Patriotism, the love that dare not speak its name

'Patriotism...is a superstition artificially created and maintained through a network of lies and falsehoods; a superstition that robs man of his self-respect and dignity and increases his arrogance and conceit.' Emma Goldman. 

She was a Communist but I wonder how many British people nowadays who are not Communists (so excluding Jeremy Corbyn) also think patriotism a bad thing.

It shows you how the Communists have succeeded to a very large extent. Many, perhaps most, of their ideas have triumphed. Sexual equality; free love, including for homosexuals; contraception; abortion; internationalism; the end of colonialism; racial equality; confiscation of property from the rich; atheism; materialism; the general idea that tradition is oppressive. 

The fascists, by contrast, lost the battle of ideas comprehensively. 

De Gaulle would have opposed immigration and the modern EU

I have always been a Gaullist. The General wanted a "Europe des nations" and knew England would not be suitable to join the Common Market (E.E.C.) He strongly opposed Arab immigration into metropolitan France. I imagine if he were alive and politically active today his political causes would be dismantling the modern EU and opposing further immigration.

I wonder had he come to power a year or two sooner whether the EEC would ever have come into existence. Had it not this might have saved Europe a vast amount of pain and wasted energy.

De Gaulle, of course, began his memoirs with the very stirring words

The future of France is Lebanese

So it's President Macron - 65%-35%. Marine Le Pen, of course, was never going to win.

There was a very high turnout in the end, 75%, but nevertheless many thought: a plague on both your houses. 12% of the ballots cast were spoiled. This is a level never reached before in the history of the Republic.

Madame Le Pen in the French presidential debate probably got into the dictionary of quotations when she said, "France will be led by a woman. It will be either me or Mrs. Merkel." It will be Mrs. Merkel, of course, as everyone always knew.

That old reactionary Joseph de Maistre’s one famous aphorism comes to mind. Every country has the government it deserves. He’d have voted Le Pen, be sure. 

Most French electors, I am sure, do not care for Marine Le Pen and certainly don't like her pretty awful father, but she is the grenade that they found to hand, as President Trump was the grenade American voters found. One third of the French voters picked up the grenade, took out the pin and hurled it.

Historians, like women, are attracted to power

Namier once said something to the effect that there is a narrative that people respect an original thinker, but nothing could be further from the truth. They only wish to hear familiar thoughts. How right he was.
John Charmley

When I was reading history at university I looked down my nose at by no means all but the majority of historians I read. Since going down I forgot this and had a lot of respect for them as a breed. Only now, reading the nonsense so many of them write, especially about Donald Trump, do I see my arrogant 19 year old self was too soft on them. They are much more closed minded, dangerous and stupid than I had realised.

I don't mind in the least their not liking Mr. Trump - I fully respect that and they might be right. It's their reasons for not liking him that are silly, ridiculous or in some cases malign.

You see this most recently with the plethora of articles ridiculing or denouncing him for his perfectly reasonable remark that had Andrew Jackson been a major politician in 1860 he might have prevented the Civil War.

Historians instead respect Lincoln who waged an unnecessary war in which 700,000 died for a noble cause.

What historians respect, of course, is power. Lincoln won. Had he lost he would be regarded very differently.

Labour since 1900 has achieved nothing really

The British Labour Party is essentially a 20th century (wrong) answer to a 19th century problem.

Labour was always a mistake. The Liberals were much more radical, much more intelligent and would have fought the 1915 general election on land nationalisation. Labour, at least for a long time, didn't have many ideas, till the Webbs taught them nationalisation. They existed originally to get working class trade unionists into the House.

The first Labour government's one memorable achievement was adding the words 'patriotism is not enough' to the statue of Nurse Cavell. The second Labour government's big achievement was the Lido in Hyde Park. At least the latter was useful. Later Labour governments had only one important positive achievement. They raised the perception and self-perception of the working class.

But this would have happened anyway, without Labour.

A spectre is haunting Europe, the spectre of fascism

A spectre is haunting Europe, the spectre not of communism, as Marx proclaimed in 1848, but of fascism or the far right. 

