Majorityrights Central > Category: History

by David Hamilton

The patricians’ view ... “The Garden of Eden with the Fall of Man” by Jan Brueghel the elder and Peter Paul Ruebens 

We are led to believe that mass immigration is a blessing to us and that only Enoch Powell and a few narrow-minded and prejudiced people have ever seen danger in it. All decent folk of good will, we are told, have embraced this break in our national continuity as a sign of enlightenment, with people progressing to a higher state of civilisation - that of a one-world utopia made up of coffee-coloured persons.

It has also been presented as an ideological battle between left and right.  But, actually, it is between people of common sense and utopian idealists.

Most ordinary people relate to the world by common sense.  We who wish to preserve our traditional way of life know how human nature works from our experience of how peoples treat with one another and what they are capable of.  We have learned from history how different ethnic groups vie with one another for power and territory.  Looking at the world around us, we see that in practice immigration is not assimilation, but the colonisation of our territory.

So the impracticable dream of a multiracial utopia has had to be socially-engineered, which required totalitarian methods.  The Utopians see immigrants as essentially good, and if we are nice to them they will be nice to us.  But this utopianism does not do away with human nature, and we perceive foreigners being brought in as cheap labour, with idealism just as a smokescreen.  If the high-minded ones are so benevolent and moral, why have their plans been underhand, we ask.  And why the public infamy for those who foresaw danger in just letting it happen?

READ MORE...

When I wrote my post about the Bielski brothers, who are lionised in Edward Zwick’s 2008 film, “Defiance”, I mentioned that a Polish-American reader of this blog had provided me with much of the background material.  The same source has now sent me a chapter from a book by a Polish national hero, Stefan Korbo?ski.  The book is The Jews and the Poles in World War II, and this fifth chapter is titled The Jews in postwar Poland.

In the decade up to 1955 Poland somehow acquired Jewish overlords not only in government and the communist party but in the secret police, in the adminstration of justice, in the machinery of political indoctrination, and so on.  It was the darkest period of the communist era, the period of “the midnight knock at the door, arbitrary arrests, torture, and sometimes secret execution”.  Korbo?ski does not dwell on the horrors that were committed during this time, but explains where political power and responsibility lay.  He leaves us to supply motive.

This is by no means dead history.  The political and legal architecture of the communist state was very different, of course, from the Western democratic model.  But in terms of its ethic nepotism and sheer tribal aggression, Jewish engagement in the “dictatorship of the proletariat” demonstrates how unchanging is the character of Jewry and how singular its interest in the monopoly of power.  As Korbo?ski noted somewhat reservedly of Stalin’s appraisal of Jews, they were “cosmopolitans whose loyalties would be to Zionism rather than the country of their residence.”

I reproduce below the entire Chapter V from The Jews and the Poles in World War II.

THE JEWS IN POSTWAR POLAND

READ MORE...

by The Narrator

There are various ways of describing and understanding the unfortunate turn many in Western Civilization have taken over the past century. Comparing events to “revolutions” and the course of specific nations to the Titanic striking the iceberg are common (engaged in by this writer as well). But every now and then a new perspective may help better see the possible causations as well as the potential remedies/outcomes to our plight.

“History repeats itself” we are told and sure enough that seems to most often be the case. More than that, specific historical incidents seem to foreshadow events on a greater scale and era.

Such an event is the Mutiny On The Bounty.  (I should state that I’m no expert on the subject and that my casual interest in it was sparked by viewing the 1984 film ’The Bounty’.)

That mutiny, wherein a group of men from a civilized Western nation, having temporarily grown accustomed to a leisurely life of hedonistic nihilism on a tropic Island, rebel against their commander when faced with returning to a orderly and disciplined, (Western) way of life, has a general theme which can be applied to our current situation.

Though it is common today to lay part of the blame for our slide into ruin on the influence of outside groups who, through media and finance, encourage activities that harm us, it is not quite telling the whole story, nor is it reflective of the less glamorous parts of Western history.  That that influence is there is undeniable. However when we look at the way Western Men, born and raised in a strong and potent Western nation at the height of its power, behaved on their own, far away from outside influence, over two hundred years ago, in an era that openly recognized racial and class differences, we see men who acted not much different than some men do today.

