May 5, 2015

Thoughts on the Debate on Christianity

via Counter-Currents

Hans Memling, Angel Musicians, 1480s
Recently, the text of a debate between Greg Johnson and Jonas De Geer appeared in these pages. Here following is my commentary on the thoughts expressed by both of the parties in the debate.

I find myself agreeing with points made by both men, and also disagreeing with both on some other issues raised here in this excellent and very civil discussion.

Both parties agree that present day Christianity is in a sorry state. There is not much to debate here, and I find myself in full agreement with this position.

Mr. De Geer points out that the decay of culture in the 20th Century was triggered by the collapse of the Roman Church instigated by the 2nd Vatican Council.

Dr. Johnson points out correctly that problems in the Church predate the Council, and while this is certainly true, the point Mr. De Geer makes is still spot-on. This is true despite the fact noted in the debate that the Scandinavian countries must have absorbed relatively little from the Roman Rite. This does not really matter all that much, since the Roman Church continued to be the flagship of Western moral behavior even after the Reformation. As I once asked of a Protestant friend (who happened to be a Methodist): Who is the head of the Methodist Church? My friend was caught flat-footed by this question; he had no idea. To be sure, he was only a nominal Methodist–but even nominal Methodists (even atheists) know who the Pope is.

The plain fact is that Protestantism, taken as a whole is essentially irrelevant–not because of the particulars of their various theologies, or because they are right or wrong, but because they are less competent theologians that their Roman professional peers. This by definition since the Roman Rite ruled the West for many centuries unchallenged and united, whereas the Reformation began to splinter soon after it started and now has hundreds of different denominations.

Reaching back in time, we can assign the troubles in Christendom to any one of a number of dates preceding the Rogue Council of 1962–1965:

The Schism of 1054

Here the Orthodox Rite has the high ground in my estimation. By avoiding the central authority of the Pope in the Western Rite, the Orthodox Church lent itself to nationalism, particularism, and ethnocentrism rather than the West’s universalism and general indifference to race and culture. The Russian Orthodox Church survived the Communist era, and remains intact and seemingly more energetic than the rapidly disintegrating Roman Church.

The Reformation

Many of the Protestant denominations were more political movements that actual religions.

Age of Exploration

In the settling of the Americas the Protestants took the high ground. When the Catholic countries (Spain and Portugal) settled the New World they commonly sent sailors only, leaving their wives and children back home in Europe. When these sailors arrived, they generally hauled off everything that wasn’t bolted down and sent it back to Europe.

They fornicated shamelessly with the ambient natives, creating a very large subclass of mixed race peoples, condemning most of the Republics south of the Rio Grande to poverty, perpetual revolution, violence, and chaos.

The Protestants (at least the English who did the lion’s share of settling North America) mixed very little with the Indians, killed off many of them, then put the rest on reservations. In contrast to the aforementioned Spanish and Portuguese, they often brought their families with them, indicating more honest intentions–to settle the land and make it their home rather than simply loot it.

The French Revolution

18th Century Bolshevism.

World War II

Pius XII, now falsely billed as a pro-Nazi Pope, was in fact a pro Marxist. He took the side of the United Nations forces during the Second World War. This became very hard to justify after the USSR entered the War on the side of the Allies as shown here in this remarkable article by Vatican Observer Mary Ball Martinez:

Pope Pius XII in the Second World War[1]

The Soviet Factor

Papal preference for the Allied side became more difficult to defend after June 1941, when this became the Soviet side. By that time Hitler’s “Fortress Europe” was overwhelmingly Catholic. Germany itself then included the predominantly Catholic regions of Austria, the Saarland, and the Sudetenland, as well as Alsace-Lorraine and Luxembourg. Moreover, the German-allied countries of Italy, Slovenia, Slovakia and Croatia were entirely Catholic, and Hungary was mainly so. France — including both the German-occupied northern zone and the Vichy-run south — cooperated with Germany. Similarly, Catholic Spain and Portugal were sympathetic.

A Catholic priest, Josef Tiso, had been elected president of the German-backed Republic of Slovakia. In France, which adopted the Axis ban on Freemasonry, crucifixes went up on all public buildings, and on French coins the old official motto of the French Revolution, “Liberty, Equality, Fraternity,” was replaced with “Work, Family, Fatherland.”


Is Paganism a viable alternative to Christianity? In the sense normally used, I doubt it. As Mr. De Geer points out: “The attempts that have been made at creating new religions or recreat[ing] old ones in certain nationalist circles have been hopelessly futile, to put it mildly.”

My view on this, much to the horror of my fellow Roman Catholics, is that the Roman Church is itself a variant of paganism. Catholics reflexively deny this as though it was some sort of a slam, but the Protestants correctly point this out about the Catholic propensity for the veneration of Mary and all the innumerable Saints. In this the Protestants are exactly correct. Not until the Reformation did we get a widely accepted monotheism in the West.

National Socialist Era

Some ceremonies during the Third Reich strongly suggested pagan rituals, such as the midnight swearing in of SS members.

The late Reichskanzler discounted full strength paganism of the sort delivered in Rosenberg’s The Myth of the 20th Century. Just the same, it seems that had the National Socialist experiment survived the War, both the Roman Rite and the Lutheran Church and some variant of each with a retro pagan admixture would likely have experienced a revival in Europe.

Indefectibility of the Church

I believe Dr. Johnson has the high ground here. Despite the persistent citation of this catch-phrase especially by Traditional Latin-Rite Catholics, the plain facts of the real world have forced even its advocates to hem and haw over this absolute statement, whittling it down from the whole Church as it was before 1962, now reducing its application to the Trad Cats in general, or one favored branch of the Traditional movement to the exclusion of others not favored.

This type of slicing and dicing is a bit too slick to pass inspection, especially when we consider that all the Popes (or anti-Popes if you prefer) from Pius the XII forward have stood 180° opposed to the general thrust of their 259 predecessors.

With 266 Popes from St. Peter to the present Pope Francis, only the last seven (or eight if you want to throw in Pius XI) have been unorthodox in both belief and practice.
Doing the math: 7÷266 = .026, or about 2½ percent of the historical Pontiffs have consistently delivered heresy during their reigns.

This time argument frames this issue correctly. The fact that in space–the world we live in today–the Pope is in the majority amongst Catholics in terms of his political bias, is interesting, but basically irrelevant in terms of getting at what is the essence of any belief system that has the right to call itself Roman Catholic. Hence the modern traditional belief, popular in some circles, that the post- Conciliar Popes are frauds, and would (or should) be declared anti-Popes by a future reactionary occupant of the Holy See–assuming that any such appears.

Is it then possible to argue that the indefectibility of the Church is preserved by the existence of a few wildcat Trad orgs around the planet, or that the turncoat SSPX, which threw out its own Bishop in Buenos Aires to curry favor with the Jews, is now the Catholic Church?

No. A church, to have a legitimate existence in any society, must inform and be backed by the culture in which it subsists. Current Western society rejects both variants of the Roman Rite and all of the Protestant denominations as well. All varieties of Christians are pariahs in today’s Western culture. The politically correct mainstream versions of any of the Christian faiths are given polite notice in the press, but the contempt is palpable.

