A.K. CHESTERTON WAS A GREAT VISIONARY LEADER A.K.   Chesterton   died   in August   1973.   He   was   the   last   British   patriot   to   have   his   works   made   available   to   the public   through   the   usual   distribution   channels.   Today,   publishing   the   truth   about   issues   that   are   of   great concern   to   Christian   Europeans   is   regarded   as   a   greater   crime   than   murder,   bombing   and   killing   innocent civilians   or   treason.   Of   course   many   of   the   politicians   elected   by   the   public   are   guilty   of   these   three   most serious crimes. In    his    book    "FACING    THE   ABYSS"   A.K.    Chesterton    summed    up    the    cause    of    European    problems. The   introduction   was   written   by   P.A.   del   Valle   where   he   says,"   Although   written   principally   for   the   benefit   of the   British   people,   everything   he   so   eloquently   describes   is   applicable   to   the   United   States,   perhaps   to   all Christendom." You   will   not   get   beyond   the   first   few   pages   when   you   will   realise   that   what   has   been   happening   to   Great Britain   is   precisely   the   same   as   that   which   has   been   happening   to   the   United   States.   I   can   promise   you   that you   will   be   enlightened   and   alarmed   as   patriots   and   good   Americans   with   the   menace   that   faces   us   as   it does in Britain. You will see that we, too, are facing the abyss. You   will   find   treason   within   our   government   and   that   they   are   deliberately   giving   their   allegiance   to   a   world order   that   officially   does   not   exist.   You   will   understand   the   reasons   for   strikes,   terrorism   and   race   mixing   are a   preliminary   to   a   dictatorship   dedicated   to   complete   enslavement   o   f   the   people.   Napoleon   has   been quoted as follows: "Financiers have no mother country, no decency, only greed". FACING THE ABYSS Chapter 1, DISEASE BENEATH THE SKIN   So   vast   is   the   scope   of   modern   political   life,   so   devious   and   complex   the   forces   shaping   it,   that   no understanding   is   possible   without   the   knowledge   that   seldom   does   appearance   reflect   the   inner   reality.   That knowledge,   for   obvious   reasons,   is   not   readily   made   available.   Electorates   would   be   shocked   if   they became aware that much government is government by false pretences. Sixty   years   ago   Hilaire   Beloc   and   Cecil   Chesterton   revealed   something   of   the   truth   in   their   book,   The   Party Game,   which   showed   politicians   to   be   engaged   in   sham   fights   on   issues   that   were   rarely   the   real   issues. Since   that   time   research   has   been   wider   and   gone   much   deeper,   resulting   in   the   discovery   that,   in   all matters   of   fundamental   policy,   and   not   simply   in   isolated   cases,   government   of   the   people   by   the   people   for the   people   is   a   contrived   delusion.   A   more   accurate   description   today   is   government   of   the   people   by   the party bosses for international vested interests. While   the   Bolshevik   Revolution   was   taking   place   in   Russia   one   of   the   chief   leaders   of   the   Left   in   Britain, Philip   Snowden,   was   making   speeches   of   such   reckless   fury   that   he   could   blame   nobody   for   thinking   that   he was   himself   a   violent   revolutionary.   Within   a   little   more   than   ten   years,   when   he   became   Chancellor   of   the Exchequer,   he   was   so   beloved   by   bankers   that   they   made   him   a   Freeman   of   the   city   of   London   and   he ended his career as a peer of the Realm. Snowden   was   not   the   only   "class   warrior"   to   blaze   a   path   into   the   exalted   world   of   the   Establishment   after making   a   name   for   himself   as   its   deadly   enemy.   I   know   of   no   Left-Wing   politician   since   the   days   of   Keir Hardie   who   impoverished   himself   in   the   "workers   cause",   but   hundreds   who   espoused   it   and   immediately improved   the   terms   of   life   for   themselves   as   a   direct   consequence.   