Within our nation there are a group of people who it is permitted, indeed almost politically correct, to despise. They are a group whom our trendiest and our most popular comedians mock, to the cheers of a modern multicultural audience and who are spoken of with contempt by politicians and social commentators.
That group is the section of the young white British working class, from sink estates and those depressing corners of the dependency culture once promoted by those same politicians who now condemn them. The one ethnic group who we are allowed to call (white) trash.
They are a group of people without a voice to speak for them, and who's own voices are only ever heard in auditorium designed to deride them. They appear as criminals on the peripheries of gritty cop shows, in documentaries about urban decay and social dependency, their words edited deliberately to make them seem more moronic and brutal even than they are, and on that other platform designed to present human failure as entertainment, the daytime TV Talk show.
They are the cannon fodder of “Tricia” and the infamous Jeremy Kyle show, that slightly more cruel British version of US TV's Jerry Springer, where observing broken lives become a blood sport, and where inadequate and broken people are metaphorically eviscerated, to amuse viewers and make them feel superior.
Such shows depend upon a regular but disposable cast of tattooed and inarticulate young men with a history of petty crime and failed relationships, together with tracksuit attired young women, Vicky Pollard clones, usually with a batch of children fathered by a selection of different men, often from a selection of different races. They are brought on stage, like lambs to the slaughter naively unaware of what is about to be done to them, and tell an unforgiving camera about their domestic disasters and dysfunctional relationships. How the viewers laugh at the “chavs”, but never with them.
Of course, such people can be mocked with impunity, they can be scorned, ridiculed and derided for they have no lobbyist or special interest groups set up to defend them and it is certainly no crime to offend them.
Even those of us who love Britain and its indigenous people, must confess to a twinge of appalled embarrassment when members of that uncouth and ill educated section of our countrymen appear before a national, and sometimes, international audience.
Yet, we must not forget who these people are, where they came from, and who it was that made them what they are. For they are, in fact victims of the same forces which are determined to destroy all of us, their destruction is merely further advanced.
There was a time when the British working class, even the poorest and least educated were a proud people with a sense of morality and family values far more rigid than those of their so called “betters”. A life of welfare dependency would have been viewed by them as shameful and to have a child out of wedlock would be a stigma, which a couple and their extended family would find hard to live down, even when, as he then usually did, the boy did the decent thing, and married the girl, something few young men, or even young women, would view as essential these days.
Perhaps the moral codes and social values were too harsh, but they kept families and communities together, unlike in the broken and dysfunctional society we now inhabit.
What was it, in a few short decades which changed such fiercely proud and moral people into the chavs, sluts and social failures who appear on the unpleasant Mr Kyle's TV show?
They became what they are because that is what society deliberately taught them to be. The levels of welfare dependency we see today is a direct result of the class warfare of the 50's, 60's and 1970's, where the demands that the rich be taxed to support the poor were never accompanied by demands for effort and responsibility on the part of the poor. As we see today, under political correctness, and its communist predecessor, the chosen victim groups are never expected to accept responsibility for their own situation. The difference is that in 2009, the white working class are no longer the chosen victims, they have ceased to be of interest to the social engineers who seek to change our society.
Those once portrayed as the noble poor, have been cast aside in favour of asylum seekers and illegal immigrants, but not before much damage was done. Worse still, as the interests of poor whites often conflict with those of the establishments new darlings, it has been necessary for the establishment to cast them in an even less deserving light.
However, their rejection by their one time champions only goes part of the way to explaining how this deprived section of our community became what it is. There were so many influences, all of them designed to change British society and all of them damaging to this particular group.
As a liberated middle class woman, I am loath to blame the sexual revolution of the 1960's and would hate to go back to a time when gay men were sent to prison and women were condemned to loveless marriages and the early deaths which so often followed the multiple pregnancies of life before the pill. However, I have the education, the background and the back-up to have enjoyed and even benefited from the greater sexual freedom of our age. The confused young women (and men) on the worst of our run down Council estates saw no such benefits, without education, such freedoms can lead to disaster.
Beyond the attitudes to sex, and possibly even more damaging was the new attitudes to discipline which have now become the holy writ of modern parenting. When our parents were children, indeed when some of you reading this were children, if a boy misbehaved he was spanked, if an older boy did so he got a good hiding, whereas if a girl did so, she would receive a ruler across her hands. This took place in schools as well as in the home, and it taught many generations before our own to respect authority and that misbehaviour had consequences.
