Monthly Archives: November 2016

‘John Bull and Uncle Sam’

The Library of Congress has an exhibition titled ‘John Bull and Uncle Sam: Four Centuries of British-American Relations. It seems an aberration for the LOC, which, like most such official institutions, is heavily weighted toward political correctness and ‘diversity.’  That fact notwithstanding, there are some things of interest there to see and read.

From the ‘Overview’ section:

“As Ralph Waldo Emerson observed in 1856, eighty years after independence, in the United States “the culture of the day, the thoughts and aims of men, are English. . . . those who resist it [English culture] do not feel it or obey it less.”

Even as Emerson wrote, however, the situation was changing. The United States was growing more confident and establishing its own identity. By the mid-1800s American ideas and products had begun to establish a beachhead in Britain. As the power of the United States increased, the cultural tides between it and the United Kingdom began to reverse, and American influence began appearing in some areas of British life. This process, which in the post-World War II period has been called, with considerable exaggeration, the “Americanization” of Britain, is the latest chapter in a complicated history that includes a broad range of shared institutions and experiences.”

Just follow the links at the top of the linked page to the various subjects.

Jeff Sessions’ ancestry

This is delicious — for me, at least, though it probably interests few others. But it does fit in with my previous post.

In the wake of the posssible nomination of Sen. Jeff Sessions of Alabama as Attorney-General, a commenter (on the same blog I cited in the last post) quotes a Tweet that gives the origin of Sessions’ surname. It is apparently Norman.

surname-sessions-2016-11-18_183324

I say this information is ‘delicious’ because it comes in the wake of the earlier slams against Normans as in the comments I re-posted here from that blog. So where are the nasty comments now? Sessions, being a very conservative Senator, is popular on that blog; probably those who like him will be claiming that he is actually Scots-Irish. That’s the ‘in’ thing to be for many Southron Americans. Funny how these things have fads and fashions, often based on ephemeral things like popular ‘history’ books and cable TV documentaries.

But history can’t be rewritten at whim; truth is not determined by popular opinion at any given moment. As I said yesterday, the Normans are not just a historical relic; their descendants do exist in the United States, especially in the South, and it’s opportune that this information about Jeff Session’s lineage appeared to illustrate my point.

The Normans

2016-11-14_184601a

The above comments are not mine; they appeared on a pro-White blog (American) recently, and though at first glance the first one may seem to be just wry humor, they both express a viewpoint which is not at all uncommon, both on American blogs and on certain British nationalist blogs I visit.

Normans are very much out of favor even in the Anglosphere countries. I’ve often wondered why, because this viewpoint. wasn’t always so emphatic. It seems that the Normans are charged and convicted with basically the same “crimes” for which the British/English are said to be guilty: they were too successful at conquest and subjugation. Certainly I’m familiar with the narrative in which William the Conqueror was said to have ruthlessly harried and subdued the Anglo-Saxon populace. But such was life in those times; maybe the Anglo-Saxons were more of a pacific people than the Normans, who were after all descendants of Norsemen, Vikings. But medieval history was rife with such conflicts; conquering and being conquered.

Today few people of English or British descent want to claim descent from Normans; it seems to be popularly assumed that the Normans actually left few descendants except for the weakened aristocratic classes or the Windsors, but even the Windsors are of mixed European (aristocratic) lineage, with lots of German blood from the Hanovers. Remember that during WWI, the Russian Czar Nicholas II, King George V of England, and Kaiser Wilhelm were all first cousins. Not much Norman descent there.

Still, because of today’s levelling spirit, which at heart is Jacobin, it’s still fashionable for both ‘right’ and left to loathe aristocracies and to exalt the ‘average’ man. The Normans are on the wrong side of history as it played out in the 20th century.

I did encounter a rare honest person, a fellow blogger from Ireland, who volunteered that he was of Norman descent, being ‘Anglo-Irish’, and that he wasn’t ashamed to say so. He was an exception to the rule; maybe the Irish, or at least the Anglo-Irish, still take pride in their Norman forebears.