Can the Roman Rite in particular, or Christendom in general, expect that in time it will revive and take its former place in European civilization?

The chances seem slim. Though devout Christians like to think of Christianity as a permanent faith, history teaches us that very little if anything in this world is permanent given a long enough time frame. Religions have come and gone before, and nothing on earth remains in stasis indefinitely.

Change is in fact a law of life. Everything extant is subject to it, and even where change is subtle, given sufficient time even the most gradual rate of change can produce an end result that is so far removed from the original that it is barely recognizable.


Here I disagree with Dr. Johnson. Liberalism is not a religion of any sort. It is, if anything, perhaps a pseudo-religion, and at that not a very good one. Rather than a theology, liberalism is a sort of mental retardation akin to the poor cognitive development found in people that have suffered from childhood lead poisoning. I do not see a better way to explain the liberal failure to understand the obvious, even after numerous clear examples in life and history prove conclusively that many of their cherished dogmas are wrong. The notion that the races of man have equal potential, and that this potential is easily malleable and can therefore be modified and improved by training and education is just one example. Repeated studies and the evidence of experience and observation through long centuries tell us that the races differ in ability, behavior and intelligence, and that much of this is inbred and cannot be modified significantly by environmental factors.

As Groucho used to say, “Who you gonna believe–me or your eyes?”

I do agree however that there are parts of liberalism (or the left) that are salvageable, and even parts that are valuable, such as leftist opposition to Zionism. Also, though liberalism has a monopoly on the worst parts of culture and the arts, it also has a monopoly on the best of these, such as they are. When was the last time any of us have read a novel from the white nationalist right equivalent in caliber to American Tragedy or Sister Carrie?

The answer here, alas, is “not ever.” 

A Civil Religion

I don’t know that this is going to work. The problem we face today is that our race and Western civ. along with it have come up against a global struggle between wildcat individualism (Whites and the West) vs. Tribalism (the jews). So far, the results seem to indicate that tribalism is a much more effective strategy with superior survival potential compared to poorly organized individualism.

Adding to our woes, there is little if any indication that tribal behavior can be taught. It seems to be an inborn trait. Either a race has it or it does not.

Much of today’s chatter on the white nationalist right exemplifies Spengler’s observation: “Those who talk too much about race no longer have it in them.”

Any way you look at it, we are in this for the long haul. If and when a new Faith is organically developed over time (it cannot be invented in committee) or an old Faith revived or rediscovered, all of us now living will likely be long dead. Even our children or grandchildren may not see the day.

We’ve been down this road before. When the great Cathedrals of Europe were built, those starting them knew they’d never see them completed.

The Köln Cathedral, begun in 1248 continued under construction until 1473 when work was stopped. Building resumed in the 19th Century and the Cathedral was completed in 1880.

The first phase of construction lasted 225 years. Total time to completion: 632 years.

We have a long road ahead of us. Our job is to lay the groundwork. Victory will be the work of the generations to come.
1. “Pope Pius XII in the Second Word War,” October 1993,

Fear and Loathing and Treason, Part 1

via Age of Treason

Listen Now

For years thousands of Africans and other non-Whites have been invading Europe, crossing the Mediterranean ocean by boat. Rather than turning these boats around, or simply sinking these invaders, European security forces, ostensibly sworn to protect their countries from invasion, have been increasingly more likely to “rescue” the invaders, to help them ashore, feed them, and release them to do as they please in Europe.

Why do European governments permit this invasion? I’m sure the details of the incidents and legal arguments are complicated and confusing. But to put it simply, it happens for the simple reason that the invaders aren’t offically regarded as invaders, but instead are described as innocent victims, “refugees” who are just looking for a better life for themselves and their families. And the simple reason for that is treason. The governments are operated by aliens and indigenous traitors who demonstrate by their words and deeds that they place the interests of alien invaders above the indigenous Europeans.

UN expert: rich countries must take in 1 million refugees to stop boat deaths, The Guardian, 22 April 2015.

François Crépeau‘s bio at McGill says he is:
the Hans & Tamar Oppenheimer Professor in Public International Law at the Faculty of Law of McGill University. In 2011, he was appointed United Nations Special Rapporteur on the Human Rights of Migrants.
UN Rapporteur Francois Crepeau Has A Very Rude Word To Describe UK’s Attitude To Migrants, Huffington Post, 12 March 2014.

The only real solution to Europe’s migrant crisis is to let everyone in, by Dylan Matthews at Vox, 21 April 2015.

VOX’s Dylan Matthews: Ending Europe Forever Is The “Only” Solution To Migrant Crisis, by James Kirkpatrick at VDare, 22 April 2015.

‘Swedes will compare this to the Holocaust’, The Local, 20 April 2015:
A Swedish MEP [Cecilia Wikström] is stepping up a pan-European cross-party campaign for “legal and safe routes to Europe” for migrants in the wake of the latest Mediterranean boat disaster.
I think that my children and grandchildren are going to ask why more wasn’t done to help people running away from Isis, or violence in Eritrea or wherever, when we knew that people were dying in their thousands. People will ask the same question they did after the war, ‘if you were aware, why didn’t you do something?’. In Sweden we allowed our railroads to be used to transfer Jews to Nazi death camps.
Will Africa’s Northern Sea be the Mediterranean or the Baltic?, by Steve Sailer, 23 April 2015.

Swedish navy widens search for mystery submarine, Associated Press, 20 October 2014.

Fourth Generation Warfare: They Just Don’t Get It

via traditionalRight

Two articles in the April 25 New York Times well illustrated the degree to which states just don’t get Fourth Generation war. The first was the lead story that day, titled “Despite Errors, Drones Decimate Weakened Qaeda”:
Revelations of new high-level losses among Al Qaeda’s top leadership in Pakistan’s tribal belt have underscored how years of American drone strikes have diminished and dispersed the militant group’s upper ranks and forced them to cede prominence and influence to more aggressive offshoots in Yemen and Somalia.
This “success story” is part of a broad PR offensive now underway to justify and ensure continuance of the drone strike program. But looked at through the lens of 4GW, there is no success, and the wisdom of the drone strike program is very much open to question.

Congratulating ourselves that al Qaeda’s leadership in Pakistan has been “decimated” is like cheering because, in an effort to pick up mercury, we have turned one big blob into lots of littles ones. More, it shows a focus on al Qaeda that is wholly unjustified. As we see with the rise of ISIS, if all the leadership of al Qaeda in Pakistan dropped dead tomorrow, nothing would change but some nomenclature.

Al Qaeda in Pakistan has largely been rendered irrelevant by the continued march of the Brinton Thesis, a chain of coups d’etat ever more to the extreme until all is brougt back to the center by the coup of Thermidor. (It is no coincidence that my picture on traditionalRIGHT shows me digging into a plate of lobster Thermidor.) In effect, the Jacobins are now in power in Islamic 4GW and al Qaeda is the Montagne, yesterdays’s news. Washington, it seems, reads only the news of the day before yesterday.

