King Arthur? Avalon? Who? What…?

https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0895/0864/products/42-21436247_1024x1024.jpeg?v=1450887342
Illustration of King Arthur Receiving Excalibur from the Lady of the Lake. N.C. Wyeth, c. 1910.

I had an instructive incident this afternoon, as I was teaching one of my behind-the-wheel students: since the struggle to save the West does not come with a salary, I teach driver’s education to put meat and bread on the table, and otherwise attempt to keep the wolves from the door.

Seeing a Toyota Avalon ahead of us at a stop light, I quipped to my student, “Well, there’s Avalon! I wonder where King Arthur is?” There was a brief silence, followed by a (slightly sheepish, to her credit) “I didn’t get that one!” from my student.

She didn’t get it. An Anglophone high school student, and one with a European last name and apparent ancestral heritage, to boot, didn’t get a reference – and not an obscure one – to the Arthurian legends, one of the most formative legendary and literary cycles in the history of the English-speaking peoples (and significant to French and German-speaking ones, as well). If there is any doubt that our educational system is in serious disarray, this one incident is proof positive, I would confidently assert.

I passed off the episode lightly, for my student’s sake – I’m teaching her to drive a car, not appreciate her own cultural heritage, and there were tasks to accomplish, and traffic and road conditions in need of attention – but it bothered me, and it continues to rankle.

But thinking about it tonight, I realized that from the perspective of the propagandists and ideologues that make up much of our educational establishment, this is an example, not of disarray, but of how well their plan is working. King Arthur should most emphatically not be taught, according to this outlook!

He is not only a member of one of the most despised of all classes (and one of the very few it is permissible – indeed, encouraged – to despise), a “DWEM” (Dead White European Male), but he actually fought against the invasion and subjugation diversity and cultural enrichment of his Romano-British land and people by the Anglo-Saxons. Really fought! With swords and spears and things. And in the process became an icon and an inspiration for defense against immigrant invasion opposition to multiculturalism for centuries thereafter.

How vile! He must have been one of those white supremacists. Oh, wait – the Anglo-Saxons were white, too! And so were the Vikings… and the Normans… and even the French and Spanish, who tried and failed to invade England. Best we just leave British / English history out of the schools entirely, unless we can find ways to convincingly pretend that they weren’t nearly as European as they very clearly and historically were, at least until the last decade or so.

We certainly don’t want to infect any of today’s students of European ancestry with any pride in their heritage, do we? Much less suggest to them, however indirectly, that it might be – perhaps even, ought to be – defended from invaders? Perish the thought!

We are seriously screwed up, and are getting screwed-er up-er, all the time!

 

Advertisements

A response to HuffPost’s “What White, Western Audiences Don’t Understand About Marie Kondo’s ‘Tidying Up'”

A still from Netflix's "Tidying Up with Marie Kondo."

Dilloway: “Backlash to the Netflix show ignores an essential aspect of the KonMari method: Its Shinto roots.”

Source: What White, Western Audiences Don’t Understand About Marie Kondo’s ‘Tidying Up’ | HuffPost

Those darned white Westerners! Always screwing everything up…

Nonetheless, despite being a white Westerner, I have a great deal of admiration and appreciation for Shinto – and many aspects of Japanese culture – myself.

And although I, personally, am not likely to reduce my book collection to thirty (yes, I realize Marie Kondo only stated that she herself only kept 30 books at a time, she was not decreeing it for everyone), I definitely recognize that I could benefit – both my living space and my head-space – from some pretty substantial de-cluttering!

My problem with this essay is that its author, Margaret Dilloway, chose to racialize the issue – ironically, since that’s exactly what she was complaining about others doing to Ms Kondo – and to do so in a way that is either ignorant of certain facts, or else intentionally disingenuous. Continue reading “A response to HuffPost’s “What White, Western Audiences Don’t Understand About Marie Kondo’s ‘Tidying Up’””

The Glories of the West: the beauty of European women

This is Europe – dirndl-wearing maidens

The beauty of European women is striking, and so is their variety! There is more than a little irony in the fact that globalists and Leftist claim that the reason for their desire to replace Europeans (and people of European descent in America, Australian, South Africa, and elsewhere) with non-European immigrants is a quest for “diversity.”

