Monday, 18 December 2017

Quotations from Walter Bagehot

SHARE
Dullness in matters of government is a good sign, and not a bad one - in particular, dullness in parliamentary government is a test of its excellence, an indication of its success. 


The habit of common and continuous speech is a symptom of mental deficiency. It proceeds from not knowing what is going on in other people's minds. 

One of the greatest pains to human nature is the pain of a new idea. 

37 comments:

  1. Did you see this?:

    https://www.amren.com/features/2017/12/is-romania-part-of-the-west-gypsy/

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. When everybody in the sewer holds his nose and points at everybody else, who will dare say that perhaps we shouldn’t be living in a sewer at all? Where among all of us flagrant sinners is there a trace of shame? Why do we suppose our sins smell like roses in the nostrils of the Almighty?

      https://www.thecatholicthing.org/2017/12/28/splinters-and-beams-%E2%80%A8%E2%80%A8/

      Delete
  2. An interesting read.

    Thanks for posting the link.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    2. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    3. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    4. The article is surely written by a confused and simple minded american unsure of which world is failing: the free market world or the socialist world. BTW, the 'Occident' is still in the socialist free fall phase, rather than the failure of 'free markets'. But these are 'isms' details.
      Every year going back to Romania, the country I left in 1987, I feel that Romanians are becoming more like the Americans that I met in 1987, and Americans more like the Romanians I left behind in 1987.
      Regarding the gypsy 'assimilation' and gypsification of Romanians, it's laughable. In reality, Romania's blessing is that we're too poor to attract parasites, and from what I have seen, there are less and less gypsies in the country as most of them have become 'occidentalized' and moved in the 'West'. True, there are some purely gypsy villages, which speaks much for the integration of the gypsies...
      This article is utter nonsense. Romania's bigger problem might be the fact that it is too poor to retain all it' intelligentsia, although, as things deteriorate outside, many may return.
      All in all I don't quite see the connection with the quotations above. Maybe the fact that we keep recycling the same nonsense, and do not go through the pain of coming up with new ideas anymore.

      Delete
    5. “I cannot sufficiently be astonished that such is the insanity of some men, such the impiety of their blinded understanding, such, finally, their lust after error..."

      Delete
  3. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  4. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  5. "Let me get this straight: Packies are grooming your girls, Maroccans are groping your women in public, when not fucking them for groceries money, Somalis are busting your lily white asses all over gangland from Copenhagen to Malmo, Sicilian (bad genes!) Mafia is running the show through albanians and Sub Saharians (what was their IQ, again?) and this guy is worried about roumanian gypsies? And you love him? OK, it's a free country... But the article linked here... is pure, unadulterated , white supremacist faggotry..."

    And your comment is pure whataboutism. The article is about Romania so why would it be talking about gangs in Copenhagen?

    Why are you talking about Pakistani grooming gangs in the UK when the Peruvian black spider monkey is nearing extinction?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 'And your comment is pure whataboutism'
      Right, it is about Matthew 7:5
      "Thou hypocrite, cast out first the beam in thy own eye, and then shalt thou see to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye."
      Douay-Rheims Bible

      Delete
    2. Your point is just nonsensical. Nowhere does the author deny that massive dysgenic immigration is happening in his own country or other Western countries. Indeed, one of the main aims of American Rennaisance is to increase awareness of this fact. The purpose of the article was to challege the widespread view among AmRen readers that 'all is well' in Eastern Europe as the dysgenic direction of the West is already old news. Secondly, how is he as a dissident writer personally responsible for the decisions of Western politicians?

      "Don't write your true opinions on foreign countries because there are problems in your own country" is a simpleton's logic. You would defend Walter Duranty's dishonest reporting on Stalinist Russia because lynchings went in the Southern States. Your accusation of hypocrisy is baseless and irrational. You copy and paste other people's quotes rather than think about your own arguments. And then you bizarrely delete your comments. I don't think you know what you're talking about.

      Delete
    3. Hey, Pepe, dude, listen... you are wasting my time... For me, and feel
      free to quote this, white identity movement is to politics what Eminem
      is to rap music... You guys are, indeed, a really sorry bunch to
      behold... Anonymous, frustrated, little nazi shitheads...
      Now, the subject is Quotations from/about Walter Bagehot. Got anything? If not,
      for folks like you God (or the NSA, not sure) created 4chan... Check it out...
      You're welcome!

      Delete
    4. Lol why did you delete the following comment, Toma?

      "Let me get this straight: Packies are grooming your girls, Maroccans are groping your women in public, when not fucking them for groceries money, Somalis are busting your lily white asses all over gangland from Copenhagen to Malmo, Sicilian (bad genes!) Mafia is running the show through albanians and Sub Saharians (what was their IQ, again?)"

      Sounds pretty racist me. Denigrating individuals of Pakistani heritage? Vile that you would accuse them collectively of grooming white girls as though it had anything to do with their ethnicity. In Britain you would rightly be arrested for using that word in public.

