The time has come and gone for the silent majority to recognise that we are the majority and that we stand by as wicked men waste our civilisation. These days, being considered right-wing in any way can make life very difficult for one at work and elsewhere — I understand. But, consider this: we have been living off the moral and civilisational bank of the Christian age for centuries and, in our bankruptcy, it has been replaced by various sects of progressivism more closely resembling Gnosticism. Still, we are left with a culture which is fundamentally incompatible with conservative Islam. I needn’t bother listing the obvious reasons for this: attitudes to marriage, women, entertainment, individual liberty etc. etc. The fault of terrorism in our own nations, therefore, is not to be laid at the feet of Muslims.
We must look to our own spiritual poverty and understand how this has allowed a system to arise which wreaks havoc and carnage in the Middle East and then throws open our doors to all those who would flee it, regardless of the reason. I want the majority, who wish to refuse Muslims access to Europe, to look in the mirror and realise that the eschewing of corruption in our lands starts with each one of us. So, yes, keep yourself informed with alternative media, share statistics like the poll above to boost confidence in those who are awake to the facts, and be more vocal on social media and in your everyday life, as the opportunities arise. But you must start with fixing up your own heart, mind and soul.
Remember, we stand against a small, absolute minority of those in our countries who do not care for Western civilisation, and the accomplishments and wonders of European history. Where we take pride and pleasure, they only want to destroy, starting with us as a people. Hungary is seeking to welcome Europeans fleeing their own countries, trying ‘to find the Europe they have lost in their homelands’, as Prime Minister Orbán put it. But don’t flee; make a stand today, shoulder-to-shoulder with the majority who would save European culture.
To conclude, consider Orbán’s Christmas message of 2017 and consider where you stand:
According to the Gospel of Saint Mark, Christ’s second commandment is ‘Love your neighbour as yourself.’ There has been much talk of Christ’s commandment in Europe nowadays. It is used to rebuke us for declaring ourselves to be Christian, while at the same time declaring that we do not want millions of people from other continents settling in Europe — and that we even refuse to let them in.
But this commandment consists of two parts, and our accusers have forgotten the second part: we must love our neighbour, but we must also love ourselves. Loving ourselves also means accepting and protecting everything that embodies what we are and who we are. Loving ourselves means that we love our country, our nation, our family, Hungarian culture and European civilisation. …
Culture is similar to the human body’s immune system: as long as it is working properly, we do not even notice it. It becomes noticeable and important to us when it is weakened. When crosses are airbrushed from photographs, when people seek to remove the cross from a statue of Pope John Paul II, when they try to change how we celebrate our festivals, then every right-thinking European citizen bristles with anger. … Europe’s immune system is being deliberately weakened. They do not want us to be who we are. They want us to become something which we do not want to be. They want us to mix together with peoples from another world and, so that the process will be smooth, they want us to change. By the light of Christmas candles we can clearly see that when they attack Christian culture they are also attempting to eliminate Europe.96
Chapter 5
Why the West Can’t Unite Against Terrorism
I’ve noted two basic responses to terror attacks from my fellow Englishmen. I imagine these pitiable reactions must be the same across Europe but the matter has been more pronounced for me in light of the two recent terror attacks on what is still called English soil — the ‘2017 Manchester Arena Bombing’ and the latest London Bridge attack. The two reactions are: 1. Deluded patriotism; and 2. New Age prayer. I want to convince you that both these impotent attempts at social unity are symptoms of a spiritual sickness which we can readily cure.
London can take it!
Just before the recent, disastrous UK general election, Prime Minister Theresa May called for us to ‘reignite the British spirit’. Also, following the attack in Manchester, my contact in the Conservative Party posted a picture of St. Paul’s Cathedral standing above a smoky, blitzed London. I believe the intention was to ride the ripple of nationalism which moved across the West this past year. His caption read, ‘London can take it.’ My first thought was not, ‘If my child had been killed in the London Bridge attack, I’d throw him under a bus for such an insensitive comment.’ Rather, I was shocked that he assumed there was any patriotism to tap into. Not only did British patriotism pass into fond memory with the empire’s collapse, but all these things were themselves symptoms of a lack of sound social identity. And no amount of increasingly unmasculine James Bond films can fix this.
It goes without saying that May’s campaign for office reignited nothing. Nevertheless, I can hear the rebuttals now; many are proud of the ‘Lion of London Bridge’ — a man who fought off the most recent attackers — as a healthy sign of British patriotism. Unsurprisingly, those who clamour for identity in all the wrong places would have us believe the man was filled with thoughts of Queen and Country as he leaped up to fend off the machete-wielding zealots. Yet, what initially caught the Lion’s eye was the attacker wearing a rival football shirt. ‘F**k you!’ he shouted. ‘I’m Millwall!’ His passion emerged from his loyalty to a sports team — the most common, imitation source of identity in the West today. Before you try to kid yourself that this was merely incidental to his unending love of Britain, parliamentary democracy etc., just remember that these words could easily have been his last.
