European Outlook # 59 May 2020

James Battersby Remembered

We are grateful to Robert Best for supplying European Outlook with this highly rare and unusual correspondence below, extracted from James Battersby's equally rare book 'The Bishop Said Amen' (published in 1947). Mr Best is a friend of Amanda Hale, James Battersby's youngest daughter who has written a book called 'Mad Hatter' about her late father, who died in tragic circumstances by his own hand in 1955. See Nation Revisited # 151 May 2019.
https://nationrevisited.blogspot.com/2019/03/nationrevisited-151-may-2019.html


JL Battersby, No 92141
2 Shore Rd
Peveril Camp 'M'
Peel, Isle of Mann

October 8th 1942
The Archbishop of Canterbury
Dr William Temple

Sir,
I write to you, the spiritual leader of our country, about a matter of the most urgent importance.

I wish that you could visit me here, in order that I might witness to you for God in the many details of which I am in possession. In summary, however, the heart of the matter is that after two years of study in Biblical prophecy in relation to present world events; as a result also of my knowledge of revelations made by the Holy Spirit to a fellow detainee, Capt TG St Barbe Baker, and from observation of my own instincts with direction from Almighty God, I have solemnly to declare to you:

1. This war is the judgement of Almighty God on those who serve Mammon.

2. Adolf Hitler is God's Judge and Chosen to fulfill the Divine Will.

I make this statement before God and therefore, fearing no man. For in these days when men must uncompromisingly chose between God and Mammon, I surrender myself to God.

I would not presume to advise you, Sir, in these vital matters, other than to plead with you more earnestly than I have ever pleaded with any man, that God may guide you to serve Him in these hours of trial for our country. I know that you have it within your power, with God's guidance, to save the lives of hundreds of thousands of our fellow countrymen. Yours is a terrible responsibility before God. There are many of us in this camp who are praying that you will discharge it faithfully.

If judgement is inevitable - and we shall all suffer judgement according to our desserts - then we yet know that God will not destroy those who led by the Spirit, return humbly to Him and dedicate their lives to His service.

JL Battersby

Copies of this letter were sent to the Home Secretary, Mr Herbert Morrison; to Cardinal Hinsley, and to DR JH Hertz, the Chief Rabbi of the British Empire; and personally delivered by TG St Barbe Baker and JL Battersby to Superintendent Ralph , MC, the Commander of Peveril Camp, Peel.

Reply from the Archbishop of Canterbury

Lambeth Palace
London SE1

Dear Sir,
The Archbishop asks me to thank you for your letter of October 8th. Consideration has been given to your views, but you will understand that owing to the pressure of work the Archbishop cannot reply personally.

Yours faithfully
Ian H White Thompson
Chaplain

Acknowledgements were also received from the Home Secretary, Cardinal Hinsley and the Chief Rabbi.

Dr Temple, Archbishop of Canterbury, died in October, 1944. He was succeeded by DR Fisher,previously Bishop of London.

Cardinal Hinsley died in 1943, and was succeeded by Dr Griffin, previously Bishop of Birmingham.

Dr Hertz died in 1946.

JL Battersby and TG St Barbe Baker wrote to the Chief Rabbi again on February 5th, 1943, writing in part.

"With further reference to our letters of November 2th and December 30th, 1942, at the outset let us state that we write this letter in the Spirit of God, which is the Spirit of Love
… we... have been successful in this prison camp in combatting feelings of hate and revenge, for we recognise that the struggle is essentially between God and Mammon, and that mankind as a whole is to blame for the suffering and misery in which the world finds itself."

"It is our wish to influence all political prisoners... and to give a helping hand needed for the conversion of all Jews, their deliverance from Mammon, and the establishment of safe transit to their new national home, wherever God has decreed it shall be."

What is Real Nationalism? - James Caterill
From the BNP Website - https://bnp.org.uk/

The word 'nation' derives from the Latin for 'to be born', by which the Romans meant having roots in a common bloodline, rather than merely being born in the same place. The members of a nation invariably also share the same language, history, values and culture - including traditions and popular entertainment. Often they have the same religion or attitude to religion. These shared ancestral roots, experiences (good and bad) and aspirations combine to make the broad mass of people identify with the nation and with fellow members of it.