      How dare you suggest that Somalis have a greater propensity to gang violence than ethnic Danes or Swedes? Copenhagen and Malmo have only been enriched by Somali immigration. They are as Swedish as ABBA and meatballs.

      Sub saharans have lower IQ than whites? Well now I'm triggered. As every decent person knows 70,000 years of divergent evolution changed nothing apart front the melanin content in our skin. Our brains were completely off limits to evolution. How dare you suggest that blacks are less intelligent? That's what the nazis believed. Diversity is our greatest strength. Please take your white supremacist bigotry elsewhere.

      Delete
    5. I consider all the people mentioned above smarter than those butt boys over at The American White Trash Renaissance. You don't get it,
      do you?
      I removed my comments in an misguided attempt to avoid hearing them puppies whining...
      It didn't work, and you are proof of that... No amount of beating can make you guys quit going back to your vomit...

      Delete
    6. "Butt boys"? Homophobia now as well! Be honest, you deleted it because you knew it was self contradictory. You read the article, which wasn't entirely flattering about your home country (because its not the controlled MSM where everything is dishonest and sanitised to restrict debate and protect women's feelz) Clearly, something in the article touched a raw nerve. However, instead of coming up with a counter argument you just went on an irrelevant rant about 'pakis' and Somalis in the UK. In doing so you (whoops!) let slip your awareness that subharan Africans have a much lower average IQ than whites (70) a fact on which their exists a Soviet-style blackout everywhere in the MSM. Yet in the same line you use the SJW/neocon label "white supremacist" to describe AmRen. This is not consistent. The only reason why sites like AmRen exist is that they are against denying the racial IQ gap and the logical consequences of it for immigration policy etc. As soon as you acknowledge the non existence of racial equality in mental capacity labels like "racist" or "white supremacist" are exposed as meaningless because the premise on which they are based i.e. Racial equality and sameness has been rejected. Your comment was self-refuting which is why you deleted it. Lol seems you weren't quick enough.

      Delete
    7. Hello Solana, sweetheart, if you would just move your comments to your boyfriends at the AmRen, the IQ of both sites will go up! Trust me!

      Delete
    8. I see you quote the Douay Bible. Good for you.

      Delete
    9. You won't believe this, but is so close to the romanian orthodox official Bible... it's uncanny! See them side by side and you'll see what I mean.

      Delete
  6. Toma why are you removing your comments?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    2. Put my comments back on, if it doesn't involve too much trouble, so I can get this monkey off my back...

      Delete
    3. No big deal! I'm sure i'll have put my Louis-Ferdinand cap back pretty soon... As H.L. Mencken once put it, “one horse-laugh is worth ten-thousand syllogisms.” Anyway, I didn't expect that knock-knee lardbag, martin bormann impersonator to have a fan-club around here, complete with the little platoon of goose-stepping bots... What the hell, let's hit them again... This, from a 2016 article 'The Alt-Right’s Jewish Godfather':

      Speaking of Spencer and of himself, Gottfried said, “I think it is probably a trick that history plays on thinkers. But I think you’re right—he says that I’m his mentor. I think I’m his reluctant mentor, I’m not particularly happy about it.” He sighed. “Whenever I look at Richard, I see my ideas coming back in a garbled form.”
      While Gottfried calls Yiannopoulos his favorite figure on the alt-right for his opposition to government-led social policy and political correctness, this puts him awkwardly in the position he once accused the neocons of occupying—diluting the authentic core of right politics. “I am not beloved by the alt-right,” Gottfried told me. “I’m sort of somebody who remains aloof.” He has some hope for “collaboration among all the elements of the dissident right,” but within limits. “Where I would draw the line personally is white nationalists. They are not people I would want to include in my alliance. They sometimes say outrageous things and they are sitting ducks for the Southern Poverty Law Center and other leftist groups.”

      http://www.tabletmag.com/jewish-news-and-politics/218712/spencer-gottfried-alt-right

      ... sitting ducks indeed but with a 'tude... I may add...

      Delete
    4. Gottfried is not on the Alt-Right. He's a paleocon. And he's spoken at American Rennaisance conferences in the past. I note that you still haven't provided a refutation of the the AmRen article on Romania. What specifically about it was inaccurate, unreasonable, unfair? All this time, you still haven't explained. You've just used chickenshit adjectives. Zero argument. I'm sure there was something in the article that was inaccurate but you haven't said what it is. Everything you have said thus far is irrelevant.

      Delete
    5. 'you still haven't provided a refutation'

      Do I have to? But I don't give a flying fuck about the opinions of an anonymous alt-right clown on anything! Do you understand this much, damn it? I don't pretend to have highly sophisticated tastes but you guys are sewage material...(that's waste water and excrement conveyed in sewers... in case you don't have a dictionary handy). Sorry to disappoint... Can't help... Get off your computer and try some physical activity you enjoy... say, toilet cruising? Who knows, you may even get lucky. Jeez!

