THE ROAD TO
SERFDOM is a REALITY
in the UNITED STATES OF EUROPE -A
COLLECTIVIST SYSTEM which STALIN-HITLER and
MUSSOLINI brought the WORLD TO WAR.
WE ARE ALL HEADED
FOR AN ADMINISTRATIVE NIGHTMARE WHERE THE OFFICIAL
RULES WITHIN A POLICE STATE AND
NO RULE OF
LAW .
If you want some very interesting
reading from a book which will no doubt be BANNED by
BRUSSELS now is the TIME to find out what was known
over 60 years ago. Hitler came to POWER because he
already found a PEOPLE and COUNTRY which had already
abandoned the RULE OF LAW in line with the
socialistic doctrine. They need us in EUROPE to PAY
THE BILLS but ON THEIR TERMS.
Unless your POLITICIANS and /or
MONARCH veto the New EU TREATY you might as well
learn what is in store FOR YOU
F. A. Hayek -The
Road to Serfdom
(1944 & 1971)
Routledge & Kegan
Paul Ltd
[It is most unlikely that you
will find such a
POLITICALLY INCORRECT
publication in your local library]
The Road to Serfdom
is probably Professor Hayek's best known work. First
published in 1944, it has been translated into
twelve languages and has made its author world
-famous. Economic planning is still a topic of
academic as well as governmental interest and study.
The Road to Serfdom, therefore, continues to form a
basis for critical discussion of planned economies.
'This book should be read by
everybody. It is no use saying that there are a
great many people who are not interested in politics
[particularly in 2008] ; the political
issue discussed by Dr Hayek concerns every single
member of the community: it is a problem of
FREEDOM in a
PLANNED SOCIETY
According to Dr Hayek, the moment we
pass arrangements to ensure
"security against severe
physical privation"
and the provision of those services
which cannot be provided by competition, to any
attempt to establish [as in 2008] a
"central direction
of all economic activity according to a
SINGLE PLAN
laying down how the
RESOURCES of
SOCIETY
should be consciously directed to
serve particular ends in a definite way"
OUR
LIBERTY
IS
GONE
[Each
underlined word has a separate bulletin]
(Listener)
[The works above were among the first
bulletins put on our EDP website- by one
who struggled to master a keyboard let alone
type and not the best in the spelling stakes in the world
but had to
get into it, whatever the difficulties. After now in
2008 having accumulated millions of words we have
improved a little-we hope?]
*
We have on our website a few years
ago mentioned the works of Dr Hayek because of the
relevance of his work to the explanation of how easy
it has been over the past sixty years for the
collectivist message to be driven by our
membership of the European Union.
It is as was said by the Scottish
philosopher David Hume:
'It is seldom that liberty of any
kind is lost all at once.'
How true that has been over the past
six decades and more importantly in the year 2008
when the final nail will be hammered into the coffin
containing our
Rights and
Liberties
of Englishman
of over 1400 years in the making.
There will be in fact three nails to
secure closed the lost LIBERTIES of a once Parliamentary
democracy unique in the world.
THE HOUSE OF COMMONS
THE HOUSE OF LORDS
and
THE QUEEN
[Of course there is the Parliament
Bill of 1911 and 1949 for the Executive to push
through the traitorous design. ONLY the QUEEN can
VETO the TREATY and ensure the RIGHTS and LIBERTIES
of HER subjects are SECURE.]
*
THE TOTALITARIANS IN OUR MIDST
A quote by The Times was very
apt 60 years ago and a stern warning to those who
find politics a bore, as it is for many in January, 2008.
When authority presents itself in
the guise of organisation it develops charms
fascinating enough to convert communities of FREE
PEOPLE into TOTALITARIAN STATE
PROBABLY it is true that the very
magnitude of the outrages committee by the
totalitarian governments, instead of increasing the
fear that such a system might one day arise in this
country , has rather strengthened the assurance that
IT CANNOT HAPPEN HERE!
[IT HAS!]
When we look to Nazi Germany [1944]
the gulf which separates us seems so immense that
nothing that happens there can possess relevance for
any development in this country. And the fact
that the difference has steadily become greater
seems to refute any suggestion that we may be moving
in a similar direction.
BUT
let us not forget that fifteen years
ago [1929] the possibility of such a thing happening
in Germany would have appeared fantastic, not only
to nine-tenths of the Germans themselves, but also
to the most hostile foreign observers (however wise
they may now pretend to have been
[as we today in January 2008 who see
how far over the past six decades the dream of a
totalitarian United States of Europe is only months
away and our once FREE country could end up part of
such a collectivist empire]
As suggested earlier in these pages,
however, it is not the present Germany [1944] but
the Germany of twenty or thirty years ago to which
conditions in this country show an ever-increasing
resemblance. There are many features which were then
regarded as "typically German" and which are now
equally familiar in this country, and many systems
that point to a further development in the same
direction.