Then all that was taken away, we were told that corporal punishment brutalises children, and as a result we have raised a more brutalised generation of children than almost any before us. An un-spanked generation has now raised to young adulthood, a group of offspring with no respect for authority, no concept of discipline or of behavioural limits.
To be fair, their behaviour and attitudes, are exactly those which our society tells them to have, all those standards and values which held families and communities together, and which made our nation great are now ridiculed and even condemned.
Read any of a number of young girls' magazines, and you will find the message that the the ultimate female ambition is to be a slut, and preferably one with a black boyfriend. White working class girls are often mocked for their revealing and sluttish clothing, but in truth these girls are wearing discount versions of the "slut chic" outfits, those ultimate role models of celebrity trash Cheryl Cole and Danielle Lloyd wear to such acclaim. What these girls wear is what the media tells them they should wear, and then condemns them as white trash when they do so.
For boys it is even worse, all the media tells them is that they are useless and guilty, which of course is what their teachers told them they were.
Many blame poor education standards for creating this lost tribe of poor failed whites at the bottom of our society, and they certainly have a point, if you read the diaries of children from previous generations, even those from very deprived backgrounds, their language and grasp of the world around was far superior to that of modern children. Yet they were far more still “children” than are youths of similar ages in this century. Children from earlier eras may have known nothing of computers and mobile phones, but it is not such skills which create a citizen, it is language and understanding your world which do that.
Apart from the standard of education, the blame lies also in what is taught, and what is not. I recall recently hearing a casual reference to the Crusades, as “a long forgotten piece of history”. Frankly, as recently as the 1970's and early 80's when I was a child, the Crusades were not long forgotten. From my days at school I know about Richard the Lionheart (or Cœur de Lion) , joining forces with Phillip of France and the Holy Roman Emperor to go on the fourth crusade, that they fought the Great Saladin or that Richard met and married Berengaria of Navarre on his way back. I know about the siege of Jerusalem (first crusade), the siege and subsequent sack of Constantinople, (fourth crusade – and an event which has, with some justice, been compared to what is happening in Europe today), I even know that King Richard's mother, Eleanor of Aquitaine participated in one the crusades (second or third) whilst still married to her first husband, the king of France.
I know so much about English history, some I admit I have researched since, (although not the crusades) but most I learnt at school, and it has stayed with me. These were not just great and exciting stories, but they were valuable parts of my education which taught me about my country and my heritage. My parent's generation, of course, were taught far more of the truth about Britain's great and glorious history, which left them, as it had left generations of Britons before them with a sense of pride in their nation, and in themselves.
No white British child is allowed to leave school today feeling proud about their history, or about their heritage.
Indeed, I was lucky that, only thirty years ago, there will still teachers at the schools I attended brave enough to tell the truth about our history. Even then, had I attended a comprehensive school on a sink estate, I doubt I would have been taught such truths.
What passes for history in our schools today comes straight from the foetid imaginations of the agenda driven, white hating enemies of our people, who are dependant for their incomes on maintaining the good will of Common Purpose. It is not in their interest to make their pupils feel good about their country or about themselves, and they will certainly not tell any truths which reveal what it was that made Britain great .
In their student's position, you and I would know we were being told lies, but how would they know that? What their teachers tell them is what the telly tells them, and their parents were taught the same lies as they are, so there is nobody to put them right.
This is a huge subject, and I have not done it justice, or done more than scratch the surface. There is a book to be written about what has been done to the poor whites in Britain. They have been assaulted on all sides and in all sorts of ways, and now their country is being taken from them. It is time for society to acknowledge the damage which has been done to them.
Let us not blame this last group of people whom it is still permissible to condemn on racial grounds, for what has been done to them, the fault is not their's, it lies with a society which decided to make them its scapegoats, and to promote other groups and races over them.
If you have no education, no money, you live in an ugly place, threatened by alien cultures, and if all around you tell you are a useless member of a race of brutes and racists, who are, in the words of Jack Straw, not worth saving, how would you behave, and would it be much different than they do?
