A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and he carries his banners openly. But the traitor moves among those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not traitor, he speaks in the accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their garments, and he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of a city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murderer is less to be feared. — Cicero, 42 B.C.
The worst difficulties from which we suffer do not come from without, they come from within. They come from a peculiar type in our country who if they add something to its culture, take much from its strength. Our difficulties come from the mood of unwarrantable self-abasement into which we have been cast by a powerful section of our own intellectuals. They come from the acceptance of defeatist doctrines by a large proportion of our politicians. But what have they to offer but a vague internationalism, a squalid materialism and the promise of impossible Utopias? — Winston Churchill, St George’s Day 1933These two quotes touch on one of my constant themes - that of the Fifth Column, the traitor within who wears down people as surely as water wears down stone or fungus eats at the most hearty oak given time. Combined, as anyone should know, the effect is magnified.
His conclusion - to become a Conservative MP - is not what I would have suggested, but he may well have reasons which I am not fully aware of yet.
5 comments:
This is a comment I made before I read your post that has some congruence with it.
It was on the subject of the underclass and can be found at:
http://crushedbyingsoc.blogspot.com/2007/12/hidden-beneath-carpet.html
"Things may well be bad for the people you speak of. But it is a relative badness. They have their physical needs met to a standard absolutely unheard of 70 years ago, probably even 50 years ago.
It seems much of what they are lacking, (apart from intelligence in many cases) is meaning to their lives. Even as things have physically improved, there seems to have been a corresponding ‘spiritual’ deterioration. It is arguable that this is the direct result of social changes pushed through by the paternalistic left for ideological reasons, together with some of the physical improvements.
The government likes to bandy the (now newspeak) term ‘community’ at every turn as they have destroyed much of the sense of community and solidarity that the British once felt.
One can’t quite call it a conspiracy, more an antipathy to all they rightly, or wrongly, lumped together in a package that they hated called: empire, anything not left patrician or working class, respect, etc...
It begins to seem they may have misidentified some of their targets and thrown the baby out with the bathwater. Just because someone you don’t like has a good idea, it doesn’t automatically make it a bad idea, many people seem to forget that, or never work it out."
At the risk of sounding like a conspiracy theorist...
Having read your comment it is worthy of note that certainly the soviet ‘security’ agencies would have had an interest in fostering such a breakdown and the intellectual left useful wing idiots who promote it.
Perhaps more controversially there may well have been (possibly Fenian) elements in the US who also felt it would be in the US interests to ensure the dismantling of the British Empire and the social machinery that had made it possible and sustained it.
Reasons for seeking election as an MP?
In despair at increasing centralisation and bureaucracy, abject cowardice in the face of terrorism, and the undemocratic handling of the Lisbon Treaty, I fond myself seriously investigating emigration to New Zealand. Why New Zealand is another, now irrelevant, story.
It hit me that this would be abandoning my home country to a very poor fate. I didn't serve in the armed forces to see our nation lose its self-determination, and I don't propose to stand aside now.
I don't know how better to fight for our country and Cameron's Conservatives seem our best practical hope of improving matters.
Thanks for replying, Steve.
An alternative to Cameron will arrive soon. Interested to know how UKIP fails your criteria (I am not a UKIPer btw).
Trust me Dont go to New Zealand
You would hate it within months
Notwithstanding the facts of our relationship with the EU and its consequences, UKIP's proposition is too simplistic: "in or out" is the wrong question because the "in" crowd can easily use fear and deception to win the argument. Witness the federalist Liberal's proposed amendment to the Queen's speech, a low ploy on several fronts.
David Cameron has spoken strongly in the Czech republic against that for which the EU stands:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7110538.stm
I believe that Cameron's Conservatives are simply a better bet than any other party for a successful, independent Britain. I suggest the judgement is whether there are more "out" voters than confirmed plus swing "in" voters; if not, progress towards reform must be gentle if we are not to see disarray and defeat.
Post a Comment