As to the drone program as a whole, it, along with airstrikes from manned aircraft, are one of our enemies’ top recruiting devices. When you circle endlessly over your opponent, now and then letting loose a missile or a bomb, you hurt him physically, you may scare him mentally, but morally you enrage him to the point where he will do anything to get back at you. The drone brings forth its low-tech equivalent, the suicide bomber. Which is more effective?

Here we see one of the most important aspects of 4GW that states apparently cannot get, namely that, as John Boyd argued, the physical level of war is the weakest, the mental level (the key to 3GW) is in the middle, and the moral level of war is the most powerful. Drones and airstrikes win at the physical level at the expense of losing at the moral level. Which means, in the end, states usually lose Fourth Generation wars.

The other piece in the April 25 Times says it all in the headlines: “Migration Crisis Facing Europe Cannot be Solved at Sea, Analysts Say”. As usual, the analysts are wrong. The problem of illegal migration across the Mediterranean, which is a 4GW invasion of the Western heartland, can easily be solved at sea. When the migrants arrive, usually in Italy, you corral them, hold them until you’ve got enough, then sail them back to what was Libya. If one of the pretend governments of Libya objects, the Italian Navy has a good amphibious capability. The San Marco land and make a beachhead, the would-be migrants are deposited on it, and the Italian forces withdraw. Militarily, it’s a piece of cake, though Italy would need the EU to foot the bill. The cost to Europe would be trivial compared to the bill for accepting hundreds of thousands of people who will never acculturate.

Here we see the state failing at both the physical and the moral levels of war. It refuses the easy physical solution, shipping them back, because cultural Marxism has emasculated Europe’s leadership morally. All you have to do is show some pictures of poor, weeping “victims” and Europe’s elites melt into a pool of blubber. No matter that some of those same “victims” will be supporting jihad on European soil once they move in (Restricting refugees admitted to Europe to Christians would help, but political correctness outlaws that too.)

When generations of war change, entities that don’t get it disappear. The U.S. and European states don’t get it. Ergo . . .

Holy Warriors and Jewish Jihad: Diaspora Jews in the IDF

via The Occidental Observer

Founders of Mahal Mums: (from left) Michelle
Sint, Linda Lester and Camille Compton
It was while on a school visit to a Nazi concentration camp site in Poland that a north London schoolboy called Max Compton underwent the religious awakening that would change his life.

Filled with Zionist enthusiasm, eighteen-year-old Max decided to leave England and join the Israel Defence Force and defend his homeland and his people. His strongly Jewish family backed him all the way and as his mum recounted later, his swearing-in ceremony at the Wailing Wall in Jerusalem was “an extremely emotional and proud experience”.

And so it was that young Max was recruited into one of the most notorious units in the Israeli army, the Givati Brigade. The “Givatis’” are one of Israel’s most aggressive front-line combat units, and proud of their hard-line reputation. Their name often comes up in connection with contentious and unjustified actions such as the shootings of Palestinian teenagers.

Max Compton is just one of around 100 British Jews (and around 1000 American Jews) who are serving with the IDF. Under a process known as Mahal, non-Israeli Jews from anywhere in the world can sign-up, and there is financial support for the hundreds who flock to Israel for a typical 20-month stint.

All of which raises an interesting question, for while home grown Muslim jihadists who travel to Syria are criminalized, pursued by the police and denounced by the government, UK Jews who join the Israel Defence Force are exempt from any censure whatsoever. Why is there one rule for the Muslims who go on Jihad and another for the Jews?

There nothing covert about Jewish Jihad. From her home in the London suburbs Max’s mother Mrs Camille Compton helps run a widely publicised support group, Mahal Mums, who have their own webpage and Facebook group and openly canvas for support from their own community.

The question of Mahal is a delicate matter for the Jewish community and is rarely mentioned in the media. In theory it is illegal, as serving for foreign forces is forbidden under the Foreign Enlistment Act from 1870, although this has never been tested in court.

The Jihadi Jews are given a pass because, nominally at least, Israel is both an ally with the trappings of a secular Western democracy in contrast to the unabashed medieval savagery of ISIS.

The problem with this is embodied in the shape of Max’s commanding officer. Colonel Ofer Winter is as much a holy warrior as army officer, and in a letter to his troops before the beginning of Operation Protective Edge, he felt moved to tell them — effectively — that they were to be the instruments of God’s terrible wrath on the enemies of Israel.

Strewn with Biblical references, it was a missive that might have been penned by Oliver Cromwell in one of his less forgiving moods. Colonel Winter wrote:
History has chosen us to be the sharp edge of the bayonet of fighting the terrorist enemy “from Gaza” which curses, defames and abuses the God of Israel’s battles…. I turn my eyes to the sky and call with you “Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God is one Lord.” God, the Lord of Israel, make our path successful, as we are about to fight for Your People, Israel, against an enemy who defames your name.
During Operation Protective Edge, the Givati Brigade met stiff resistance in the West Bank town of Rafah. A major and sergeant were killed and a lieutenant was captured.

It seems that a decision was made to make an example of Rafah and on a day to be known as “Black Friday,” the unit moved into the Palestinian town and embarked on what Israeli sources admitted was “the most aggressive military action of its type ever carried out by the IDF.”

The indiscriminate air, artillery and infantry onslaught took place without even the usual cursory warning to civilians and when the dust settled, at least 160 lay dead under the rubble and many more had been grievously maimed and wounded.
In the eyes of many, this has reinforced Colonel Winter’s reputation as a bloodthirsty religious maniac. He has also has been accused by one Jewish blogger of leading his Givatis’ into carrying out another massacre in a fearful episode that led to him being dubbed the “Butcher of Khuzaa”.

Colonel Winter may be loved by his troops and adored by his many fans in the Orthodox community as a Zionist warrior. But he is also something of an embarrassment. The civilians corpses he leaves in his wake — and the attendant publicity — are bad for business. Not that the Israeli military care about civilian casualties, but they do recognise the value of good PR. It is far from the image of the measured, secular, “most moral, most humane military in the world” that they wish to project. The problem with Colonel Winter is that he does reveal the reality of the IDF behind the smooth publicity machine.

Up until recently the British media have largely stayed away from the double standard of Jihadi Jews and home-grown Islamic warriors. Then the editor of a small circulation British academic journal called Anthropology Today  which is produced by the Royal Anthropological Institute,  ran an article on it in the April, 2015 edition.

The article is called “Three Jihads — Islamic, Christian and Jewish” and examines the phenomenon of believers from each of the three faiths who embark on holy war
It draws attention to the double standard over dual loyalty and notes that the religious intensity of the Jihadists is emphasised while that of the Jewish foreign fighters is ignored.

Professor Laura Nader of the University of California–Berkeley, is cited describing Jewish foreign recruits as “indoctrinated” to hate the Palestinians and that the Holocaust is used to justify Israel’s actions.

