The latest essay by our Israeli correspondent MC discusses Nationalism and Socialism. Which one is good, and which one is bad? And which one is currently ascendant in this our twilight dystopia?


by MC

“Hear nothing that we do not wish you to hear. See nothing that we do not wish you to see. Believe nothing that we do not wish you to believe. Think nothing that we do not wish you to think.”

— Joseph Goebbels (Peikoff p.60)

The Bible tells us that Yah split the people into nations, and that behind the pre-Babel globalism was ‘Nimrod’ the mighty Hunter.

In the Hebrew, Esau was also a ‘mighty hunter’ — literally ‘a man of the field’; it is one of those phrases in ancient Hebrew that is not well understood. Just think how confusing the 1955 Doc Brown found Marty’s use of the word “heavy”…

The Trinity of Nimrod, Semirage and Tammuz was not at all healthy. The tower (of Babel) that they built was obviously designed to withstand a repeat flood, giving Yah the finger as such. The same kind of flood that Yah had used to wipe out a pre-flood mankind that was playing with genetic modification and creating chimera as described in the Book of Enoch., The flood wiped out the Nephilim (Giants), which Nimrod also wanted to reconstruct, post-flood.

Mankind could not be trusted with globalism even then, and this ‘new’ globalism is likely to be similar to what it was under Nimrod, with Satan rubbing his hands in glee.

There is nothing intrinsically wrong with Nationalism, but it does mean that we have to decide whether the problem with the Nazis, the National Socialist German Workers Party. was the Nationalism or the Socialism, or both.

Socialists claim it was the Nationalism that was at fault and have demonized ‘nationalism’, even whilst, in many ways, upholding it. After the war they took the moral high ground, claiming that all wars would be stopped if ‘nationalism’ was eradicated. This is one of the founding memes of the European Union and it is there in the preamble to the Treaty of Rome: the idea of “ever closer union”. Although the EU has a democratic façade, it is ruled by a committee, a “Council of Ministers” which ‘votes’ on items submitted to it by a ‘commission’ which comprises senior civil servants from the member nations under their respective ‘commissioners’ (a sinecure position given to retiring national politicians). There is, in the EU, a democratic deficit which is hidden behind the façade of a powerless European Parliament.

In many ways this European behemoth resembles the Nazi administration posited in its 1942 planning, and when compared with the way the United States tackled the same set of problems with disparate states in a federal (nationalist) setting, one can begin to see the contrasts. The USA, historically, had an amazing ability to recognize problems early and resolve them before they became fatal.

The Nazis sought a homogeneous German culture which excluded ‘non-Aryans’. The EU wants a unified ‘European’ man. The modern “Great Reset” wants to recreate a homogenized feudal culture where enslaved people across the whole world are allowed to exist solely to produce food and goods for the master race.

In the USA, each state has retained its unique character. Why? Because the idea was to keep Federal interference at a minimum, limited by a Constitution to defence and affairs of state via an elected executive. The EU, however, seeks to ‘harmonize’ the various member states via diktats from an unelected body. In the UK we always bought petrol (gas) by the imperial gallon, and butter by the half-pound. That all had to change once we joined the EU, and many small gas stations had to close down rather than buy new gas-pumping equipment calibrated in litres.

Another EU diktat also required that abattoirs have separate entry roads and exit roads. Again, many small local abattoirs had to close down.

Eventually the UK decided to leave the Union, and it seems many other groups across Europe are considering the same. Poland is having its issues, too, finding out that the EU is intolerant of Polish tradition and culture. There is a hidden cost to membership and access to funds: that of conformity and cultural suicide.

Over the top of all this are the ghoul billionaires, injecting cash into a globalist agenda. Soros and Gates were preceded by a hundred years by the multi-millionaire Cecil Rhodes who used his fortune to set up the original infrastructure (The Round Table) for world domination.

An interesting read on Rhodes and his influence is here. Although it contains the real history, it is a propaganda piece where the history is spun in such a way as to create a conspiracy theory.

Any study of the Rhodes circle quickly gets bogged down in conspiracy theories, but in any study of 20th-century history, the associated entities in the diagram above keep cropping up in unclear roles. For example, Neville Chamberlain appeared to think that he had brought Hitler back into the ‘Chatham House’ (Royal Institute) fold with his declaration of “peace in our time”. Chamberlain and Lord Halifax (his deputy) were convinced that Churchill was a dangerous idiot. They knew (or thought they knew) that Hitler too was part of the ‘round table’ brotherhood, and could thus be contained within the current globalist grouping without resorting to actual war. Their vehicle, of course, was the ill-fated League of Nations, which was a formation doomed to failure because of contradicting obsessions, with peace being enforced by the might of the Royal Navy and the French Army, both of which were to be rapidly disarmed.