I have spoken before to the point that if their desire was truly for diversity and multiculturalism, they would do all they could to foster diverse cultures and peoples in their own historic and geographic context, not seek to mix them up all over the world (but of course, mostly in what have historically been European-majority lands).

But just consider this one point: they claim they want “diversity.” European women (and men, too, of course) have a stunning diversity of hair and eye colours. Even of the two lovely young women in this picture, one is a dark blonde, the other a light brunette; it’s hard to tell from the pic, but I suspect their eye colors differ, as well.

Image may contain: 5 people, text

In the name of “diversity,” the Leftist lunatics want to import an ever-increasing number of people who, other characteristics aside, are uniformly characterized by black hair and brown eyes. Where is the diversity in this, I ask you? From Scandinavia to Sicily, from Ireland to Illyria, Europe has all the diversity it needs. And so do the rest of us!

Battle Lines Are Clearly Drawn: Multicultural Utopia VS Populist Traditionalists | Oath Keepers

HuffPost Germany Writer Calls For Replacing Germans With Migrants to Stop Populism

In a very revealing article posted by Paul Joseph Watson, on InfoWars.com, Paul points out a HuffPost Germany writer, Veit Lindner, who asserts, that to stop the momentum of the “new right,” “it would actually be best to just replace” the German people with foreigners.

Source: Battle Lines Are Clearly Drawn – Multicultural Utopia VS Populist Traditionalists – Oath Keepers

Yes, I know that many people will simply ignore / dis-count this, due to its source. That would be a mistake. The article is real, and it is scary.

Referring to the “New Right” (those who are of a traditionalist / populist mindset, who wish to preserve and protect their people and their ethnic and cultural heritage) as a “stinking flatulence,” the author of the HuffPost piece (frighteningly entitled “Repeople us! Why the German people should be abolished”) asserts that

“it would actually be best to just replace them [ethnic Germans]. Attention, Germans! Fall in for comprehensive repeopling! [Umvolkung]

“Black, brown, yellow, white, Asians and Arabs, Africans, you people from America, India, people of all faiths – come and help us! Stream in and repeople us, but thoroughly! […]

A little more genetic and cultural seed-scattering here and a little more self-abolition through reproduction fatigue there – that, as Deniz Yücel once called it, would be the ‘most beautiful side of the perishing of a people.'”

As if there could ever be anything beautiful about the perishing of a people! Imagine the outcry – wholly justified – if someone on the right were to write such a thing, and publish it in a (relatively) mainstream publication, about any demographic group except white Europeans? But no, it is not only acceptable but praiseworthy to sacrifice Europeans for this utopian multicultural future.

This is a nihilistic, vicious, hateful, and intrinsically violent vision: calling for the disruption and destruction of a people, a culture, and a society that have developed organically over centuries and millennia, to forcibly impose a socially-engineered vision believed by a small number of zealots – violent extremists, rather – to be preferable to that highly developed culture: a culture which has brought aberrations like Marx and Hitler, true, but has also brought us Mozart, Handel, Beethoven, and Strauss; glorious art and architecture; remarkable scientific and technological advances; along with, yes, pretzels with German mustard, a wide range of tasty sausages, and other features of a remarkably rich and flavorful cuisine; excellent beer; folk dances, dirndls, and lederhosen, and the joys of Oktoberfest.

And now all of this must be swept away, to make room for a new, supposedly “multicultural” future. Why? No one has ever provided any sort of remotely logical reason! Because of Hitler? That was 80 years ago! Because of the “New Right”? Well, guess what: the New Right arose precisely because of and in reaction to this extreme multicultural program the Left is attempting to impose, not just on Germany, not just on Europe, but on the West as a whole. The New Right are the antibodies, fighting the disease of Leftist insanity.

But of course, anyone opposed to the Leftists’ utopian vision will be pilloried as a racist, a xenophobe, a white supremacist. However, it is not racist, xenophobic, or any sort of “supremacist” to oppose and resist the destruction of your people, your ethnic and cultural heritage. Rather, it is a moral duty, just as defending one’s own family would be: for one’s nation and people are one’s family, writ large.

If you are a “person of colour” and are calling for this “repeopling,” you are advocating ethno-cultural genocide; if you are of European heritage, then you are advocating ethno-cultural suicide. In either case, you are bat-shit crazy (pardon my language), you are diseased, you are a vile and evil person. I want nothing to do with you, and I will do my best to unmask and denounce you as the horror you are.