While the members of a nation often live under one government, the nation and the state are not the same thing. Nations can be subjected to foreign rule for centuries but still retain their identity and thirst for their freedom. The nation is what really matters, a living thing whose present owes both a debt to its past heroes and sacred duties to its as yet unborn future generations. The state is merely the form of government which the nation chooses, for the time being, as for it and for its future survival. In a healthy society without problems of external domination or an out-of-control elite, the form of government will reflect the traditions and the innate character of the people making the nation. The state and its personnel should serve the nation , not the other way round.

Shared culture is one of the most important building blocks of a strong nation, but it is not the only one. Modern scientific research is now identifying the specific genes for certain kinds of behaviour - conformism and individuality, for example. It shows that the proportion of such genes vary among different human populations. This doesn't mean that any one group is 'better' than another, it does mean that human populations are different. The rebuttal of old Marxist egalitarianism proves that culture springs from the inborn nature of the people.  Put simply, when large numbers of Brits went to India, they didn't become Indian, either in terms of ethnic identity or culture. And if large numbers of Africans come to Britain, breathing English air or even being born in England can never make them or their descendants English.

Even if a nation is composed of the descendants of immigrants (the USA, for example), why should that mean that it should accept further mass immigration on a scale that brings poverty and social collapse to many of its communities? In any case, it is not true in Britain. Again, the latest DNA science has buried the old leftist lies for good. We know that the vast majority of indigenous Brits can trace their ancestry directly back to the first post-Ice Age hunter gatherer settlers of our lands - 17,000 years ago. Further waves of genetically and culturally closely related tribes arrived in Neolithic times as farmers, and these were 'topped up' by further migration from mainland Europe, the Anglo-Saxons and Vikings for example. Tests on 9,000-year-old remains of Cheddar Man found that the local village school-teacher was his direct descendant. By comparison, the Maoris only reached New Zealand 700 years ago, yet no liberal would dare to sneer that they are "mere immigrants".
Nationalists reject these double standards and insist that the British people are the indigenous, 'first people' of our islands and are entitled to recognition and respect as such.

The liberal-left talk a lot about diversity, but the mass immigration policies and One World 'ideas' they promote are in fact destroying human diversity. At present there are around 5,000 different national/linguistic/tribal groups in the world. This wonderful diversity is being wiped out so fast that scientists estimate that by the end of this century only 800 will survive. This catastrophic wipe-out of human bio-diversity can only be stopped if the free peoples of the world reject the Marxist propaganda and capitalist greed that together both favour mass migration and the destruction of separate nations through integration. All peoples have the right to control their geographical and cultural borders so as to preserve their identity. And the individuals and regimes running their states must either help this process or lose all legitimacy. 

A nation can assimilate a limited number of immigrants. The more different they are and the larger their numbers, the harder this becomes. At a certain point - which can only be recognised if the host population are free to express their concerns openly - immigration stops being about the rights of immigrants and becomes about the colonisation and dispossession of the indigenous community. Even if integration is possible, it is only acceptable if the original inhabitants welcome it without brainwashing or coercion, and it should never be on such a scale as to fundamentally change the identity and core characteristics of the nation in question. Genocide - the destruction of a people - does not have to involve mass murder. Its evil can also be accomplished through propaganda and social conditioning to encourage different populations to mix. Tyrannical regimes have done this for centuries, knowing that rootless and divided populations are easier to control and exploit than proud and homogenous nations.

What's so special about Britain and the British? First, we have the same rights to our land, and to self-government within it, as every other indigenous people on Earth. Second, the genius of the closely related British family of nations who are indigenous to our islands has made an absolutely unique contribution to the development of human freedom, happiness and material comfort of the whole world. The rule of law, free speech and parliamentary democracy, the Industrial revolution, the computer age, some of the world's finest literature, so many great sports - these and many other things are our special gift to Mankind. Why should a people who have achieved so much, and who still have so much to achieve, meekly accept their dispossession and destruction by an elite that has no democratic mandate for such drastic change? The free peoples of Britain have never consented either to mass immigration or to the snuffing out of our right to self-determination in a federal Europe. That is why resistance to those evils is not only a matter of right, but of duty to our nation. Our duty - and your duty - not only on behalf of those alive today, but for the British heroes of the past and for those yet to be born.