Once more history rhymes…

There is still a Utopian belief that the eradication of nations and borders will bring about world peace and harmony — the great melting pot.

The other related obsession is faith in the Malthusian concept of ‘overpopulation’. This is the belief that the world would be a better place if useless groups of people were genocided.

But these are not the beliefs of Nationalists; they are the beliefs of Socialists. So of the Nationalism and the Socialism of the Nazis, which one truly defined and reflected their beliefs?

To be a ‘Nationalist’ is to be ‘Far Right’, what does this actually mean? ‘Far Right’ is a meaningless label meant to detract and deter. Socialism has a credibility problem: all too often socialists have resorted to mass murder. Their true history is very, very nasty. Even if one does not believe in Nazi ‘socialism’, one must remember that most of the pioneering work of genocide was done by the Lenin/Trotsky/Stalin cartel who were even more overtly socialist. It has been necessary therefore to create a series of mythologies to divert attention from the totally immoral history of socialism and somehow pin their horrendous crimes on the ‘Nationalists’, and to do this, one must somehow subtract the socialism from National Socialism, whilst at the same time separating the murderous ‘Stalinism’ from peace-loving and benevolent Soviet Socialism.

Unfortunately, and using the Holocaust as a tool, this has been achieved to a very great extent. I never cease to be amazed at the extent of the Holocaust, but then I look at Coronamadness and I see exactly the same things beginning to happen, this time on a worldwide basis, even to the extent of fooling of the very Jews who were the major victims of the first holocaust.

Here in Israel, the identifying of Fauci with Mengele is resented as a form of cultural appropriation, but to me ‘never again’ is much more important. If the cap is appropriate then it should be worn.

When we allow a cultural/ethnic/unvaxxed group to be demonised, we carry on our shoulders the risks associated with promoting Nazism. Do I want to exterminate all Muslims? No, but I would love for Islam to be brought into the 21st century. That Islam mandates that I, an unbeliever (in Mohammed) be exterminated is unacceptable, that they fire explosive rockets at me in the name of Allah and his ‘peaceful Prophet’ is an irony, and that the embedded cognisant dissonance is suppressed to a whisper is despicable, drowned out by irrational yells of ‘Islamophobia’ and “they stole our land,” yet I have a truly rational fear of the Islamic hate for me and my kind. But then he who shouts loudest…

Nationalism, with secure borders and the vetting of would-be immigrants for cultural compatibility, is not problematic unless the country concerned is redistributing wealth: a central tenet of socialism. For the overarching problem of socialism is the financial instability that comes from robbing the productive to pay for the unproductive. Although this sounds noble, it is impractical to the point of being disastrous. In a any nation state, gaining financial stability is a struggle, let alone having to cope with an ever-increasing burden of financially unproductive people, particularly those one might call ‘welfare thieves’, those who are prepared to parasitize a welfare state.

Included in these parasite classes are those ‘intellectuals’ who pontificate on social theories such as equity, race and gender; those who actually inhibit productivity rather than promote it.

We have seen a lot of this in the last two years. We take a mild cold virus that we have lived with for millennia, we ‘tweak’ it and then propagandize it to create a panic. We then offer a toxic ‘vaccine’ as an intervention, one that appears to actually kill more than it cures.

Socialism is an emotional and unscientific response to chronic fear, fear of financial hardship, fear of debilitating illness and a nebulous fear of being ‘exploited’. It is a lack of belief in Creation, and a belief in a series of mythical (theoretical) ‘accidents’ that ostensibly gave rise to life, the universe and everything. Because life is an ‘accident’ we are locked into a perilous and fearsome world and must find shelter — underneath the red flag of socialism…

The people’s flag is deepest red,
It shrouded oft our martyred dead
And ere their limbs grew stiff and cold,
Their hearts’ blood dyed its every fold.
So raise the scarlet standard high,
Beneath its shade we’ll live and die,
Though cowards flinch and traitors sneer,
We’ll keep the red flag flying here.

It sounds nice, but it has never been the people’s flag — its always been the elitists’ flag, and underneath its shade is always some form of slavery.

