Marine Le Pen has suggested that the French-speaking part of Belgium become part of France, pending a referendum of all Belgians. This follows last year’s vote in which a majority of voters in Flanders favored Flemish separatists. Le Pen stated that “if Belgian is going to split, if Flanders pronounces its independence, which seems more and more credible a possibility, the French republic would do well to welcome Wallonia into its heart.”
A related article, “End of Nationalism Dream Dying in Belgium” notes that “If even Belgium’s Dutch speaking Flemish and francophone Walloons cannot live together then how can Europe’s ‘Union’, a more recent and even more artificial construction, hope to bridge national differences?”
Indeed. The EU project was built on moral idealism of the left rather than on a realistic understanding of what motivates people. Attachment to ethnically similar people sharing a common language and culture is a bedrock part of human nature–hence the robustness of these differences no matter how much the left would like to engineer them away.
But realistic assessments are not at all in evidence in the article. For example:
“Belgium today is what Europe must be: a place where languages and cultures must live together. Europe will be Belgian or it will not be,” warned Geert Van Istendael, a Flemish writer and historian this weekend.
Beatrice Delvaux, the editor of the French language Le Soir newspaper, accused Flemish nationalists of using “emotions, lies, manipulations and excitement” to threaten both Belgium and the EU.
“That is what is at stake. If the Flemish nationalism pulls it off and shatters the country, it will also be one of the gravediggers of Europe.”
We can only hope.
As a French nationalist, Le Pen understands that joining Wallonia to France would have vast repercussions and likely spell the end of the EU. Indeed, it could well be the spark that ignites a rejuvenation of European national feelings related to immigration. If the Walloons and the Flemish cannot live together, how could anyone think that Europe could live with millions of unassimilable Muslim immigrants, not to mention Africans, etc.?
Facing the Future as a Minority
Was the Immigration Act of 1924 Illiberal?
I want a part of Francophone Louisiana to be bought by France back from U.S.A. as Napoleon should have kept it. If Canadians want to kick the Quebecois out, they are welcome in New France! New england is up north. France needs to go in and civilize things on the ivory coast, because some Creols would like to see their mother africa, without violence. Acadians and Acadianians would like to see France. The Chitimacha would like to see us go. People should live in their proper climate regions. Africa for africans, europe for europeans, americas for americans.
European inter-cultural relations work very well when based around Swiss style localism and decentralism. A confederation rather than federal model. How can big centralised government lead to self determination?
One of the reasons Czechoslovkia failed is because it was foisted on to to 3 million Suddeten Germans, 5.5 million Czechs and 2 million Slovaks in a centalised “democratic” model that effetively prevented regional self determination to the Slovaks and Germans because the bigger populations effectively dictated to the smaller ones.
(This was in fact done deliberatly)
The EU has some value as a forum to bypass elites and big money, its methods of election have actually allowed nationalist MPs to gain seats where they could not do so in their own nations.
bad bad analysis,
belgium feels comfortable breaking up BECAUSE it is now part of a larger union, and wont feel threaten in a economic/sovereign/security sense.
u will soon see the same thing happening to spanish/italian/greek/bulgrian/hungrian “nations” because they never have been a true homogenous ethnostate like germany, but had to stay together cause size used to matter. Now with a single euro currency, complete open borders, and absolute absence of any potential intra-european wars there is no reason why proud people such as catalonians, mecedonians, lombardians… would suppress their need to express their own unique identities.
again these breakups will happen thanks to EU otherwise they would not have felt safe about breaking up
excuse my english
I hadn’t heard that. A citation to nationalist groups like the Flemish that indicate that is how they analyze the situation would be nice. It’s hard for me to think that nationalists like the EU if for no other reason than open borders. And the EU apologists don’t seem to like it at all.
I am confused. How can there be “break-ups” and the EU continue to exist?
I guess Wilt means that some form of semi-autonomy within the EU is possible. If that is the case, then what does semi-autonomy mean? The EU now wants a common financial arrangement wherein there are to be no German banks, or French banks, etc. but only EU banks. Aside from technical issues of consolidation, any sovereignty with regard to finance would be gone. No country could have its own banking laws, policies, etc.
