Majorityrights Central > Category: History

When most people think of slavery they probably have an image of a white slave owner and a black slave. This is the picture of slavery we have been given through countless books, films and TV shows.

It’s an image which fits in well with left-wing theories that white men have established a dominant power structure which oppresses other races, and that therefore white society is morally illegitimate and must be deconstructed.

Up to now, the main argument against such a left-wing view has been that it was actually white men who ended the slave trade. This is a good and effective argument, but it now appears that much more ought to have been said against the left-wing view.

READ MORE...

On April 9th 1942 some 76,000 Allied forces, Philipino and American, surrendered to General Masahura Homma on the Bataan Peninsula.  The following day they were force-marched from Mariveles, on the southern end of the Peninsula, about 100 kilometres north.  Their destination was Camp O’Donnell, a prison camp in Nueva Ecija in the Philippine region of Central Luzon.  They were denied food and water, bound, beaten or killed with impunity by the Japanese soldiers.  Some were bayoneted when they fell from exhaustion.  Others were made to dig their own graves and buried alive.  Only 56,000 prisoners reached the camp.  Of these, thousands died later from malnutrition and disease.

Now, it happens that last night, April 9th, I received an e-mail with a link to the website of the, of course, anti-semitic, fascistic, Hitlerian yada, yada historian, David Irving.  The linked page was an old post reproducing a Haaretz article by Schlomo Shamir from April 24th, 2004.  I have not, incidentally, been able to get the Haaretz search engine to dig up the original article.  But I don’t doubt that Mr Irving, a man with first-hand experience of libel litigation, is citing it correctly.  He quotes Mr Shamir thus:-

A table in an appendix to the Gribetz report states that compensation and benefits paid to individuals and institutions since 1953, comes to a total of $53,871 billion, of which 44 per cent went to individuals and institutions in Israel, 28 per cent to others in the U.S., and 28 per cent to survivors in the rest of the world.

READ MORE...

This post is a rather roughly thrown together response to John’s interesting trawl through David Gelernter’s piece in The Weekly Standard, The Inventor of Modern Conservatism.

There is no disputing that Gelernter is correct about Benjamin Disraeli’s status as an inventor, as are all the many historians and students of politics who have wiseacred to the same end.  The issue is not one of historical accuracy nor even one, solely, of etymological accuracy.  I am not claiming that Disraeli’s invention lies in the ascription of the word “Conservatism” to his new politic of the right in mid-Victorian England.  I am claiming that he invented the historical precedents by which he could carry-over the terms and conventions of Conservatism into his own new Establishment.  In so doing, he indeed became the first neoconservative.  But in substance it was an act of anti-Conservatism and an act, as Martin Hutchinson emphasises in his truly exceptional and recently published opus Great Conservatives, of legerdemain.

READ MORE...

This morning while I was searching for a suitable, January 18-related image for our banner I came across this historical entry:-

18 January 1951:  Hermann Flake sentenced to death for “hate campaign against German Democratic Republic”.

Intrigued, I googled as many likely combinations as I could come up with but the information-safe remained firmly shut.  Does any MR-reading student of twentieth-century history know Flake’s story and the true nature of his crime?