Nationalism is in many ways a panacea for the fears generated by socialism, the idea of an identity in which one can take comfort, and with which one can co-operate to earn the basic essentials of life — The free exchange of labour, ideas and mutual support based upon a commonly held culture. Under nationalism, whilst I may be flipping burgers to provide my daily bread, I can be studying astrophysics or brain surgery in my spare time, with a view to a better future. If I live in fear, then there is no point to astrophysics — better to learn karate.

There are many comfortably-off African Americans who have become full blown AMERICANS in every way, but there are many others who have no desire to be American when they can feed off the socialist tit, whilst kicking mother ‘liberty’ in the gut.

Many poor arrived on the shores of the USA and found relative wealth and freedom. In a nationalist environment, hard work and prudence usually (but not always) pay benefits, whilst socialism only creates slaves.

The basis of socialism is supposed to be a feeling, perhaps that we should “love our neighbour as ourselves.” But loving your neighbour without loving the Lord your God is fraught with difficulties and frailties. The reality is the desire to want to be seen to love your neighbour, but actually hating his guts. It is primarily the human frailty which always causes socialism to fail, with each person indulging in emotional posturing and ambition rather than stopping to ponder the rest of the parable — “but who is my neighbour?”. The priest and the scribe followed (religious) tradition; the robber was just a criminal; the real neighbour was the despised and rejected Samaritan, the guy who actually stopped and addressed our needs. Priests, scribes and robbers are not our neighbours; Good Samaritans are. Socialists tend to be robbers, those who beat us and leave us for dead, and you might say that the Samaritans are those who clear up the mess after the socialists rob us of everything we have.

What has Brandon done to shut down COVID-19 as he claimed he was going to do? Print vast amounts of currency to cheat us by inflation, each dollar bill printed devalues the dollars we hold from our paychecks and our savings. Reduce gas priced by two cents and claim an economic miracle?

No, just our gullibility stretched out to its limit. I hope those politicians who blocked election audits are now happy — they’ve finally destroyed the American Dream and replaced it with a dreary wokist nightmare.

It is time to move on, to put Covidophobia aside and live life. We really need to get the politicians responsible for the farce to understand the anger that is being generated as people discover that granny died alone and in agony because greedy clinicians and pharma execs thought more of profit than of patients.

It is American Nationalism that will pull the USA through — a confidence in the Constitution, and the unblinkered application of one LAW for ALL. If Brandon is a traitor then he needs to be arrested and tried. The same with Clinton, Fauci and all those others that support them. May they rest in peace prison…

MC lives in the southern Israeli city of Sderot. For his previous essays, see the MC Archives.

22 thoughts on “Nationalism

  1. It is one of the ironies of life, that when we were growing up in socialist Czechoslovakia, we were all patriots. Nationalism was encouraged by the Party, even though it also hewed to “international communism” or whatever the PC phrase was then. And the economies and cultures of eastern Europe were all nation based. Apart from the necessary kowtowing to Moscow.

    • Some historians claim that Stalin had to become a nationalist in order to inpire the Russian people to fight the Germans. He restored ‘ranks’ to the military and started referring to the ‘Motherland’ and ‘mother Russia’. I strongly suspect that the ‘anti-Nationalism’ scree is only used as a political weapon for disruption and weakening of the target immediately before physically subduing it, and of course for defaming the conservative (far right) movements in the victim countries.

      The USSR and the Nazis may be gone, but their ghosts are still haunting us….

      • If Hitler had waited 2 years the Russian military would have put a stake through the heart of the communists and we would not be where we are now, them and the bloody Brits and their great game.

  2. “because greedy clinicians and pharma execs thought more of profit than of patients.” They will answer to Yah for what they have done. They will share an eternal fate with the god whom they worshipped as they worshipped themselves, their lusts, and their pleasures, a fate that I would not wish upon anyone.
    The world is increasingly becoming divided into two camps, those who have YAH as their God and Yah Shua as their Lord and Savior and consider others ahead of themselves knowing that both them and others were created by YAH who gave them an eternal soul and free will to exercise their choices; and Satan who has no authority apart what those who worship themselves grant him. As such, the worship of self and Satan must demonstrate increasing fervor and loyalty to the point of eventual self-destruction.
    Thus, the difference between nationalism and socialism can be seen to have its roots in the difference between YAH and Satan, between Creator Lord God and usurper thief, liar, murderer and scoundrel. What is sad is that people will choose the latter because they get what they want when and how they want it not knowing they will pay the piper with their own skin for the tunes that they have called. Abram had faith and probably was the only one who did besides Job, and both of them had a rough go of it here but were rewarded for their faith with friendship with YAH, and as such serve as examples for the rest of us to follow.
    So… God rest ye merrie, gentleman with comfort and cheer