      Delete
    6. Sewage, excrement, toilet cruising, just more vulgarity and cursing. So lame. It's not an argument to call an opinion “waste water". It’s a rhetorical evasion. What specific ideas of AmRen do you regard as "sewage" exactly? The idea that race exists? The idea that races differ in significant ways? You haven't even stated what your points of difference are. You decided to post a lot of bluster about an article on Romania that you didn't like but when challenged to explain in basic terms what it is you disagreed with, you've just offered nothing but lame jokes, insults, adjectives, foul language and gibberish. Just empty BS with nothing to back it up. No different from any leftard PC undergrad who is used to parroting the language of her professors for papers and exams but is unused to dealing with any substantive views she doesn't like. If you post your opinion here you should be expect to be challenged on it. If it irritates you to be asked to back up your opinions with arguments then save yourself the trouble and don't post them in the first place. Simple.

      Delete
  7. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Matters of Government

    Do not be confused by offices and stations: “the king” will stand for any national power.

    In Christian or in ancient Hebrew terms, the Covenant is between God and His people. It is not, as earthly kings have long maintained, between God and any nation state. There is no “divine right,” of kings, or of electorates.

    The officers of state are only officers of state, and themselves must answer to the highest power — not above but alongside their peoples. In Christian terms, they are answerable to Christ, through the Church he founded; to the Spirit that animates that Church; to God in the universal Kingship of Christ.

    Let me be plainer. The Covenant is not a collectivist arrangement. It is actually the opposite of a collectivist arrangement, and was so from the beginning. The true Christian teaching stands in anticipation of, and opposition to, the ideals of that “Reformation,” which worked themselves out as a spiritual as well as contractual relation between the People and the State (exalted in “Americanism”). The Covenant is instead with persons, both vertically in their relations with God, and horizontally in their relations with each other: cor ad cor loquitur. To love God and to love thy neighbour: that is the whole teaching. Everything follows from that.

    This is a politics in opposition to politics; a politics that produces martyrs, for the principle at its heart cannot be explained to the Princes of this World.

    https://www.davidwarrenonline.com/2017/12/29/saint-thomas-of-canterbury/

    ReplyDelete
  9. 'Dullness in matters of government...'

    Sisson regarded most of the public servants he knew as unimaginative and small-minded, since they interpreted their offices - which, for him, went back to at least Elizabeth I - in a perspective that reached back just a few general elections, or, at furthest, to Sisson's bête noire, the constitutionalist Walter Bagehot.

    A Tory of an ancient breed, to whom modern conservatism was as obnoxious as modern socialism, Sisson would call on long-established precedents - most notably Jonathan Swift - to maintain that matters of church and state are the business of poetry, even of lyric poetry.

    https://www.theguardian.com/news/2003/sep/09/guardianobituaries.obituaries

    ReplyDelete
  10. "sapping under the surface of received ideas"

    In The Case of Walter Bagehot (1972) he attacked the spirit of Victorian liberalism on account of its vain belief in progress and its scorn for the simple veneration by which most people live. Bagehot, he felt, was the representative figure of modern politics, the "economic man" for whom everything must be measured in terms of profit and loss.



    pve wood

    ReplyDelete
  11. Replies
    1. It should be noted that Bagehot’s magic does not work on everyone. One who is conspicuously resistant to his spell is the English poet and critic C. H. Sisson. In The Case of Walter Bagehot (1972), Sisson assembled what amounts to a brief for the prosecution. Sisson’s objection to Bagehot is twofold. On the one hand, he sees him as “a founding father of the apologetics of ‘fact,’” a skeptical, even cynical, force bent on exploding inherited values. On the other hand, Sisson regards Bagehot as “a moneyed provincial pushing his way in a conventional society.”

      What we get from Bagehot is not so much a theory as a position, and not so much a position as a form of tactics. It is Walter Bagehot whom the successive positions are intended to protect—the Walter Bagehot who slipped down the crack between Unitarianism and Anglicanism; who was the child of the Bank House as some are sons of the manse; whose money was better than that of the squire’s but did not produce better effects on the locals; who should have been educated at Oxford but was above that sort of conformism; who conformed instead to the world of business but was cleverer than its other inhabitants; who was all the time worried about the sanity of his stock and did not have any children; who distrusted hereditary powers and owed all his opportunities to family influence.

      https://www.newcriterion.com/issues/1998/10/the-greatest-victorian

      Delete
  12. Don't know... I'll try to find the book.
    How about this:

    In 1959 Sisson spent a sabbatical year studying administrative
    practices in Europe to see whether British administration could be
    improved by adopting continental systems. His conclusions were
    negative, and he later criticised British academics who preached the
    superiority of other systems without bothering to understand the
    strengths of the British public service as it had evolved over the
    centuries.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/obituaries/1440839/C-H-Sisson.html

    ReplyDelete