The people of whom I speak are the first casualties of a war which most of Britain, indeed most Europeans, do not yet know they are fighting. They were our weakest flank, and they were the first to fall. They deserve our sympathy, our help and our protection, not our condemnation.
That group is the section of the young white British working class, from sink estates and those depressing corners of the dependency culture once promoted by those same politicians who now condemn them. The one ethnic group who we are allowed to call (white) trash.
They are a group of people without a voice to speak for them, and who's own voices are only ever heard in auditorium designed to deride them. They appear as criminals on the peripheries of gritty cop shows, in documentaries about urban decay and social dependency, their words edited deliberately to make them seem more moronic and brutal even than they are, and on that other platform designed to present human failure as entertainment, the daytime TV Talk show.
They are the cannon fodder of “Tricia” and the infamous Jeremy Kyle show, that slightly more cruel British version of US TV's Jerry Springer, where observing broken lives become a blood sport, and where inadequate and broken people are metaphorically eviscerated, to amuse viewers and make them feel superior.
Such shows depend upon a regular but disposable cast of tattooed and inarticulate young men with a history of petty crime and failed relationships, together with tracksuit attired young women, Vicky Pollard clones, usually with a batch of children fathered by a selection of different men, often from a selection of different races. They are brought on stage, like lambs to the slaughter naively unaware of what is about to be done to them, and tell an unforgiving camera about their domestic disasters and dysfunctional relationships. How the viewers laugh at the “chavs”, but never with them.
Of course, such people can be mocked with impunity, they can be scorned, ridiculed and derided for they have no lobbyist or special interest groups set up to defend them and it is certainly no crime to offend them.
Even those of us who love Britain and its indigenous people, must confess to a twinge of appalled embarrassment when members of that uncouth and ill educated section of our countrymen appear before a national, and sometimes, international audience.
Yet, we must not forget who these people are, where they came from, and who it was that made them what they are. For they are, in fact victims of the same forces which are determined to destroy all of us, their destruction is merely further advanced.
There was a time when the British working class, even the poorest and least educated were a proud people with a sense of morality and family values far more rigid than those of their so called “betters”. A life of welfare dependency would have been viewed by them as shameful and to have a child out of wedlock would be a stigma, which a couple and their extended family would find hard to live down, even when, as he then usually did, the boy did the decent thing, and married the girl, something few young men, or even young women, would view as essential these days.
Perhaps the moral codes and social values were too harsh, but they kept families and communities together, unlike in the broken and dysfunctional society we now inhabit.
What was it, in a few short decades which changed such fiercely proud and moral people into the chavs, sluts and social failures who appear on the unpleasant Mr Kyle's TV show?
They became what they are because that is what society deliberately taught them to be. The levels of welfare dependency we see today is a direct result of the class warfare of the 50's, 60's and 1970's, where the demands that the rich be taxed to support the poor were never accompanied by demands for effort and responsibility on the part of the poor. As we see today, under political correctness, and its communist predecessor, the chosen victim groups are never expected to accept responsibility for their own situation. The difference is that in 2009, the white working class are no longer the chosen victims, they have ceased to be of interest to the social engineers who seek to change our society.
Those once portrayed as the noble poor, have been cast aside in favour of asylum seekers and illegal immigrants, but not before much damage was done. Worse still, as the interests of poor whites often conflict with those of the establishments new darlings, it has been necessary for the establishment to cast them in an even less deserving light.
However, their rejection by their one time champions only goes part of the way to explaining how this deprived section of our community became what it is. There were so many influences, all of them designed to change British society and all of them damaging to this particular group.
As a liberated middle class woman, I am loath to blame the sexual revolution of the 1960's and would hate to go back to a time when gay men were sent to prison and women were condemned to loveless marriages and the early deaths which so often followed the multiple pregnancies of life before the pill. However, I have the education, the background and the back-up to have enjoyed and even benefited from the greater sexual freedom of our age. The confused young women (and men) on the worst of our run down Council estates saw no such benefits, without education, such freedoms can lead to disaster.
Beyond the attitudes to sex, and possibly even more damaging was the new attitudes to discipline which have now become the holy writ of modern parenting. When our parents were children, indeed when some of you reading this were children, if a boy misbehaved he was spanked, if an older boy did so he got a good hiding, whereas if a girl did so, she would receive a ruler across her hands. This took place in schools as well as in the home, and it taught many generations before our own to respect authority and that misbehaviour had consequences.