  3. Like an apple this thought fell on my head: The “Socialists” have the ultimate goal of eradicating “poverty”, and I have red articles talking about how and why God of the Bible never gets rid of “poverty” even though he could do so easily. However – maybe the idea of “eradicating poverty” is flawed in its basic premise: That powerty exists as a “problem”

    Lets consider an apple tree: It makes apples. Lots of apples! I harvest apples every fall, and load my apple banks full of apples so that I never run out of apples…

    And still – the Apple tree makes more apples than I can eat!

    So – what happens to the apples I don’t harvest? Poor little creatures come, and eat them. Deer, birds, worms – and even the “rotten apples” are eaten by the poor bacteria.

    Therefore, what if the whole socialist notion of “poverty” is actually upside down? That the “poor” are in fact a “proof of abundance”! Because if there was no abundance – the rich will become poor, and the poor will die.

    I understand that this argument has more than one edge, and as such represents only one side of the “poverty coin”, but this side seems to be craftfully hidden from the people by the socialists.

    PS: We probably have had the “best” version of Communism in Czechoslovakia, it was rather comfortable and “abundant” if compared to what happened in Russia and elsewhere. But still, the communist propaganda would target the USA by showing pictures of “people living under bridges in NYC”. Look! They are oppressed!

    The fact that those poor homeless people could live under bridge in NYC was taken for a “fault” – while in fact – it may have been the “proof of American abundance”.

      • yes Elky, there is the notion of absolute and relative poverty, the last being more complicated. Say you make 45K $ a year, alright, you are not poor in many countries, even rich in most. But then book a vacation to Norway where a beer comes for 9$ ,or Switzerland, where a Pizza comes for 35$. Then you will feel relatively poor.
        Or make minimum wage and live in a trailor park.
        You have to eat and dress, but that is it.
        Absolute poverty has no access to any of this.

  4. It is American Nationalism that will pull the USA through — a confidence in the Constitution, and the unblinkered application of one LAW for ALL.

    In other words, America will not pull thru, thanks to folk like Emma Lazarus who lied about America being a “nation of immigrants” where the “wretched refuse” of the world would automatically become fine, upstanding citizens by stepping on to the magic dirt ((C) VoxDay) of American soil. People who think the Constitution is the Solution are naive, at best. Israel has the right idea: it’s a state founded on racial and religious exclusivity where there is no nonsense about universalism, equality and “wretched refuse”.

  5. MC: Thanks for another thoughtful essay. You conclude, “It is American Nationalism that will pull the USA through — a confidence in the Constitution, and the unblinkered application of one LAW for ALL.”

    Alas, I argue that it is American individualism, not nationalism, that is what made America the country it is today, but, it is the false boogeyman of nationalism that is tearing America apart. Then enemies of individualism blame rising nationalism as a threat that must be tamped down, yet, the enemies of individualism are guilty of projection. The enemies of individualism distort the meaning of “nationalism” as some sort of recidivist, supremacist cult, when it the love of the American ideal of individualism (the basis of the Constitution) that the enemy detests.

    If America does pull through, it will be because the ideal of American individualism wins the day. The battle lines are drawn yet, the outcome is uncertain.

    Americans don’t think of themselves as nationalists. Americans think of themselves as individuals.

    • I would say America is nationalist who are rugged individuals. With the 3rd world invasion taking place since 1964, it will come to bloodshed because we are Balkanizing at an unprecedented rate that is unsustainable and bloodshed inevitable as history has shown time and time again.

      • @ G

        The often-repeated Cultural Marxist/woke statement is “Diversity is our strength,” but that’s a bald-faced lie. The statement ‘Diversity + proximity = war,” as gloomy and dark as it portends, is much closer to the truth, historically-speaking.

        Europeans, in particular northern & western Europeans, have shown themselves to be adept at creating what sociobiologists and anthropologists term “high IQ, high trust” societies. Sweden a half century or more years ago was an example. Eastern and southern Europe, too… they differ some but only in degree but not kind.

        The method the globalists have seized upon to fracture the high internal unit of these societies is to force-feed large numbers of immigrants and foreigners into such societies. And from people and cultures radically-dissimilar to native Europe.

