text
stringlengths 0
33k
|
|---|
In isolated settlements of the kind, idlers or objectors can be banished, but once the system has been made universal the refusal to do the share of work allotted to one can only be punishable by death. The text adopted by militant Socialists as their battle-cry, “If a man will not work neither shall he eat!” must be literally carried out by a Socialist State, and the proletarian disciples of Ca' Canny, no less than the “idle rich”, as also those workers for whom no employment can be found, will find that the law of the hive can be even more ferocious than the hated government of “Capitalism”. |
Mr. Stewart Grahame has well said that “few, even amongst Socialists, realize the ferocity of Socialism”. They imagine that “that classic pattern of Socialist administration, the Reign of Terror”, was an accident that need not recur if the experiment of Socialism is repeated. But we have only to examine the writings of Socialists to recognize that the Reign of Terror was simply Socialism carried out to its logical conclusion. Thus we find even a Socialist of such reputed moderation as Mr. H. M. Hyndman writing these words: |
“The whole noble array of barristers, solicitors, accountants, surveyors, agents, and about ninety-nine hundredths of the present distributors would be wholly useless in a properly organized society. They live upon the existing bourgeois system ... They will disappear with the huckster arrangements on which they thrive. |
Since there is at present no way of making human beings disappear it is obvious that they must be killed off, for, as Robespierre perceived, they cannot all be absorbed by work of essential utility, and can therefore only be left to die of starvation. So all Socialist roads lead bade to the old system of depopulation, and it is questionable whether the guillotine was not the humaner method. |
Syndicalism at any rate does not conceal its intentions in this matter. The massacre of the drones — and of those whom overcrowding of the hive forces to become drones — forms an essential part of the programme that Mermeix has well described as “a Neronic dream”. |
In the exultations of Georges Sorel over the coming death struggle between Capital and Labour, we seem to hear a Roman Emperor rejoicing in anticipation over the collision between two racing chariots that is to strew the arena with the mangled remains of men and horses and drench its sand in blood. Syndicalism as formulated by George Sorel is the plan of the World Revolution stripped of its illusory wrappings and revealed in all its naked deformity. It is avowedly anti-patriotic, anti-religious, anti-democratic; it is, in the words of one of its own advocates, Pouget, “the negation of the system of majorities”, and its sole aim is rule by force and violence. Far more than Socialism, it is the direct continuation of the programme of the Illuminati. Can we not see Weishaupt smiling in his grave as we read the words of Sorel: “It is impossible not to see that a sort of irresistible wave will pass over the old civilization?” |
(Since writing the above chapter I have been informed on good authority that M. Georges Sorel has definitely gone over to the Royalists. I wonder how many youthful Syndicalists are told of this incident in the life of their prophet. — Author's Note.) |
The Modern World |
The Modern world: Is based upon unsound notions about family, persons, society, values, notions which are untrue and destructive at the same time. |
The fact is that not one of the major tenets of Liberalism or Political Correctness have any solid foundation in the nature of things. |
Equality is a patent lie. Diversity is not a strength or blessing but a cancer and a curse. Tolerance is not the virtue of the strong but of the pathetic and weak. Pluralism and individualism combined with hedonistic consumerism amount to anarchy under any other label. |
And because the world view of the PC Liberals is based upon unsound and untenable, notions the result has been to turn the entirety of society into an asylum ran by the inmates at large. |
But the believers keep doubling down on their 'values' like junkies shooting smack. They will keep importing and supporting barbarism, keep demanding more 'tolerance', keep hammering away at the foundation of the Western Culture to the ruin of the West. Keep lighting fires until the fires literally consume their own person. They delight in their own on coming doom as they doom the rest of us. The secret is that Liberal Political correctness is a death cult - affirming all things that lead to death as ' free expressions' and rejecting all healthy, normal, natural behaviors as 'oppressive authoritarianism'. It must logically lead to death as it exalts death above life. The modern world is a dead, dull world of repeating sameness. There is no vitality. No originality. No craftsmanship. Only repeats of repeats upon remolds upon recasts. The PC controllers have polluted the theater to the point that 'action movies' have no human action in them at all - everything happening upon a green screen. In learning, and print all is shaped according to very PC specific codes. Every act, mannerism or lack of appropriate zeal on the job, and increasingly in the home, are rigorously policed for signs of unapproved isms, phobias, or other deviations from the New PC Normal. The most dedicated shock troops of PC self police through double think. This auto-internal policing makes one stupid, vile, weak and servile. It makes one stupid because PC is immune to logic being based upon feelings. It makes one vile because it makes one arrogant, as PC exalts the selfish individuals above all other considerations. |