Integrate into what exactly?
It is sad to see Brits call for Muslim immigrants to make more of an effort to integrate — and then, when radicals physically attack our soulless society, we scramble around looking for something outside of our consumerism for them to integrate into. The realisation that we have absolutely nothing to offer people from other civilisations except for smartphones and a relatively superior market, leads us to the next common reaction of Brits to terrorist attacks — New Agey platitudes.
The morning after the Manchester attack, in particular, radio presenters were umming and ahhing as they clamoured for some transcendent, collective value system to appeal to — something by which to objectively condemn the attacks. There was none, and so they attempted instead to focus on the best of human nature, rather than the worst — the heroic men who acted on their protective instincts to help others.
Phrases such as, ‘It’s just all about the love and togetherness, you know?’ were ubiquitous. The only thing missing was the hippy’s vocative case — ‘maaaaan.’ The aptly named memorial ‘One Love’ concert presented the perfect, if undignified, opportunity for various musicians to virtue signal to the world how in tune they are with the great spirit of love, peace, togetherness, vegetables etc. Do you see? We have no unifying cultural institution through which to mourn collectively, and so even the misery of our decline is merchandised.
But there is still the search for something more; not just to unite us but provide a common conscience and identity, to secure our people against the threats we face from within and without. The appeals to emotion and the use of pseudo-spiritual language are all our soul-starved people are familiar with — the glancing understanding their ‘friend who does yoga’ has of the transcendent. And this is precisely why we are a dying and conquerable civilisation.
The Church is Eastern Europe and Eastern Europe is the Church
How else are we to explain Europe’s indomitable civilisation being beset by barbarians at the gates and the plutocratic pursuit of political power? The answer is apparent to much of Eastern Europe; they have seen where the unstable forces of leftism lead them and have re
turned to the Church as that common transcendent system of higher cultural values which bound Europe together into a network of communities. This is why they stand strong and terror-free, boldly declaring their Christian identity and closed borders in the face of the EU taking Poland, Czechia and Hungary to court.
But, today, where is our sense of community? We pass silently by each other from home to work and back again, so that we may consume some empty, urban pleasure with a handful of friends or family (if we have bothered to reproduce) on the weekend. This is what we have been reduced to.
It is undisputed that we Europeans are prone to individualism. This is certainly an advantage when it is countered by voluntary, pro-social institutions which provide that sense of self-actualisation and self-transcendence which Maslow identified as the highest of our needs. But such things have died a slow death throughout the modern period. The Renaissance saw the greed of bankers fight for individual freedom from responsibility, in an attempt to evade the Church’s moralising about the working man. After the papacy had been corrupted and Europe was in a much weakened state, the Reformation was transformed from a movement which questioned said corruption into one which subverted all spiritual authority. Lutheran individualism was an opportunity for a rising mercantile elite to privatise the conscience of all, turning the obligations of sovereigns into the centralised systems of coercive powers we call nation states — money, religion, law and other important institutions were seized.
Eventually man would come to question all authorities (except for the now unlimited state) until he detached himself from all those cultural authorities which help us identify our purpose. What else are we Westerners today other than mere economic units? Yet we fancy our lives to be so much more attractive than those of traditional communities, who have no less access to the precious commodities by which we seek to define ourselves. But when we become so weak that the state power of our own government finds us to be the path of least resistance, we would rather adopt the slave ethic of blaming Muslim communities for being too strong than take a look in the mirror.
Unlike them, we have no common conscience to define ourselves with any more. We have sought something other than the Church to do so — the superiority of our people (like Germany) or the vastness of our colonialism; and, even today, the PM would wish these charred embers of the razed Church were somehow reignited, if only for a moment’s warmth, rather than to rebuild and return to the true meaning of that most important of edifices. That of course would once more impose obligation and responsibility on any who assumed a position of power.
Belloc saw this cultural collapse coming even before WWII:
Thus a whole religion sustains modern England, the religion of patriotism. Destroy that in men by some heretical development, by ‘excepting’ the doctrine that a man’s prime duty is towards the political society to which he belongs, and England, as we know it, would gradually cease and become something other.97
Following the nihilism of the 1960s and our current social bankruptcy, will we continue to clutch at straws? Will we learn the lesson of Eastern Europe and elevate religion as an important cultural institution which promotes self-limitation and love, or continue resorting to the coercion of socialism? Solzhenitsyn noted, ‘Untouched by the breath of God, unrestricted by human conscience, both capitalism and socialism are repulsive.’98 It seems inescapable then: that which maintains the level of social cohesion which keeps Eastern Europe relatively free of terrorism, is the spirit summed up by Viktor Orbán — ‘Europe and the European identity is rooted in Christianity’. So, where do we go from here?