We have already mentioned the most
significant , the increasing similarity between the
economic views of the Right and left
[as in 2008]
and their common opposition to the
LIBERALISM
that used to be the common basis of
most English politics.
We have the authority of Mr Harold
Nicolson for the statement that during the last
Conservative government, among back-benchers of the
Conservative party
"the most gifted... were all
socialists at heart"
(Spectator, April 12, 1940, p.523)
[Is that not true in 2008]
and there can be little question
that, as in the days of the Fabians, many socialists
have more sympathy with the Conservatives than with
the Liberals.
There are many other features closely
related to this. The increasing veneration for
THE STATE
-the admiration of
POWER
and of bigness for bigness' sake, the
enthusiasm for
"organisation"
OF
EVERYTHING
(we now call it planning),
and that
"inability to leave anything to the
simple power of organic growth"
which even H. v. Treitschke deplored
of in Germany sixty years ago (1884), are all
scarcely less marked in this country now ,than they
were in Germany.
How far in the last twenty years
England has travelled on the German path is brought
home to one with extraordinary vividness if one
reads some of the serious discussions of the
differences between British and German views on
political and moral issues which appeared in this
country during the last war [1914-18]
It is probably true to say that then
the British public had in general a truer
appreciation of these differences than it has now
[1944]; but while the people of this country were
then proud of
THEIR DISTINCTIVE TRADITION
there are few of the political views
then regarded as characteristically English of which
the majority of people in this country do not now
seem half-ashamed, if they do not positively
repudiate them.
It is scarcely an exaggeration to say
that the more typically English a writer on
political or social problems then appeared in the
world, the more is he today forgotten in his own
country. Men like
LORD MORLEY
or
HENRY SIDGWICK
LORD ACTON
A. V. DICEY
who were then admired in the world at
large as outstanding examples of the political
wisdom of liberal England, are to the present
generation [1944 and again in 2008-more so] largely
obsolete Victorians.
Perhaps, nothing shows this change
more clearly than that, while there is no lack of
sympathetic treatment of Bismarck in contemporary
English literature, the name of Gladstone is rarely
mentioned by the younger generation without a sneer
over the Victorian morality and naive utopianism.
I wish I could in a few paragraphs
adequately convey the alarming impression gained
from the perusal of a few of the English works on
the ideas dominating the Germany of the last war
[1914-18] where almost every word could be applied
to the views most conspicuous in current English
literature. I shall merely quote one brief passage
by Lord Keyes, describing in 1915 the "nightmare"
which he found expounded in a typical German work of
that period: he describes how according to a German
author
even in peace industrial life must
remain mobilised. This is what he means by speaking
of the "militarisation of our industrial life" [the
title of the work reviewed] Individualism must come
to an end absolutely. A system of regulations must
be set up, the object of which is not greater
happiness of the individual (Professor Jaffe is not
ashamed to say this in so many words), but the
strengthening of the organised unity of the state
for the object of attaining the maximum degree of
efficiency (Leistungsfahigkeit), the
influence of which on individual advantage is only
indirect. - This hideous doctrine is enshrined
in a sort of idealism. The nation will grow
into a "closed unity" and will become, in fact, what
Plato declared it should be -
"Der mensch im Grossen".
In particular, the coming peace will
bring with it a strengthening of the idea of State
action in industry....Foreign investment,
emigration, the industrial policy which in recent
years had regarded the whole world as a market, are
too dangerous. The old order of industry, which is
dying to-day, is based on Profit; and the new
Germany of the twentieth-century Power without
consideration of Profit is to make an end of that
system of Capitalism, which came over from England
one hundred years ago.
[ Economic journal, 1915,
p.450]
[Is this not still the policy of the
original six founders of the EU particularly France
in 2008]
Except that no English author
[up to 1944]
has yet to my knowledge dared openly
to disparage individual happiness, is there a
passage in this which is not mirrored in much
contemporary English literature
And, undoubtedly, not merely the
ideas which in Germany and elsewhere prepared
totalitarianism, but also many principles of
totalitarianism itself are what exercises an
increasing fascination in many other countries?