Let us remember that “utopia” means, literally, “no place.” It does not and cannot exist. What utopians call for is something that is unnatural, unreal, that cannot happen. It is an illusion, a false promise of peace and cooperation that in fact could only end in death and destruction. Doubt me? Well, we just “celebrated” (some of us mourned) Bastille Day, the 14th of July, the date marking the storming of the Bastille and thus the dawn of the French Revolution.

As I have commented elsewhere, those who are actually aware of the existence of Bastille Day, here in the U.S., tend to celebrate it (if they give it a second thought) as if the French Revolution was the American Revolution, Pt. 2. It was not. Despite the cries of “Liberté, egalité, fraternité!” (“Liberty, equality, fraternity!”), it started in blood, it was advanced by blood, and it ended in blood: a dark and sinister time in the world’s history. Today’s Leftists are treading the same bloody path – one which has been tread by the likes of Stalin, Mao, and Pol Pot, among others.

The mindset revealed in this HuffPost Germany essay is a classic example of the old adage that those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it. The only good thing that I see in all of this is that the extreme Leftists are finally showing their true colours. They are not tolerant, they are not peaceful, they are not compassionate, and they only want “diversity” on their own terms. I can only hope that the fence-sitters and moderates wake up to what is actually being proposed, and realize how bad it actually is, and how bad the people proposing it actually are!

Mark my words: if enough of us do not say, “No! You are wrong, you are crazy, this cannot and will not be allowed to happen,” we will find ourselves in a violent and bloody conflict that will make the French Revolution look like a walk in the park.

 


 

Nota Bene: What constitutes “genocide”? Well, here’s the UN’s definition, from its “Convention on Genocide,” which it considers (rightly) a crime against humanity:

Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide

Article II

In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical [sic], racial or religious group, as such:

  1. Killing members of the group;
  2. Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
  3. Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
  4. Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
  5. Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

If you don’t think at least (b), (c), and possibly (d) describe what’s going on in Europe at present already, and particularly what is being proposed in the HuffPost Germany essay referenced above, you are not paying close enough attention!

 


Do you appreciate and/or enjoy these posts, and want to support The Anglophilic Anglican in my defense of Western Christendom, and enjoyment of Western culture and civilization?

Then please consider supporting me on Patreon!

Many thanks in advance.

 

Britain slips (further…?) into “1984” mode

“Hey, Tommy Tommy! Hey, Tommy Robinson!”

— chant from a recent Free Tommy Robinson rally in the UK

There is an old saying that goes, “I love my country, it’s the government I can’t stand.”

I love Great Britain, its history, its culture, its Queen (God save Her Majesty!), its monarchical, aristocratic, folk, and just plain quirky traditions, and yes, I believe, its potential – if it can shake off these “dark times” (in Katie Hopkins’ words) it is going through. But its government? That, I have less and less respect for all the time.

In this latest confirmation that George Orwell (author of the classic work of dystopian fiction, Nineteen Eight-Four) was not wrong, just several decades premature, social activist and citizen journalist Tommy Robinson was recently livestreaming outside the latest grooming-gang trial in the UK. As reported in, inter alia, the National Review,

“The police turned up in a van and swiftly arrested Robinson for ‘breach of the peace.’ Within hours Robinson had been put before one Judge Geoffrey Marson, who in under five minutes tried, convicted, and sentenced Robinson to 13 months. He was immediately taken to prison.”

Tommy Robinson is a controversial figure, to say the least. The founder of the English Defense League, he is definitely to the nationalist and populist right of center. For those whose social and political perspective is globalist and statist, or “progressive” and multiculturalist, that’s enough to make him persona non grata.

But he has not only been opposed to the enforced mass immigration that the now apparently dead-in-the-water Brexit was, in part, about, but he has been focusing on exposing the mostly-Pakistani Muslim “grooming gangs” – as the British press delicately phrases it – or as Hopkins more accurately puts it, “rape squads.”

This is no exaggeration. Would that it were! But as Douglas Murray points out in a National Review article that pulls no punches on either side, “every month brings news of another town in which gangs of men (almost always of Pakistani origin) have been found to have raped young, often underage, white girls.”