Now, it is one thing to dress up for holidays and another thing to enjoy sovereignty (and its responsibilities.) What the EU wants to to turn Europe into a kind of US, with a federal gov’t superior to all its states, or used to be states.
Europeans are not keen on this idea. Nationalism by another name like the EU, is not nationalism. j
@wilt: The E.U. has also emboldened Scottish nationalism. How well Switzerland, with its different languages, works seems something of an anomaly. The ruling class in Europe is committed to a large, single market along the lines of the United States — money, after all, is at stake. And there is the fear that another war between European nations, in the nuclear era, would mean the final destruction of Europe. The unevenness of economic development in Europe is a problem — more extreme than the U.S. even with its poorer southern states. That one part of Europe can be in recession while another is not causes problems as to what economic policies should be pursued and when. How things unfold in the current, problematic conditions will bear observing.
Oh. Oh. Here we go again. Walloons to France. The Flemish to the Netherlands. If the priciple is language, what about Alsace-Lorraine? Blame it on Charlemagne’s kids.
Switzerland is a highly regimented society. The language groups don’t differ very much from one another. The Swiss **Romande** (Catholic French speakers) are more “German” in character than the French in France. Swiss Protestants value their country’s traditional independence and neutrality which is bound up in the integrity of its territory and national institutions.
There was never the slightest possibility of Switzerland’s majority German speakers coming “home to the Reich” in the manner of the Austrians and Sudeten Germans before the outbreak of World War II. On the contrary, the commanders of the Swiss Army met on the high peak of the Ruetli and swore an oath to resist the invader even if the country’s borders were forced.
The Italian speakers are Switzerland’s poorest group but Italy, a weakly united country itself, does not exert sufficient “pull” to draw them away.
To add to this, many perhaps most Swiss speak and read two languages with nearly equal fluency and a good number speak three.
@Philip:
Scottish Nationalism? What’s that? Wearing kilts and going to folk festivsals to listen to beautifull lyrical celtic music? Scottish voters ensured the British Labour Party stayed in power against the wishes of a vast majority of English voters. Tony Blair was able to continue his massive immigration program in order to develop more labour voters steeped in ethnic resentments. The SNP would appear to be nothing more than a folk dancing party with a parliament. That’s not the kind of nationalism the White folks of Britain need to survive they should dissolve themselves and get out of the way.
Another possibility for a possible merge would be with Luxemburg. From Wallone pov that would be more acceptable as joining with France would mean losing lots of influence in its own affairs.
@Caleb:
Galeb, your of on a tangent of your own making. The point I made is that Czechoslovakia was a poor democracy in many ways the opposit of Switzerlands decentralised localist model and this is one reason it failed.
A rough run down on the Sudeten Germans is this: they had originally been part of the Kingdom of Bavaria and then became joined to Austro-Hungarian Empire through one of the many stratetgic Hapsburg marriages. After WW1 the treaty of Versailes placed them into the new nation of Czechoslovakia rather than the natural fit of Germany which they bordered.
This was against the princple of ‘right to self determination’ that Woodrow Wilsons propagandistic but popular 14 point plan had espoused since no plebescite was offered the Suddetens. Given the long history of attempting to join pan German nation building that they would have chosen to be united with their German brothers is forgone.
This was to satisfy the French General Clementus desire to reduce Germany in size for French strategic reasons.
In order to ensure they could not vote to leave the new country ‘democratically’ a highly centralised ‘democracy’ was created to which were added several million Slovaks to counter balance the Germans, the Slovaks were also somewhat unhappy with the situation. (they have now split off ). Suddeten German resentments include the shooting of unarmed demonstrators in multiple villages during local council elections in 1919, land redistributions that had the effect of bringing a greater Czech population into German areas, fear of assimilation, Leader Eduard Bennes use of the Suddens as pawns (prior to Hitlers ascent) in threatening to expell all 3 million Germans if Germany and Austria united into one nation, the dismissal of some 50,000 German railways workers for Linguistic reasons.
Culturally and racially there is not a real problem with Germans and Czechs getting along given their racial and cultural similarities, more or less indistinquishable apart from language. I’ve been to enough ‘Grenzfests’ starting on both sides to know that racially and culturally there are no differences that would not allow these two to get along well. However the structure the victorious allies set up allowed the domination of the German minority and that is what happened. Had Czechoslovakia been built around the same principles as Switzerland it might have stood a chance.