Then all that was taken away, we were told that corporal punishment brutalises children, and as a result we have raised a more brutalised generation of children than almost any before us. An un-spanked generation has now raised to young adulthood, a group of offspring with no respect for authority, no concept of discipline or of behavioural limits.
To be fair, their behaviour and attitudes, are exactly those which our society tells them to have, all those standards and values which held families and communities together, and which made our nation great are now ridiculed and even condemned.
Read any of a number of young girls' magazines, and you will find the message that the the ultimate female ambition is to be a slut, and preferably one with a black boyfriend. White working class girls are often mocked for their revealing and sluttish clothing, but in truth these girls are wearing discount versions of the "slut chic" outfits, those ultimate role models of celebrity trash Cheryl Cole and Danielle Lloyd wear to such acclaim. What these girls wear is what the media tells them they should wear, and then condemns them as white trash when they do so.
For boys it is even worse, all the media tells them is that they are useless and guilty, which of course is what their teachers told them they were.
Many blame poor education standards for creating this lost tribe of poor failed whites at the bottom of our society, and they certainly have a point, if you read the diaries of children from previous generations, even those from very deprived backgrounds, their language and grasp of the world around was far superior to that of modern children. Yet they were far more still “children” than are youths of similar ages in this century. Children from earlier eras may have known nothing of computers and mobile phones, but it is not such skills which create a citizen, it is language and understanding your world which do that.
Apart from the standard of education, the blame lies also in what is taught, and what is not. I recall recently hearing a casual reference to the Crusades, as “a long forgotten piece of history”. Frankly, as recently as the 1970's and early 80's when I was a child, the Crusades were not long forgotten. From my days at school I know about Richard the Lionheart (or Cœur de Lion) , joining forces with Phillip of France and the Holy Roman Emperor to go on the fourth crusade, that they fought the Great Saladin or that Richard met and married Berengaria of Navarre on his way back. I know about the siege of Jerusalem (first crusade), the siege and subsequent sack of Constantinople, (fourth crusade – and an event which has, with some justice, been compared to what is happening in Europe today), I even know that King Richard's mother, Eleanor of Aquitaine participated in one the crusades (second or third) whilst still married to her first husband, the king of France.
I know so much about English history, some I admit I have researched since, (although not the crusades) but most I learnt at school, and it has stayed with me. These were not just great and exciting stories, but they were valuable parts of my education which taught me about my country and my heritage. My parent's generation, of course, were taught far more of the truth about Britain's great and glorious history, which left them, as it had left generations of Britons before them with a sense of pride in their nation, and in themselves.
No white British child is allowed to leave school today feeling proud about their history, or about their heritage.
Indeed, I was lucky that, only thirty years ago, there will still teachers at the schools I attended brave enough to tell the truth about our history. Even then, had I attended a comprehensive school on a sink estate, I doubt I would have been taught such truths.
What passes for history in our schools today comes straight from the foetid imaginations of the agenda driven, white hating enemies of our people, who are dependant for their incomes on maintaining the good will of Common Purpose. It is not in their interest to make their pupils feel good about their country or about themselves, and they will certainly not tell any truths which reveal what it was that made Britain great .
In their student's position, you and I would know we were being told lies, but how would they know that? What their teachers tell them is what the telly tells them, and their parents were taught the same lies as they are, so there is nobody to put them right.
This is a huge subject, and I have not done it justice, or done more than scratch the surface. There is a book to be written about what has been done to the poor whites in Britain. They have been assaulted on all sides and in all sorts of ways, and now their country is being taken from them. It is time for society to acknowledge the damage which has been done to them.
Let us not blame this last group of people whom it is still permissible to condemn on racial grounds, for what has been done to them, the fault is not their's, it lies with a society which decided to make them its scapegoats, and to promote other groups and races over them.
If you have no education, no money, you live in an ugly place, threatened by alien cultures, and if all around you tell you are a useless member of a race of brutes and racists, who are, in the words of Jack Straw, not worth saving, how would you behave, and would it be much different than they do?
The people of whom I speak are the first casualties of a war which most of Britain, indeed most Europeans, do not yet know they are fighting. They were our weakest flank, and they were the first to fall. They deserve our sympathy, our help and our protection, not our condemnation.