Although few people , if anybody, in
this country [1944] would probably be ready to
swallow totalitarianism whole, there are few single
features which we have not yet advised by somebody
or other to imitate. Indeed, there is
scarcely a leaf out of Hitler's book which somebody
or other in this country [England] has not
recommended us to take and use for our own purposes.
[which is of course what many Nazi traitors such
as Edward
Heath
Geoffrey
Ribbon
and
Roy
Jenkins and a
great deal of others, even to this day in January 9,
2008 when we have a prime minister who shows he has
learnt a great deal from Hitler in refusing the
PEOPLE a REFERENDUM.]
[Each underlined word has a
separate bulletin]
This applies [particularly to many
people who are undoubtedly Hitler's mortal enemies
because of one special feature in his system. We
should never forget that the anti-semitism of Hitler
has driven from his country, or turned into enemies,
many people who in every respect are confirmed
totalitarians of the German type.
[At the end of the 1939-45 European
War the Americans were conned by the
German
academics that their real enemy was Russia and as a
result the Americans stopped their De -Nazification
programme shortly after the Surrender. At least 77O
top Nazis of particular interests were allowed to
settle in the US. One noted individual was Von Braun
the rocket expert who later helped the American
Space success. There were some with knowledge in the
'Black Arts' and other subversive activities.
Regrettably over the decades the Nazi influence had
grown and it has only been in the last few years
that American Intelligence has realised that their
intelligence services were supporting future German
expansion. The United States of Europe has been not
only a brainchild of the Nazis but also supported by
the Americans for over four decades.
Much of this information is included in the
underlined words above from information received by
the
INTERNATIONAL CURRENCY REVIEW
www.worldreports.org
from certain members of the
Intelligence Services and included in their
Summer-Autumn 2005 journal which we were to receive
on or about October 10-2005 and was promptly placed
on our EDP website. As we have explained on a number
of occasions the so-called FREE PRESS in our country
has been reluctant to give the TRUTH to the PUBLIC
no doubt because of the great harm it will do to our
now so-called DEMOCRACY?]
*
MATERIAL CONDITIONS AND IDEAL ENDS
(1944)
There is one aspect of the change in
moral values brought about by the advance of
collectivism which at present time provides special
food for thought. It is that virtues which are
held less and less in esteem and which consequently
become rarer are precisely those on which the
British people justly prided themselves and in which
they are generally recognised to excel. The
virtues possessed by the British people possessed in
a higher degree than most other people, excepting
only a few of the smaller nations , like the Swiss
and the Dutch [It was no coincidence that the
Dutch voted against the New EU Treaty in 2005.],
where independence and self-reliance, individual
initiative and local responsibility, the successful
reliance on voluntary activity, non-interference
with one's neighbour and toleration ,and suspicion
of power and authority. British
strength, British character, and British achievement
are to a great extent the result of a cultivation of
the spontaneous.
But almost all the traditions and
institutions in which British moral genius has found
its most characteristic expression, and which in
turn have moulded the national characteristic and
the whole moral climate of England, are those which
the progress of collectivism and its inherently
centralistic tendencies are progressively
destroying...
... The Left intelligentsia, indeed
have so long worshipped foreign gods that they seem
to have become almost incapable of seeing any good
in the characteristic English institutions and
traditions.
[IS THAT NOT SO IN 2008 AND FOR
SOME YEARS PAST]
That the moral values on which most
of them pride themselves are largely the product of
the institutions they are out to destroy, these
socialists cannot , of course, admit.
That this attitude is unfortunately
not confined to avowed socialists. Though one must
hope that this is not true of the less vocal but
more numerous cultivated Englishmen, if one were to
judge by the ideas which find expression in current
political discussion and propaganda [as in 2008]
the Englishmen who not only
"the language speak that
Shakespeare spake",
but also
"the faith and morals hold that
Milton held"
seem to have almost vanished.
Though the subject of this chapter
has already invited more than one reference to
Milton, it is difficult to resist the temptation to
add here one more quotation, a very familiar one,
though one, it seems, which nowadays nobody but a
foreigner would dare cite:
"Let not England forget her
precedence of teaching nations how to live."
It is perhaps, significant that our
generation has seen a host of American and English
detractors of Milton - and that the first of them,
Mr. Ezra Pound, was during the war broadcasting from
Italy!
To believe, however, that the kind of
propaganda produced by this attitude can have the
desired effect on our enemies [1944] and
particularly the Germans, is a fatal blunder [as we
see in 2008] The Germans know their country, not
well, perhaps, yet sufficiently to know what are the
characteristic traditional values of British life,
[but particularly English
life] and what for the
past two or three generations has increasingly
separated the minds of the two countries.