Professor Nader, who is of Lebanese extraction, writes: “Today around 100 British nationals are serving in the Israeli army, supported by proud British mothers, however the April 2014 British report on counter-terrorism does not include as….threat the indoctrinated British citizens returning home from service in the Israeli military, since the UK is already an ally of Israel.”

She continues: “The Mahal network of jihadists were taking part in the Israeli ground offensive in the Gaza Strip last summer, which resulted in the death of so many innocent Palestinian civilians.”

She mentions a BBC TV programme which looked at the rise of military rabbis in the Israeli defence Forces. “According to this programme, military rabbis played a prominent role in Israel’s invasion of Gaza [in 2014]…, side by side with civilian rabbis, thereby, they argue, making the war holier, making the army better — ‘more moral’. Some reserve military think this change is dangerous because once it is a holy war ‘there are no limits’.

The BBC report stated:
Israel’s army is changing. Once proudly secular, its combat units are now filling with those who believe Israel’s wars are “God’s wars”.
Military rabbis are becoming more powerful. Trained in warfare as well as religion, new army regulations mean they are now part of a military elite.
They graduate from officer’s school and operate closely with military commanders. One of their main duties is to boost soldiers’ morale and drive, even on the front line. (2009)
All of this prompts the question; with Israel drifting in a relentlessly Orthodox direction and the military being filled with religious fervour, what exactly is the difference between the Jewish Jihadis as opposed to the Muslim variety?
Of Birthright (Israel) trips she says they “recruit youngsters to visit a fantasy Israel where they receive instruction on Zionism.” On these trips, she says “visitors learn to hate the enemy, the Palestinians”.
Professor Nader goes on to write that “For Judaism, extremism is justified as a result of the Holocaust, anti-Semitism and the right of return”; and further: “Islamic jihad has some contemporary parallels in Judaism.”

It is a calm and measured article but the airing of this sensitive issue in public has predictably incurred the wrath of the British Board of Jewish Deputies in the shape of Vice-President Jonathan Arkush who could barely contain his indignation and claimed there were inaccuracies but strangely did not point them out.

“The piece was grotesquely distorted and inaccurate and we are at a complete loss to understand how the journal thought it fit to publish,” he said. “We are currently investigating what further action to take.”

Jewish News  went on to quote one Jewish anthropologist, who preferred to remain anonymous: “This is the first time that I have come across such blatant anti-Semitic, anti-Israeli vitriol in a RAI publication.”

Up until now Israel has enjoyed virtual immunity for its actions in the Gaza and West Bank, but that is all set to change for on April 1, Palestine formally joined the International Criminal Court.

The Palestinians have already said that one of their first actions will be to bring war crimes charges against senior Givati Brigade officers for the atrocities committed under Operation Protective Edge.

The possibility of having Colonel Winter brought before a war crimes tribunal in the Hague has concentrated minds wonderfully in the Israeli government. Spectacular buck-passing and in-fighting seems to have already broken out. The Jerusalem Post has reported on the impact: “A bombshell has fallen within the ranks, turning military commanders and lawyers against each other on a possibly unprecedented level.”

It’s not surprising then, that Israel has retaliated against the Palestinians by withholding tax revenue collected for the Palestinian government.

Back in the leafy streets of the prosperous London borough of Barnet, Mrs Camille Compton could be forgiven for feeling concerned.

After all, having your son attached to a war crimes tribunal charge, however tangentially, is bound to dampen the spirits of what was meant to be a triumphant homecoming.

But if it is any consolation, they can spare a thought for the parents of Mashudur Choudhury, a Portsmouth man who was one of six who travelled to Syria in 2013, all intending to martyr themselves. Four succeeded. On his return Choudhury was arrested by counter-terrorism officers and jailed for four years.

All of this is extremely hard to fathom for ordinary White British people. They were never asked whether they wanted either of these alien groups and their conflicts in this country just as they were never asked whether they wanted their country transformed out of recognition. But of course, as far as Britain’s elites are concerned, their views don’t count.

Nominalism and the Destruction of the Islamic World

via Amerika

Graaaaaagh1 recently appeared on Mike Enoch’s podcast2 discussing a common topic on the show, the Judaic spirit embodied by the Old Testament and the possible origins of Moses. Particularly, both men recommended the book Moses the Egyptian by Jan Assman.3. It argues that nominalism, the philosophy that universals do not exist and that denies the unity behind material forms, initiated the collapse of Western Civilization through great evils such as iconoclasm, the Enlightenment, the Reformation and Progressivism.

Graaaaaagh argues, essentially correctly, that iconoclasm and anti-intellectualism in the Christian faith are the result of its periodic reversions to the practical tribal elements of the materialistic philosophy within Judaism. This philosophy, which Assman calls the “Mosaic distinction,” forces hostility to outsiders by reducing moral concerns for their welfare. It removes religion from the clouds where it concerns itself with moral thought experiments and returns it to hard reality, where defense of the realm is more important than worrying about what theory will justify it.

Graaaaagh believes that such a reversion is a necessarily recurring function of Christianity, generally, and here I disagree. A firm hierarchy and elites with an esoteric understanding of Christianity will see that in fact that wisdom of that religion is that it balances Jewish practicality with pagan transcendental beliefs. Transcendentalism does not say that because universals exist outside of man, we should abandon man; rather, it suggests that universals point man to a path that leads toward success. The point is union of man with divine order, not replacing one with the other, although in the absence of a firm hierarchy and quality elites it rapidly degenerates to that stage.

Prior to nominalism, the theological philosophy that dominated in continental Europe was Scholasticism, which emphasized a unity between humans and heavens in a traditional, meditative order. Scholasticism is famous for some of its more puzzling debates, such as the number of angels which could dance on the head of a pin, and many modern students therefore dismiss it as the silliness of medieval schoolmen. But what is less known is that Scholasticism was a hearty and deep philosophical strain that produced incredible thinkers such as Thomas Aquinas and St. Bonaventure.

This was the period of the Ghibelline Middle Ages, feted by Julius Evola as the closest Europe had come in this dark age to achieving something approximating Traditional governance. This was also the period of the Germanization of Christianity, of the building of great Cathedrals and of crusades, the re-emergence of spiritual männerbunden in the orders of holy knights.

Scholasticism, or an Islamic variant of it, had also been ascendant in the various Islamic states of the Mediterranean for centuries before the University of Bologna opened its doors. Probably its greatest enunciator was Ibn Sina, who articulated a coherent philosophy that reconciled neo-Platonism and its logical and rational creator with Islam. This philosophy was continued with Ibn Rushd, who translated and expounded upon Aristotle, while continuing and propagating the idea of a God who operated by rational laws and a logic that was knowable. This philosophy left open the possibility of science and material advancement, as well as mystical and metaphysical advancement through understanding the divine system. Although this state of affairs could not endure for long, considering Islam’s deeply Judaic character, it managed to maintain itself for centuries because the intellectual elite of the Islamic world supported it.