17 comments:
When one look at the England/UK, and see these documentaries about the estates where people of the kind you talk about live, one can only wonder what went wrong.
In most European countries you find ghettos, and people who live a life one does not envy them, but compared to some people in the UK they have a good life.
The children of the '68 generation grew up without seeing consequences from what they did (I was one of them), the problem is the children of the children they are even worse of they have parents who do not have a clue about these things, which makes things even worse.
As for education, one cannot expect children to have an interest for an education if their parents get by just "fine" without one.
This whole thing generates a group of people who probably never will be a part of the society, and until the politicians change things this will just get worse.
Corporal punishment is a really bad thing to talk about, but a rap in the bottom have never hurt anyone, and sometimes children needs to get reminded that someone is in charge.
I cannot see an easy way to solve the problem.....
Sarah, I have the sense that you may be conflating two problems here. Is it not true that the true, great and honorable history of England and the UK is hidden from the young of all socioeconomic levels today? That is my impression, so that it is not just the poor working class that are denied the proper understanding of who they are, but rather all white British youth. (Pardon me for making assumptions if I am off base, but that is simply the way it appears to me.)
That said, the lack of proper teaching is without devastating to the people of this group because it destroys their sense of identity. This was, of course, the purpose for denying them this knowledge systematically for an extended period of time.
I have to observe that we are seeing the same thing at all socioeconomic levels in the US. Our young people have no sense of history, no idea who they are, who we are, where we have come from, or what we have done in the past. The have been fed a line of lies by marxist academics all of their lives, and it is thoroughly ingrained by the time they leave college. I fear for my grandchildren; they know nothing at all of the America that I grew up in, but their parents want it that way.
Dr D
It is certainly correct that children at all levels of society are no longer taught the truth about British History and are subject to many of the same influences I mentioned in the article, but it effects them in different ways. For some the false history becomes a recruiting tool for "Common Purpose" and they become the teachers and social apparatchiks undermining our society into the next generation. Others still have the resources and back up to overcome the propaganda and live valuable lives, however, no doubt to has an effect on their view of themselves and their nation, which is why there is so little public resistance to what is happening.
However, the impact on the poor white working class has happened much more quickly, and has been so much more devastating because they have nowhere else to go but down, and as there are so many other factors at play which make them so much more vulnerable. I have been thinking of writing this article for quite a while now, but the more I thought about the subject, the bigger it became, and, as I said in the article, I have only just scratched the surface of what has been done to those people. My article does not come close to addressing the subject.
There is so much more to say, such as the unfair allocation of social housing, the very nature of post 1960's social housing, how it breeds crime and despair.
The fact that teachers are deliberately favouring pupils from minority backgrounds, and disadvantaging those from the indigenous population.
The distorted portrayal of poor whites in popular culture / drama.
The manner in which they are encouraged to emulate migrant criminal behaviour, and then blamed for it.
The manner in which they are being forced out of their communities and outnumbered with foreigners. The way in which their communities are being split up.
The people who hate us are attacking us at all levels of out society, but there are many factors which made the poor white working class so much more easy for them to harm, which is why I called them the first casualties.
This is a great article Sarah. Like Dr D, I agree that all indigenous children are being taught a self-loathing version of history. That it does have a real negative psychological impact is beyond dispute. I recall a remark that my sister made within the past couple of years that made me want to weep: "We [i.e. the English] are such an ugly race." I was astonished.
Where had such a sentiment originated? Unlike me, my sister left compulsory education at the age of 16 and therefore has not had the benefit of a university education. I can only attribute such an attitude to her having imbibed deeply from the poison chalice of 'popular culture'.
We grew up on a small council estate, but were taught good manners and encouraged to work hard at school by our maternal grandmother. Much of what I learnt about geography and history actually came from a set of Edwardian children's encyclopaedia's, so I have always possessed a somewhat different take on the contemporary world from my peers.
The vilification of the feckless and literally hopeless section of the indigenous working class is seen, as you correctly comment, as fair game by virtually all. My boss, a so-called 'moderate' Muslim, whilst acknowledging recently that there was a serious problem in his 'community' with inbreeding and the resultant genetic conditions, still saw it as acceptable to then make derogatory remarks about the mental and social attributes of the white inhabitants of a local estate, whilst pulling faces and making a moronic sound. Can you guess what one of his main roles is? Yes, you probably have: office diversity commissar.