Had the Nazis been succesfull Switzerland would have drifted into close economic and political ties with the 3rd Reich while maintainintg its character. There was simply no compelling reason to to invade Switzerland nor would it have been popular with Germans, the invasion of Holland for instance was extremely unpopular with Germans.
I doubt your own Israel could take much out of the Swiss model of localist democracy, the cultural gap between Palestinians and Jews is now too great.
@wilt:
There are countervailing forces however, Countries like Spain blocked the full recognition of Kosovo in case it’s own regional separatists got ideas to breakaway.
@Bear: “Scottish voters ensured the British Labour Party stayed in power against the wishes of a vast majority of English voters.”
English Tories are not exactly Scottish nationalists.
@Bear:
20th June 2011. Cameron’s war with SNP over migrants: Westminster rejects Salmond’s bid to flood recession-hit Scotland with foreign workers.
I confess I have a hard time processing that article. It’s amazing that a supposedly Scottish nationalist party would want massive non-Scottish immigration. What exactly is the point–to have your own flag? Voters? Oil money? Sometimes you just want to bang your head against a wall.
@wilt:
The Likud Connection: Europe’s Right-Wing Populists Find Allies in Israel
Belgian Jewish community surprised by Israeli Deputy Minister’s visit to Flemish extreme-right politician
The Flemish nationalists are the most successful of all.
Something to think about perhaps ?
The E.U.-Scottish nationalism nexus:
The Scottish National party’s white paper on Scottish independence carries this headline quote from the Dundee summer cabinet of 2009: “In my view the most cogent argument for independence for Scotland is the need for separate representation at the European Union.”
@wilt:
This is a response to both Wilt and Prof. Kevin … you are both correct / neither of you are wrong.
The situation in Europe is, needless to say, very complex. I am currently authoring a work that is somewhat related, and which might greatly interest the TOO readership … once I have at last finished! Hopefully it will enter the public domain sometime early next year.
Italy has long been culturally split along north/south lines. Have you heard of the Northern League? A political party founded in January 1991, which effectively pre-dates the European Union. So, while the EU has certainly given unintended space for small ethnic groups to reassert themselves safely, such stresses have actually been around since well before Maastricht.
Also, there has long been a north/south divide stressing England. Both the politics and culture change appreciably once you cross an abstract border, which most take to be a roughly east/west line dissecting Watford, which is situated in Hertfordshire (just north of London). An Ashkenazi-Jewish stronghold by the way.
Regionalization is part of the EU blueprint. So, the phenomenon is not only being pulled (so to speak), it is also being pushed from Brussels. This article by Faro, of Harvard, discusses the issue in some detail. A PDF will open/download:
http://www.hks.harvard.edu/kokkalis/GSW7/GSW%206/Jeremy%20Faro%20Paper.pdf
Note that Scandinavian centric groups already exist that are ostensibly independent of the EU. And Scottish Independence was being expressed 60 years ago when the Stone of Scone (read: “Skoon”) was stolen from Westminster Abbey on Christmas Day, 1950.
And of course, the unelected European Commission promotes a strong regionalization policy, as clearly set out in its webpages, titled: INFOREGIO.
http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/index_en.cfm
Under their European Territorial Cooperation Objectives, the European Commission is running Cross-border programmes to breakdown and/or dilute borders: http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/atlas2007/eu/crossborder/index_en.htm
Hence my premise that both pull and push forces are working concurrently, making the task of performing a macro assessment far more complex than it would first appear (at face value).
Anglo-Saxon: It would be great if you would submit your article to TOO.
@Anglo Saxon:
Dear Kevin. My project is a book, and it has been heavy going. The topic gradually turning (from a research standpoint) far more complex than I ever imagined. For example, I am having to write lengthy Appendices to help wrap it all together. I am 6 months overdue already.
It would be my absolute pleasure to submit extracts or derivatives extrapolated from my manuscript, as articles for publication at TOO. Could you please explain the submittal procedure? Do I simply e-mail the address published on your website?
