Europeans, are morally adrift. They don’t believe in the same God that their ancestors believed in, so they can’t respond to black barbarism in the way their ancestors would have responded. If you don’t regard black people as gods you can treat them like the thugs that they are.

In the 18th and 19th centuries the British not only defended their own in Britain, they defended their own abroad. For instance, in my school days of long ago, I remember reading about an incident that took place in an African country in the 1800s. A British couple were jostled in an African riot, and in retaliation the British invaded the country and deposed the black dictator. Nor did the British in India allow their people to be killed or injured without retaliating. It’s sad and tragic when white men no longer believe they should defend their own people.

The incident in Trafalgar Square was typical of the ongoing war waged by the colored races against white people. And the liberal response to such incidents is always the same. “Let’s not let the acts of a few violent ‘youths’ prejudice us against the vast majority of fine, moderate black people who are a credit to multi-racial Britain!” If the white-liberal does not know by now that there is no such thing as a moderate black person he will never know, because he has no intention of removing the mind-forged blinders from his eyes. The only reason every single black in a formerly white country doesn’t riot, rape, pillage, and murder is because some are still afraid that there might be consequences for their actions. The escalating number of black atrocities in every European-based nation is the result of more and more blacks coming to an awareness that there will be no white response to black violence except the usual liberal double-speak. Gangs of black murderers and rapists will be called ‘youths,’ and their criminal activities will be described as ‘unfortunate’ but (as if some outside source was making them commit violent acts) “understandable under the circumstances, blah, blah, blah…”

No matter what acts of violence are perpetuated by blacks we must, our clerical elite tell us, keep up the refrain, “Let’s not let a few misguided youths prejudice us against a whole people. And let us not become violent; that would be counter-productive.” But why shouldn’t whites be prejudiced against blacks? Have the negroes as a race ever shown themselves capable of supporting the good and hating evil? The bolder ones seem to genuinely enjoy murder, rape, and mayhem. And the more timid majority enjoy the violent activities of their fellow blacks vicariously. While working as a police officer I was struck by the contrast between the black and white neighborhoods. When we went into white neighborhoods to arrest white punks the people there cheered us. When we went into black neighborhoods to arrest black punks the people threw rocks and homemade explosives at us.

And why is it a given that white people must not respond violently to black crime? Because it is ‘counter-productive’? I beg to differ; immediate, violent retaliation is the only thing that does deter black violence. As whites retreat and appease, the blacks advance and escalate their violence. If the anti-Christian Christians of the new Christless churches would stop looking for the mythical, moderate blacks whom they can worship and adore and face reality, they would see that every humane, charitable impulse on this earth emanates from white people. It’s quite simple, Mr. Negro-worshipping Liberal. When the white remnant disappears so will charity. And then what will happen to your beloved black gods?

In view of what Savanhu considered to be European unfitness to govern Rhodesia, we might examine what he would consider to be African fitness. Having already glanced at African political fitness we can leave that on one side. But where for example the Africans’ purely humanitarian regard for their own kind is concerned, we find the Native Affairs Department reporting that film scenes of African children suffering from disease and starvation are greeted with shrieks of laughter by African audiences, “We have found that a distressingly large proportion of our rural population see nothing but humour in the sufferings of other people,” Mr Nesham, the N.A.D. senior information officer, reported. Similarly, Mr Guy, of the Rhodesian Association for the Prevention of Tuberculosis, stated: “I have met no Coloured, Asiatic or African workers in the campaign against tuberculosis. Is it too much to ask members of these communities to come to our assistance?” Likewise, the only African-managed orphanage in Rhodesia reported that it has to rely entirely on White generosity for its support, as Africans themselves refuse to contribute because they feel that that is “the white man’s job.”
It is the colored barbarians’ love of cruelty and indifference to human misery (and the Asian surpasses the black in this regard) that separates them forever from the antique European. Between such wholly different peoples there can be only enmity. The white is repulsed by the black’s barbarism and the black is enraged by the white man’s attempts to bring him out of his beloved Babylonian night. The new “unity” between whites and the colored races has come about because the white liberal has become a techno-barbarian. The techno-barbarian, like the colored barbarian, has not charity, but there is a difference between the two barbarian tribes. The techno-barbarian, because he once was Christian, does not want to look at the consequences of his inhuman philosophy. He relies on his technology to shield his eyes from his own cruelty. Where a colored barbarian would kill a child up close and personal with no compunction whatsoever, a white liberal has the child tortured and killed in an abortuary hidden from his liberal eyes. The modern liberal is like the head bad guy in the old gangster films. He tells the hero that he deplores violence, but he must torture him if he doesn’t talk. When the hero refuses to talk the leader exits the room and “regrettably” leaves the hero to the not-so-tender care of his subordinates. Robespierre, an ardent opponent of capital punishment who had thousands killed in the name of humanity, was a forerunner of the modern technocratic liberal.