Such   improvement   does   not   itself indicate   personal   insincerity,   but   neither   does   it   betoken   any   great   attachment   to   the   command   "Sell   all   ye hath   and   give   to   the   poor".   The   higher   the   leaders   progressed   the   wider   became   the   gap   in   wealth   between them   and   those   (including   the   poorest   in   the   land)   whom   they   originally   purported   to   represent.   Nobody seemed to mind. Typical   of   all   too   many   post   war   socialist   idols   are   those   who   denounce   the   parasitical   capitalists   who   prey upon   them.   In   particular   I   am   thinking   of   one,   where   had   it   been   possible   to   arrange   for   his   Welsh   miner constituents   to   come   to   London   for   a   sight   of   their   champion   luxuriously   disporting   himself   amidst   the   West End   flesh-pots,   they   would   have   recoiled   in   sheer   incredulity.   I   once   asked   him   how   he   reconciled   practice with   precept.   Scarlet   of   cheek   he   could   only   roar   at   me:   "You   see,   you   cannot   help   being   scurrilous!"   It   is   by no   means   unknown   for   members   of   Parliament   representing   working-class   constituencies   to   change   into shabbier clothes and borrow old second-hand cars to attend meetings in their own area. Other   such   leaders   have   simpler   tastes,   but   how   many   lack   an   eye   for   the   main   chance,   how   many   spurn an   opportunity   to   feather   their   own   nests?   How   many   by   stressing   the   inequalities   between   rich   and   poor, have   personally   widened   the   gap   by   their   own   advancement?   It   is   not   "scurrility"   which   bids   me   pose   such questions,   but   an   earnest   desire   for   the   general   political   scene   to   be   observed   other   than   through   rose- tinted spectacles. Politically    what    is    seen    as    the    Conservative    Right,    is    regarded    against    all    the    facts,    as    the    staunch champion   of   patriotism   and   traditional   British   values.   Not   only   has   it   betrayed   our   national   interests   and   the interests   of   those   who   were   loyal   to   us   in   every   part   of   the   world,   but   it   has   vied   with   the   Left   for   the   deep dishonour   of   obliterating   the   British   nation   as   a   separate   historical   entity   empowered   to   manage   its   own affairs. In   1955   Harold   Macmillan,   replying   to   a   question   of   mine,   said   that   he   was   gravely   concerned   about   the influx   of   coloured   immigrants.   Next   year   he   became   Prime   Minister.   From   that   time   until   1964   the   immigrant population   increased   so   rapidly   that   to   pass   through   large   areas   of   the   Midlands   soon   became   like   driving through   Karachi   or   Bombay.   The   politicians   of   all   parties,   in   encouraging   or   even   in   tolerating   the   gift   of   our islands   home   to   swarms   of   disparate   breeds,   have   been   guilty   of   treason   immeasurably   more   damaging than that of any act for which war-time traitors were hanged. In   the   consideration   of   such   matters   it   is   only   fair   to   the   Left   to   say   that   since   the   days   of   Robert   Blatchford, it   has   never   pretended   to   be   other   than   anti-patriotic.   Its   wan,   thin   bloodied,   priggish   leader,   in   the   "thirties" Clement   Atlee,   was   proud   to   boast   that   he   and   his   colleagues   were   deliberately   giving   their   allegiance   to   a world order (which did not happen to exist) and not to their own country. Conservatives   can   make   no   such   claim   for   their   manifest   treasons. As   they   claim   to   be   patriots   most   of   them trade   under   a   fraudulent   label   and   do   so   unblushingly   because   they   know   that   their   traditional   image, handed   down   from   a   nobler   past,   is   firmly   implanted   in   the   minds   of   their   followers.   As   Labour   voters   look upon   the   their   party   as   their   bulwark   of   defence   against   the   "wicked   capitalists"   ,   so   do   the   old   dears   (of whatever   age)   look   upon   the   Conservative   Party   as   their   bulwark   against   the   depredations   of   the   "wicked socialists". Both images are false. There   are   Right-Wing   M.P.’s   intelligent   enough   to   be   aware   of   what   their   leaders   are   doing?   