(Except for the bit about Europe this is a good article. Federation would not destroy our sovereignty it would guarantee it, just as the rights of California or New York are protected by the federal constitution of the USA).

The Hungry Must be Fed

The nations of the world are trying to revive their battered economies by propping up businesses and supporting the unemployed. People have got to eat and governments have got no choice but to feed them. This is not as revolutionary as it sounds. Most states have some form of social security. The alternative would be a discontented population leading to anarchy. Democratic states would not survive and authoritarian regimes would have to use maximum force to stay in power.

We don't know how long it will take to get back to normal following the coronavirus crisis. Some hopeful politicians are predicting an immediate comeback but others are talking about years of stagnation. But whatever happens billions of dollars will have to be found, and traditional policies will be turned upside down. Right-wing governments that dislike 'Socialism' will have to feed the hungry. The middle classes will object to feeding the unemployed, but there is no alternative.

These billions of dollars are not 'created out of thin air' as the conspiracy theorists would have us believe, they are raised by taxation, bond sales or borrowing. Every penny will have to be paid back, however long it takes. We finished paying back our war debts to Canada and the United States in December 2006. The Argentine government defaulted on its debts in 2001 and they are still suffering. Governments and bankers are well aware of the consequences of failure.   

The rich nations of the northern hemisphere will be discomforted by the worldwide recession but the poor nations of the south will be devastated. They depend on exports of oil and raw materials that are not wanted during a recession.  We must prepare to resist the millions of refugees that will flee from poverty. This has already started with the Syrian refugees. When they first arrived on Europe's doorstep Angela Merkel welcomed them, but there was such an adverse reaction in Germany that the European Union is now paying Turkey to keep them out. It's cheaper to pay the Turks than to let in multitudes of hungry and desperate people.

President Trump is hoping to stop the influx by building a wall on the Mexican border, but his own Republican backers employ immigrants to pick their crops and work on their construction sites. These 'patriots' like to wave Old Glory and chant "USA, USA", but they rely on cheap labour.  

Of course, nothing lasts forever but while the world sorts itself out the taxpayers of the wealthy nations will be penalised as never before. The retirement age is likely to be put back even further and pension funds will be pillaged. We have just about got over the financial disaster of 2008, only to be plunged into another crisis. But one thing is for sure, the hungry must be fed and people must receive a living wage, whether they are working or not. 

Creative Accounting

The huge sums of money that the government has pledged to the economy are beyond belief. Boris Johnson has promised to spend "whatever it takes" to support businesses when the lockdown is over. That's on top of the billions allocated to the National Health Service.

Britain is not Zimbabwe, or the Weimar Republic. We will not  print worthless money. We will not have multi-billion pound notes in circulation and we will not default on our loan repayments. We will raise the money by taxation, bond sales, and borrowing. Because we have a good credit rating the international banks will lend us the money, but they will want us to produce a business plan, to show how much we need, what we will spend it on, and how we intend to repay it.

There is no obvious target for cuts in government spending. How can we chose between defence, education, housing, transport, the NHS, the police, the prison service, transport, or local government? All of these departments were starved of funds during ten years of austerity and now they face another decade of uncertainty.

The last time that we were in this desperate situation was in 1976 when prime minister James Callaghan borrowed $3.9 billion (about $18 billion today). The International Monetary Fund lent us the money but only on condition that we stuck strictly to an agreed budget under their supervision. So much for "getting our country back."

Whoever is charged with putting our business plan together must be a creative accountant. Our gross domestic product is bound to fall as firms go bankrupt and workers are made redundant. And as our GDP falls so will our tax revenue. As people are thrown on the scrapheap the pension funds will stop buying bonds and the insurance companies will stop insuring government loans. To recover from this nightmare we will need a leader with the ability to revive our flagging economy. There is an old saying: "cometh the hour cometh the man", we can only hope that it's true.

Comments

Please use the facility at the end of this blog to leave your comments and see what others have to say. 

European Outlook

All articles are by Bill Baillie unless otherwise stated. The opinions of guest writers are entirely their own. We seek reform by legal means according to the UN Declaration of Human Rights, Article 19:

"We all have the right to make up our own minds, to think what we like, to say what we think, and to share our ideas with other people."

This blog will appear occasionally in support of Nation Revisited which is posted monthly. https://nationrevisited.blogspot.com