We are developing the social individualist meta-context for the future. From the very serious to the extremely frivolous... lets see what is on the mind of the Samizdata people.
Samizdata, derived from Samizdat /n. - a system of clandestine publication of banned literature in the USSR [Russ.,= self-publishing house]
|
Samizdata quote of the day – Let’s not have a second world war Dr. Mackail, in one of his recent essays, has laid fresh stress on this point when he says there were not enough Romans left to carry on the work of Rome. There are fears among those who are responsible for Government to-day, fears not yet gripping us by the throat, but taking grisly shape in the twilight, that the Great War, by the destruction of our best lives in such numbers, has not left enough of the breed to carry on the work of the Empire. Our task is hard enough, but it will be accomplished ; yet who in Europe does not know that one more war in the West and the civilization of the ages will fall with as great a shock as that of Rome ? She has left danger signals along the road ; it is for us to read them.
– Stanley Baldwin (Prime Minister as was), 9 January 1926. Maybe fear of a repeat of the collapse of the Roman Empire is an ever-present feature of Western civilisation. I still fear it though.
|
Who Are We? The Samizdata people are a bunch of sinister and heavily armed globalist illuminati who seek to infect the entire world with the values of personal liberty and several property. Amongst our many crimes is a sense of humour and the intermittent use of British spelling.
We are also a varied group made up of social individualists, classical liberals, whigs, libertarians, extropians, futurists, ‘Porcupines’, Karl Popper fetishists, recovering neo-conservatives, crazed Ayn Rand worshipers, over-caffeinated Virginia Postrel devotees, witty Frédéric Bastiat wannabes, cypherpunks, minarchists, kritarchists and wild-eyed anarcho-capitalists from Britain, North America, Australia and Europe.
|
Sadly it’s not just up to the government of the UK
World War II could have been prevented.
War could have been prevented a stronger line in 1936 – the German army was under orders to retreat from the Rhineland if the French or British showed any sign of doing anything. Or even in 1938 when there would have been a German military coup if Chancellor Hitler insisted on attacking Czechoslovakia – had the British and French made it clear they would stand by Prague, the German army was NOT ready for war even in 1938.
The “we needed to delay war in order to rearm” argument does not work (indeed is the reverse of the truth) – because the Germans were rearming faster than the British and French were, so delaying helped them – not us.
A tougher line would have prevented World War Two.
And a tougher line, when war came (came in spite of, or rather BECAUSE OF, the policy of Appeasement), have led to a much quicker victory.
It is often forgotten that most of the German army and air force was committed in the east (in Poland and elsewhere) in 1939 – the British and French could have marched into the Rhineland (the industrial heartland of Germany) and won the war – yet they did NOTHING.
There is also the bizarre decision NOT to declare war on the Soviet Union in 1939 – in spite of its invasion of Poland. The Soviet Union invaded Poland and then invaded Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, part of Romania, and then Finland – but there was no Declaration of War – no rounding up of pro Soviet agents (mostly in the Labour Party and the Trade Unions) even though pro National Socialist German figures were rounded up.
It is utterly baffling – British government behaviour makes no sense, unless influence (in the bureaucracy and so on) by leftist forces goes back a lot further in time than is normally thought.
The opportunity to cripple the Labour Party and the political Trade Unions (the “Collective Bargaining” responsible for the mass unemployment of the 1930s) presented by the pact between National Socialist Germany and the Soviet Union and the Soviet Union’s invasions of Poland, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania and Finland, was just thrown away.
Indeed the Labour Party was invited into the government and leftists were given control of such things as education and propaganda in the British armed forces – leading to the disaster (and it was a disaster – a terrible disaster) of the 1945 election – which ended the United Kingdom as a great power.
As for now….
I was watching people on GB News saying that we must increase taxes in order to build up the British armed forces – in order to take on Mr Putin.
Sadly, tragically, most people in political circles do not yet grasp just how weak the British economy (and British society) now is.
The United Kingdom not only imports more food than ever before, it also imports far more manufactured goods than it experts.
As late as the 1930s (and contrary to the lies of the media and the education system) British industry was actually quite strong compared to nearly all other countries (rather more efficient than National Socialist Germany – contrary to the propaganda) – sadly, tragically, that is no longer true.
As for “banking and financial services” – a lot of that is Credit Bubble, the idea that it can sustain a population of almost 70 million people (bloated by mass immigration and the natural increase of hostile population groups) is false – indeed the idea is utterly absurd.
Britain is no position to increase military spending to “take on Putin” or anyone else.
The United Kingdom is not the great power it once was – its economy no longer has a real foundation, and its society is torn apart (undermined) by “Diversity” and “Social Liberalism”.
Britain is no condition to go to war with anyone – I beg people to please understand that.
“Maybe fear of a repeat of the collapse of the Roman Empire is an ever-present feature of Western civilisation. I still fear it though.”
As it should be. All great civilizations have collapsed of their own weight eventually. It’s inevitable. Everything that has a beginning, also has an end.
And, I believe, it has a lot to do with that old maxim:
Strong men make good times
Good times make weak men
Weak men make bad times
Bad times make strong men
Lather, rinse, repeat.
Perhaps I should have explained that better.
Baldwin acted on his concerns about civilisation. He was wrong.
I am acting on MY concerns about civilisation. How do I know I am not wrong?
“Baldwin acted on his concerns about civilisation. He was wrong.
I am acting on MY concerns about civilisation. How do I know I am not wrong?”
You don’t *know*.
No one ever does for sure. People make their decisions and judgments based on the best information they have at the time, colored, of course, by their own opinions, experiences and biases.
The ones who turn out to be right are the ones that are the best at looking at the lessons of history and taking away the right messages and not letting their own desires or wishes interfere with an objective view of cause and effect.
That’s the left’s biggest failure, in my opinion: they cannot ignore their own utopian pipe dreams about how the world *should* be long enough to clearly determine the relationship between cause and effect. When everything goes to sh1t as a result of their policies, it *can’t possibly* be a result of their policies, because they had such good intentions. It must have been some outside force sabotaging them…or they just didn’t do leftism *hard* enough. Surely it’ll work next time.
Patrick Crozier – Stanley Baldwin may not have been “wrong”.
World War II, and perhaps (perhaps) even more the Atlee victory in 1945 destroyed Britain as a Great Power – and since the 1960s cultural decline, mass immigration, and now fertility collapse would indicate that Western Civilization may well fall.
Remember it takes time – Roman society was insane from at least the time of the Emperor Diocletian, but the Western Empire struggled on for another century or so.
It has barely been a century since Stanley Baldwin said what you have quoted – so NO he was NOT wrong.
There is no way that the United Kingdom with the size of the government as it now is and the growth of hostile populations within the United Kingdom, can survive – the question is not “whether” but WHEN will the United Kingdom collapse.