READ MORE...

The following essay was written for the The Occidental Observer site, and sent on to me by the author to publish here.
GW

SOCIOBIOLOGY OF A COMMUNIST KILLING FIELD: THE CROATIAN BLIEBERG

By Tomislav Sunic

In the study of communist terror different methods from different fields have been applied, ranging from the fields of political science, historiography and philosophy to international justice. An impressive number of books about communist crimes have enabled observers to grasp this unique phenomenon of the twentieth century, which inevitably brings about a large and emotional outcry, followed by constant haggling about different body counts. Whether it is the former communist Cambodia or the former communist Poland, in the memory of many citizens of former communist countries communism is a synonym for an inhumane political system.

Despite the fall of communism as an ideological and political-legal system, the communist ideas of egalitarianism and the belief in permanent economic progress are still alive, albeit in other forms and under different names, and even amidst people who self-describe themselves as anti-communists. Perhaps the reason for that lies in the fact that the ideas of equality, internationalism (‘globalism’) and economic growth are today better achieved, or appear better achievable, in the liberal capitalist West than in the former ‘real-socialist’ countries in the East.

READ MORE...

By David Hamilton

City drugs turf war

DOZENS of extra police officers patrolled the streets of a Sheffield suburb last night after yobs from rival gangs armed with sticks and swords clashed in a drug-related turf war and a man was stabbed in the city centre.

The trouble between the Afro-Carribean and Somali gangs has been simmering all week but finally spiralled out of control when youths armed with sticks and swords fought on the streets of Broomhall on Thursday night and a man was stabbed outside Primark in Sheffield city centre yesterday morning.

Today Ch Supt Jon House, Sheffield district policing commander, said ... ““We now feel, following conversations with the leader of the council and the leader of the Labour Party, a more robust stance of stop and search must be taken to reassure members of the public.”

... Coun Mazher Iqbal, former Sheffield Council cabinet advisor for community safety, said the city centre stabbing followed problems starting last weekend. “It started as a dispute between Somali and Afro-Caribbean youths but has escalated and involves two gangs. We’ve had people carrying serious weapons, baseball bats, knives and pick-axes.

From yesterday’s Sheffield Star

The following article was published at

http://www.cdall.net/ on 2nd August 2007.

TAMING GANGS - THE SHEFFIELD SOLUTION

History is exciting narrative and can also guide us with contemporary problems. It does not repeat itself exactly but similarly and study can clarify present disorders. A major problem for decent people living their everyday lives is the take over of our towns and cities by violent gangs that have been allowed here by the authorities. A precedent 1920’s Sheffield, England, was terrorised by gangsters. They lived in cramped back to back houses in courtyards which sociologists use as the excuse. But joining a gang gives power, a sense of importance, of belonging to something, money, possessions, prestige and women offering themselves to you. It gives identity as most gangs are formed on Ethnic lines and based on a territory.

These gangs gambled. Bookies operated outside factory gates with “runners” inside collecting bets for them and one made £75 to around a £100 each day even though it was illegal. Another popular form of gambling was “pitch and Toss.” This was a simple form of betting that required no equipment to pack up and carry away. It was tossing 3 coins into the air with the two forefingers and betting on the proportion of, say, heads that turned up. The biggest and most profitable “Pitching” site was on “Sky Edge” a promontory that gives a panorama over the city and with well-placed lookouts or “Crows” raiding policeman could be spotted from afar.

READ MORE...

“I dabbled in politics in the late 1960s and 1970s, more out of guilt than anything. Guilt for being rich and guilt thinking that perhaps love and peace isn’t enough and you have to go and get shot or something, or get punched in the face to prove I’m one of the people.  I was doing it against my instincts.”

John Lennon, quoted just before his death.