It makes one weak because it makes one's thoughts predictable, being based upon emotionally stunted 'needs' presented to one by the PC media. |
It makes one servile because it requires one to perpetually kowtow before the alter of the mass feeling, which master is again immune to reality, or logical thinking about reality. |
Thus Modern World has nothing to offer - Being based upon individualism, hedonism, and consumerism. It is literally the antithesis of the values of the past which were communal, ethical and productive. The individual is the dissected and dead remains of the once living Western community. Hedonism is the rubble and the ruin of our high trust society based on the former moral order imposed by the True Faith. And consumerism has reduced all things to mere commodities and has taken all the pride out of producing products worthy of a man's name in its vile race to the cheapest labor sources. This utterly empty imitation of a proper functioning society and national polity has replaced all the former truths of our people with communist and consumerist inspired lies which have been accepted as 'the new truth' by the easily beguiled masses; however, there is NO such thing as new or old truths. Truth is ETERNAL or it is not the truth but merely a convince used as a means to an end. Man - the best and highest kind of men at any rate - attempts to take the ideal timeless pure absolute TRUTH his mind and soul perceive in moments of insight rational and otherwise and replicate what good truths he may among himself. This is our nature, our dilemma, able to see the best and yet never able to make this best thing a reality. |
The Truth as a way of life is simply that if one lives a life in accord with the Nature of Man in harmony with Creation, and the Creators dictum, one will live a life worthy of living. Anything else is willful indolence which partakes of the decay in morals PC has presented as 'the new normal' - that shall not be acceptable. |
Now to be fair, no 'True' IE Platonically perfect government will ever be possible among men, as we are not perfect beings, nor ideal thought experiments conducted in a vacuum. But men are capable of creating social, economic and political forms that more or less are true in the sense that they tend toward the final end of Just, stable government that ensures the survival of the common stock over all other things. Common Good over Selfish Interests. |
Many are presented with this simple humbling, Truth but few grasp it. Many will reject it outright, being greedy, selfish, destructive and atomized themselves they cannot see or will not accept that other things are possible. These sorts are lost to us, and must be left in the land of the dead and dying, for they will not come out of the forsaken city of woe, to the land of the Living. They refuse to see, and thus are willfully blind, blindly leading others to their doom. They are the multitude of Sodom, who must serve their part so that the elect may know mercy and grace. But for those that will have other ways, that would want and do wish for something else out of existence. That something else is A real legal lawful doable Plan to really be free of PC. A plan that has an actual chance of success. It is logical, simple and based upon the Real Nature of Mankind, not upon rationalist notions about what ought to be. We have been taught that Nature is secondary but this is a lie. Nature is dominate over nurture though both play a role - that is just the empirical fact. The information contained in the pdf simply requires that much of the lies taught to all of us be unlearned - Materialism, Hedonism, Atheism and Individualism primary among them. These are cancerous memes killing the People and their communities as they sedate their minds with false happiness. |
For many the pdf will be harder than for others, as all of us have been taught a mountain of false ideological nonsense from birth about the nature of everything including nature itself. Many are deeply invested in those lies, and will go into the deep with the sinking ship of falsehoods rather than swim to new shores. An open mind and the willingness to let go of this modern world order which is so void, so empty, so vacuous and stultifying. A willingness to think of things from other angles and to 'shift' the frame of reference from the 'assumed' PC liberal materialist one under which most of us where brought up and which we, like fish in water, notice not at all. |