But then the nominalism reared its ugly head. Al Ghazali was a nominalist in the most crude sense; his ultimate insistence, and the bill of particulars he wrote against of Averroes, was naked occasionalism, which holds that material cannot cause events; all events come from God alone. His book, the Incoherence of the Philosophers, argued that phenomena were not the result of system or greater truth that could be discovered, but rather individual, immediate acts of an omnipotent God. God, of course, is not bound by systems, principals, or discoverable things. He could turn upside down the rules of nature at a whim; gravity goes up; magnetism can be reversed; atomic particles break apart and reform the next day. Many were convinced by this initially; but more importantly, occasionalism took on the trappings of a pious affirmation. After all, Allah is also Al-Qadeer, the omnipotent. How could you claim to be a Muslim and deny God’s supremacy at every moment?

Averroes tried to respond, and his book he penned in response to Al Gahzali, Incoherence of the Incoherence, is an Aristotelian masterwork. But the battle had been won, and the pious fulminations had already set in motion the closing off of the issue. Perhaps this was inevitable, but it set off centuries of inbreeding and savage anti-intellectualism lead to rapid and disastrous decline. Averroes (a Spaniard) and Al Ghazali (a Persian) were not Semetic Arabs; they were exemplary thinkers, embodying the straightforward and questing Aryan intellectualism that mirrored the high churchmen of Europe. With the religious sanction firmly in place, the blood and expression of the Aryans, already thin, all but vanished within the Islamic world. What remained in Persia had to go underground and hide, and mask its Indo-European mysticism in Islamic clothing.

The lesson reactionaries can draw from the decline in Islamic thinking is this: the elites must understand the nature of reality and be concerned with asserting it. This includes suppression of the populist philosophies like occasionalism (dualism) and materialism which please people because they make life convenient, instead of a quest for intellectual rigor. Obviously this does not apply to outgroups; and no, allowing so-called “freedom of speech” for prole-tier people is not to be encouraged. But amongst the designated hierarchy, the quest for civilization, principles and the true and good must be allowed to continue. Once shut, some doors are impossible to reopen.


Tribalism in Action

via Radix

The riots in Baltimore can teach America a lot of things. Here’s one lesson: Report: Baltimore Gang Members Unite To Protect Black-Owned Businesses, Direct Looters Towards Chinese- And Arab-Owned Stores
Members of three Baltimore street gangs came together in unity during Monday’s riots to protect businesses — or at least some of them.
Crips, Bloods and Black Guerilla Family gang members reportedly stood guard in front of some black-owned businesses to protect them from would-be looters and arsonists. Instead, ne’er-do-wells were directed to businesses owned by Arabs and Chinese, according to The New York Times.
. . .
“I rolled over here on a truck and I was the only Crip, and everybody else was Bloods, and they didn’t do anything to me,” Charles, a Crip, told The Times. “We’re together in this.”
“There is only so far that you can push people into a corner. We’re frustrated and that’s why we’re out there in the streets,” Charles added.
He told The Times that he and members of the Bloods gang quashed their beef and protected black-owned businesses and their owners.
“Instead, he said, they pointed the rioters toward Chinese- and Arab-owned stores,” The Times reported.
. . .
Some black-owned businesses — which make up about 35 percent of Baltimore’s businesses — apparently knew of the protection that that status could provide. Some posted signs as early as Saturday, which also saw some rioting and looting, notifying would-be looters that they were black-owned.
This is something very foreign to White Americans. . .and it disturbs them. Blacks trying to defend their own businesses while having no concerns what happens to non-Black businesses shows a high level of racial solidarity—an explicit tribalism that most Whites don’t like. But unfortunately for “colorblind” Whites, every race practices this kind of tribalism—except for Whites. It’s the rule of us vs. them, the in-group vs. the out-group, the gang vs. the other.

It’s an idea Whites need to stop rejecting and start accepting.

The Cosmic Mystery

via Gornahoor

That Self, which is free from sin, free from old age, from death and grief, from hunger and thirst, which desires nothing but what it ought to desire, and imagines nothing but what it ought to imagine, it is that which we should search out; that which we must try to understand. He who reaches that Self and understands it gains all the world of desires. ~ Chandogya Upanishad

Lead the thoughts from the head into the heart and keep them there.

With this saying of the Greek fathers, Bede Griffiths describes the opening of the Heart to the Cosmic Mystery. The Upanishads likewise need to be read that way. Although there are 108 Upanishads in theory, the twelve principle Upanishads are what matter.

From the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad, Griffiths identifies three words that signify the Godhead: Brahman, Atman, Purusha.
  • Brahman. Brahman is the source of all creation or the ground of all being.
  • Atman. Atman, the Self, is the ground of all consciousness.
  • Purusha. God as Person.
There is a progressive realization that Brahman, Atman, and Purusha are all One. This chapter is concerned with the first two. The understanding of the word “Brahman” illustrates Griffiths’ powerful methodology.

The root of Brahman is “Brh” which means “to grow or to swell”, which is the physical meaning. The psychological and spiritual meaning then identifies this “swelling” as the rising up of the awareness of God. Hence, he explains:
The word Brahman came to mean a prayer, something which rises up in the heart, swells within, breaks out and opens up to the divine, to a mystery beyond. Man is in search of this hidden mystery, and it is a mystery which cannot be named.


Griffiths reminds us that “sacrifice was the centre of all ancient religion.” Since everything comes down from above, it must be returned. Thus, the sacrifice is the return to God, and sin is the opposite, the appropriation of something to one’s self. This rhythm of the world — coming forth from, and then returning to, God — is rita, or cosmic order. When you live in that rhythm, you are said to be turning the wheel of the law, the dharma chakra. When you sin, you are going against the law of the universe.

Brahman is the power which sustains the sacrifice and sustains the whole creation. There are two aspects.
  1. Brahman is the source of everything.
  2. Brahman pervades the universe.
Griffiths rejects the misunderstanding that this represents a form of pantheistic monism. Griffiths then discusses several stories from the Vedas, which we can’t summarize here, other than to point out that some truths can only be expressed by stories, parables, myths, and the like.

Positive and Negative Approaches

Since Brahman can never be fully encompassed in words, two methods developed to aid understanding. The positive and negative approaches are not unlike cataphatic and apophatic Christian theology. In the first approach, imagery is used to describe the ineffable. The richness of such symbols is adequately described in several of Rene Guenon’s works.

In the negative approach, Brahman is “neti, neti”, or “not this, not that”. That is, no image or concept will ever be adequate. Once again, the “head” will fail us, but the “heart” will see. Griffiths reminds Christians of the same thing.

The Hidden Source

Few people try to find the hidden source of the things in the phenomenal world. Once again, Griffiths illustrates this with a story about a Brahman youth who learned Sanskrit, memorized the Vedas, and so on. After his studies, the youth returned to his Father, who asked him:
Svetaketu, as you are so conceited, considering yourself so well-read and so learned, my dear, have you ever learned of that instruction by which we hear that which cannot be heard, by which we perceive that which cannot be perceived, and by which we know that which we know that which cannot be known?
The son did not know, so the father showed him a fruit from a banyan tree and opened it up. When asked, the son said he saw several seeds. When the father broke a seed and asked again, the son said he saw nothing. The father explained that the banyan tree arose from the subtle essence that cannot be seen.