At a brief lull during the Who’s performance of Tommy, [Abbie] Hoffman, who had ingested LSD after working the past few hours at the medical tent, abruptly walked onto the stage and began addressing the crowd from Pete Townshend’s microphone.  He shouted, “I think this is a pile of shit! ... While John Sinclair rots in prison ...”  Alerted to the disturbance, Townshend (who apparently had been too distracted to notice Hoffman ambling onto the platform), snarled at Hoffman, “Back off!  Back off my fucking stage!”  He then struck Hoffman with his guitar, sending the interloper tumbling.  As the crowd let out an approving roar, Townshend returned to his microphone to add a sarcastic “I can dig it!”  Following the conclusion of the next song, the short “Do You Think It’s Alright?”, Townshend issued a stern warning to those in attendance: “The next fucking person that walks across this stage is gonna get fucking killed, alright? You can laugh, [but] I mean it!”

From the Wikipedia entry on the Woodstock Festival

During last month, the fortieth anniversary of the Paris student protests, the press was well-populated with articles about the generation of 1968.  I am nearly but not quite one of them and, personally, I’ve found a lot of what was written to suffer from generalisation.  The spirited, no-nonsense attitude of Townshend and the coerced and manufactured gaucheness of Lennon were nowhere mentioned.  But they are both much closer to the world that I encountered as a (very) young man.

One does well to remember that, at heart, the 60s generation as a whole was probably no more interested in left-wing political activism than any other.  Rather, it was caught up in an historical moment in the West so coloured by cultural, religious and political exhaustion, and - something entirely new - so drenched with the images of an inexcusable, far-away war, that millenarianism and rebelliousness were a simple, mechanical response.

Many aspects of it were ineffably silly and lightweight.  But a few managed to turn escapism from the grey reality of our parent’s world into an adventure of self-discovery.  These were a pure intoxication of the spirit, the like of which I have not seen since.

READ MORE...

Here is the full text of Enoch Powell’s speech to the Annual General Meeting of the West Midlands Area Conservative Political Centre, at the Midland Hotel, Birmingham on 20th April 1968.

The supreme function of statesmanship is to provide against preventable evils. In seeking to do so, it encounters obstacles which are deeply rooted in human nature. One is that by the very order of things such evils are not demonstrable until they have occurred: at each stage in their onset there is room for doubt and for dispute whether they be real or imaginary. By the same token, they attract little attention in comparison with current troubles, which are both indisputable and pressing: whence the besetting temptation of all politics to concern itself with the immediate present at the expense of the future.

Above all, people are disposed to mistake predicting troubles for causing troubles and even for desiring troubles: “If only,” they love to think, “if only people wouldn’t talk about it, it probably wouldn’t happen.” Perhaps this habit goes back to the primitive belief that the word and the thing, the name and the object, are identical.

At all events, the discussion of future grave but, with effort now, avoidable evils is the most unpopular and at the same time the most necessary occupation for the politician. Those who knowingly shirk it deserve, and not infrequently receive, the curses of those who come after.

A week or two ago I fell into conversation with a constituent, a middle-aged, quite ordinary working man employed in one of our nationalised industries. After a sentence or two about the weather, he suddenly said: “If I had the money to go, I wouldn’t stay in this country.” I made some deprecatory reply to the effect that even this government wouldn’t last for ever; but he took no notice, and continued: “I have three children, all of them been through grammar school and two of them married now, with family. I shan’t be satisfied till I have seen them all settled overseas. In this country in 15 or 20 years’ time the black man will have the whip hand over the white man.”

I can already hear the chorus of execration. How dare I say such a horrible thing? How dare I stir up trouble and inflame feelings by repeating such a conversation?

The answer is that I do not have the right not to do so. Here is a decent, ordinary fellow Englishman, who in broad daylight in my own town says to me, his Member of Parliament, that his country will not be worth living in for his children. I simply do not have the right to shrug my shoulders and think about something else. What he is saying, thousands and hundreds of thousands are saying and thinking - not throughout Great Britain, perhaps, but in the areas that are already undergoing the total transformation to which there is no parallel in a thousand years of English history.

READ MORE...

The only programme of the five in the BBC2 White season which has garnered any kind of praise from right-thinkers is “Rivers of Blood”, a surprisingly sympathetic and rounded portrayal of the great and courageous Enoch Powell.  Naturally, it has found its way onto YouTube.  My thanks to wintermute for sending me links to all six parts.

Part 1

Part 2

READ MORE...