[over the past two generations we
have seen the result of the failure of the English
people to apprehend what was happening to their
country until recently when they now know they are
only months from losing
THEIR FREE CONSTITUTION AND COUNTRY.]
If we wish to convince them, not only
the country of our sincerity, but also that we have
to offer a real alternative to the way they have
gone, it will not be by concessions to their system
of thought. [Regrettably
that is exactly what has happened over the past
sixty years by our traitorous prime ministers who
have been financially rewarded from a
Nazi slush fund.]
We shall not persuade them with
a stale reproduction of the ideas of their fathers
which we have borrowed from them - be it
STATE-SOCIALISM
"Realpolitik"
"scientific"
planning, or corporativism.
We shall not persuade them by
following them half the way which leads to
TOTALITARIANISM.
[THEY HAVE ALMOST DONE SO IN 2008]
If the English themselves abandon the
supreme ideal of
FREEDOM and HAPPINESS
of the individual, if they implicitly
admit that their civilisation is not worth
preserving, and that they know nothing better than
to follow the path along which the Germans have led,
they have indeed nothing to offer.
To the Germans all these are merely
belated admissions that the British have been wrong
all the way through, and that they themselves are
leading the way to a better and new world, however,
appalling the period of transition may be.
The Germans know that what they still
regard as the
BRITISH TRADITION
and their own new ideals are
fundamentally opposed and irreconcilable views of
life. They might be convinced that the way they have
chosen was wrong -but nothing will ever encourage
them that the British will be better guides on the
German path.
Least of all will that type of
propaganda appeal to those Germans on whose help we
must ultimately count in rebuilding Europe because
their values are nearest our own. For
experience has made them wiser and sadder men: they
have learnt that neither good intentions nor
efficiency of organisation can preserve decency in a
system in which personal freedom and individual
responsibility are destroyed.
What the German and Italian who have
learnt the lesson above all want is protection
against a monster state - not grandiose schemes for
organisation on a colossal scale,
[as we have seen in the
case of the expansion of the EU over the past three
decades] but opportunity
peacefully and in freedom to build up once more his
own little world....
If we are to succeed in the war of
ideologies and to win over the decent elements in
the enemy countries, we must first of all regain the
belief in the
TRADITIONAL VALUES
for which this country stood in
the past, and must have the moral courage stoutly to
defend the
IDEALS
which our enemies attack.
Not by shamefaced apologies and by
assurances that we are rapidly reforming, NOT
by explaining that we are seeking some compromise
between
TRADITIONAL ENGLISH VALUES
and the
NEW TOTALITARIAN IDEAS
shall we win confidence and support.
Not the latest improvements we have
effected in our social institutions, which count but
little compared with the basic differences of two
opposed ways of
life.
[Each underlined word has a
separate bulletin]
BUT OUR
UNWAVERING FAITH IN THOSE TRADITION WHICH HAVE MADE
THIS COUNTRY A COUNTRY OF FREE UPRIGHT, TOLERANT AND
INDEPENDENT PEOPLE -IS THE THING THAT COUNTS.
*
This was so in 1944 and should be so
in 2008 if the people wake up to the con-trick which
is being played on them by the majority of their
politicians who can only at present imagine the
power they will assume who toe the line of the
NEW EU TREATY.
*
[As we have said a number of times
over the past years the traitor Tony Blair will be
offered the position of the first President of the E
U Council as a reward for his vital signature on the
Treaty. Our only hope of remaining a
FREE NATION STATE
will be if
THE QUEEN
refuses to ratify
the Treaty.]
*
THE GREAT UTOPIA
[1944]
THAT socialism has displaced
liberalism as the doctrine held by the great
majority of progressives does not simply mean that
people have forgotten the warnings of the great
liberal thinkers of the past about the
CONSEQUENCES
OF
COLLECTIVISM.
because they were
persuaded of the very opposite of what these men had
predicted. the extraordinary thing is that the same
socialism that was not only early recognised as the
GRAVEST THREAT
TO FREEDOM
but quite openly began as a reaction
against the liberalism of the French revolution,
gained general acceptance under the
FLAG OF LIBERTY
It is rarely remembered now that
under socialism in its beginnings was frankly
AUTHORITARIAN.
The French writers who laid the
foundations of modern socialism had no doubt that
their ideas could be put into practice only by a
DICTATORIAL GOVERNMENT.
To them socialism meant an attempt to
"terminate the revolution"
by a deliberate reorganisation of
society on hierarchical lines, and the imposition of
a coercive
"spiritual power".