        The much-vilified (by the usual MSM-communist apologists for the NWO) Irish parliamentarian Enoch Powell warned Great Britain of the dangers ahead as long ago as the 1960s in his “Rivers of Blood” speech, which has proven to be remarkably prescient. But to no avail, the voices of native Europeans no longer are heard by the rulers of their respective countries.

        In the U.S., the 1965 Immigration and Naturalization Act, also known as the Hart-Celler Act, was the great watershed which marked the ‘great diversification’ of these United States. Since that time, we – meaning the U.S. as a country – has taken in the largest cohort of foreigners to enter a major nation, not just in U.S. history, but in world history – for that time span of roughly half a century.

        Even the United States, a nation famous for its welcome of immigrants, may not be up to the task of assimilating so many people from so many lands. And that assumes that they want to assimilate and are being provided the means to do so…. which is unfortunately most-emphatically not the case at present or in the recent past.

        Will this result in war or some sort of “hot” conflict? Well, we are already embroiled in a “cold civil war,” according to some analysts, and the end may not be in sight. Some sort of break-up or secession movement is also possible, as multiple regions seek to reassert their sovereignty as Americans free from the heavy hand of Sodom on the Potomac, a.k.a. Washington, D.C.

        In light of such developments, it is easy to become pessimistic, but on the other hand, as Adam Smith once noted, “There is a lot of ruin in a nation,” which I take to mean that even a nation which is declining and falling apart may take a surprisingly amount of time to finally hit bottom.

        It seems that we are living through that ancient Chinese proverb, “May you live in interesting times…”

        • I do agree with your above missive. I am not a pessimist, those of European extraction will put up with quite a lot, until they don’t, then the wrath of the angry Saxon comes out to play with a terrible vengeance and resolve, think Balkans on steroids.
          As for ole Powel, he was English, not Irish. He was also the youngest Brigadier General in the British Army during WW2.

    • I agree with you to an extent Bill.

      Nationalism is great where you recognise the people wearing your colours. But when nationalism is spoken about by frauds from other countries it is a trap used to control a specific group.

      Nationalism has been the false crux on which the globalists have destroyed thousands of America’s most rugged individuals through endless wars.

      One of the globalists plans is to get you to cross the Rubicon by getting white countries to embrace foreign scum as their own in a Nationalist setting – Olympics and so on. Cheer on the fraud because he is running in your colours and we are paying him to be rich using your taxpayer funds!

      Look at England and France football teams for an idea where this is headed. When those two teams play each other its Africa v Africa. Total nonsense. Then look at all the white English fans going on about how good or bad the English football team is! Its pathetic.

      The US was once white and it they had their independence, and produced the best of everything. What was not to be proud of that.

      Then Reagan began allowing the hordes in and though the national theme has continued few would recognise much that is American as it was just 30 years before. And, they have lost their independence.

      That independence was strengthened by their creativity and wealth. The wealth was taken and given to other countries, the independence dissipated. Competition with the hordes became inevitable and the laws gave the horses more rights than those with generations of history.

      The US aint coming back. It is gone and has been for a long time. Those who still retain some independence need to group together and have a state secede. Then they can create their inevitable utopia.

      The Utopia of the past is not achievable with the Fed, legal system and Corporates all aligned against the people. So the US is done.

      No group of animals flourishes by taking in other breeds or worse, putting other breeds in decision making positions.

      The only answer is war. The question is when.

      • War is coming to all western nations including down under. These 3rd worlders and globullist have not learned the hard lesson, but soon will, it is not nice to make the European man angry, for it never ends well for those who do, much to their collective horror, for nobody does war better than we do.

    • I agree with you: America is unique by its drive for “individualism” and by that goverments are established among men to secure maximum individualism possible. Unlike all the other countries, where one is a subject to a king, or Caesar, or whoever claims his or her right to “rule over people”. That is why America is a primary target for the globalists. They don’t want no souvereign men, no real “Free Americans” – they want servants, and workers that they can rule over…

      “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.–That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed”

  6. Although the EU has a democratic façade, it is ruled by a committee, a “Council of Ministers” which ‘votes’ on items submitted to it by a ‘commission’ which comprises senior civil servants from the member nations under their respective ‘commissioners’ (a sinecure position given to retiring national politicians).

    I read eventually Soviet became like a brand but my understanding is it means Council.
    Republic of the Union of Socialist Councils? I am not really that educated on the history there. After learning that every time I see the word council in regard to an organization, I can’t help but think Soviet and people from the past saying we will accept it piece by piece.