An analogous idea in Eastern Christianity is that all things participate in God’s creative energy through an inner principles, or logoi. This is explained at The Uncreated Energy (logoi) of God in Nature. (H/T Ekzy’l)

Thou Art That

The deepest mystery of the Upanishads is “Tat tvam asi”, “Thou are That”. This does not mean “I am God”, as some Western wannabe Vedantists have told me. That is how it must sound to the thinking rationalizing mind, but its mystical meaning is:
I, in the deepest centre, the ground of my being, am one with that Brahman, the source of all creation.
Although Griffiths does not express it in these terms, this shows us the two ways to the mystery of God. In the macrocosmic way, we look at the world and recognize God as the hidden source behind the world of phenomena. In the microcosmic way, we look within ourselves to find the source of our own being.

The Four States

In following the path to the source of our own being, there are four states of consciousness. We identify the Self with one of those states, depending on what we understand to be real.

Waking State

In this state we take our ordinary waking state to be the most real. We are a body, we have experiences, we pursue money, sex and power, and so on. But all this passes away, so this cannot be the real Self.

Dream State

A man or woman may then try to find something more real, more immortal. So they look within. They learn to recognize their thoughts, feelings, desires, fears, likes, dislikes, and so on. At this point, people will be led to consider their Personality to be the real Self. Nevertheless, the personality will perish along with the body.

Sleep State

Those who go further will learn to detach from the personality, recognizing the real Self is neither the body nor the personality. At this point they may discover something deeper. They will see that much of their life is “just happening”. The body adopts certain postures and movements on its own. Thoughts and feelings arise from some deeper part of oneself, beyond conscious control. Hence the real Self is beyond any conscious awareness of it. This is the state of deep, or dreamless, sleep.


The fourth state is beyond all the waking, dreaming, and sleep states, yet integrates them all. This is the true Self. We are so accustomed to believe that mind and reason are the supreme principles. But that is illusion (maya) and ignorance (avidya). Yet turiya is beyond thought.

Ego Death

Griffiths relates the story of Nachiketas, who does down to the underworld and meets Yama, the god of Death. He explains:
This is a fundamental principle of all religious teaching. If you want to reach your true Self, if you want to find God, you have to die. In the Christian tradition baptism is death. To be baptized is to participate in the death of Christ. The ego has to undergo this death, the ego, which is the person the mask which we seek to preserve.
Nachiketas is offered three boons by Yama.
  1. Nachiketas asked to be reconciled with his father. The seeker has left home in search of Truth. He eventually needs to return to be reconciled with his pat, with the tradition of his family and people.
  2. Nachiketas asks to understand the fir sacrifice, which is the offering of everything in the Cosmic fire of life.
  3. Nachiketas asks to know what lies beyond death. At first, Yama declines to answer, but finally explains about the Self, Atman, and so on.
Unfortunately, few are those today who would accept those boons. Words like “God”, “soul” and so one have lost all significance as they don’t correspond to experience. Even the religious, who may know doctrines, do not know God in their hearts.

The Abyss

Real doctrine cannot be obtained by argument. Instead, Faith is necessary, when understood as an “illumination of the mind”. It comes by hearing. Beyond death by baptism, the illumination of faith, there is something else, as the Upanishads put it:
The wise, who, by means of meditation on his Self, recognizes the Ancient who is difficult to be seen, who has entered into the dark, who is hidden in the cave, who dwells in the abyss as God; he indeed leaves joy and sorrow far behind.
This is the experience of God in the darkness, and the Ancient One is the primeval source of your being.

Essential Eurasianism: Understanding the Ideology Behind Putin's Actions

via Alternative Right

The Three Bogatyrs (1898) by Viktor Vasnetsov
Much has been said about the ideology of Eurasianism — many criticisms raised, many praises expressed — but what exactly does it stand for?

Among the competing definitions and explanations of Eurasianism, that presented by Alexander Dugin in Putin vs Putin (Arktos, 2014, p. 175 – 177) is probably the best summary of the core beliefs, as it presents the most important elements with neither apology nor justification, unlike many of other explanations that are available.

In keeping with this approach, rather than discuss the relevance of each Eurasianist position, I will introduce them objectively so that you can judge each for yourself. Dugin presents the following three core beliefs as the essentials of Eurasianism (an ideology often associated with the Fourth Political Theory, though more concerned with geopolitics).
1. Multipolar World Theory (MWT)

The first belief of the Eurasianists is that the world should not be unipolar, as is currently the case with American hegemony, nor bipolar, but multipolar. This entails first breaking free from Western spiritual hegemony (cosmopolitism, liberalism, democracy, etc.) and from American world domination. 
Instead of a unipolar world, the Eurasianists envision the creation of several independent and sovereign centers of global strategic decision making. Concretely it would mean the creation of several blocs, called Great Spaces, where geopolitical decisions would be taken, but in which the sovereignty and interests of smaller nations, with regard to international matters, would be subsumed.
2. Integration of the Post-Soviet Space

As a consequence of MWT, Eurasianists wish to see the integration of the former Soviet states, though based on a different ideological basis than before. The former Soviet republics would be reunited with Russia resulting in a more powerful bloc that could oppose American imperialism.

3. Russian Federation

The Soviet republics would be united within the Russian Federation, thus abolishing the pre-existing nations. Ethnic nationalism and separatism would be fought vigorously, although ethnic and religious rights should be protected (though without any legal recognition of these ethnic groups). Russian would become the official language, meaning that everyone, including people from different ethnic backgrounds, would need to speak Russian as a second language, while the Russians could speak their own language wherever they are in the federation.
In closing, even if Eurasianism, as termed by Dugin, is claimed to be a traditionalist conservative ideology with ties to the German Conservative Revolution, it is first and foremost a geopolitical project clearly opposed to ethnocentrism and ethnic nationalism.

Observations of an Overeducated A/C Man, Part 2

via Theden

Part 1

The Mystic

Friday night. I’m expecting the usual bro-nite ritual: I go over to his place. He gets two cases of beer. And we kill at least one and sometimes both cases as we discuss philosophy, religion, politics, our own lives. We’re each drawn, in varying proportion to these insoluble subjects. We agree and disagree enough on each to at least keep the conversations lively. I’ve been initiating him to the various slang and memes of the largely internet-based Alt Right. “Cuck” is a known epithet. “Shitlib” is another. “Negrophilic” was once uttered and drew a hearty peal of laughter. Other tokens of our two-man culture are “The Six Years,” “White Light,” and “The Bloomington Trip.” We’ve been friends for years. Probably about seven.