Where freedom was concerned, the
founders of socialism made no bones about their
intentions.
FREEDOM OF THOUGHT
they regarded as the root-evil of
nineteenth-century society, and the first of modern
planners, Saint Simon, even predicted that those who
did not obey his proposed planning boards would be
"treated as cattle".
Only under the influence of a strong
democratic currents preceding the revolution of 1848
did socialism begin to ally itself with forces of
freedom. But it took the new
"democratic socialism"
a long time to live down the
suspicions aroused by its antecedents. Nobody
saw more clearly than [Alexis] de Tocqueville
(1805-59) that democracy as an essentially
individualistic institution stood in an
IRRECONCILABLE CONFLICT WITH
SOCIALISM:
'Democracy extends the sphere of
individual freedom [he said in 1848], socialism
restricts it.
'Democracy attaches all possible
value to each man; socialism makes each man a mere
agent, a mere number.
'Democracy and socialism have
nothing in common but one word: equality
BUT NOTE THE DIFFERENCE:
while
DEMOCRACY seeks EQUALITY
in
LIBERTY
SOCIALISM seeks EQUALITY
in
RESTRAINT and SERVITUDE.
[These words were right in 1844
and they are right in 2008 and it is what you will
get more of in the future United States of Europe.]
Dr Walter Lippmann (1889) comments:
the generation to which we belong is
now learning from experience what happens when men
retreat from freedom to a coercive organisation of
their affairs. Though they promise themselves
a more abundant life , they must in practice
renounce it ; as the organised direction increases,
the variety of ends must give way to uniformity.
That is the nemesis of the planned society and the
authoritarian principle in human affairs.
[This is as true today in 2008 as we
have seen particularly over the past ten years when
almost every part of our lives are under close
scrutiny and where the legislation particularly from
Brussels has turned into a flood. The more
laws that are put on the STATUTE BOOK the more there
will be great injustices because as the saying goes
the
'best government is one that
governs the least."]
In the early passages of Professor
Hayek's best known works he said in 1943:
....For at least Twenty -five years
before the spectre of
TOTALITARIANISM
became a real threat, we had
progressively been moving away from the basic ideas
on which European civilisation has been built.
That this movement on which we have entered with
such high hopes and ambitions should have brought us
face to face with the
TOTALITARIAN HORROR
has come as a profound shock to this
generation [19 14-1944] , which still refuses to
connect the two facts. Yet this development merely
confirms the warnings of the liberal philosophy
which we still profess. We have progressively
abandoned that
FREEDOM
in
ECONOMIC AFFAIRS
without which
PERSONAL AND POLITICAL FREEDOM
has never existed
IN THE PAST.
Although we had been warned by some
of the greatest political thinkers of the nineteenth
century, by
Alexis de Tocqueville and Lord Action
that
SOCIALISM MEANS SLAVERY
we have steadily moved in the
direction of
SOCIALISM
[As has been the case since that time
in 1944 when the evidence became clear that the path
to socialism was indeed the path to
SLAVERY
as we shall all witness in 2008.]
And now we have seen a new form of
slavery arise before our eyes, we have so completely
forgotten the warning, that it scarcely occurs to us
that the two things may be connected .[as shown over
the past six decades of which the results will be
seen in all their true colours in 2008]
HOW SHARP A BREAK not only with the
recent past but with the whole evolution of Western
civilisation the modern trend towards socialism
means, becomes clear if we consider it nor merely
against a background of the nineteenth century, but
in a longer historical perspective.
We are rapidly abandoning not the
views merely of
COBDEN and BRIGHT
of
ADAM SMITH and DAVID HUME
or even of
LOCKE and MILTON
but one of the salient
characteristics of
WESTERN CIVILISATION
as it has grown from the
FOUNDATION of CHRISTIANITY
and the
GREEKS and ROMANS.
Not merely nineteenth-and
eighteenth-century liberalism, but the basic
INDIVIDUALISM
inherited by us from
ERASMUS and MONTAIGNE
from
CICERO and TACITUS
and
PERICLES and THUCYDIDES
is progressive relinquished
The Nazi leader who described the
National-Socialist revolution as a counter -Renissance
spoke more truly than he probably knew. It was
a decisive step in the destruction of that
civilisation which modern man had built up from the
age of the Renaissance and which was above all an
individualist civilisation.
INDIVIDUALISM
has a bad day today [1944]
[IS NOT THAT TRUE IN 2008]
and the term has come to be connected
with egotism and selfishness. But the
individualism of which we speak in contrast to
socialism and all other forms of
COLLECTIVISM
has no necessary connection with
these.
