Bruges Group Blog

The final lines of G K Chesterton’s poem “The People of England” are “We are the people of England; and we have not spoken yet. Smile at us, pay us, pass us. But do not quite forget.”. The period of mourning, and the magnificent funeral, of our beloved late Queen have shown that these words are not empty, but reveal the truth. Despite years of hectoring by the intellectual Left, whose domination of the media, particularly the BBC, has given the impression that their view of the world is the only acceptable one, and that to be what they describe as socially progressive represents the only virtue, the ordinary citizens of this country have shown that they have not changed, and that, when the chips are down, they are as patriotic as those who endured, and won, two World Wars in order that freedom and democracy might survive.

The true British spirit of those days, as portrayed in the great war films of the 1950s, such as “The Dambusters”, “Reach for the Sky”, and “The Cruel Sea” , shows a people with grit, and determination, using both the shield of freedom, and the sword of righteousness, to defeat evil regimes seeking to destroy democratic civilisation. They are far removed from the vociferous, carping, and ignorant, left wing activists, who claim to seek a socialist Utopia, but in fact would plunge this country in a dystopia as envisaged by Orwell in 1984, where humour and laughter do not exist, only a grim pursuit of power for themselves. What a contrast to the smiling face of Queen Elizabeth!

In the last words that Holmes ever addresses to Watson he says “Good old Watson! You are the one fixed point in a changing world”, and this is something that could also be said about our much mourned Queen Elizabeth II. She was never afraid of innovation, and was instrumental in transforming the monarchy to adjust to the modern world, yet in those matters which abide, and are truly important, she was steadfast. As the last significant link to the great Second World War generation she represented duty, courage, faithfulness, humour, and a stoic endurance of the worst, in order that the best should ultimately triumph. To use the words of Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar, in the eponymous play, she was “as constant as the Northern Star”, and contrary to the speech of Antony from the same source “The evil that men do lives after them; the good is oft interred with their bones.”, the good that she did will survive, as her son takes on the mantle she has now laid aside.

Thanks to our careers in the administrative sector of the Church my wife and I had the honour of meeting Her Majesty at the time of the Silver Jubilee, and later attending a palace garden party, and we can attest to the fact that she was expert at putting people at their ease, and showing an interest in their lives. She was a truly great lady, a devout Christian, and an example to all in how to behave.

Although we shall never see her like again the new King is cut from the same cloth, and offers a certain hope that her legacy will continue. The monarch, by standing about the political fray, provides a calm centre to our national life, preventing by their very presence the possibility of any sort of demagogue becoming a dictator, or some democratic, but divisive figure, becoming President.

Constitutional monarchy has been shown to be the best system yet devised to protect the rights of all, providing a template for governance which billions around the word envy. Who could believe that a President Edward Heath, Tony Blair, or even Boris Johnson, could unite the nation, and command the love and respect that the monarch enjoys?

In the face of the blandishments of the vociferous republicans we should indeed be foolish to throw out an institution which has served us so well, although there is one danger which could yet destroy it. Should, God Forbid, through a terrorist attack, or a simple plane accident, anything happen to the Prince of Wales and his family, we should be faced with the prospect of the Duke of Woke becoming King. Harry has shown himself to be courageous, and supportive of injured soldiers, but he is unfortunately also, just like Edward VIII, not very intelligent. He has fallen under the influence of one who is herself the product of the shallow, celebrity culture of Hollywood, and who seems to be obsessed with the idea that she is somehow oppressed, even when living in a vast mansion. His accession would be unacceptable to vast numbers of people, who are sick of being lectured on their supposed shortcomings by the woke. In addition, although never convicted of anything, the Duke of York, next in line if the Sussexes were excluded, would also be rejected by too many for him to inherit the throne. If it were constitutionally possible these two parts of the royal family should be removed from the line of succession, in order to safeguard the future of the monarchy

Two more truths can be derived from the events of this month.

The first is that the Armed Forces, despite the efforts of too many administration to downgrade their importance, remain the same disciplined organisations they always were, responding triumphantly to the demands put upon them . The bearer party of Grenadier Guards were superb, and all deserve medals, while the faultless performance of the troops on the day was breathtaking to behold.

The second is that, in an age when useless managers infest so many of our public, and indeed, private bodies, the skills of the Duke of Norfolk, shown in his organisation of everything, put such parasites to shame.

The Queen has gone. God save the King.