Since this is an issue the authorities would rather not confront, they are needless to say not inclined to look favorably on someone whose activities – as a social activist and citizen journalist – are forcing the issue into public attention. Have some of his actions been unwise, even foolish? Yes. Has the British government’s response to him been disproportionate and extreme? A thousand times, yes! Murray continues,

“The primary issue is that for years the British state allowed gangs of men to rape thousands of young girls across Britain. For years the police, politicians, Crown Prosecution Service, and every other arm of the state ostensibly dedicated to protecting these girls failed them. As a number of government inquires have concluded, they turned their face away from these girls because they were terrified of the accusations of racism that would come their way if they did address them. They decided it wasn’t worth the aggravation…

“What can be said with absolute certainty is that Tommy Robinson has been treated with greater suspicion and a greater presumption of guilt by the United Kingdom than any Islamic extremist or mass rapist ever has been. That should be — yet is not — a national scandal. If even one mullah or sheikh had been treated with the presumption of guilt that Robinson has received, Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, and the rest of them would be all over the U.K. authorities. But different standards apply to Robinson.”

And now he has been sent to prison for 13 months, where – if he is in an open ward, in which are a very large proportion of Muslims – he may end up coming out in a body bag. As Tucker Carlson and Katie Hopkins point out in the video above, you don’t have to like Tommy Robinson, agree with him, or even know who he is to understand that what has happened to him is wrong. To quote Murray again,

“Tommy Robinson will be in prison for another year. And all those people happy with the status quo will breathe a sigh of relief. ‘Thank goodness that troublemaker has gone away.’ Yet their real problem has not gone away. There is no chance of their real problem going away. Because they have no plan for making it go away.

“They have a vague hope, of course, which is that at some point soon in the coming generations this will all simmer down and the incoming communities will develop similar views about the status of women as the rest of society. And perhaps we will get there someday. But it is telling that the apparently tolerable roadkill en route includes one young man from Luton — and thousands of raped girls.”

Report: Most Brits Say Immigration Has Divided Communities

immigration mosque uk

“A strong majority of Brits think immigration has divided communities, particularly in areas most affected by mass arrivals, polling by a left-wing group has found.”

Source: Report: Most Brits Say Immigration Has Divided Communities

“A strong majority of Brits think immigration has divided communities, particularly in areas most affected by mass arrivals, polling by a left-wing group has found. The study, by the think tank Demos, also found that large numbers of people believe the government should be working to preserve traditional ways of life in a time of globalisation and deep economic change.”

Please note: this is a study by a left-wing group! Even though they may be in ideological agreement with the pro-mass-immigration, enforced-multiculturalism agenda, even they are unable to ignore the fact that it is deeply unpopular with the British people: indeed, they actually tweeted out that 71% of Brits believe the sense of community in their area has deteriorated over their lifetimes. That is nearly three-quarters!

The study further noted that “A large number of Brits are also ‘particularly incensed by cultural pluralism, seen to be favoured over British values and traditions, and political correctness, regarded as taxing and repressive.'” This is, of course, the case not only in Britain, but throughout much of the West – including the United States, where the election of President Trump is an indicator of a significant push-back.

“Only three issues appear to truly unite the nation – the belief that the country is in a state of decline and that further change lies on the horizon, feeling that immigration has negatively impacted British society, and believing the nation’s cultures and traditions are not being sufficiently defended and promoted.”

Finally, however, the study notes that

“Despite the widespread critiques of contemporary British society, and anxieties about the future, many citizens remain both resilient and begrudgingly optimistic – a point that sets them apart from participants in our French and German focus groups.”

In other words, despite its frustration and aggravation, and despite a massive influx of alien elements, Britain – so far – remains Britain: doughty, pugnacious, and determined, keeping a stiff upper lip. That, at least, is encouraging! All may not yet be lost, in “England’s green and pleasant land.” God grant that it ever remain so! And may God strengthen the hands of those seeking to keep Britain British.

 

Boys are Growing Frustrated by Living in a Feminized Society… and That’s Showing Up in Their Friendships | Intellectual Takeout

Boys are Growing Frustrated by Living in a Feminized Society… and That’s Showing Up in Their Friendships

Rules are great and necessary, but the fact is, we’re disallowing boys to be boys.

