Here is the news: the bleedin' obvious

Out here in Thailand I have had ample opportunity to watch the BBC World News. In China, my previous abode for three years, the BBC was banned. Though, I understand that this ban on the BBC is no more. Anyway, the important thing is that I I can now watch British news in a foreign country.

The immediate impression I have is just how Left Liberal the BBC news actually is. I must admit that several news reports have made me laugh out loud. Not because the standard of journalism is bad. Far from it. But there are moments when what is being reported appears to defy common sense.

In one report, for example, a BBC journalist took the trouble and danger of reporting undercover in Zimbabwe. The BBC is banned in Zimbabwe. It was a courageous thing to do. The report concluded that intimidation and violence was leading to an unfair election. Well, blow me down!! I never suspected that.

Talk about pulling your puches. While the population of Zimbabwe starve and are beaten to death your average BBC journalist will be agonizing about intimidation and unfair elections.

I suspect, however, that unless the SAS or a similar professional military unit are given the opportunity of enforcing regime change, the suffering in Zimbabwe will continue. To do nothing except gnash liberal teeth makes the owners of such teeth entirely complicit with the death of the innocents. So why do such people continue to abide in angst rather than recommend effective action?

The answer is Liberal Left views on Post Colonialism.

From what I have heard so far on the never ending debate on Zimbabwe there are some who more concerned about sensitivities associated with Post Colonialism than they are about saving peoples lives. In the modern BBC world, a bleedin’ heart image matters more than life itself.

Left Liberal ideas on Post Colonialism dominate and affect policy decisions but, I argue, that these views are mistaken since it was through Victorian Christian Missionaries and the enforcement of anti slavery laws at sea by the British Navy that the indigenous people of Africa were saved from Arab Swahili/Muslim slavery. Trade was considered by David Livingstone as essential to defeating slavery so that goods rather than people became the necessary commodity. It made sense and it worked.

Others, such as the explorer, Henry Stanley, developed a Christian moral initiative into a what became known as colonial Africa. Colonialism might not have been an ideal system but it certainly helped to get rid of the slave trade. Today, the people of Zimbabwe are slaves to a home grown tyranny. And, I don’t need to be BBC reporter to know this. I do not need to be paid at taxpayers expence to report on the bleedin’ obvious.

How long must action against a corrupt and murderous regime be delayed? How many people must die before Left Liberals abandon mistaken notions on British history?

Secular Myths

This morning I read something which surprised me. For a long time I have accepted secular and conventional wisdom on the Catholic Church. I had thought that the Catholic Church was rich. People told me so. I believed it.

I had thought there might be something in the claim that the Catholic Church had a lot of money in the bank. And so it is often asked how it could truly represent the poor and marginalized in the world? A good question until I found some time to read more into the subject.

In an acclaimed book entitled, “Sacred Causes” by Michael Burleigh there is plenty of detailed information which explains things. On page 70, Burleigh says:

“During the first world war, pope Benedict XV gave away his own fortune and then the Holy See’s ordinary revenue to repatriate prisoners of war and civilian refugees, so that by 1922 the Vatican treasury amounted to the lire equivalent of £10,000. Unable to pawn a Bernini, Michelangelo or a Raphael, his successor managed to deplete the financial recources still further, with generous donations to those ruined by the hyper inflation in Weimer Germany and gifts to the starving multitudes in the Soviet Union. Only the generosity and financial acumen of North American Catholics staved of financial ruination.”

Now this breaks a few secular myths, does it not. Good for you Catholic Church. As usual the secular world invents its very own secular myths whilst ignoring the truth.

The shame of the Left

Why do British/English Left Wingers hate their country? Why are they ashamed of British history? I do not understand it. The British have so much to be proud of in terms of their charity and force for good in this world. They were the first developed nation to put an end to slavery by trading in goods rather than people. This ended the Muslim Swahili slave trade in Africa. Both Blacks and Whites were slaves of the Ottoman Empire. Scandinavians who ventured too far into the Mediterranean had little defence against an attack at sea since their Navy was in no position to defend them. But any slave who managed to free himself and climb on board British Royal Navy ship whether he be Black or White or Yellow would be a free man in the early 19th century. No other Navy offered a comparable freedom or were willing to fight to see freedom enforced on the high seas. The Left refuse to acknowledge not only this but great advances made in medicine, social reform, democracy, wealth creation and so on. Britain is a country which now attracts millions of immigrants who seek a better way of life. Immigrants come to Great Britain for every reason; economic advantage, security, work, respect, love, hope, peace, adventure. Although some come for an easy life and others for crime too. Nevertheless, Britain remains a country which has produced more than its fair share of famous people who are well known not for the bad they have done but for the good. Everyone knows this. Everyone knows that Britain fought WW2 against tyranny on the continent of Europe. Most might know that Britain had to borrow $3,000,000,000 from the Americans to finance a welfare state enjoyed today by health tourists the world over at a cost to the tax payer of £13,000,000,000 a year. Such generosity continues. The Left often see Great Britain as a ruthless exploiter of all and sundry. The Left are often ashamed of their country; although I see the Left as people who are simply ashamed of themselves. This is not the shame of most Brits but it is the shame of the British as represented by a significant number of British people who never tire of making their bleedin' heart heard. I think I will now go and read some Keats or Shakespeare. Much more preferable to neo-Marxist ideology.