Yes. Send articles, preferably in MS Word, to editors@theoccidentalobserver.net. Looking forward to it.
You may scoff at Scottish nationalism, but they WON an election in 2010 outright, which purely ethnic parties elsewhere in the UK are far from doing. They are indeed largely civic in tone. What wins them votes is practical competence. The tolerance for immigration is partly because there isn’t much of it in Scotland and partly leftist dogma.
More generally, if you insist on politicising ethnic purity, the practical effect for young people is to reduce their field of potential boyfriend/girlfriend to those from their own ethnicity. I think Professor Macdonald would have to concede that the individual genetic interest in a fit mate would carry the day over group allegiances in such a situation.
It seems to me, watching from the United States, class issues are intertwined in Europe’s nationalist movements. The movements in poorer parts of countries tend to lean to the left, and those in richer parts of countries tend to lean right. During the 1980s, as I recall, the Northern League was always being accused of being neo-fascist.
Bear, your English is, shall we say, idiosyncratic. By “General Clementus” you mean Clemenceau, the Prime Minister of France?
It is true that Swiss governing authority, what there is of it, is mainly exerted through the Cantons, the federal government being relatively weak. But then the Swiss are a highly civilized people and don’t need much governing. Gun ownership, for example, is widespread in Switzerland and not just the rifles and ammunition each reservist keeps in his home. Yet homicide is unheard of there.
It also is true that the Czechs behaved high handedly toward the other national groups in prewar Czechoslovakia. Even the German-speaking Jews disliked the Czechs for their ethnic nationalism. However, every Successor State had an insoluble internal problem — though the Czechoslovak was the most severe — or else a deep grievance as to lost territories.
It is untrue that Hitler saw no difference between Germans and Czechs or Czechs and German-speaking Austrians. Like his neighbors he hated those slavic “inferiors” residing just across the river from his home town of Linz.
Hitler believed that all German-speaking people longed to be part of the Third Reich. Much of his foreign policy — his **Ostpolitik** — was dedicated to bringing this about even at considerable inconvenience to those already living in Germany. The stubborn independence of the Swiss showed this belief to be false, even a lie.
@Lancashire lad:
The SNP views on immigration are in line with their other policies (eg that clown who talks like IM Jollie releasing the Lockerbie bomber). Salmond was always a socialist first and foremost, his party are far to the left of Labour now.
Vlaams Belang is a genuine nationalist party, the SNP are just an excuse for Salmond to get his snout in the trough (literally, he claimed £400 per month for food)
@Caleb: “Switzerland is a highly regimented society. The language groups don’t differ very much from one another. The Swiss **Romande** (Catholic French speakers) are more “German” in character than the French in France.”
Maybe so, but still, the French speaking part of Switzerland seems to be more politically correct than the German speaking region. Maybe it is the influence of French newspapers.
In November 2009, there was a referendum in Switzerland to ban the presence of minarets on the mosques that are being built in the country.
See this Switzerland map with the the results of the referendum.
“Red indicates opposition to the ban of minarets, green support of the ban.”
As you can see, it is disproportionately the French speaking Swiss who want a minaret on every Swiss mosque.
I’d guess it’s true in Belgium too. The French speaking Belgians have probably been infected by the “French” ideology.
@Anglo Saxon: Your inarguable assertion that this state of affairs is “complex,” preeminently in the historical plane, is (or ought to be) a timely reminder, though I doubt whether it will be much heeded hereabouts—certainly not by my fellow Yanks, whose triumphally successful indoctrination in the superiority of the short view has made the American understanding of history akin to that of the computer or the internal combustion engine: it is something essential that they can’t fix and whose workings they don’t comprehend. If USA Today or Fox News were to say that Bush the Elder’s cabinet included Fouché and Talleyrand or that FDR was a contemporary of Lysander of Sparta, few would even notice, let alone balk.
The “progressive” view of history was already regnant in public and much private education when I entered elementary school sixty years ago this September. Its paramount assumption—that the historical “evolution” of the United States from a confederation of fragmented, inherently sovereign, largely autonomous mini-entities to a centralized, crypto-oligarchical, pseudodemocratic maxi-state—was tacitly but forcefully advanced as a moral exemplar. Indeed, it was presented as the sole acceptable exemplar for assessing the foreign and domestic past. (Having enjoyed a rigorous pre-Vatican II Catholic education, I escaped the worst elements of this weltanschauung, although the insidious Americanist heresy, which largely adopted this perverted secular view and became the postconciliar coin of the realm, polluted and distorted my own thinking for forty years and more.)