We hear about a crisis in mental health which requires urgent solutions, but it may be that, rather than any physical cause, this is the result of the way in which the realities of our modern world are affecting peoples’ perceptions.

Those living in these islands for the past two millennia have had much to cause them concern. The dictatorship of the Roman Empire, the wars between the original British and the Saxons, then those between the latter and the Danes, followed by the Norman Conquest, the many wars with Spain, France and others, culminating in the battles with Germany, and then the Cold War. In addition we have endured plagues, and famines, while much of the nation lived in what we would now describe as poverty.

Today we have been faced with the Covid pandemic, the renewal of war on the European continent in Ukraine, demands that we wear sackcloth and ashes for the past sins of our ancestors, accept blame for supposed climate change, and fret over matters of sexual identity. If there is any truth in American police dramas, as shown on TV, psychiatrists seem to be inventing countless new phobias, and other mental conditions, although it often seems that these are produced by defence lawyers trying to excuse the guilty.

There are however two major differences between our times, and the past. Firstly for many centuries, however bad things were, the vast majority had a religious faith, which offered a hope, and for most, a certainty, that there was an order to their lives. presided over by a beneficent deity, who would ensure that in the end justice would prevail, and they would enter a blissful new life. Now, with so many believing in no such thing, people face an existence in a vast, unending, perhaps eternal universe, with only personal oblivion to which to look forward at the end.

However, such thoughts may usually be far from most people’s thoughts, but what is not is the fact that the unprecedented expansion in communications brought about by the technological revolution is bringing concerns before us that would not have disturbed our ancestors. I can remember when the first live satellite signal to Britain from the United States was broadcast via satellite on July 23, 1962, but now we think nothing of speaking live to friends in Australia from our own studies at home. Where once, if one had an opinion on some issue which one wished to share publicly it was necessary to write a letter to a newspaper, or hold a meeting, now everyone with access to the Internet can broadcast their views to their heart’s content via social media. The inevitable result is that people are worried more and more by things of which they would not have been aware in the past, and expected to take positions on matters that do not impinge on their daily lives, and on which nothing they do or say would have any effect.

In 1973 the French author and explorer, Jean Raspail, published his dystopian novel “The Camp of the Saints”, which portrayed the destruction of Western civilisation by Third World mass immigration to France and the West, much of it by sea. Its name comes from the bible’s book of revelation, which depicts the apocalypse. Unsurprisingly it was decried by many as being racist, and indeed it has been popular with parties and groups who espouse far right policies. However, it returned to the best seller list in France in 2011

It undoubtedly contains underlying assumptions about the differences between racial groups, which run contrary to contemporary beliefs. Those of us who espouse Christian values know that the young child in a Third World slum is as important, and worthy, as any rich denizen of a rich country, while the accident of birth should be no guide as to the life to which one aspires.

However there can be no doubt as to its relevance to the question which is becoming more and more central to the modern world, that concerning the mass movement of peoples across the globe, and in particular for us in the UK, confronting the continued, and growing problem of illegal immigration across the Channel. On one end of the argument would be a halt to all immigration, on the other a free for all, with no limits imposed, and where the line is drawn is of increasing importance.

In the modern world a full stop would be impracticable, as well as immoral, as those fleeing in fear of their lives must be given hope of a refuge. To open the door entirely would, apart from provoking a massive adverse reaction among the indigenous population, very quickly reduce the host country to chaos, and economic destruction. We have tried to compromise with limits applied, yet valid refugees being welcomed, in particular those from areas, such as Ukraine, where conflict is taking place.

When looking at the specifics it is clear that the vast majority of those coming across on small boats are young men, albeit accompanied bya much smaller number of women and children. In addition, interviews with those arriving reveal that a majority are coming from countries which are not being subject to violent conflicts. These facts make clear that the bulk of these migrants are in fact motivated by economic factors, and should therefore be taking their place with those who are taking the legal route to claiming asylum, not being allowed to jump to the head of the queue. It should also be noted that they will have been paying considerable sums to criminals, indicating that they are not destitute, while they are coming directly from France, a country not considered dangerous, and where they should be claiming asylum.

It is quite understandable that very many people from the third world would wish to live in the West, but we must also consider the fact that we lack the infrastructure ranging from GPs, housing and employment to absorb unlimited numbers. Those who constantly seek to block anything the government tries to do to stop the flow of illegal immigration refuse to answer the direct question as to how many immigrants they would consider too many, and instead resort abusing those attempting to find a workable compromise as racists. It is doubtful that the lawyers, and metropolitan liberals supporting open door policies would themselves find their own jobs and way of life under threat, as the burden would fall upon the working class in already deprived areas.