The crazed voices you hear from the hinterlands of Liberaldom are the “conservative Christians” of the Catholic and Protestant denominations. “It doesn’t matter that white people no longer support the antique faith of Europe,” they tell us. “The black, yellow and brown people of the world will take up the cause of Christian Europe.” Oh really? Where is the evidence for such an astounding claim? In Africa where the inhabitants, in the absence of white rule, have returned to cannibalism and voodoo? In China where Asian cruelty still reigns supreme over all other forms of cruelty? How about Mexico where the ancient Aztec faith has returned? Et tu, Mr. Conservative Christian? Why must you plunge your dagger into the European remnant? Aren’t there already enough bleeding wounds in the Europeans? If the conservative wants to regain his honor as a man of Europe instead of trying to hold on to his cherished corner of Liberaldom, he must venture forth with the remnant band of Europeans to wrest the kingdom of Europe from the liberals and colored barbarians. But it is easier to proclaim heathendom the new Christendom than it is to fight for the restoration of Christendom. Which is why we won’t see the conservative in the ranks of the antique Europeans. That’s just as well, because the conservative, when forced to choose between the antique Europeans and black-worshipping Liberaldom will always side with the liberals. Something to do with the side their bread is buttered on.

In a short story called “The Haunted Man,” Charles Dickens tells the story of an educated man, a Chemist, who makes a bargain with a phantom from the world of spirits. The ghost grants him a “gift.” The Chemist asks to be released from the remembrance of all the sorrow, wrong, and trouble he has ever known.

“I have the power to cancel their remembrance – to leave but very faint, confused traces of them, that will die out soon,” returned the Spectre.
And the Chemist is also granted the power to erase the remembrance of sorrow and trouble in the lives of others.

“And take this with you, man whom I here renounce! The gift that I have given, you shall give again, go where you will. Without recovering yourself the power that you have yielded up, you shall henceforth destroy its like in all whom you approach. Your wisdom has discovered that the memory of sorrow, wrong, and trouble is the lot of all mankind, and that mankind would be the happier, in its other memories, without it. Go! Be its benefactor! Freed from such remembrance, from this hour, carry involuntarily the blessing of such freedom with you. Its diffusion is inseparable and inalienable form you. Go! Be happy in the good you have won, and in the good you do!”
Of course the “gift” does not make the Chemist a happy man; he becomes a haunted man, and he does not bring happiness to others, for without the remembrance of past sorrows there can be no present joy. The haunted man and the people he blights with his presence know neither sorrow nor joy; they are devoid of all humanity. And without a knowledge of past sorrow the haunted man cannot know the Man of Sorrows who turned our sorrows to joy with His resurrection from the dead. It is only when a woman breaks the curse by refusing to give up the remembrance of her dead infant, that the chemist and those he polluted can once again see the light.

Redlaw fell upon his knees with a loud cry.

‘O Thou,’ he said, ‘who, through the teaching of pure love, hast graciously restored me to the memory which was the memory of Christ upon the cross, and of all the good who perished in His cause, receive my thanks, and bless her!’

I would suggest that the great majority of modern Europeans are in the spiritual state of Redlaw, the Chemist. They have tried to build a utopian world of science in which there is no remembrance of past sorrows. So the faith of their ancestors, who believed in the Man of Sorrows, must be either eliminated or modified into a Christianity without the cross.

I love the ending of Dickens’ story. The haunted man is not restored by a wise man; he is restored to life because one simple, unlearned soul loves too much to give up her remembrance of past sorrow. Christ’s Europe, the Europe of Grimm’s fairy tales, “A Christmas Carol” and Christmas caroling, church bells at midnight, and evening lingerings, depends on our loving remembrance of the cross of Christ and our determined refusal to let His Europe, with all its sorrows and troubles, die. Europeans who love deeply will simply not let barbarian hordes rule His Europe. God has never abandoned His people. If we hold fast to our remembrance of Christian Europe we will see miracles in the blessed plot of land and throughout the sacred realm of Europe. +

Labels: ,