Spectre is the right word, for spectres are imaginary and the threat of fascism is imaginary, just as the threat of communism was in 1848

But, as in 1848, it's a fear of the people by their rulers.

In case you hadn't noticed, the left is nowadays terrified of the workers. Needlessly, as the workers are brainwashed too.

I do not think it is especially useful to call Islamists fascists as they are different in quite a few ways from Mussolini's movement, but if they are fascists then they are a fascist threat that is certainly not imaginary.

Steve Bannon may have been right when he said,

I think we are in a crisis of the underpinnings of capitalism and on top of that we’re now, I believe, at the beginning stages of a global war against Islamic fascism.

Bernard Lewis: Will the future see an Islamised Europe or a European Islam?

In 2010 the greatest historian of the Middle East, Bernard Lewis, predicted that by the end of the decade Iran would abandon political Islam, while Turks adopted some form of Islamist rule. The old man might yet be right.

He also said in 2010 that Muslims were making their third attempt to conquer Europe, an attempt which seemed to have a much better chance at success than the first two as it took the form of peaceful migration rather than military aggression.

“The only question remaining for us to answer regarding the future of Europe is will it be an Islamised Europe or a European Islam?"

I suspect that the country that poses the biggest danger to Christendom/Western Christian civilisation is not Iran or Turkey, and certainly not Russia or North Korea, but Saudi Arabia.

ISIS is a very big danger if we overreact to them, as the Americans overreacted to September 11th, and alienate many Muslims in Europe.

Macron will be President of France

French exit poll result:

Macron - 23%
Le Pen - 23%
Fillon - 19%
Melenchon - 19%

The Gaullist Fillon might have been a good President, despite the corruption allegations. Macron will do less well against Marine Le Pen than Fillon, so she will be happy to meet him in the second round. Nevertheless I am sure that Macron will be President.

He will be another Trudeau. Possibly another Hollande.

And bad news for Britain in the Brexit negotiations.

Why should Great Britain or America fight for the Sunnis?

Obviously, the USA and UK should never have invaded Iraq. They should have launched a short punitive expedition into Afghanistan in 2001, restored the monarchy and then allowed the Taliban to come back. Nation-building was always (a liberal) folly: Afghanistan and Iraq were not post-war Germany, as should have been clear.

But having broken it, as Colin Powell warned, the USA bought Iraq. Leaving it alone led to ISIS. So what is the solution?

I don't know. Unfortunately, the USA may now back the Israeli-Saudi-Sunni alliance against the Shia crescent (Iran, Syria, Hezbollah). I hope Mr. Trump resists this temptation.

Almost all the terrorist atrocities against Western Europe and the USA are committed by Sunnis, yet we are constantly told that Iran, which is fighting ISIS and Al Qaeda, is the great threat. Why? 

Will there always be an England, Europe or America, whatever the origin of their inhabitants?

But today, France’s most read and most discussed popular writers—novelists and political essayists—are conservatives of one stripe or another. They are not concerned, even slightly, with the issues that animate American “mainstream” think-tank conservatism—lowering taxes, cutting federal programs, or maintaining some kind of global military hegemony. Their focus is France’s national culture and its survival.

These words are from an article by Scott McConnell in the latest issue of The American Conservative called The Battle for France, which you should print off and read, whether or not you are interested in France. It is about the future, or lack of one, of Western/Christian civilisation. 

I came across it via Professor Tom Gallagher, the historian and commentator.

It contains a quite astonishing piece of information, which I had seen before.

Because the government does not publish statistics about race, some curious researchers have looked at the number of newborn babies screened for markers for sickle-cell anemia, a test given if both parents are of African, North African, or Sicilian origin. The figure has risen from 25 percent in 2005 to 39 percent in 2015. In the Greater Paris region it has risen from 54 percent to 73 percent.

Gentle reader, I don't suppose you have time or patience just now to read several brilliant articles about the effects on the West of mass immigration from the Third World. 