Those left liberals, indulging in their usual virtue signalling at no immediate cost to themselves, should reflect that, if nothing is done, there will inevitably be a reaction which could affect far more than immigration policy.

If Elon Musk succeeds in ending the left liberal bias on Twitter, which he will find hard, perhaps he might turn his attention to ‘NextDoor’, the local internet, where the same morons are allowed to run riot. Although I never touch social media, as so many of its users have obviously forgotten to take their tablets, I have used ‘NextDoor’, as one can advertise goods for sale, or seek information on local tradesmen etc. However it does also open the door to postings on any subject, so the woke, and other idiots, frequently add comments on a number of social issues, but always from the left liberal point of view. Any of us who respond are then subjected to abuse, with no effort being made to answer anything we say, the comments being full of claims, and no substance.

Remainers accuse Leavers of xenophobia, to doubt man made climate change causes the extreme environmentalists to call us scientific illiterates at best, although more usually morons, any statement pointing out that the British Empire was not all bad, and that one should leave the past to the past, is greeted with accusations of racism, as does any questioning of allowing thousands of illegal immigrants to land on our beaches, while if one dares to question the left consensus on sexual matters, particularly ‘trans’ issues this provokes completely over the top abuse.

I recently encountered this latter crowd when I dared to mention ‘so called’ trans men, pointing out that one female inmate of a prison had been raped by one such, as had a female occupant of a hospital ward. This generated hysteria, with me accused of being a rabid right wing transphobe, which some were unable to answer because they were so upset. Poor little snowflakes!

One particularly moronic woman posted the following “Your hate and fear is palpable. Your comments are abhorrent. You have absolutely no idea with regards to “ trans” personal issues and use media propaganda and stereotyping to spread hate, fear and paranoia. This is the same type demonising of the Jewish race and paranoia and hate that was spread in 1930’s Germany, U.K. and many other countries due to Fascism. So that illustrates exactly what you are. A Facist through and through filled with hate. Or in other words a sad little man”. This directed at someone who hates Nazis, and fascists, and who has always supported Israel!

This same lunatic followed up with “You have no hate yet you hate trans. You say you want to protect the rights of free speech but free speech begins with tolerance. Tolerance of everyone in our society not just the people we decide should have free speech. Women fought for rights and so do trans fight for rights. A trans person doesn’t choose who they are - they simply are the way they are. Those who aren’t trans are lucky enough to know who they are but I don’t expect you to understand that or to understand the mental anguish or persecution that many trans endure and yet you choose to judge and persecute trans people more by what incidents you read depicted propaganda in the media. Yes Goebbels and Mosley would have been extremely proud of you. Your hate is evidenced by your hate comments. You are the bigot. I believe In tolerance and equality. I think a trans person has just as many rights as the next person as a human being first and foremost and should be treated as such. The difference is I know trans people and value them. I also know women and value them. Just as much as I know men and value them. Each one is a person and as such are all entitled to rights. You don’t see any of them as people. You just divide them into labels that’s the difference and one label disgusts you. As for trying to protect women- don’t make me laugh. That’s your justification you tell yourself for your hatred. Keep lying to yourself because I can assure you no one else believes you”. This latter comment was because I dared to defend J K Rowling, and said that I supported the hard won rights of women.

After all this I replied in some anger, although without abuse, yet I then found that the ‘moderators’ had removed me from the forum for a week, because I had breached their laws on politeness. These latter must either be more snowflakes, who cry if they hear anyone arguing, or else just products of our modern education system, who believe all the rubbish the liberal left spouts. I suspect the latter.

What is clear is that most of these imbeciles are not themselves ‘trans’, but are merely virtue signalling to prove how wonderful they are (they think!). I expect that the few who do come under the ‘trans’ heading would rather be left alone to get on with their lives, but they are just cannon fodder for the mainly white, middle class, university (if you can call them that these days) educated idiots.

These people cannot be stopped from ranting, but it would be of great help if the silent majority, who rightly regard them with contempt, would join me in hitting back. If enough were then censored by the ‘moderators’ it would make a good case for closing the whole cesspit down.