....But the essential features of
that individualism which, from elements provided by
CHRISTIANITY
and the philosophy of classical
antiquity, was first fully developed during the
RENAISSANCE
and has since grown and spread into
what we know as
WESTERN EUROPEAN CIVILISATION
-the respect for the
INDIVIDUAL MAN
qua man, that is the recognition of
his own views and tastes as supreme in his own
sphere, however narrowly that may be circumscribed,
and the belief that it is desirable that men should
develop their own individual gifts and bents.
"FREEDOM" and "LIBERTY"
are now [1944 and in 2008] words so
warn with use and abuse that one must hesitate to
employ them to express ideals for which they stand
during that period.
TOLERATION
is, perhaps, the only word which
still preserves the full meaning of the principle
which during the whole of this period was in
ascendant and which only in recent times has again
been in decline, to disappear completely with the
rise of the
TOTALITARIAN STATE
[Has not this been the picture over
the past six decades with the decadent fruits
of that creation coming into full bloom over the
next six months in 2008 in
ENGLAND -WALES and SCOTLAND.]
*
Even much more recent warnings which
have proved dreadfully true have almost entirely
forgotten. it is not yet thirty years since Mr
Hilaire Belloc, in a book which explains more of
what has happened since in Germany than most works
written after the event, explained that
"the effect of Socialist doctrine on
Capitalist society is to produce a third thing
different from either of its two begetters - to wit,
the
"SERVILE STATE"
(The Servile State, 1913, 3rd edition
1927, p. XIV)
IS THIS NOT
WHAT WE NOW HAVE IN ENGLAND AND A GREAT DEAL MORE SO
IF THE NEW EU TREATY IS RATIFIED IN 2008?
*
SECURITY and FREEDOM
The general endeavour to achieve
security by restrictive measures, tolerated or
supported by the
STATE
has in the course of time produced a
progressive transformation of society -[as we have
found to our cost in 2008] -a transformation in
which, as in so many other ways, Germany has led and
other countries have followed.
This development has been hastened by
another effect of socialist teaching, the deliberate
disparagement of all activities involving economic
risk and the moral opprobrium cast on the gains
which makes risks worth taking but which few can
win.
We cannot blame our young men when
they prefer the safe , salaried position to the risk
of
ENTERPRISE
after they have heard from their
earliest youth the former described as the superior,
more unselfish and disinterested occupation.
the younger generation of today in 1944 [as in 2008]
has grown up in a world in which in school and press
the spirit of commercial enterprise has been
represented as disreputable and the making of profit
as immoral, where to employ a hundred people is
represented as exploitation but to command
[i.e. centralised control] the same number is
honourable.
Older people may regard this as an
exaggeration of the present state of affairs [not in
2008] but the daily experience of the University
teacher leaves little doubt that as a result of
anti-capitalist propaganda values have already
altered far in advance of the change in institutions
which has already taken place in this country.
The question is whether by changing our institutions
to satisfy the new demands, we shall not unwittingly
DESTROY VALUES WHICH WE STILL RATE
HIGHER
[As we are set to do in 2008]
The change in the structure of
society involved in the victory of the
IDEAL of SECURITY
over that of
INDEPENDENCE
cannot be better illustrated than by
a comparison of what ten or twenty years ago could
still be regarded as the
English
and the
German
type of society.
However great the influence of
the army may have been in the latter country, it is
a grave mistake to ascribe what the Englishman
regarded as the "military" character of German
society mainly to that influence. The
difference went much deeper than could be explained
on that ground, and the peculiar attributes of
German society existed no less in circles in which
the properly military influence was negligible than
in those in which is strong.
It was not so much that at almost all
times a larger part of the German people was
organised for war than was true in other countries,
but that the same type of organisation was employed
for so many other purposes, which gave German
society its peculiar character. It was that a
larger part of the civil life of Germany than any
other country was deliberately organised from the
top, that so large a proportion of her people did
not regard themselves as independent but as
appointed functionaries , which gave her social
structure its peculiar character.
Germany had, as the Germans themselves boasted, for
long been a Beamtenstaat in which not
only in the Civil Service proper but in almost all
spheres of life income and status were assigned and
guaranteed by some AUTHORITY.
[As we find in England in 2008 -with
enormous finance sucking QUANGOS -and a growing
multitude of non-jobs of a host of other
privileged GOVERNMENT bodies at LOCAL and CENTRAL
level.