The Cavalier class in the old South identified themselves, generally, as Anglo-Norman, but then they were of a different time in which being of such a background was not thought to be something that one had to apologize for or deny. John Randolph of Roanoke, that great eccentric and public figure, said (as did fellow Virginian John Taylor of Caroline) “I am an aristocrat; I love liberty. I hate equality.”

I think that statement would meet with outrage from a lot of people in 21st century America. Too often we accept the idea that equality is a valid ideal, and that any decent person believes in equality. But there is no equality in nature. Equality and freedom can’t coexist, in fact, because equality requires perpetual coercion to maintain. Some will always excel or outdo or outcompete the rest. Always. Lifting people up by artificial means can never be successful; the cream will rise to the top.

It’s easier to cut the high-achieving people down than to raise the underachievers up.

The Normans are now low men on the totem pole by popular consensus. They were the ‘tall poppies’ so down they came in the post-French revolution mind.

But where are those Normans? Here, in America, and in Australia, and Canada, New Zealand, South Africa, and even in England. And that’s not to mention the Normans who still live in Normandy. But wherever people of British descent are there are people with at least some Norman blood. The Normans are not extinct.

I will have more to say about Norman descendants in the future. It seems to be an area of history and genealogy that is not much talked about.

Brexit delayed

I wrote about Brexit just after the passing of the measure, and it seems since then that there is increasing doubt being cast on the outcome.

Various sources, usually ‘official’ sources, scoff at the idea that there is deliberate intent to thwart the plan to exit the EU. The claims ring very hollow, however,  when it appears that a suit brought by two non-indigenous ‘British’ people will delay if not prevent the exit.

“The case was brought by British citizens Gina Miller and Deir dos Santos, a hairdresser.”

They may be British citizens, obviously citizenship is made too easy — but they are not British (or English, Scottish, or Welsh) but of foreign origin. Miller is described as a multi-millionaire, and is of Guyanese origin, while Deir dos Santos, whose name is obviously Portuguese, is Brazilian in origin.

Just for the record, the  law firm behind this is Mishcon de Reya, described as a “British” law firm with offices in New York and London. It was founded by a Victor Mishcon, and as I suspected, he was ‘the son of a rabbi’. Were his parents British-born? I can’t be bothered to look it up, because obviously some identities transcend place of birth; one can be ‘in’ a country but not ‘of’ it, which is the case here, evidently. Just a bit of trivia about Mishcon: they represented Princess Diana. And it appears they are a bit of a left-wing activist law firm.

So whichever way you cut it, there are moneyed and powerful — and foreign — interests trying their best to thwart the will of the majority of the people of Britain, that is, the rightful heirs of the country of Britain.

We have a de facto one-world government now, it seems, when foreign people with interests in opposition to the native-born majorities can exercise power and influence to such a degree. It’s as true here as there.

It remains to be seen whether Brexit will ever be put into effect, what with these machinations going on.

Over-optimistic

day-we-celebrate-2014-03-24_033812

The above was printed in 1891, hence the reference to the 44 states of the Union.

Also, in case some don’t recognize some of the allusions, such as the reference to ‘John Bull letting Jonathan go’ — the ‘Jonathan’ in question is ‘Brother Jonathan’, who was the American equivalent of the British personification John Bull. Brother Jonathan was usually depicted visually as being tall, thin, and top-hatted, sort of a precursor of Uncle Sam.

But the optimism about the future of America being control of all of North America, from the Aurora Borealis (the pole, presumably) to ‘Lessep’s Last Ditch‘, (the Panama Canal) — well, that obviously proved to be unfounded. As to Europe clamoring for annexation by our country, that has hardly happened either. And there isn’t to be a United States of the World, at least not one headed by Anglo-Saxon America. Now I hope we know enough to realize that any kind of world federation is not something to be desired. Unfortunately though many of us know what a bad idea it is, we are in danger of having it forced on us, and we, that is, the Founding Fathers’ posterity, will most assuredly not have a leading role of any kind in it.

However, maybe the prophecy about Mexico trying to slip in under the wings of the Eagle is coming true — but not in the benign way that the writer must have intended it.

Yes, there was a time, apparently at its peak in the 1890s, when Anglo-America still saw a bright and glorious future for us and our posterity. What happened to change all this along the way? I could offer my answers, but we probably all recognize when things started to change irrevocably.