In   the   middle 50’s   Captain   Henry   Kirby,   Conservative   M.P.   for   Arundel,   asked   me   to   visit   him   at   the   House   of   Commons. His   object   was   to   tell   me   that   he   and   very   many   of   his   colleagues   greatly   admired   the   work   I   was   doing   in defence   of   British   interests   at   home   and   overseas.   I   expressed   my   gratification   adding   that   it   would   be   even more   encouraging   were   the   Members   to   defend   these   causes   from   the   floor   of   the   House   of   Commons. "Never   fear,   it   will   come,   it   will   come"   he   assured   me. The   years   went   by   but   nothing   came. Then   it   occurred to me to ask why, if the others were afraid to speak out, Kirby did not himself defy the Devil. Here   as   far   as   I   can   remember,   was   his   answer:   "Look   at   the   chaps   on   our   side   of   the   House,   if   they   do   not possess   private   means,   have   this,   that,   or   the   other   City   directorship,   or   are   political   advisers   to   this   or   that big   corporation   they   would   struggle   financially.   Some   of   the   biggest   corporations   have   quite   a   bevy   of political   advisers,   and   not   from   all   Benches!   For   my   own   part   I   have   no   City   directorship   or   emoluments   from any   outside   source.   If   I   were   to   stand   up   in   the   House   and   hammer   home   the   truths   you   publish,   Central Office   would   not   lose   a   day   before   going   to   work   in   my   constituency.   Someone   else   would   be   put   forward   as the official candidate at the next election and I would be ditched". Kirby’s   ironical   understanding   of   his   colleagues   in   Parliament   shows   something   of   the   reality   of   life   in   the Palace   of   Westminster,   as   it   does   the   unreality   of   many   popular   conceptions   of   what   takes   place   there. While   it   cannot   be   said   that   the   politician   is   a   greatly   esteemed   figure   in   modern   Britain   few   people   realise how great the difference between Parliamentary values and the values held in private life. In   this   extract   from   "Facing   the Abyss"   by A.K.   Chesterton   we   can   see   that   through   a   conflict   of   interests   it   is impossible   for   Parliament   to   do   what   is   right   or   to   serve   the   national   interest.   In   fact   we   would   be   better   off   if Parliament   was   abolished   and   an   alternative   means   of   governing   the   country   was   formed.   Or   at   least dispense   with   Party   politics   and   elect   representatives   on   a   rigid   constituency   basis   with   MP’s   selected locally   from   within   the   area   they   represent.   Candidates   would   be   selected   on   an   agreed   list   of   policies.   If   an MP   deviated   from   the   manifesto,   local   residents   would   be   able   to   confront   him   and   say   either   stick   to   the agreed policies or you will be replaced. How   many   people   do   you   know   that   belong   to   the   Labour,   Liberal   or   Conservative   Party?   I   don’t   know   any. Therefore   many   people   with   knowledge,   ability   and   a   desire   to   work   in   the   national   interest   are   immediately excluded.   Worse   still   ask   any   MP   and   they   will   tell   you   they   cannot   do   what   they   want   because   they   have   to adhere   to   party   policy.   Ask   the   party   leaders   and   they   will   tell   you   that   they   have   to   conform   to   the   money- power   that   funds   the   government.   If   they   are   truthful   they   will   admit   that   the   Zionist   movement,   Freemasons, Bilderbergers   and   Fabians   between   them   also   have   the   power   to   dictate   government   policy.   The   logical thing    to    do    is    get    rid    of    the    corrupt    party    system    and    elect    individual    MP’s    selected    from    the    most knowledgeable, capable and honest people, who would take the best course of action.
27
Updated 2 nd. Oct17 - 21:00 bst
Back to Top Back to Top Back to Index Back to Index Prev. page Prev. page Next page Next page Download as PDF Download as PDF