With over 6.000,000 employees
of the GOVERNMENT and growing every day. We
now have a country of
TWO NATIONS
Those under the control of
centralised authority with their special privileges
and those who though also under growing control from
the CENTRE are considered second class subjects. Of
course , as soon as the GOVERNMENT can squeeze more
from them it will then offer another bribe to some
section of the remaining tax-paying outcasts.
All will become clear as the
TREASURY
finds that it has not been
PRUDENT ENOUGH
with nothing put by for a
RAINY DAY.
THE BRIBERY OF THE PEOPLE HAS BEEN
TO THE FOREFRONT OF NEW LABOUR POLICY FOR VOTES.]
As we have said on countless
occasions in the words of Lord Acton (1834-1902]:
'Power tends to corrupt, and
absolute power corrupts absolutely. great men are
almost always bad men.'
The problem we have in our present
supposed but almost destroyed constitution is that
with the checks and balances ignored it is a case of
as the Protector Oliver Cromwell said so aptly to
Members of Parliament:
'It is not fit that you sit here
any longer!...you shall now give place to better
men.'
[Speech to the Rump parliament, 22
Jan. (1654)
*
To continue with the issue of
SECURITY and FREEDOM
While it is doubtful whether the
spirit of
FREEDOM
can anywhere be extirpated by force
[They certainly tried in Blairdom and
now Gordonvill as they have the
Terrorism Bill
to arrest anyone who should speak our
at a Labour Conference or remember the dead of the
IRAQ at the Cenotaph and no doubt hundreds of other
law-abiding subjects who once believed they lived in
a
FREE COUNTRY.]
It is nor certain that any people
would successfully withstand the process by which it
was slowly smothered in Germany. Where
distinction and rank is achieved almost exclusively
by coming salaried
SERVANT of the STATE
where to do one's assigned duty is
regarded more laudable than to choose one's own
assigned field of usefulness, where all pursuits
that do not give a recognised place as inferior and
even somewhat disreputable, it is too much to expect
that many will long prefer
FREEDOM to SECURITY
[which is exactly what the BUSH with
his Patriot Bill/BLAIR with his Terrorism Bill
obtained with an illegal war in IRAQ so desperately
needed in the early years of the 21st century and in
evidence today in January, 2008.]
And where the alternative to
security in a dependent position is a most
precarious position, in which one is despised alike
for
SUCCESS and for FAILURE
only few will resist the temptation
of safety at the
PRICE of FREEDOM.
Once things have gone so far,
LIBERTY
indeed becomes almost a mockery,
since it can be purchased only by sacrifice of most
good things of this earth. In this state it is
little surprising that more and more people should
come to feel that without economic security liberty
is
"not worth having"
and that they are willing to
SACRIFICE THEIR LIBERTY FOR
SECURITY
[As many have done over the past
decades but particularly over the past ten years
prior to 2008]
There can be no question that
adequate security against severe privation , and the
reduction of the avoidable causes of misdirected
effort and consequent disappointment will have
to be one of the main goals of policy.
But if these endeavours are to be
successful and
NOT DESTROY INDIVIDUAL FREEDOM
security must be provided outside the
market and
COMPETITION
be left to function unobstructed.
Some security is essential if
FREEDOM
is to be preserved, because most men
are willing to bear a risk which
FREEDOM
inevitably involves only so long as
that risk is not too great.
But while this is a TRUTH of which we
must never lose sight, nothing is more fatal than
the present fashion among intellectual leaders of
extolling SECURITY at the expense of FREEDOM.
It is essential that we should
re-learn frankly to face the fact that
FREEDOM CAN ONLY BE HAD AT A PRICE
and that as
INDIVIDUALS
we must be prepared to make severe
material sacrifices
TO PRESERVE OUR LIBERTY.
If we want to retain this we must
regain the conviction onwhich the
RULE of LIBERTY
in the Anglo-Saxon countries has been
based and which
BENJAMIN FRANKLIN
expressed in a phrase applicable to
us in our lives as individuals no less than of
NATIONS:
"Those who would give up essential
liberty to purchase a little temporary safety
deserve neither liberty or safety."
THE END
[possibly?- in more ways than one!]
*
*
*
[We have advocated that members of
PARLIAMENT should ONLY serve ONE TERM. This will
enable more suitable individuals in the community to give some time
for
THEIR COUNTRY
This will enable the members to
express their true views knowing that they cannot be
blackmailed to toe the line particularly if the
EXECUTIVE wish to sell THEIR COUNTRY to a FOREIGN
POWER.