Your comments on Italy and Scotland are of course apt. Having a Czech grandmother, however, I find myself drawn even more ineluctably to that people’s curious mind-set and history. Everyone knows (or thinks he knows) that Czechs and Slovaks don’t much care for one another—they don’t, in truth, but they do largely get along and have done for centuries. But fewer know that Moravians and Bohemians—the two groups that constitute what non-Czechs call Czechs—are themselves barely on speaking terms, at least attitudinally. I wonder whether there is something crypto-noteworthy in the continuing choice of the German name Bohemia for the territory that its natives call Čechy—the land of the Czechs [I hope that a cap C with a hacek above it appeared at the start of the place-name]. I am sure that it is noteworthy that Bohemian Czechs call themselves “true Czechs,” a turn of phrase that tells all one needs to know about how Bohemians regard Moravians!
As for Belgium, I doubt whether one American in a million knows what virtually every Briton and European over the age of fifty has always known: that Belgium was confected largely by the Congress of Vienna, primarily to separate the Catholic Dutch from the Protestant Dutch, from whom the Catholics did not wish to be separated. It’s no wonder that idiotic European intellectuals of a century ago adored Woodrow Wilson: he reminded them of the good old days when guys in striped pants and specs decided everything, especially where country A ended and country B began, and Heaven help any peasants who didn’t tug at their forelock and obey.
@wilt:
The Hungarian nation was a homogenous ethnostate before the Turkish invasions (over 80% Hungarians), and has been so since the Treaty of Trianon (1920) cut off virtually all minority areas (with huge chunks of Hungarian-only) areas. Hungary is actually way more homogenous than Germany, for example Hungarian has no real dialects. I know some Székelys (a Hungarian group living on the southeastern edge of Transylvania, in the middle of present day Romania, surrounded on all sides by Romanians), and I sometimes detect a slight accent as they speak Hungarian. Sometimes. But not always. (Moreover, I cannot tell where they are from, only that it’s a bit different from standard Hungarian.)
So Hungary will not be split in the way the UK or Spain might be split. There are simply no real regional differences, no ethnic minorities (except for the Gypsies, who are not a majority anywhere, at least not yet).
@Caleb: The Swiss languages are totally different. Even the Swiss German dialects differ from canton to canton, from valley to valley, with Wallisertüütsch (the German dialect of the predominantly French speaking canton Valais) declared totally unintelligible by most of the rest of the German speaking Swiss. It must be noted that the German speaking Swiss (Deutschschweizer) speak dialects that are unintelligible for most Germans. (Except for those in the border areas. With the exception of Wallisertüütsch, the Swiss usually understand each other even if their dialects are somewhat different.) Also the Swiss usually consider their knowledge of High German as a foreign language (when you ask them how many languages they can speak).
Actually I don’t think the Swiss system works all that wonderful. First, immigration is still growing, with an ever larger number of immigrants getting eingebürgert (made citizens). Second, the minorities (French and Italian speakers) vote overwhelmingly to the left, and against immigration reform. Without them, the Swiss German speakers would probably already have stopped immigration.
So I think the Swiss (at least the Swiss German speakers) would be better off without the minority parts of the country.
@Caleb: The German dialect speaking Swiss don’t consider themselves Germans. After all, they use a different language. A lot of them actually dislikes the Germans.
@Gabor: What valuable information! Thank you very much.
I have two questions for you. To what extent do the Swiss comprehend that the U.S. government’s controlling cabal has been working (successfully, need I add) to destroy their nation—not merely its independence—since the Tribally led assault on Swiss banking’s confidentiality began thirty or more years ago? To what extent do you see Maastricht and Brussels cooperating in that assault?