Dr Livingstone I presume?

After reading a fair bit of the new biography about the explorer Henry Stanley I was surprised to learn of just how much adversity he had to overcome before "finding Livingstone". And, that, in deepest dark Africa, he probably never said: "Dr. Livingstone, I presume".

Apparently, what Stanley said about himself owed much to a deep insecurity about his childhood which developed into a need to exaggerate short comings or any perceived weakness.

Consequently, some have placed too much trust in what Stanley said instead of what Stanley did. Nevertheless, what Stanley did was extraordinary enough. He had to overcome being rejected by almost everyone he knew including his parents. Though it is not this that concerns me.

It appears that an Arab/Swahili Muslim slave trade was at work throughout East and Central Africa during the 19th century. David Livingstone, a Christian Missionary, witnessed the reality of this and considered that the only effective way to end the slave trade was by opening up the whole region to colonialization and trade. For trade in goods and ideas rather than people.

It is notable that Stanley was to some extent duped by King Leopold ll of Belgium who placed Colonial and nationalistic ambitions above any altruistic or Christian ideas for ending the slave trade. King Leopold also used Stanley to compete with the French for land in the Congo.

But it is Henry Stanley the misunderstood hero who emerges from these pages of history as a man of our times. Who overcame personal disadvantage to continue in the vision set down by Livingstone.

So instead of immersing ourselves in shame about British history let us consider the facts. That William Wilberforce was an English Tory. That David Livingstone was a Scot. That Henry Stanley was Welsh (albeit with an American accent). And, that, alongside the might of British Navy and British public opinion, all helped to fight against the slave trade in Central and East Africa.

Views on Western Civilization: A letter to Left Liberals

I am posting this blog for the sake of posterity. It was written a few years ago and I would like to keep it on file here.

I feel there is a need to say more about the value of Western Civilization. It is my contention that many overlook the importance of Christianity as a model for society. I too have done this. But I am taking more time to understand our origins which now shape the society and culture we have inherited and live in today.

I have been critical of Multiculturalism. I still am. I cannot see how a British New Labour Government can expect a society to run smoothly if it has had a policy of uncontrolled immigration. England is an already overcrowded small island. It is not America. I believe this debate is about common sense. But some are intent on crying "racism" as soon as a discussion takes place. Shame on them.

My intent is to open up a debate that has been crying out for attention. To expect a society to tolerate every religion, creed and language is a noble idea based upon the evolvement of Human Rights law in secular society. Although, this law is not so well received in countries which do not share a Western Christian tradition.

And this is yet another essential point. British society is changing. Not all change though is for the better. In this view I remain conservative.

Whether it is realistic to expect societies to transform themselves for the sake of Human Rights law is open to discussion. What I suspect has happened is that the Government, New Labour, have abused their power and the democratic process by creating a client state. And, that uncontrolled immigration was not simply a matter of negligence but Government policy to assist it in holding onto power.

But these are mainly political contentions. My aim here is to highlight the importance of the tradition and culture that is now the world's great inheritance. A Europeanization which many now refer to as Globalization.

So how did Western Civilization evolve into the society we have today?

To my mind it is to a self critical, liberal, tolerant Christian culture and tradition which has forged and shaped the secular society that liberals enjoy today.

In many ways Christianity has argued itself out of power and influence to accomadate a Christocentric view. The classic example of this is perhaps the fight against slavery by William Wilberforce. Christian ideas about equality encouraged others. Eventually, women and womens suffrage.

All this happened in a Christian society which became more Secular by the minute. All this began two thousand years or so ago because one Man, Jesus Christ said, "the Sabbath was made for Man; not Man for the Sabbath." This was revolutionary thinking and freed Man from excessive religious legalism. In other words, a law of love; not a love of law.

What we have today, and that includes womens equality, has evolved from Christian consciousness and ideas about equality. Without which we would be the same as any other Civilization.

What do you mean by that? I hear you ask.

Well, if we examine women's rights - in almost every country in the world which does not have a Christian religious tradition -you will find that women are often held in some disregard. Certainly, there is little chance of equality unless there are exceptional circumstances.
One only has to travel to any of the following countries to test the validity of this observation; China, Japan, Burma, Thailand, Laos, Iran, Indonesia, India, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Syria, North Korea, Qatar etc etc. I have visited or lived in seven of these countries but I do not think I need to travel to every country in the world to make this case. As it is I have travelled to nearly thirty different countries and this experience has shaped my opinion.

The view expressed here embraces Christianity and not just Catholicism because any attempt to provide an overview on Christian thinking and its affects on society necessarily demand it. To talk only about Catholicism, is, in this context, like painting a picture of a tree without its branches.

Lastly, I wish to quote Joseph Ratzinger from his book on Jesus of Nazareth. He writes about the solid ground of a Christian belief that guarantees the dignity of man by rooting it in the dignity of God:

"In the antithesis of the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus stands before us neither as a rebel nor as a liberal, but as the prophetic interpreter of the Torah. He does not abolish it, but he fulfills it, and he does so precisely by assigning reason its sphere of responsibility for acting within history."