What white children on these estates need to be taught is a sense of self-respect, responsibility and self-reliance. They must not be persuaded into believing that their condition is beyond redemption, and that their culture is inferior to that of all other non-indigenous groups.
My boss's hatred of the white English working class was further expressed by his comment: "What is English culture? Fish and chips? Is that it?" With people like him dictating what is included in the curriculum via the Labour Party, is it any wonder that our children grow up thinking that they are worthless?
"Fish and chips"! What about Boudicca, Bede, Alfred, Shakespeare, Newton, Hooke, Boyle, Faraday, Darwin, Dickens, Nightingale, Orwell and Holst? There are of course thousands of inspiring examples of people from our history who have helped to shape all that is best in human civilisation. Alas, such history and culture is ignored, and our children are force-fed a diet of national guilt and self-loathing which Roger Scruton describes eloquently as "oikophobia" - a hatred of home.
Some of our Islamic colonists are happy to promote and intensify the self-hatred of sections of the white working class, and to compound its misery through flooding our marginalised communities with heroin, pimping its young women and abusing its children. How would our forebears look upon what our society has become? Would they not be rightly horrified?
Sarah
A truly excellent article!
"For boys it is even worse, all the media tells them is that they are useless and guilty, which of course is what their teachers told them they were."
How true!I can give you an example from my schooldays:-
I was the only girl in the physics class, and only one of two girls studying chemistry. Our teacher would invalidate the boys on a daily basis with such phrases as.
" I don't know why I bother sometimes; all you boys will be doing one of two things when you leave school." Art, or in the embroidery class"
By this he meant 'drawing the dole' or sewing mail-bags in prison'.
To add insult to injury he would say such things as:- " look at these two girls here, they beat your scores every time"
This was in the 1960's
We girls were derided in a similar way by the maths teacher. I cannot recall his exact phrases; but we were not included or encouraged. "Girls are useless at maths" was the impression given.
None of us were taught much at all in history.
I was from a Middle class family and was born on a small private estate on the edge of town; my brother's had attented Cof E primary schools, Grammar school and then various universities.
My father died suddenly when I was four, and my mother placed me in the local primary school, which was located in the centre of a sink estate.
Known as 'Dodge City,' because it was where the most dysfuctional families lived.
Well, I 'adapted and survived' to cut a long story short.
I am glad to say though that some of the children I went to school with, both there and at the 'Comprehensive' (which had an even worse reputation) did do well for themselves despite the low educational standards.
I can imagine that those schools are far worse now though, because of the lack of discipline!
Thank you for this article, Sarah, a most insightful analysis.
I've little to add to the perceptive comments made already, just a couple of observations.
Re: education, the book It's Your Time You're Wasting by former supply teacher Frank Chalk, pseudonym, sets out both the problem of a 'sink' school with pupils from a 'sink' estate and the contrast with a well-to-do school (from across town), in a well-to-do area.
The book does, I think, at least indirectly underscore the benefits of a stable home life for the up-coming generation.
I think that does come back to the comments you make concerning the so-called 'sexual revolution' of the 60s. As you'd probably guess, my view is somewhat more negative than yours and I believe that so-called revolution (more like a capitulation - the 'new morality' being nothing more than the old immorality) is a major contributory factor to today's social malaise*.
*Such has always existed, of course, e.g. 'small' pox, I understand, was so named because in the Victorian era, the 'big' pox was syphillis. But then the devilment was hidden, not publicly endorsed by politicians and the MSM, as is the case now. I think that even double standards are better than no standards at all.
Once you start abandoning what are derisively called 'taboos,' it is the start of the slippery slope that ends in Sodom and Gomorrha.
This is easy to prove because a study of Genesis 10, 13, 18, 19 reveals that the original sodomites were black (i.e. Hamitic) child molesters.
Which, as your article shows w.r.t. impressionable young white girls and adolescent/teen magazines, is about where we are at - all aimed at the destruction of British racial identity, no less.
In biblical terms, this is expressed succinctly by St Paul as Be not deceived: evil communications corrupt good manners 1 Corinthians 15:33, manners referring to manner of life, essentially, not merely accepted behavioural norms etc.