Those of you that feel like rejects from modernity and who have NO love for the PC liberal world - This was all done for you. You personally. You as a whole. You. You, who are the living way to other assumptions behind social, economic, and political relations. You who will shape the future. An Organic Living Society is a matter of Living People working in unity. It is no more impossible than any other idea is 'impossible' in fact because it accords with nature it is quite very possible indeed. Something much better than this tepid mess is possible. That something else is at this link https://drive.google.com/ucexport=download&id=0B3zfTMw10IXTVjlESk9hWTE2Snc 193 page pdf clean link. |
<|endoftext|> |
Attempting to pacify the unreasonable is expecting the irrational. |
The chaos in Baltimore is a symptom of the majority American population's inner spiritual weakness. It's a manifestation of their self doubt. It is an expression of their apathetic and indolent worldview. Which worldview centers around trinkets and sports games. Meanwhile mindlessly like slaves, the same majority mass labors away day and night to pay taxes which support the very chaos which threatens to consume their society, and destroy everything they hold dear -- they pay for ghettos, mass immigration, divserity feminism and political correctness. |
Thus by their own hand is the chaos enabled to spread, without end, day after day, and a worker slave drones work day after day to pay to fund more chaos. |
It is utter madness. It is a once great people literally holding up the funeral pyre of their nation one city at a time. Fire, looting, pillaging, and barbarism eat away at the foundations of their civilization, and the drone slaves simply keep working away, while the masters continue lying to the slaves and themselves insisting everything is 100% OK. |
It is national schizophrenia. It can be nothing else but a form of insanity. For what rational person can look at these ghettos and the riotinglooting and pillaging that happens down there, and wish to claim the equality was such as those? The fact is that even in cities where blacks control everything the ghetto blacks blame YT for all their woes. And the media encourages this view, so do the academics, and the uptown yuppie liberals --all of which are full of self hating people, whose actions directly will lead to the end of our great society and people. |
This is my analysis of our national psyche on these riots. The fact is is that barbarism cannot be appeased through weakness, since the primitive man knows that what matters is strength and power not right and rationality -- those only have application after one is strong and has the power to impose ones values. Savagery cannot be tamed by means of surrender -- for savagery knows no compromise. Riots cannot be tempered down by means of bribes since all such payments in time turning to tribute been based on weakness as they are -- and those who pay tribute or subject vassal peoples. These being true. And the blacks and other minorities being barbarian savages who riot quite often. It follows that we cannot buy them off, we cannot give them little bits of power here and there nor can compromise with them, without subjecting ourselves to their whims and losing power over our own lands. The loss of control of our own lands is the preludes who are disappearing from history. Thus barbarism must be called barbarism savagery must be called savagery and they must be confronted and checked. This behavior must be met with punishments not rewards. With big sticks and not carrots. With spine and not with supplication. We are rightful rulers of these lands and we have no reason to compromise or bandy about terms with these barbarous savages. Anything else is abdication of our right to rule our own lands -- leads us back to the fact that attempting to pacify the unreasonable is expecting the rational. |
<|endoftext|> |
What's Wrong with the World G.K. Chesterton |
DEDICATION To C. F G. Masterman, M. P. |
My Dear Charles, |
I originally called this book "What is Wrong," and it would have satisfied your sardonic temper to note the number of social misunderstandings that arose from the use of the title. Many a mild lady visitor opened her eyes when I remarked casually, "I have been doing 'What is Wrong' all this morning." And one minister of religion moved quite sharply in his chair when I told him (as he understood it) that I had to run upstairs and do what was wrong, but should be down again in a minute. Exactly of what occult vice they silently accused me I cannot conjecture, but I know of what I accuse myself; and that is, of having written a very shapeless and inadequate book, and one quite unworthy to be dedicated to you. As far as literature goes, this book is what is wrong and no mistake. |