@Pierre de Craon: I regret to say that I accidentally dropped some copy from paragraph 2 of my previous comment, copy that rendered the passage in question syntactically and significationally incomplete. It should have read as follows:
—that the historical “evolution” of the United States from a confederation of fragmented, inherently sovereign, largely autonomous mini-entities to a centralized, crypto-oligarchical, pseudodemocratic maxi-state was both desirable and inevitable—
with the words in italics being the dropped copy.
Right Gabor, for that matter they don’t much like the german speaking Austrians either. Old historical grudges are hard to shake.
Nationalism based on language and common ancestry has brought many conflicts in the world. Gen. Charles de Gualle wanted Canadian Quebec province to join France. French colonialists created Lebanon out of Syria for Christian minority. East Timor was taken off Indonesia for oil on the name of Christianity. Bangladesh came out of East Pakistan on the same reason. And recently, Sudan is split into two by US-Israel based on African pagans and Muslim Arabs.
http://rehmat1.wordpress.com/2011/07/10/obama-blesses-break-up-of-sudan/
@Pierre de Craon: In your phrase “…the continuing choice of the German name Bohemia…” are you referring to it’s usage (Böhmen in German) by German speakers only, the English speaking world only, or by everyone but the Czechs?
Speaking of EU “unity” and separatist movements, don’t forget the Basques.
@Rehmat: “East Timor was taken off Indonesia for oil on the name of Christianity.”
Just about the opposite happened. East Timor was illegally invaded by Indonesia after getting a green light from Gerald Ford and Henry Kissinger. Indonesia then massacred about a quarter of East Timor’s population. Only much public pressure on Bill Clinton got him to get Indonesia to back down.
@Pierre de Craon:
Greetings Pierre!
Regarding Belgium … Yes indeed; doubtless they would also be shocked (‘agogged’) to learn that the Netherlands was once a bailiwick of the Spanish Hapsburgs. [For those who wish to read more, see: Charles II (6 November 1661 – 1 November 1700)]
I have an historically priceless photograph of President Wilson arriving at Dover, England, on 26 December, 1918. He is being greeted at the dockside by an English delegation representing the King, who are kitted out in regalia and wigs. As the shutter clicked, a King’s Greeting (proclamation) was being read to him; Wilson standing, his top-hat in hand, with a solemn expression.
Also in this small delegation (as befits the formal reception afforded to a POTUS) is a man carrying a Ceremonial Mace. Like fasces carried by the Lictors of old, it is shown resting on this man’s right shoulder. It is this holder of the mace that captures the entire photograph. This stout, late thirties Englishman is staring at Wilson with utter contempt. You will find this image in a marvellous book from 1988 entitled: “An Ocean Apart” by David Dimbleby and David Reynolds. Within just a couple of years of his European trip, this philandering fool and too-proud former academic felt impelled by guilt and remorse to admit he had himself sounded the death-knell of the United States by signing the Federal Reserve Act into being. This is why he is (and shall remain) the only President to have ever been buried in Washington DC.
As regards the long-recognized neurotic, and fickle nature of the USA …
… I can strongly recommend (assuming you have not read it already) the book by Jonah Goldberg: “Liberal Fascism ~ The Secret History of the American Left from Mussolini to the Politics of Meaning.” Within its 400 delightful and informative pages, Goldberg somehow succeeds in explaining the political origins of that vile harridan named Hillary Clinton, without resorting to bad language.
@elise:
Southern Whites have ‘evolved’ to live in de South USA. Higher testosterone levels, Southern (White) hospitality to civilize it. Some negative weird side effects, but all in all.
The big elephant in the room is that, although there are ‘regional animosity’ between the White Europeans, Minorities are seen as ‘other than’. They do not register as ‘white other people’ they register as just ‘other’. So the normal antagonist attitude toward whites is either subverted *by multi-cult doctrine, and natural indifference.
Written German is the same whether in Switzerland, Austria or Germany itself. Some phrases are different like the old Austrian greeting **Servus!**, which isn’t German at all but Latin.
It is for the Swiss alone to decide their immigration policy. Swiss citizenship is and always has been difficult to achieve. It is not easy even to become a resident foreigner there. But as elsewhere in Western Europe, their population is aging. They need workers in the service sector to care for the elderly. The only solution is to allow greater immigration.
