The Myth of Germany as an Evil Nation

“The image of Germany as a sinister, predatory, warlike nation only took root in the twentieth century. Nineteenth century Germany, by contrast, was seen as a place of peace and enlightenment.”

Source: The Myth of Germany as an Evil Nation  – Smash Cultural Marxism

Although this article suffers, in my estimation, from its none-too-subtle anti-Jewish bias, what the author has to say about the demonization of Germany is squarely on the mark.

I have shared elsewhere on this blog (“Who’s to blame for World War One?”) how the idea that Germany is solely or even primarily to blame for the First World War is entirely counter-factual, the result of Allied propaganda created to mask their own complicity and to justify a horrific and completely unnecessary war; and is is widely recognized by sober and objective historians that the rise of Hitler and the Nazi party was a direct and perhaps inevitable result of the draconian punitive measures leveled against Germany by those same Allies, when victorious.

Prior to World War One, “Germany was admired by the world as a center of learning, for its high culture and for its achievements in every field; but also for its culture of honesty, hard work, orderliness and thrift, which existed even at the lowest level of society. British scholars and journalists had been very favorably disposed toward all things German, including their history, culture, and institutions throughout the nineteenth century,” and “British author Thomas Arnold (June 13, 1795 – June 12, 1842) saw Germany not as a nation with a unique predisposition toward authoritarianism and regimentation, but rather as a ‘cradle of law, virtue, and freedom,’ and considered it a ‘distinction of the first rank’ that the English belonged to the Germanic family of peoples.”

Continue reading “The Myth of Germany as an Evil Nation”

Advertisements

French Girl: Milo Is Right, Europe Is Falling – YouTube

I am not exactly a fan of Milo Yiannopoulos, for a number of reasons – not least because he’s not exactly, shall we say, the most wholesome of examples in his personal habits. But my father had a saying: “even a stopped clock is right twice a day,” and he is square on with respect to the threat posed to the West – both Europe, most immediately and critically, and also America and the rest of the European diaspora – by mass immigration of Muslims, mostly from the Middle East and Africa.

As has been pointed out in this blog previously, the majority of Muslims are not actively and violently attempting to destroy Western civilization. However, the majority of those who are actively and violently attempting to destroy Western civilization are Muslim. And their justifications for doing so are explicitly Islamic in nature, regardless of the attempts by some on the Left to obscure this fact. That makes Islam an existential threat to the West, even if many of its individual exponents are not. This is a distinction which seems lost on far too many, these days.

This young woman, who came to the U.S. with her family in 2007 to escape what was already becoming a difficult situation – even before the borders of Europe were basically thrown open a couple of years ago, under the auspices of German Chancellor Angela Merkel and her vice-grip on the European Union – and who has been visiting her former country annually since then, further confirms what many of us have had good reason to fear: that the situation is bad, and it’s only getting worse. Anyone who does not realize this either has their head completely in the sand, or is being willfully obtuse.

The Queen grants Royal Assent to the Brexit Bill – Royal Central

Her Majesty The Queen has given Royal Assent to the bill authorising a British exit from the European Union. The Queen’s signature allows Prime Minister Theresa May to formally start the process of leaving the EU.

Source: The Queen grants Royal Assent to the Brexit Bill – Royal Central

I mentioned a few days ago that Her Majesty The Queen was expected to grant Royal Assent to the bill authorizing (American spelling!) “Brexit.” This did in fact occur, albeit a bit later than originally anticipated: Thursday, March 16th, 2017.

The European Union Notification of Withdrawal Bill was accepted by MPs and the House of Lords on Monday, and The Queen had been expected to sign the Bill on Tuesday. There is speculation that Nicola Sturgeon, First Minister of Scotland, caused such a media furore by calling for a second independence referendum that The Queen postponed the law until today.

Those who believe that Her Majesty is powerless, a mere figurehead, should take note:

Royal Assent is required to make legislation in the United Kingdom law and The Queen has the power to make and repeal laws. Laws usually originate from the Houses of Parliament, either the Commons or the Lords, and experience a lengthy process of debate and review. Once the legislation has been passed by both houses of Parliament, it is then sent to The Queen in Her daily red boxes of state papers. There can be a slight delay here as Her Majesty has a great deal of papers to work through. It remains the case, however, that no bill can become law without The Queen’s approval.

Royal Assent, granted after a bill has been passed by Peers and MPs, is different from Queen’s Consent. Queen’s Consent is required for members of Parliament to debate a bill and has to be granted on issues which affect interests of The Crown.  The Queen has been asked to grant permission for a whole multitude of debates, covering everything from higher education, civil partnerships and identity cards to animal welfare and pensions.

In at least three cases since 1990, The Queen has refused Consent. This happened in 1999, when The Queen refused to allow plans to transfer command of the Armed Forces to the Prime Minister to be discussed in Parliament. The Bill would have effectively meant that The Queen would no longer be Commander-in-Chief. She has also jettisoned bills referring to House of Lords reform and the removal of Crown immunity. Some critics of the monarchy argue that The Queen should not have such a powerful veto, but it is generally accepted that Her Majesty acts in the best interests of the kingdom.

 

Duke and Duchess of Cambridge visit Paris

The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge are visiting Paris for two days of official engagements. [Yesterday] their Royal Highnesses visited the Élysée Palace for the start of the tour where they were welcomed to Paris by French President François Hollande.

Patrick, Bishop and Missionary of Ireland, 461 | For All the Saints

Source: Patrick, Bishop and Missionary of Ireland, 461 | For All the Saints

Despite the “pop-culture” association of St. Patrick’s Day with leprechauns and green beer, this is actually the feast-day of a very impressive and influential saint of the early Church: Saint Patrick (Patricius) was a Briton who became the missionary to and evangelist (and ultimately, Bishop) of Ireland, which in turn ultimately led to the amazing flowering of faith and culture which was early Christian Ireland – and the salvation of the Classical inheritance of Western Europe, during and following the period often known (somewhat incorrectly and misleadingly) as the “Dark Ages.”

St. Patrick’s Day – Duke and Duchess of Cambridge visit the Irish Guards

This morning The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge visited the Irish Guards barracks in London to present them with Shamrock as part of St Patrick’s Day celebrations.

The Strength of St. Patrick – Crisis Magazine

st-patrick-window

“To learn of the many missionaries and martyrs of the Church who have gone abroad throughout hostile nations is to be moved by the hardships unceasingly endured, and the intensity of heroic virtue constantly displayed, to accomplish the work of God. Even so, I cannot help but esteem the labors of St. Patrick as among the greatest of those who have traveled far and wide for the discipleship of Christ.”

Source: The Strength of St. Patrick – Crisis Magazine

“On this day, we look to find the strength of St. Patrick in ourselves—that is, in our bishops and priests, in our religious and laity—to articulate the challenge of faith in the midst of difficult, even impossible, odds. In this age of ours, who would dare to go before senators and judges, declaring in the likeness of the saint: “Some put their trust in nations and some in avarice for every earthly thing; but we in the Lord our God”? Whether berated with the din of laughter, or caught in the clamor of scorn, it is our special task to give to the world this expression of the serenity and hope of Christian fortitude: a power that is never irrational, never violent, but also never afraid. And if it is thought by some to have diminished, or even gone wholly out of the Church, I stridently assert that in some persons its example remains unbroken…

“Although it is undoubtedly true that each and every one of the Church’s saints display a faith and virtue which is for all the ages of the world, I would especially believe that St. Patrick—though he lived some sixteen centuries past—is truly a saint for our times.”