It may seem a refinement of insolence to present so wild a composition to one who has recorded two or three of the really impressive visions of the moving millions of England. You are the only man alive who can make the map of England crawl with life; a most creepy and enviable accomplishment. Why then should I trouble you with a book which, even if it achieves its object (which is monstrously unlikely) can only be a thundering gallop of theory? |
Well, I do it partly because I think you politicians are none the worse for a few inconvenient ideals; but more because you will recognise the many arguments we have had, those arguments which the most wonderful ladies in the world can never endure for very long. And, perhaps, you will agree with me that the thread of comradeship and conversation must be protected because it is so frivolous. It must be held sacred, it must not be snapped, because it is not worth tying together again. It is exactly because argument is idle that men (I mean males) must take it seriously; for when (we feel), until the crack of doom, shall we have so delightful a difference again? But most of all I offer it to you because there exists not only comradeship, but a very different thing, called friendship; an agreement under all the arguments and a thread which, please God, will never break. |
Yours always, |
G. K. Chesterton. |
* * * |
PART ONE |
THE HOMELESSNESS OF MAN |
* * * |
THE MEDICAL MISTAKE |
A book of modern social inquiry has a shape that is somewhat sharply defined. It begins as a rule with an analysis, with statistics, tables of population, decrease of crime among Congregationalists, growth of hysteria among policemen, and similar ascertained facts; it ends with a chapter that is generally called "The Remedy." It is almost wholly due to this careful, solid, and scientific method that "The Remedy" is never found. For this scheme of medical question and answer is a blunder; the first great blunder of sociology. It is always called stating the disease before we find the cure. But it is the whole definition and dignity of man that in social matters we must actually find the cure before we find the disease . |
The fallacy is one of the fifty fallacies that come from the modern madness for biological or bodily metaphors. It is convenient to speak of the Social Organism, just as it is convenient to speak of the British Lion. But Britain is no more an organism than Britain is a lion. The moment we begin to give a nation the unity and simplicity of an animal, we begin to think wildly. Because every man is a biped, fifty men are not a centipede. This has produced, for instance, the gaping absurdity of perpetually talking about "young nations" and "dying nations," as if a nation had a fixed and physical span of life. Thus people will say that Spain has entered a final senility; they might as well say that Spain is losing all her teeth. Or people will say that Canada should soon produce a literature; which is like saying that Canada must soon grow a new moustache. Nations consist of people; the first generation may be decrepit, or the ten thousandth may be vigorous. Similar applications of the fallacy are made by those who see in the increasing size of national possessions, a simple increase in wisdom and stature, and in favor with God and man. These people, indeed, even fall short in subtlety of the parallel of a human body. They do not even ask whether an empire is growing taller in its youth, or only growing fatter in its old age. But of all the instances of error arising from this physical fancy, the worst is that we have before us: the habit of exhaustively describing a social sickness, and then propounding a social drug. |
Now we do talk first about the disease in cases of bodily breakdown; and that for an excellent reason. Because, though there may be doubt about the way in which the body broke down, there is no doubt at all about the shape in which it should be built up again. No doctor proposes to produce a new kind of man, with a new arrangement of eyes or limbs. The hospital, by necessity, may send a man home with one leg less: but it will not (in a creative rapture) send him home with one leg extra. Medical science is content with the normal human body, and only seeks to restore it. |
But social science is by no means always content with the normal human soul; it has all sorts of fancy souls for sale. Man as a social idealist will say "I am tired of being a Puritan; I want to be a Pagan," or "Beyond this dark probation of Individualism I see the shining paradise of Collectivism." Now in bodily ills there is none of this difference about the ultimate ideal. The patient may or may not want quinine; but he certainly wants health. No one says "I am tired of this headache; I want some toothache," or "The only thing for this Russian influenza is a few German measles," or "Through this dark probation of catarrh I see the shining paradise of rheumatism." But exactly the whole difficulty in our public problems is that some men are aiming at cures which other men would regard as worse maladies; are offering ultimate conditions as states of health which others would uncompromisingly call states of disease. Mr. Belloc once said that he would no more part with the idea of property than with his teeth; yet to Mr. Bernard Shaw property is not a tooth, but a toothache. Lord Milner has sincerely attempted to introduce German efficiency; and many of us would as soon welcome German measles. Dr. Saleeby would honestly like to have Eugenics; but I would rather have rheumatics. |