It has been said that there are things in that Book (Authoriized King James 1611 Holy Bible) that will put you on your ear.
You can well understand why some nations ban it that don't ban nuclear weapons.
But I still believe the Book to be Britain's WMD, Weapon of Mass Deliverance.
Hi Casper
The '68 generation certainly have to share the blame for the broken society we now live in, however, the rot goes far further back than the 1960's, they were the flowering of a seed planted many decades before.
At the root of what has happened is the ideology which imprisoned half of Europe for most of the 20th Century.
I don't just mean Communism, there is a wider attitude that Western society deserves to be replaced. For most, the attitude is not even thought through, because they don't think.
To them it matters not what replaces it, or that what replaces it might be infinitely worse, it matters only that it is replaced.
I appreciate that there are all sorts of negatives to corporal punishment, and I am not suggesting it as a solution. However, when it was effectively banned it was not replaced with anything, apart from some woolly unworkable tosh about "reasoning with kids".
As you say, growing up without experiencing the consequences of one's actions leads to disaster.
Once again, we seem to believe that we are right, and every generation which came before us was wrong. However, as we keep finding, that isn't always so.
Sarah
Yes, a succinct appraisal of modern day decline of indigenous social mores that began a few decades ago but now appears to be rapidly gaining strength in a race to the bottom of the cesspool....and, none of which I believe to be by chance, but by deliberate design.
Remember the "45 Communist Goals" revealed back in the early '60s? Although not mentioned in this list, you could add the celebrated "mass 3rd world immigration to western countries" to further dilute and then denigrate the last remaining 8% of the world's White inhabitants. Of course, the poor white working-class will bear the brunt of these un-official policies.
As in Britain's relatively unknown "Common Purpose", and other such sinister organizations, America is also under constant attack from the "elites".
Public education is one such approach to "dumbing down" students.
On a lighter note, I've always remembered the book titled "Mister God, This Is Anna" that reflected another era of Britain's (or Ireland?) poor. I'm not sure whether it was written as fact or fiction, but it's a heart-warming story that I remember reading about 35 yrs. ago and have never forgotten. I've not been to Britain (I live in Canada), but it appears that the, relatively speaking, halcyon years of the past could not last forever.
Hi Durotrigan
Like you, your sister's comment makes me want to weep as well, how blind can she be, I wonder what she could have been comparing us to.
As to your boss, I guess that you could hardly have told him what a lying old b~stard he is. One might as well turn to him and say what is Asian culture? Poppadoms and child abuse? of course, when we say the same things the same things they do, they just shriek the "R" word at us.
Unfortunately, so many of the white talking heads in our society have condemned our culture a elitist and redundant, ignoring the fact that it is far superior to anything they are trying to replace it with.
Sarah
I had the pleasure of watching the Channel 4 programme on the history of Christianity about the Crusades. I'm bery sorry that I could not find the whole episode for you to watch but here is two clips:
http://www.channel4.com/programmes/christianity-a-history/video/series-1/episode-4/massacre-at-jerusalem
Maybe I'm missing something - but what was/is beautiful about horrendous massacres of Pagans, Jews, Muslims and other non Christians by Christians in the name of Christ?
Please enlighten - I believe you say that there is a lot of propoganda - so tell me your version please?
I saw the distorted Channel 4 anti-white anti Christian propaganda thanks.
I don't think I said that the crusades were beautiful, I said that they were not a long forgotten period of history when I was at school.
Your prejudice and bigotry (and Channel 4s) is revealed by your enthusiastic embrace of terms such as "massacre". There were certainly battles and many casualties, and indeed atrocities on both sides.
However, Christianity was fighting to save the holy land, and later parts of Europe from an aggressive Islamic invader.
Re: C4 documentary, I did not see it but another side to 'Christian' aggressiveness exists.
This is the on-going aim of Rome to stamp out so-called 'heretics.' Fox's Book of Martyrs edited by Forbush, summarises the millennia-long persecution of genuine bible-believing Christians by the papacy.
This persecution was well-understood by England's great poet, John Milton, whose writings exposed Rome's savage campaign of 'religious cleansing' against the Christian believers of northern Italy, known as the Waldenses. His (once) famous poem On The Late Massacre at Piedmont, 1655 reads in part as follows:
Avenge, O Lord, Thy slaughtered saints, whose bones
Lie scattered on the Alpine mountains cold;
Even them who kept Thy truth so pure of old,
When all our fathers worship stocks and stones...