  7. Contrary to popular belief, nationalism and patriotism are not the same thing.

    Nation-states, as a formal entity, date back at least to the Peace of Westphalia of 1648 – which is the generally-recognized demarcation between the modern nation-state and what existed before.

    The existence of nations is owed in part to the organizing effect military affairs have been wider society. Technological changes such as the compound long bow and the spread of black-powder firearms spelled the end of the mounted heavily-armored knight as the decisive weapon of land warfare. It took some time (nearly two centuries) for that change to make itself felt, as armies continued to armor their horse-mounted fighting men and even foot-soldiers, but never the less, the paradigm had shifted.

    Knights were expensive, but because of their elite status and relatively small numbers, the local nobleman or king could afford to keep them, as long as he could pay them either in wages, with titles and land, or in war booty – so the system worked and was perpetuated.

    But when a commoner armed with a long bow could take out a knight – sometimes from as far off as two or three hundred yards away – the era of the knight on horseback was marked for an end. An unskilled man holding a black powder firearm could do the same thing from closer in, and as firearms technology advanced, their range grew also.

    These changes prompted the rulers to change the organization of society. No longer could an elite caste of warriors protect the kingdom or its people. Not when armies consisting of conscripts & commoners could number in the hundreds or even thousands, or more. Since commoners now were participants in the protection of the kingdom, they demanded and won a greater share of the wealth and position in society.
    This gave rise to what later became the middle class. And since only nations could field large armies numbering in the tens or even hundreds of thousands of men, the nation-state became the new organizing principle for European civilization. A principle which was widely-emulated around the world.

    Astute rulers, kings and other leaders began to share power with not just members of the nobility and the clergy, the two long-established power centers in medieval society, but with the emerging merchant and middle classes, but also with the many functionaries and bureaucrats necessary to run an ever-more complex system. Grudgingly perhaps these rulers gave way to the new order, but they could not stop the tide of change.

    Thus came to be the modern nation. Astute and shrewd leaders began fostering a sense of loyalty and devotion to the new order, not just to themselves but to the state itself and its symbols – the flag, its institutions, and so on. This loyalty was essential if the masses were to acquiesce to their sons being conscripted or press-ganged into military service.

    Turning to patriotism, the word comes from the Latin “patria,” meaning “father.” Patriotism is devotion or love of a specific time, place, and people. It is not general in nature or holistic in the way nationalism usually is.

    A nationalist, then, may feel a sense of duty or even love for his country, but it extends not just to those people, places and things that he knows first-hand, but the nation as a geopolitical entity, a place on a map with a flag and national anthem. The patriot, in the true sense of the word, feels love and devotion, too, but to specific people, places and things. To the ways of life, customs, habits and traditions of his people. To his land and home and community.

    The great G.K. Chesterton once said “The true soldier fights not because he hates what is in front of him, but because he loves what is behind him.”

    He was describing patriotism, every bit as much as he was describing nationalism. It is true that in some times and places, national leaders – both good and evil – have successfully harnessed patriotism in the cause of the nation-state or nationalism, but the two ideas remain distinct. And ought to remain that way.

    Indeed, we know from innumerable examples around the world that when a man’s faith in his nation falters for some reason, his sense of patriotism remains… his attachment to those things near-and-dear to him. We also know that men backed against a wall will fight on fiercely even against immense odds when they are defending their homes and families.

  8. Thank you MC for another enlightening essay. I am not a lover of socialism and its attendant compulsion and totalitarianism and your quoting of the socialist anthem brings back a lot of memories. I recall sitting in a communal bath after an afternoon playing rugby at the Portsmouth Grammar School and belting out another version of that anthem which ended with the words..
    “I’m out of work and on the dole, so stick the red flag …………” And that’s what I think of socialism.

    • I never got to play PGS (Price’s School Fareham), so I don’t know that bath, but when I visited my Aunt in Windsor Locks (Conneticut) we went to dinner at a place with a lady at the piano. I was Id’d and the waitress took my Royal Navy ID card. This was given to the Lady at the piano and – a very shy navy guy (red faced me) was called up on stage….
      – “Hey lootenant d’ya like (Harold) Wilson (UK PM at the time) – this is his song:-”
      The working class can kiss my ****
      I’ve got the foreman’s job at last…..

      (This was 1975 – my uncle was a Democrat activist – worked for Hamilton Standard in Hartford).

      • It was too bad that the Rhodesian’s didn’t whack that communist Wilson while they had the chance, it would have saved us a lot of problems we have today.

Comments are closed.