The last two words of David Lean’s magnificent film “The Bridge over the River Kwai” are spoken by the character Major Clipton, when he contemplates the chaos surrounding him, as he cries out “madness, madness”. I have the same reaction when I look at the insanity which is distorting our culture, as ‘woke’ imbeciles are allowed to run amok, forcing changes which no one but they, and their idiotic followers want.

We now see a man, Lia Thomas, who has ‘transited’ to a woman, becoming the first transgender woman to win an NCAA swimming title. Anyone whom dares to question whether such people should be allowed to compete in the women's division after transitioning, is subjected to abuse, and threats for doing so. One of our sporting heroines, Sharron Davies MBE, has revealed that she has been subjected to such threats over her views on transgender women competing in women's sport, when she stated that it was unfair for such women for to be competing against normal biological females. She wrote: "I’ve received several threats to myself and my work because I present evidence based facts on the unfairness of male inclusion in women’s sport. Which is biological sex based decriminalisation. I will not stop bringing these actual facts into the light or be bullied into silence. I’m used to it now. But I feel we are turning the corner and open debate to find science based solutions are not far away that will protect the integrity and rights of females in sport as well as offering up ways to be inclusive but not as the cost of another groups’ rights."

Thomas' victory came after a civil rights complaint was submitted against the University of Pennsylvania for permitting this person to compete on its swimming team, it being pointed out that Lia's ranking was 462nd when competing in the male ranks. One competitor, Reka Gyorgy, complained to the athletics association about its decision to let Lia race against "biological women". However Labour equalities minister MP Charlotte Nichols disgracefully congratulated Lia on the achievement, saying "As a former competitive swimmer myself, indeed, I know full well how much training is required for a title like this. Anyone trying to diminish Lia Thomas' achievement because of lazy transphobia should frankly pipe down. Huge congratulations to her." That this nonsense should emanate from someone tasked with achieving equality for women is unsurprising, as Labour spokesmen and women now seem unable to distinguish between the sexes, something most normal people have no problem doing. The giants of the Labour past must be spinning in their graves.

Another example of this lunacy is the situation which has arisen at the Putney Tennis Club where the membership form has classed the option for 'female' as 'no longer valid'. The club stated that this was glitch, but, as one of its members says, “someone had to type in “Female (no longer valid)” , while another said that they suspected that the club had been taken over by ‘woke’ loonies, and this confirmed it.

Nottingham university continues to prove that it no longer deserves the name “University”, as it cancelling the offer of an honorary degree to Dr Tony Sewell, because his report on race in the UK failed to reinforce the former’s prejudices against white people. A statement was issued saying that "The university has strict criteria governing the award of honorary degrees, because these are conferred at our public graduation ceremonies. The criteria were revised a number of years ago to preclude us from awarding them to figures who become the subject of political controversy, so that a day of celebration for our graduates does not attract such controversy.” This from an establishment that has no problem cosying up to the fascists of Communist China.

A similar example of our so called universities being in the hands of the woke is of course Jesus College, Cambridge, again an institution willing to make excuses for China, but determined to remove the plaque in their chapel dedicated to the philanthropist Tobias Rustat because of false claims about his connections to slavery. For once right prevailed, and the decision of he Consistory Court of the Diocese of Ely was that the plaque should remain, but of course the monomaniacs of woke are determined not to leave it at that, being prepared to spend even more on continuing to pursue this false claim. In a similar refusal to accept outcomes the idiots at Oriel College, Oxford, with their “Rhodes Must Fall” campaign, refuse to accept that they have lost.

On a different front the Mayor of Woke, Sadiq Khan, has warned commuters that “staring” can be a form of sexual harassment and has launched a series of Transport for London posters that feature the mayor and British Transport Police’s emblems. So now we have the situation where a chap might be sitting there, absentmindedly thinking about his dinner, and finding himself suddenly accused by some neurotic female opposite of staring. Of course this sort of vague offence relies on the usual woke principle of guilty unless proved innocent, and can only provoke conflict where there was absolutely no offence committed.

When attending a recent football match I looked around at the crowd, and it occurred to me that probably almost no one there cared one iota about woke, and most would not even know what it was. This whole social movement is the product of largely white, middle class, university educated, metropolitan liberals, and is in fact an attack on working class culture by a bunch of elitists, who, in the past, would have been dismissed with contempt as twerps. The true blame for its spread rests with the organisations, and businesses, who choose to take it seriously, and allow their HR departments to persecute decent people in its name. Ordinary, well meaning citizens should treat the whole thing as the madness it is, and, where possible, boycott any body which is revealed as having adopted it.