An eyewitness account of the massacre had this to say.
My hand trembles so that I scarce can hold the pen, and my tears mingle in torrents with my ink, while I write the deeds of these children of darkness - blacker even than the Prince of Darkness himself Jean Leger, Waldensian pastor 1655, History of the Waldenses by Rev J.A. Wylie, p 144.
It was only the political intervention of England's Lord Protector, Oliver Cromwell that forestalled the persecutions, for at least a few decades.
Those facts of history used to be taught in English schools, I think. I bet they aren't now.
I don't think you'll see them on C4 either.
http://www.evangelist.org/year2000/0699fait.htm
Sarah - even the Pope recignizes the huge catastrophe they were!
The Pope might just be wrong on some issues, condoms and AIDS for instance.
However, my post was not an argument in favour of the "crusades", the point I was making was that British History is no longer taught in our schools, and they were an example I used.
That said, whether or not they in themselves were successful, which they largely were not in the Middle East, does not mean that there was no justification for fighting them.
They were certainly not an example of unprovoked Christian aggression against a peace loving Islam.
They were fought in the context of an invading and agressive Islam, which has harboured the same expansionist ambitions for fourteen hundred years, and were still seeking to invade Christian lands as recently as the 16th Century.
The Prophet, Chick Publications, is good w.r.t. the Crusades. Basically, the Muslims double crossed the Pope who had made a deal with them to capture Jerusalem for 'his (un)holiness' in return for Vatican finance to help them conquer and hold North Africa, eliminating Jews and NT Christians in the process.
But the Muslims decided to keep Jerusalem once they'd got it and the Pope sent his coalition forces in repeated and unsuccessful attempts to get it back.
While Eastern Europe remained vulnerable to direct military Islamic invasion until (I think) the 17th century, when the Muslim armies were stopped at the gates of Vienna, Muslim aspirations to conquer Western Europe by force were largely blunted (until the present day) by the victorious Frankish army under Charles 'the Hammer' Martel, at the battle of Tours in 732 AD (a conclusion disputed by some modern historians but roughly in accord with subsequent events, until 20th and 21st century Western national leaders began to allow Muslims in in droves, as seen in France and elsewhere e.g. Britain).
In that sense, therefore, thanks to the victory of Tours, Martel and his Frankish knights can be perceived as deliverers of the West, according to the Crusader model. The picture of the Crusades themselves is, I think, a little more convoluted. It appears, for example, that many Jewish communities suffered at the hands of pillaging Papal Crusaders en route for the Holy Land. See The Godfathers, Chick Publications. While the Muslims were undoubtedly forestalled by the Papal attempts to capture Jerusalem, at the same time, as indicated earlier, Western NT Christians, e.g the Waldenses and Albigenses (northern Italy and southern France, respectively) were, as the historian Benjamin Wilkinson (Our Authorized Bible Vindicated) shows, "suffering under the iron heel of the Papacy." In other words, Western Europe was not a civilised place for bible-believing non-Catholic Christians for about 1500 years, until the Protestant Reformation and even then, official state-sponsored persecutions of alleged 'heretics,' e.g. of the Protestant Huguenots by Louis XIV, did not cease until about the 19th century on the Continent.
But thanks to their martyrdom, we do (in this country) still retain a measure of religious freedom (for now).
Finally, re the Crusades, I feel that we should not be at all surprised by Medieval wheeling and dealing between friends-by-default in high places who subsequently become foes, with dire consequences for ordinary individuals. I seem to recall that Saddam Hussein, of evil memory, was once allied to the West, when Iran went 'fundamental' under the late but not (by the West) lamented Ayatollah Khomeini.
Plus ca change...
Apologies for the length of the above comment but the subject of this post, Sarah, is as big and wide-ranging as it is vital to a proper understanding of present-day global 'moving and shaking,' which, I fear, is set to get worse before it gets better.
Sarah
Just discovered your blog via Green Arrow, the articles are harrowing in their honesty.
Great blog entry Sarah. You did more than scratch the surface. You have a real grasp on the situation.
I'd love to hear your thoughts on who's responsible and what we can do to resolve the problems facing us.
Post a Comment