The Mystic is twenty-seven. Lives with his parents. College drop out less than five credit hours away from graduating with a degree in English. Has worked various menial jobs through the years. Deeply into Eastern mysticism, religion and philosophy. Starting with Taoism he wound his way through a number of Buddhist and Yogic practices until winding up somewhere along the continuum of Zen Buddhism and casual nihilism. “The Six Years” refers to his last relationship, one he ended the same time he dropped out of school. “White Light” refers to the intensely mystical and introspective sensation one can get during either meditation or hallucinogenic drugs, both of which he uses semifrequently. “The Bloomington Trip” is his one effort in years to do something with his life beyond what seems like from the outside to be bare minimum.

He’s always been well read, but his life experiences seemed to begin petering out about the time his LSD use began. At some point at about age twenty-two, he decided that the “life script” of going to school, getting the job, marrying the sweetheart and working through a career was not for him. He abruptly cut his standing commitments to school, work and spouse-to-be. This was supposed to be the lifestyle equivalent of a slash and burn, which is where you cut down an overgrown forest to make room for a cultivated field. But the “field” of his life largely went to seed. He didn’t work for years, never moved out, but still kept consuming thick, dry books and dank, resinous marijuana in roughly equal proportion. Like I said, he is well read, but he never produced proof of it. No great work. No lengthy treatise. Nothing survives of his collegiate efforts, and nothing has been written since.

His drug use never strayed into hard substances but instead wallowed in the delirium of psychedelics. The aforementioned “Damned Lies” of numbers tell me that people of our generation don’t get sheets of LSD like our parents did. I’ve seen otherwise. For a time it seemed to become an oddly banal occurrence for him to simply Turn On, Tune In and Drop Out. And those days, though they seem to be receding, have affected his outlook, his personality and his work ethic.

He broke up with his high-school sweetheart of six years, confessing to her that his heart hadn’t been in it for the whole second half of the relationship. Religious differences, value differences, and his desire to break with a lifestyle he didn’t want were all cited. He hasn’t had another girlfriend, or even a fling, since. She gets married this summer. Without fail, he brings her up in some way every night we hang out. Either to contrast some point about relationships that I made, or just completely unprompted.

Years of relative leisure and solitude finally drove him to embark on a kind of pilgrimage. He gathered supplies, trained, and acclimated himself to the norms and subculture of drifters and the homeless. The goal was to walk several hundred miles to a Zen Monastery in Bloomington, Indiana. From there he wanted to see if the life of a monk was good for him but for the short to medium term a hard lifestyle of meditation and work was what he would get. After being picked up for vagrancy just one town away at the start of his trip, he made it to Bloomington in about three days of hitchhiking.

The pilgrimage lasted a few months. Emails were sporadic to me and to his father. He made artful use of homeless resources, the rentable rooms of the monastery and locations where his general loitering and vagrancy could be passed off as being a college student. Ultimately, his living situation grew capricious, he grew disillusioned with the monastery, and he found himself sleeping outside more and more frequently, even though winter was fast approaching. He came back home.

That’s the only story of note I can tell about him in all the years since he shredded social ties, responsibilities, and roles and attempted to forge something better for himself.

Did anyone gain from this? Not the immediate family he loves and still lives with who are enervated by his crippled career prospects. Certainly not the prospects for forming a family on his own. Arguably the girl he left—who had similar life changes thrust on her but handled them readily—did benefit. His own insistence that the spiritual lessons and goals learned from the years of volcel verging on incel hedonism are dubious.

“Albert, you know you’re getting to that stage of life where you’ll become The Man. You’ll be that patriarch. You’ll get married to Kate and have kids and be That Man.”

“You could do that too, you know. The changes you’d have to make to put yourself on that trajectory are fewer than you think.”

“I don’t think I’m at that point yet,” He says sadly. “But I want to be there to advise you.”

Counter-Currents Radio: Vanity, Pretentiousness, & Snobbery

via Counter-Currents

Listen Now

John William Waterhouse, Echo and Narcissus
Greg Johnson has a conversation with Canadian filmmaker Hugh MacDonald about the concepts vanity, pretentiousness, and snobbery. Topics include:
  • Good and bad senses of vanity
  • Good and bad senses of pretentiousness
  • The concept of taste
  • Good and bad senses of snobbery
  • Elitism
  • Bad vanity, pretentiousness, and snobbery all have aspects of failure and falsehood
  • Narcissism
  • Rousseau on vanity (amour propre) vs. self-love (amour de soi-même)
  • Vanity and honor
  • Caring about the opinions of others
  • Vanity and civilization

Paul Craig Roberts Has Crossed the Line

via Koinen's Corner

Paul Craig Roberts has crossed the line, for me at least.  He has gone too far this time.  I have removed him from my blogroll on the right sidebar.

See my preceding post immediately below.  Roberts has now shown his hand, and has made it clear he is a disinformation agent, a shill, for the Jews.  And most likely a self-hating White man, to boot.

Check out the latest post on his blog (here).  He makes some good points, as usual.  And as usual, I agree with him -- in this case with his contention that it is very foolish for the United States to feel it is so 'exceptional' that it can tell everyone else what to think and do, and that its perceived exceptionalism is a valid basis for shoving democracy down everyone's throat, bombing country after country, and coercing other nations to go along with that psychotic behavior.

But it is one thing to say that a phony sense of exceptionalism in the area of foreign policy is no legitimate basis for our insane behavior in recent years, and it is an altogether different thing to belittle White people by suggesting that we are only exceptional in comprising such 'diminutive numbers' on the world stage.  Has he forgotten, or just simply chosen to overlook, all the accomplishments of the White race?  No, he has not.  He knows full well that it is the White people of the world who have essentially built modern civilization.  Our exceptionalism in that sense is not diminished by the reproductive proclivities of the Chinese, Asians, Africans, South Americans, rabbits, mosquitos, or ticks.

Then, he goes on to place the nefarious warmongering role of the Jewish-dominated mainstream media squarely on the shoulders of the White people of America -- he blames the 'White People's Media' for falsely accusing and condemning Russia and Iran.  And he then goes on to denigrate the 'White Media' three more times for inaccurate and dangerous portrayals of the situation in Ukraine.

That's just outrageous.  Roberts knows better -- he is being disingenuous; deliberately deceptive in my opinion.  He is covering for the Jews.

And that is no small matter, because it is the complicit and culpable Jews -- through their ownership and control of the major mainstream media and their control over Congress -- who are doing everything they possibly can to demonize Russia and Iran and instigate hostilities, all of which could very well ignite World War III.

So, it is just inexcusable and intolerable for Roberts to mislead his readers by blaming the 'White People's Media' for this lethally despicable behavior; and in keeping with the thoughts expressed in my preceding essay, I have no choice but to call him on that by removing the link to his website from my blogroll.

British Democracy in Decline

via Western Spring

As the day of the General Election draws near, falling party memberships, falling voter turnout and diminishing respect for those in public life are all factors signalling a widening gulf between those in government and the people they are meant to represent.

In recent decades voter turnout at general elections had been gradually falling, dropping from 83.9 % in 1950 to 77.7% in 1992 and following which there was a marked drop of over six percentage points to 71.4% in 1997, followed by another larger drop of eleven percentage points to 59.4% in 2001. In the two general elections since then the turnout has appeared to recover somewhat to 61.4% in 2005 and 65.1% in 2010, but this has been largely the result of the campaign to encourage wider postal voting and other initiatives such as ‘Operation Black Vote’ designed to increase electoral participation by ethnic minority voters.