Still, I wanted to post links to another six 'must read' articles on the subject, which is almost the only important political issue of our days. You might want to bookmark this page or even print them off to read at your leisure. 

Like most nice people, I didn't give immigration from the Third World into Great Britain or Europe much thought until a few years ago. When a man I knew in MI6 tried to tell me about the dangers caused by Muslims in Europe I assumed he did so because he was a very rigorous Low Church Protestant. When Tom Gallagher told me about the late Oriana Fallaci and opened the subject of the 'Islamisation' of Europe with me I thought he was absurdly alarmist. I thought the same at first when Ruth Dudley Edwards talked about Islamisation.

Now, like everyone's, my views have changed, because the world has changed and we have all noticed. Despite the official propaganda. It is not that we become more extreme as we age, though we certainly become wiser and less inhibited. It's the world that has become more extreme.

The best comment on Brexit I've seen

I voted for the principle of national sovereignty and I expect to suffer for this choice. You do know there have been actual *wars* of independence, don't you? It will not be easily won. A lot of Remainers seem to be saying that they are *not* prepared to suffer for the principle of national sovereignty and that if we suffer just one jot of inconvenience or anxiety, we should have remained.

1O pieces of advice

I don't like work — no man does — but I like what is in work — the chance to find yourself. Joseph Conrad

What people said this weekend

Peter Hitchens‏Verified account @ClarkeMicah  15 seconds ago

Must sign off now. But amazed by liberal left. Donald Trump transformed in a night from fascist moron to hero. I still think he's an oaf.

Michael Caine, interviewed on Sky on Friday, explaining why he voted for Brexit,

It wasn’t about... racism, immigrants or anything, it was about freedom

[On the possibility that Britain might be less prosperous because of Brexit]

I'd rather be a poor master than a rich servant.

Politics is always chaotic. In politics, you’re always going into areas you’ve never been before, so you’re going to get lost and then you’re going to find your way. And then it’ll be all right.

Has Donald Trump been turned? Not necessarily

On Thursday night there were a lot of interesting news stories. 

A horrible story about the use of chemical weapons in Syria.17 suicide bombs had briefly opening the road out of Mosul, presumably allowing the leader of ISIS to escape. The story or non-story about Donald Trump's nefarious links to Vladimir Putin trundled on, now involving Carl Bernstein. 

When we woke up yesterday there was only one story. President Trump had bombed Syria because of the pictures he had seen of dead children, including 'beautiful babies'.

I feared and more than half-expected that Mr. Trump would be turned by the American foreign policy establishment. Now that danger is acute. Especially since Rex Tillerson said the day before that the US still wanted regime change in Syria.

Steve Bannon being shoved off the National Security Council was a worrying sign, as was the destruction of Mike Flynn by the FBI. Instead of a National Security Advisor who worried about Islam the USA has one who worries about Russia. 

Donald Trump has many good instincts and insights, which is why he is President, but a very short attention span. He has surrounded himself with a bunch of people, including James Mattis and Nikki Haley, who do not share any of his vision of the world, possibly because there are few experienced people in public life who do.

Steve Bannon is Mr. Trump's conscience and must be very beleaguered.

Mr. Trump could turn out to be another Republican president who cuts taxes for the rich and sends soldiers to kill and die in pointless wars in the Middle East. Ones from which Saudi Arabia and Israel benefit, rather than America. While taking in as many refugees as Obama did and doing not much more about illegal immigration.

But it does not have to be like that.

Christopher Caldwell Tells Us How to Think About Vladimir Putin

Christopher Caldwell is the most interesting journalist I read. Do read this talk he recently gave, gentle reader. 

'Yet if we were to use traditional measures for understanding leaders, which involve the defense of borders and national flourishing, Putin would count as the pre-eminent statesman of our time. On the world stage, who can vie with him? Only perhaps Recep Tayyip Erdoğan of Turkey.

Well happ'd on, brother-ranger of the brine!

A mixed bag of quotations today.