@Lookaroundu: I meant the English-speaking world, sir. Who knows what today’s German movers and shakers call Böhmen? (Answer: Probably whatever Bibi Netanyahu tells Angela Merkel to call it.)
The essential point was that calling Bohemia Bohemia—in any language—is a genuine anomaly. It is a usage that is utterly incompatible with the usual demands of the denizens of today’s political and pseudocultural beau monde, a world where PC-mad idiots scream you down if you use such ancien régime place-names as Burma, Bombay, and Saigon; where only knuckle draggers don’t call Gypsies the Roma, Basques the Euskaldunak, and Lapps whatever it is that Matt Parrott called them a few threads ago; and where once-commonsensical Merriam Webster dictionaries insist that readers spell Muhammad with an underdotted h and Esfahan with a breve over the second a, not to mention the replacement of the initial I with an E. Which Tribal big shots have the Czechs riled and vexed, I wonder, to merit such pariah treatment?
I haven’t forgotten the Basques, but when I stumbled across the positively drooling Wikipedia piece on them half a dozen years ago, I concluded that the Tribe must have assigned them full-bore Endangered Species status. Evidently the people whose lives the Basque make a misery are people that deserve punishment for centuries of racism, ageism, sexism, elitism, and anti-youknowwhatism.
@Anglo Saxon: I have seen the Wilson image you refer to, but I little heeded the expression on the face of the mace bloke. I’ll look again. Of course, only blue bloods ever took Wilson for aught but a monster or a fool—until, that is, fifty-plus years of indoctrinationeducation made him a presidential superhero over here and a proto-NWO hero among EU-philes.
A Scots-centered footnote to my earlier comment/reply. Your Stone of Scone anecdote reminded me that I first learned something of substance about the SNP in a long article by Thomas Fleming in an issue of Chronicles from 1995 (I think). I am abashed to say that I actually believed for several years subsequently that there was a genuinely growing independence movement in Caledonia. Given your presence on the sceptr’d isle, you would know incomparably more about this than I do, but my distinct present-day impression is that so long as Tories and Socialists continue to toss the Scots the periodic prime ministerial bone, they will contentedly resign themselves to the comfortable vassalage that Mel Gibson’s William Wallace could ne’er persuade the lairds to shake themselves free of. Am I right or wrong?
@Pierre de Craon: As usual, you are correct Pierre.
For the life of me, and as an Englishman, I could never make sense of Scottish Nationalism; at least, its anticipated political manifestation. And then, per chance I began to follow a wonderful “agitation for justice” campaign in part orchestrated by an energetic blogger named Paul Drockton [http://www.moneyteachers.org/]. Mr. Drockton, who is based in Utah (yes, he is a Mormon) has done a great deal to bring the murky shadows in which Scotland’s political elite apparently reside to world attention.
Paul Drockton is actually a Silver Bullion broker and independent financial advisor (NOTE: I am writing this for intellectual interest, I have had no business dealings with Mr. Drockton, but I do feel I owe him my full support for all the free advice he has given me and others over the years) … but he also regularly blogs on political and cultural issues. You will find his article archive under this sub-section: http://www.moneyteachers.org/Deadmanmusings1.htm
He is well worth reading if you have the time.
Apparently, in Scotland, the dirty, corrupt, and bestial rabbit-hole goes very deep, and is traversed by most of Scotland’s most powerful, including the Judiciary. Surprise, surprise, the words Freemasonry and Satanism do spring to mind.
There is an ongoing landmark child-abuse case involving a child named Hollie Greig. Here are extracts lifted from Paul Drockton’s own website (Deadmanmusings):
Someone involved in this sordid case was also connected to the Dunblane school massacre which took place on 13 March 1996 (for more info, open the Wikipedia page “Dunblane”). If memory serves me well, Lord Robertson, the former head of NATO has also been implicated in this child abuse case. This is precisely why Robertson resigned from his post, as head of NATO. If you don’t recognise the name, then you will do after visiting his Wikipedia page: http://wikipedia/en/wiki/George_Robertson,_Baron_Robertson_of_Port_Ellen
Informed persons such as Paul Drockton have identified the Satanism and NWO plotting going on within Scotland, and the sinister political connections that are spread right through the Scottish establishment like a cancer. It is very important to realize, Dunblane was actually a staged event as the PTB wanted a catalyst to transform the gun laws throughout the British Isles.