 The Turnout at UK Parliamentary Elections [1]:

The result of low voter turnouts has been to create a situation in which the legitimacy of government is increasingly called into question, as individual candidates and whole governments are now elected with the active support of only a minority of electors.

For example, in 1997, the voter turnout was 71.4% and New Labour were elected with just 43.2% of the vote. This means that the percentage of the total electorate that voted for Tony Blair’s first Labour government was just (71.4 x 43.2 /100 =) 30.9%.

Less than one in three of the electorate actually voted Labour, yet Tony Blair and his Labour government were elected with a majority in the House of Commons of 179!

A similar situation existed in 2001, when Labour won 40.7% of the vote on a voter turnout of just 59.4% and this means that Blair’s second Labour administration, which enjoyed a Commons majority of 167, was elected with the support just (59.4 x 40.7 /100 =) 24.2% of the electorate!

Worse still, was the situation in 2005, when Tony Blair was re-elected to the third term in office, by just 35.2% of a 61.4% turnout, which means that third Labour administration, with a majority of 66 MPs in the House of Commons, had the support of just (61.4 x 35.2 / 100 =) 21.61% of the electorate!

When David Cameron’s Conservative administration took office in 2010, despite winning 36.1% of the vote on a turnout of 65.1%, i.e. having the support of a greater percentage of the electorate than Labour in 2005, (65.1 x 36.1 =) 23.5%, the Conservatives did not have a Commons majority and were only able to form a government through coalition with the Liberal Democrats.

Furthermore, it has now become normal for two out of every three MPs to lack the support of a majority of local voters, and an increasing number now win their seats with only around 40 per cent of the vote. The ‘First Past The Post’ voting system used in our General Elections, means that two thirds of MPs, 433 of those elected in 2010, did not have the support of a majority of the voters in their constituencies [2].

With just over 1% of the population, political party membership in the UK is a distinctly minority pursuit. Furthermore, with more than 1 million members each, there are more members of the Caravan Club, or the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds, than of all Britain’s political parties put together.

Again, these are astounding statistics and they are the result of a dramatic decline in recent decades in the numbers of people identifying with political parties sufficiently to want to be members and give them active support.

Declining Political Party Membership [3][4]:

More recent figures released this year, show the membership of the above political parties as: Conservatives – 149,800; Labour – 190,000; and LibDems – 44,000.

There have been in recent decades, a catalogue of political scandals, which have served to rock public confidence in our government and in our politicians and which have exposed the current class of professional career politicians as venal and corruptible and unworthy of our trust.

Such scandals included; the cash-for-questions affair in1994; the £1m donation to the Labour Party made by Bernie Ecclestone in 1997, which created a political scandal when the incoming Labour government changed its policy to allow Formula One to continue being sponsored by tobacco manufacturers; The cash for honours scandal on 2006; and the long running Parliamentary Expenses scandal of recent years [5].

A consequence of all these scandals is that many people, and young people especially who might normally be expected to be amongst the most ideological of voters, have become disillusioned regarding the honesty and integrity of elected politicians and this, coupled with the failure of politicians to keep their electoral pledges has caused the public to increasingly reject the idea of political party membership and to abstain from voting altogether.

The Pattern of Non-Voting at Parliamentary Elections [6]:

Clearly, in almost all age groups there has been a marked decline in the numbers voting, and this tendency is particularly marked amongst the young with 55% of people aged 18 to 24 claiming to have abstained from voting during the 2005 General Election.

Politicians have tended on occasions to dismiss the trends highlighted above as evidence of a general apathy on the part of electors, an apathy that is widespread and not specific to, nor reflective of a deteriorating relationship with government. However, the following table does not support such an assertion.

Trends in Political Interest, 1986–2003 [7]:

 This table demonstrates that the public interest in politics has remained fairly constant throughout the period from 1986 to 2003 and therefore the lack of interest in political party membership and the increasing tendency to abstain from voting clearly demonstrates, not apathy over political issues, but voter disillusionment with the conduct of elected politicians and with the electoral process altogether.

Increasingly politicians seek to excuse their lack of effectiveness by claiming that trends are ‘global’ or ‘international’ and that they are therefore unable to effect change without the support of their counterparts in other countries.

Increasingly, politicians seek to excuse their lack of action and belittle their critics by claiming that issues are more complex than the man in the street can appreciate, and by dismissing seemingly obvious and in many cases electorally popular solutions as ‘crudely simplistic’ and ‘unlikely to succeed’, even though no attempt has been made to test them.

However, politicians are increasingly seen as self-serving, venal and corrupt; accepting ‘cash for questions’, ‘cash for honours’ and ‘cash for influence’; using their elected positions to line their pockets and as a base from which to launch subsequent and lucrative careers as lobbyists on behalf of vested interest groups when their term in office runs out.

Elected politicians of all three of the main political parties increasingly appear at odds with the electorate over issues of great concern; supporting continued mass immigration into Britain when the public are strongly in favour of strict immigration controls; supporting membership of the European Union and acquiescing to increasing demands from the EU, when the majority of the public want the influence of the EU to be curtailed; refusing to take a hard line on crime when the public are crying out for such an approach; and allowing British industry to go to the wall or be exported abroad, when the public want our industries and the jobs they provide to be protected from unfair overseas competition.

Regarding all these issues and many more, elected politicians are increasingly seen as contemptuous of public opinion and what is worse, they are seen to be acting as a cartel, thereby denying the public any real electoral choice. With regard to all of the issues identified above, Labour, the Conservatives and the LibDems have virtually identical policies and therefore, whichever of these parties the electrate votes for, government policy remains the same.

Furthemore, when one realises that successive governments have been formed with the active support of less that 1 in 4 of the electorate, it is unacceptable and it undermines the moral legitimacy of our democratic system that they govern with such disregard for the wishes of the majority of the British people.

Such a state of affairs increasingly poses a threat to democracy as finding themselves living in a society that does not reflect their wishes, and under an apparent tyranny which does not protect or promote their interests, disaffected and alienated sections of the public already exhibit an increased readiness to challenge the legitimacy of government policy and a reduced willingness to sacrifice in the wider interests of our society.

Our society is therefore becoming more self-centred and less cohesive and there is a growing propensity among less responsible sections of the public to indulge in violent and destructive protests and demonstrations such as were seen during the riots that took place during the summer of 2011.

There are now legitimate concerns among large sections of the public that if the democratic system in this country remains unresponsive to public opinion, and if government continue to react feebly in the face of those who take the law into their own hands, this could well set in motion a train of events that will lead to an increasingly violent and turbulent political future in which electoral politics will play a diminishing role.

Never before has there been a more pressing need for all people of goodwill to organise with a view to effecting a root and branch reform of our political system, and so that government will once again reflect the majority views of the electorate and implement policies that put the interests of the British people first.