*
*
[Font altered-Bolding & Underlining
Used-Comments in Brackets]
THE ENEMY WITHIN
[We have recently heard that the
police now have great numbers of criminals in their
cells because there is no room in prison. At the
same time we are told that the sentences have to be
such as not to incur a prison sentence. The victims
have been ignored and in some cases themselves
thrown in a cell. A driver who kills someone on the
road will now not go to jail. We now hear that a
whistle-blower in the so-called Heath Service had to
take her case to the High Court and though she
has been proved innocent of the charges and received
an apology after 5 years she will lose her
occupation even though the GOVERNMENT has said that
this should not be so. We now have the usually endlessly
happy suntanned cavalier attitude of Peter Hain who
thinks it is a big laugh to hide £100,000 of his £200,000
donations for his deputy prime minister contest from
the appropriate authority. As is usual with
New Labour Mr Hain can look forward to being
promoted for his waywardness. The list is endless of the
incompetence of members of the GOVERNMENT but they
are still in place because we no longer live in a
TRUE DEMOCRACY.
We have for years now asked for a
debate about PR Proportional Representation which is
the only way to clear most of the deadheads out of
our House of Commons. But though we have constantly
pushed this vital issue nobody seems to be
listening particularly the dozens of smaller
political parties in the country who would benefit
from the change.
We know the tripartite twisters in the
House which are in the majority do not wish to share
their power with anyone except BRUSSELS.
We believe that under PR we will have
representatives to represent all kinds of opinion in
the country including our new comers, which will give them
a stake in the country, and as a consequence they
are more likely to integrate fully into
THEIR COUNTRY.
We believe that the Sentences
Guidelines Committee under the Lord Chief
Justice (?) is an affront to TRUE JUSTICE
behind which the GOVERNMENT of the Day can hide from
its FAILURES and PROMISES.
The new Lord Chancellor a
lawyer by
going along with the measures which have nothing to
do with justice but are in the main a matter suited
to an accountant has undermined our once respected
JUSTICE SYSTEM.
If the victims see that they
are denied justice under these circumstances then
they may take the matters into their own hands and
the responsibility will be on the shoulders of the
Lord Chancellor. Of course his reply will be
as is usual
"NONSENSE"
*
A
Champion of Individualism from the late 19th century exposes the
fallacies in collectivism and central planning.
*
*
*
THE QUEEN'S SPEECH ON THE EVE OF
THE DESTRUCTION OF OUR UNIQUE NATION STATE URGES
EVERYONE TO BE KIND TO EACH OTHER - ON SEPTEMBER
3,1939 ENGLAND DECLARED WAR ON GERMANY-WHATEVER FOR?---Most
looked at bulletin since placed on our website
Jan.5 again on 6 and 7-and 8 and 9... We know we have touched a nerve
so keep
coming and pass on the message.
We want a
REFERENDUM not a
fait accompli
in your traitorous House of Commons.
At this most momentous and dangerous
hour in our long history in our Island Home the
following expressions comes to mind:
fortes
Fortuna adjuvat - Fortune
helps the brave.
fori et
fideli nihil difficile -to
the brave and faithful nothing is difficult.
fortis
cadere,cendere, cedare non potest -
the brave man may fall -
he cannot yield.
*
In 1773 the
Boston Tea Party led to American Freedom - In 2008 the
EU TREATY will lead to English Slavery-and the People
-DO NOTHING?
*
WHY is a BRITISH GOVERNMENT NOT
PLAYING FAIR as they in the PAST TREATED their NEW
SUBJECTS in allowing them THEIR CUSTOMARY LAW
in our once EMPIRE - to be denied to US in
the UNITED STATES of EUROPE?
"Red Lines" are
"Red Herrings"
*
*
THE PEOPLE
HAVE SPOKEN-IS THE EU COMMISSION LISTENING?
*
Ditch the EU
TREATY after IRISH REJECTION
SAY VOTERS
by
Daniel
Martin
Political
Reporter
[Daily
Mail-Wednesday, June 18,2008]
MORE THAN HALF of voters
believe Britain should drop the
controversial European Treaty in the wake of
its rejection in last week's
IRISH
REFERENDUM'
The poll comes as the Tories
launch a last-ditch bid in the
HOUSE of
LORDS
today to delay the
RATIFICATION
OF THE TREATY.
And
10,000 people
have signed a
PETITION
on the
DOWNING
STREET- WEBSITE
within the past few days
JUNE16-2008
, calling on the
GOVERNMENT
NOT TO RATIFY THE BILL
[WHY DON'T
YOU?]
Downing
Street website is
http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/Abandon-Lisbon/
*
JUNE 18-2008
|
*
|