In the wake of Dunblane, and following a government sponsored inquiry, it was soon ruled that ordinary UK citizens could no longer own firearms.
So, when viewed in unconventional ways, Scotland certainly looks to all intents and purposes like a basket case, and that they badly need a man like Mel Gibson to gather what remains of the Clans for one last do-or-die battle.
I might add that this Hollie Greig story from Scotland (complete with its indirect connections to NATO and Brussels) also connects us back to Wallonia, as it is in that very region where some of Europe’s most notorious child-abuse cases have taken place. I have seen it written that Belgium (read “Wallonia”) is a hot-bed of child sex and ritual abuse activities.
Be warned, the ‘capital’ of Europe happens to be situated inside Wallonia!!
You really couldn’t make this stuff up could you.
“You really couldn’t make this stuff up could you”
Actually certain types of people find it easy to make that kind of thing up and to believe in it. Thomas Hamilton had his own manifesto which was full of allegations about the conspiracy against him (between billionaires, the CIA and top politicians) .
We are all looking forward to your article, keep taking the tablets old mate.
@Anglo Saxon: I appreciate this information. I recall the fact of the Dunblane atrocity well, though less so its details. Squirreling through some of the links you sent led me to the curious bit of information that the files of the official UK investigation (whether some or all isn’t clear to me) have had a 100-year lock placed on them. Just like the U.S. executive branch files relating to the first week of December 1941—the week of the Pearl Harbor unpleasantness (actually, some of those files have been sealed in perpetuity).
I’m sure that this is mere routine. Only a tin-foil hat type would sniff conspiracy here.
@tadzio: What hindered Charlemagne from enacting primogeniture? The eldest child rules as sovereign and the likelihood of nation-building decreases. Do I smell sulpher or is it really matzoh?
Hey! We want the polish corridor and Prussia back!
Then, Markus, we would have to give back California…Hey! Not such a bad idea — if K. macDoodle goes with it.
@Caleb
Yeah,and lets give West Palestine(incorrectly known as “Israel”) back to the Palestinians!I think as a Jew you would welcome such historical justice.
“As nationalists, our duty is to work to build a better country for our own people, not to worry about or interfere in the affairs of others. The Middle East is simply not our problem or our business.” Nick Griffin.
If there are White Africans then there surely are Palestinian Jews. They govern the State of Israel. No need to give it back.
@Caleb:
Those “Palestinian Jews” should live as dhimmis of the Muslims.Allah wills it,and macCaleb should obey.
Unless you have converted to Islam you would be **dhimmi**, too — dhimwit!
Philip darling when was the last time you read Dutch colonial history? Not only East Timor, but the rest of 13000 Indo-China islands were occupied by Dutch in the name of Christianity. When the rest of Muslim-majority islands chose to create an independent country under the name Indonesia – Dutch kept the East Timor island for over two decades.
Here some some history of that region – which is never told in European schools.
http://rehmat1.wordpress.com/2009/02/21/indonesia-de-islamization-of-muslim-majority/
KMac says:
If the Walloons and the Flemish cannot live together, how could anyone think that Europe could live with millions of unassimilable Muslim immigrants, not to mention Africans, etc.?
And that just about says it all.
Rehmat, Indonesia is not and never has been an Islamic state. The post-War movement for independence from the Netherlands was not religious but nationalist — with a leftist tinge.
Not all the islands that comprise that country even want to be part of Indonesia; the South Moluccas are a prime example. Not all the islands even have a predominantly Muslim population, like beautiful Bali with its water temples and religious shrines long pre-dating the coming of Islam.
The irony is that present-day Islam in Indonesia is prone to terrorism and violence though Islam first came there through merchants and traders and in contrast to how it spread westward from Arabia, quite peacefully.
Doug, speech patterns can be more important than racial appearance in determining who is or isn’t “one of us”. The election of our current President illustrates that.
If Africans and Muslims learn the language of their adopted country — as their children surely will — then acceptance could come before French and Flemish speakers in Belgium, Tamils and Sinhalese in Sri Lanka, English and French in Canada ever learn to coexist.