Source: Boys are Growing Frustrated by Living in a Feminized Society… and That’s Showing Up in Their Friendships | Intellectual Takeout

“Let’s face it: Little boys are different from little girls and adults. And unless we allow them to have outlets for natural boy play and ideas, we should not be surprised when they seem frustrated and can’t succeed in modern society. Is it time to stop treating the traditional, rough-and-tumble boy like a dangerous creature who must be toned down to suit feminized society?”

My answer to this question can easily be guessed by my readers, I suspect!

This is an excellent short essay, perhaps all the more notable in that it is written by a woman, Annie Holmquist. By all means, please follow the link and read it! The voices (both male and female) pushing back against the über-feminization of Western society are growing in number and in volume, and that is all to the good. But there is still a long way to go.

The culutural Marxists who seek to destroy what is left of Western civilization and Western Christendom are powerful, well-entrenched in dominant positions among our academic / educational, political, and media elite, and have learned well how to apply psychological and social jujitsu against a West which, by its nature, is predisposed to compassion, justice, and a laudable (within bounds) tendency to root for the underdog. Convince Westerners that you are oppressed, and they will bend over backwards to do anything they can to “liberate” and assist you – even to their own detriment!

The problem is that the Left, and its favored classes – women, people of color, and anyone who is “different” from what used to be the “norm” of Western (and Christian) society – are no longer the underdogs; in fact, by many if not most measures, they are or are well on their way to being the top dogs (*), even as they continue to complain about being “oppressed.”

I don’t think any fair-minded observer can deny that the major groups which today’s Leftists portray as the bogeyman – whites, males, and Christians – made some serious missteps, and committed some serious abuses, in the past. But neither are we uniquely culpable among the world’s people; far from it! If our sins may at times seem more boldly emblazoned on the fabric of history, it is because there was a time, not so distant, historically, when we were both technologically and socio-politically dominant. Those days, however, are in the past, and falling farther astern with every turn of the screw.

Nor is it justice to continue to visit the sins of the fathers – whether real or imagined – upon the sons, literally as well as figuratively, ad infinitum. Not only is it morally vicious, it is unwise. I am sure there are those on the Left who view the angst being suffered by boys and young men, especially those of European ancestry, through the lens of retributive justice; and who would like to think – or at least, hope – that white males will either somehow disappear altogether, or else at least lapse into a sort of voluntary dhimmitude, in which they accept their new, inferior, status as somehow their due.

Something of the sort has happened in Germany, in the decades since the Second World War, due to feelings of shared national guilt (encouraged and exploited by the victorious Allies); but even there, rumblings of discontent are beginning to be heard. What goes around, comes around, and people can only be kept down for so long before they start to rebel – as Leftists, of all people, should have sense enough to realize from their own experience!

To cite Germany again, one would think we would have learned the lessons of the Versailles Treaty, the Wiemar Republic, and the rise of the Nazis: perhaps the classic example of retributive justice gone awry, coming about as it did largely in reaction to the humiliation imposed upon post-WW I Germany by France, and to the ascendancy of the cultural Marxists’ political forebears in the former. The modern Left, it seems, is taking a page out of France’s book, c. 1918 – hardly a wise model, in my opinion.

But I digress from the topic at hand, which is that boys need to be allowed to be boys. Human nature cannot be changed, on a fundamental level; those who try are doomed to disappointment. It can be educated; it can be refined; it can be channeled into productive, as opposed to unproductive, directions. But it remains human nature. And just as water boiling in a closed container will build steam-pressure until it finds the weakest point to achieve an outlet, if we do not allow boys natural-but-productive outlets for their boyhood – their maleness – they will find unproductive ones, and the situation for society will be worse than if they had simply been allowed to be boys.

Be cautious, O “liberals”! As ye sow, so shall ye reap. But the harvest may not be what you expected!

 


 

* As the article linked in my previous post indicated, the “gender gap” in higher education solidly favors women (41.5% male vs 58.5% female, across all degrees, or 141 degreed females per 100 males); people of color are out-breeding people of European ancestry by a substantial margin, both worldwide and in the Westincluding the U.S., where non-Hispanic whites are projected to become a minority of the population (47%) by 2050; and as to those who are “different,” be it in sexuality, gender, religion (or lack thereof), etc., one has only to be reminded of the dictum often attributed to Voltaire: “To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize.” Whether Voltaire said it or not, there is considerable truth in the statement!