For the good of the country and countrymen we sincerely love, it seems that we must return to the Church. I shall let Solzhenitsyn have the final word:
We shall have to rise to a new height of vision, to a new level of life where our physical nature will not be cursed as in the Middle Ages, but, even more importantly, our spiritual being will not be trampled upon as in the Modern era.99
Chapter 6
The Correlation Between State Growth and Mass Irresponsibility
It is my firm belief that the state is the embodiment of collective irresponsibility and that, for this reason, it incentivises its own growth. Having to maintain a good reputation in a community can be hard work; but, we live in a time of declining birth rates and a growing nanny state — our communities have all but perished in the increasingly hostile environment brought by the growth of the state. Allow me to give you a personal example to illustrate.
Very recently, someone close to me had her Nursery School business ranked inadequate by the UK government childcare regulator, Ofsted, for the simple fact that the staff were not preparing reports to prevent the radicalisation of these 1–3 year olds. It beggars belief that I should have to point out that the business caters to mostly middle-class white folks of Western and Eastern European backgrounds (not what you would call a high terror threat area), especially when this lady’s business has been described as an institution of the local community many times in the decades since it was first established. Nevertheless, because this lady finds using the internet a nightmare (and we all know how user-friendly local council websites and networks are), and because nothing is sent to her via post any more (to save the whales and all that), she was unaware of this government regulation designed to prevent toddlers from becoming suicide bombers or white supremacists. She was planning to retire soon; yet the state, with this slap in her face, seems completely out of touch with the community she has provided a service to.
So, the questions naturally arise: How did we get to the point where businesses of good faith count for nothing? How did we reach the stage where the state can declare pillars of the community inadequate over bureaucratic minutiae? More importantly, why do the masses automatically look to the state to fix these local issues when it is the state that is creating an inhospitable environment for the very communities we sorely lack?
Once the state gets its foot in the door, that’s it — game over! Give it the proverbial inch and it will eventually become a handsomely paid middleman for every conceivable human interaction. Many will say this is a good thing — even those readers who fancy themselves ‘conservatives’. But this does nothing but incentivise a lack of responsibility: if the state will take the blame, pick up the pieces, protect me, etc., what need have I for a good reputation with my neighbours, my local contacts, customers, what have you? And it’s not just that European tendency to individualism which is to blame for this development, it is the majority who want the greater irresponsibility which the state fosters (irresponsibility being its only fuel-source).
This is the downward spiral of Western civilisation. Since Luther’s irresponsibility in the face of spiritual authority was seized upon by various Northern European plutocrats, the state emerged to monopolise and centralise systems of control over the people — national churches, national currencies etc. etc. Hobbes’ Leviathan — above the law, dictator of the law and, thus, chiefly irresponsible — reared its monstrous head, only to grow to Godzilla-like proportions of societal destruction. Various liberalising European movements, whilst rightly demanding greater freedom for the people, nevertheless looked to Leviathan to provide it and so began the separation of the folk from every existing community institution and their replacement with a new god. ‘Greater freedom’ amounted to no more than greater irresponsibility from group expectations in one’s local community. Now, the state is the only platform through which anyone can do and, increasingly, think anything.
The problem is, being so far removed from real, rational, personable, human interaction, the state simply seeks to impose more regulations on our interactions in order to avoid having to take responsibility for certain of its own failings. ‘What a litigious society we live in!’ Well, we have made the state the all-father, and like father, like son: our only motivation in an irresponsible society is to cover our arses. The simple reason being, the state is no more t
han the manifestation of collective irresponsibility — everyone passing the buck to everyone else, collectively, so that no one might take the blame, except in those circumstances that a scapegoat is needed to quash any troublesome matter which might require the public to think. It is our failure to take individual responsibility for our actions, for the safety and stability of our communities, which has caused the power-vacuum now filled with a torrent of state regulations. And, so, only strong, healthy communities can take the power back for our own good.
Yet, it isn’t just leftists who feed the monster; they are not alone in their general desire for the state to use its irresponsibility to interfere in private affairs for selfish ends. So-called conservatives have long forgotten the belief that communities, built from the bottom up, are the answer to our many social woes. They too think that the state can impose some top-down solution to incentivise greater social cohesion, but all this does is store up greater state power for the day when Leviathan is so powerful that all dissent results in family members going missing in the night. In short, they believe they can wield the One Ring of Power and not vice versa.
The Uniqueness of Western Law Page 10