Wednesday, March 26, 2008

[family] only one of seven planks

Please do go over and read the whole of this by MJW:

David Cameron’s plans to make a “family friendly” Britain are rather brave for two crucial reasons, firstly the social liberal left has done a remarkable job chipping away at the foundations of family values, supposedly for the benefit of those who choose less conventional lifestyles (and no matter what dysfunction the attitude of “all lifestyles are valid” causes). Secondly, because focusing on family values leaves the party open to criticism next time an MP lauding such values is caught shagging around.

What MJW is unconsciously and yet by accident referring to is the spitting on the family by the globalists for which this is one plank in the platform I've published at this blog a number of times. Here it is one more time [yawn]:

1) Abolition of all ordered governments
2) Abolition of private property
3) Abolition of inheritance
4) Abolition of patriotism
5) Abolition of the family
6) Abolition of religion
7) Creation of a world government

It's written down, they don't deviate from it, it's only us who waver and say it's not possible. Scroll down to the Morgan post and there is their dystopia in one - cold, grey-blue, metallic, lifeless, joyless, soulless. What an aim in life!

10 comments:

Gracchi said...

How could someone abolish patriotism- its a feeling, and feelings are not in the control of governments. Name a country in the world which has abolished inheritance- I'd like to know where that has happened. In the UK the only question is about whether to abolish inheritance tax which has been around since the 1890s. Abolishing the family! How James? To be honest I see no evidence for that whatsoever: I have tons of friends who are married and I'm in my twenties and I'd like to get married when the right girl turns up for me so I really don't believe that the family is being abolished. As for religion- again its a feeling and hard to abolish, furthermore I see no evidence of people abolishing religion in the UK- there are laws even being drafted by some to give religion further special protections in law.

James, you are a good fellow but this is paranoid nonsence.

Gracchi said...

sorry just on to your two other points- would the abolishing of ordered government contradict with teh establishment of world government. I don't see that as being an issue either- again in the UK the parties are arguing about how to make government more able to control criminals and in the US a government which has ruled unconstitutionally is about to lose an election and be rejected (no matter who wins it will be a rejection for Bush and Cheney).

Your other point was the abolishing of private property: Ok there is an imminent recession, these happen all the time- early 70s, early 80s, early 90s etc. The last couple of years have seen a very benign economic outlook especially for property. I'd go further- name me a single politician who has a parliamentary seat anywhere in the world James who wants to abolish private property- I can't think of one- perhaps in Russia there is a relic of the early 20s but name me someone and make it someone from a g8 country because otherwise it doesn't really matter who wants ot abolish private property.

Bretwalda Edwin-Higham said...

Tiberius - these are not my points - they are Theirs.

Bretwalda Edwin-Higham said...

The last couple of years have seen a very benign economic outlook especially for property.

Tiberius - can you say this with a straight face? Have you heard of housing crisis, Norhtern Rock or any of these things? You have to look outside occasionally.

Gracchi said...

I was not commenting on this year James but since 1993 property has done very well- its just that now as my comment acknowledges there is a potential recession whose depth none of us have any idea about as yet.

Theirs. Who are they James? Can you name one person that I might have heard of who is part of this they? Because I can't think of one who believes in what you have outlined as their plan- not Gordon Brown, not George Bush, not Angela Merkel, not Nicholas Sarkozy, not Tony Blair. So name someone please.

Bretwalda Edwin-Higham said...

Yes - Brown and Blair for a start, the Round Table, Club of Paris, former head of Tesco, myriad psychologists - my blog is dotted with these.

Common Purpose's Julia Middleton, Kissinger, Cheney - it would take all night.

Bretwalda Edwin-Higham said...

John Jacob Astor, Irving Berlin, Luther Burbank, Henry Clay, Thomas E. Dewey, Henry Ford, Barry Goldwater, Samuel Compers, J. Edgar Hoover, Charles Lindbergh, General Douglas McArthur, Andrew Mellon, General John J. Pershing, Will Rogers, Sigmund Romberg, John Philip Sousa, Mark Twain, and Chief Justice Earl Warren

President George Bush, Prescott Sheldon Bush, George W. Bush (George Bush's father), John Kerry, David Boren, William F. Buckley, Henry Sloane Coffin Sr. and Jr., Henry Luce, Henry Lewis Stimson, William Howard Taft, McGeorge Bundy, Archibald MacLeish

Professor Carroll Quigley, Bill Clinton's mentor at Georgetown University

Joy Elmer Morgan, former editor of the "NEA Journal,"

July 26, 1968 - Nelson Rockefeller pledges that "as President, he would work toward international creation of a new world order."

British Humanist Association

Lucis Trust

Zbigniew Brzezinski

Catherine Barrett, former president of the National Education Association

Chester M. Pierce, Professor of Education and Psychiatry in the Faculty of Medicine at Harvard University

Current head of Harvard

Head of William and Mary

Roy M. Ash, Director of the Office of Management and Budget

Former U.S. Deputy Assistant Secretary of State, Trilateral and CFR member Richard Gardner

Retired Navy Admiral Chester Ward, former Judge Advocate General of the U.S. Navy and former CFR member

...and on and on and on, Tiberius. :)

Bretwalda Edwin-Higham said...

Another

Gracchi said...

James I don't have the time to go through all of the names that you cite there. So I'm going to pick one of them William Buckley. Buckley was a journalist so it was through his public pronouncements that he made the greatest difference to politics which makes this easier. He founded the National Review which will come up again and again. Ok lets take your points:

1. Abolition of Ordered Government.
I don't know what you mean specifically by this but definitely Buckley's magazine acquired the reputation of being strong on law and order and resisting incursions into it from minority and other groups.

2. Abolition of Private Property
Buckley's magazine was stern in defending private property. Buckley himself ran on a ticket in New York to lower taxes. He supported every Republican candidate for President- was influential with Ronald Reagen. He also was instrumental in promoting pro-property policies and hated the Communists in the Soviet Union more than just about anyone in public life.

3. Abolition of inheritance
Whose magazine do you think first named inheritance tax the death tax in the US and therefore led the charge against inheritance tax.

4. Abolition of Patriotism
Buckley was a strong anti-communist, basically argued that the US was right in almost every war that they thought. There is a clip of him doing this with Chomsky on Youtube. He was a devoutly patriotic American- the idea that he wanted to abolish it is crazy.

5. Abolition of the family
Buckley was married and had children- quite how he abolished the family or wanted to I don't see. His magazine again led the charge against gay marriage, against sex outside wedlock, against anything that didn't savour of family life.

6. Abolition of religion
What? Buckley the devout Catholic abolishing religion- that's ridiculous. Lets be sensible here, he promoted the greatest invasion of public life by the religious since the Great Awakening.

7. Creation of a world government
Ummm Buckley's magazine invented the concept of a tranzi which you'll find that Matt Sinclair uses. They frequently go on about the evils of the EU- and that's no different to Buckley's attitude himself.

James I've just picked one of your examples- but I could have done this for many of them- those that I know about at least.

Welshcakes Limoncello said...

I would like to see some "single people friendly" policies.