This is the arresting and dominant fact about modern social discussion; that the quarrel is not merely about the difficulties, but about the aim. We agree about the evil; it is about the good that we should tear each other's eyes out. We all admit that a lazy aristocracy is a bad thing. We should not by any means all admit that an active aristocracy would be a good thing. We all feel angry with an irreligious priesthood; but some of us would go mad with disgust at a really religious one. Everyone is indignant if our army is weak, including the people who would be even more indignant if it were strong. The social case is exactly the opposite of the medical case. We do not disagree, like doctors, about the precise nature of the illness, while agreeing about the nature of health. On the contrary, we all agree that England is unhealthy, but half of us would not look at her in what the other half would call blooming health . Public abuses are so prominent and pestilent that they sweep all generous people into a sort of fictitious unanimity. We forget that, while we agree about the abuses of things, we should differ very much about the uses of them. Mr. Cadbury and I would agree about the bad public house. It would be precisely in front of the good public-house that our painful personal fracas would occur. |
I maintain, therefore, that the common sociological method is quite useless: that of first dissecting abject poverty or cataloguing prostitution. We all dislike abject poverty; but it might be another business if we began to discuss independent and dignified poverty. We all disapprove of prostitution; but we do not all approve of purity. The only way to discuss the social evil is to get at once to the social ideal. We can all see the national madness; but what is national sanity? I have called this book "What Is Wrong with the World?" and the upshot of the title can be easily and clearly stated. What is wrong is that we do not ask what is right. |
* * * |
II |
WANTED, AN UNPRACTICAL MAN |
There is a popular philosophical joke intended to typify the endless and useless arguments of philosophers; I mean the joke about which came first, the chicken or the egg? I am not sure that properly understood, it is so futile an inquiry after all. I am not concerned here to enter on those deep metaphysical and theological differences of which the chicken and egg debate is a frivolous, but a very felicitous, type. The evolutionary materialists are appropriately enough represented in the vision of all things coming from an egg, a dim and monstrous oval germ that had laid itself by accident. That other supernatural school of thought (to which I personally adhere) would be not unworthily typified in the fancy that this round world of ours is but an egg brooded upon by a sacred unbegotten bird; the mystic dove of the prophets. But it is to much humbler functions that I here call the awful power of such a distinction. Whether or no the living bird is at the beginning of our mental chain, it is absolutely necessary that it should be at the end of our mental chain. The bird is the thing to be aimed at--not with a gun, but a life-bestowing wand. What is essential to our right thinking is this: that the egg and the bird must not be thought of as equal cosmic occurrences recurring alternatively forever. They must not become a mere egg and bird pattern, like the egg and dart pattern. One is a means and the other an end; they are in different mental worlds. Leaving the complications of the human breakfast-table out of account, in an elemental sense, the egg only exists to produce the chicken. But the chicken does not exist only in order to produce another egg. He may also exist to amuse himself, to praise God, and even to suggest ideas to a French dramatist. Being a conscious life, he is, or may be, valuable in himself. Now our modern politics are full of a noisy forgetfulness; forgetfulness that the production of this happy and conscious life is after all the aim of all complexities and compromises. We talk of nothing but useful men and working institutions; that is, we only think of the chickens as things that will lay more eggs. Instead of seeking to breed our ideal bird, the eagle of Zeus or the Swan of Avon, or whatever we happen to want, we talk entirely in terms of the process and the embryo. The process itself, divorced from its divine object, becomes doubtful and even morbid; poison enters the embryo of everything; and our politics are rotten eggs. |
Subsets and Splits