Formerly no one was allowed to think freely; now it is permitted, but no one is capable of it any more. Now people want to think only what they are supposed to think, and this they consider freedom. Oswald Spengler


A true friend is the greatest of all blessings, and that which we take the least care of all to acquire. Duc De La Rochefoucauld

Emil Cioran predicts the end of European civilisation

 

Vacillating instincts, corroded beliefs, obsessions, and anility: everywhere conquerors in retreat, rentiers of heroism confronting the young Alarics who lie in wait for Rome and Athens; everywhere paradoxes of the lymphatic. There was a time when salon sallies traversed whole countries, foiled stupidity or refined it. Europe, coquettish and intractable, was in the flower of her age; — decrepit today, Europe excites no one. Even so, certain barbarians await their chance to inherit the finery, impatient at her long agony.

The Romanian aphorist Emil Cioran, in Syllogismes d’Amerture (1952) - the English translation of the book is here. 

It's interesting that he said this before the Algerian War, when Algeria still constituted three departments of France.

Pessimism was to Cioran what daffodils were to Wordsworth or butlers to P.G. Wodehouse. Cioran even achieved the feat of being too pessimistic for Samuel Beckett. This broke up their friendship.

Carl Jung on good and evil

Filling the conscious mind with ideal conceptions is a characteristic of Western theosophy, but not the confrontation with the shadow and the world of darkness. One does not become enlightened by imagining figures of light, but by making the darkness conscious.

It is a fact that cannot be denied: the wickedness of others becomes our own wickedness because it kindles something evil in our own hearts.

Why I don't like International Women's Day

A week ago sunny weather arrived in time for Mărţişor. Time to walk
hatless and scarfless along Calea Victoriei in the spring
sunshine.

Romanians consider that spring starts on March 1 (Mărţişor) and men here
celebrate it by offering mărţişoare to women. A mărţişor is a trinket,
usually by peasants who come to Bucharest to sell them,
though some fortunate ladies receive expensive versions of mărţişoare
encrusted with gems.

If you failed to invite a lady for dinner on Mărţişor today you have a

second chance, because March 8th is International Women's Day. It is a day which, if it is noticed at all in the West, is marked by left-wingers and feminists. In Romania it is a very big thing but, after more than forty years of left-wing ideas and political correctness, it is simply about giving women presents and inviting them to dinner.

A very pleasant custom but, still, I dislike IWD because it is Marxist.

Chamberlain, Churchill and the End of Glory

If I am to manage to continue reading books I probably have to give up fiction. Having taken almost two years with 'War and Peace' (do read it if you haven't), I returned with relish to John Charmley's 'Churchill: the End of Glory'.

The book caused great controversy when it appeared 25 years ago because it portrayed Churchill in a new and unflattering light. It is sceptical about Chamberlain and Deladier's decision to go to war with Germany in 1939 and the British cabinet's decision not to find out the details of Hitler's peace overtures after the fall of France in 1940. Foreign Secretary Lord Halifax wanted to. Churchill, the new Prime Minister, and the Labour leader Attlee convinced the (all-party) war cabinet not to do so.

Having been lucky to evacuate the army from France in time and having ruled out negotiations, Churchill had no plan for defeating Germany nor any means of doing so.

As Professor Charmley points out:

The Americans were not about to enter the war in December 1941, as Churchill's despair in November showed. They came in because they were forced to, just as the Soviets had done; only the British and the French were mad enough to volunteer for war.

I followed 'Churchill: the End of Glory' with Professor Charmley's 'Chamberlain and the Lost Peace', which dissects the way in which England came to go to war.

Neville Chamberlain and Benito Mussolini at Munich, 19 September 1938

I recommend both books very highly.

They tell a very sad story about the end of British greatness.

I admire Churchill as a great Englishman, comparable with Nelson, Wellington and Dr Johnson. I have come to think, however, that Neville Chamberlain and Halifax were wiser statesmen.

Yet it was they, not Churchill, who took us to war.

The crucial decision that led to war was the decision to give a guarantee to Poland and, oddly, Romania. It was taken by Chamberlain in March 1939, under pressure from Halifax, after Germany seized the Czech lands.