Saturday, April 18, 2015

Right and Left, continued

As I mentioned last week, it is widely believed that just as Communism constitutes the Far Left, Nazism constituted the "Far Right," as if if you take right-wing ideas and make them really extreme, you get Nazism. But given that the Right arose to defend Crown and Church, is that really accurate?

"Ever since the autumn of 1938, and because I realized that Japan would not join us unconditionally and that Mussolini is threatened by that nit-wit of a king and the treasonable scoundrel of a crown prince, I decided to go with Stalin. In the last analysis, there are only three great statesmen in the world, Stalin, I, and Mussolini. Mussolini is the weakest, for he has been unable to break the power of either the crown or the church. Stalin and I are the only ones who envisage the future and nothing but the future. Accordingly, I shall in a few weeks stretch out my hand to Stalin at the common German-Russian frontier and undertake the redistribution of the world with him."

--Adolf Hitler

Friday, April 10, 2015


What will probably always separate me from the majority of Christians, even liturgically traditionalist Christians who are not without appreciation of the merits of pre-Revolutionary Christian civilisation, is that they are willing to accept (perhaps with a little regret) that the World has largely moved on from kings & queens, hereditary succession, dynastic alliances, coats of arms, formal aristocratic hierarchies, royal courts, and so forth, and so those things cannot be considered as important politically as they once were, and I'm not. And if that means the world leaves me behind, so be it.

But perhaps someday the total collapse will come and it will be recognized that we were right. The replacement of kings with presidents has been a disaster for the Church and a disaster for Humanity. Someday the insanity must end.

Goebbels versus "Priests and Tsars"

Few persistent misconceptions are more irritating for real right-wingers (that is, reactionary monarchists) than the canard that the Nazis were "right-wing," that is, just sort of a more extreme version of the Tories. Daniel Hannan, with whom I strongly disagree on the English Civil War but who is correct about a lot of other things, sets the record straight:

"On 16 June 1941, as Hitler readied his forces for Operation Barbarossa, Josef Goebbels looked forward to the new order that the Nazis would impose on a conquered Russia. There would be no come-back, he wrote, for capitalists nor priests nor Tsars. Rather, in the place of debased, Jewish Bolshevism, the Wehrmacht would deliver “der echte Sozialismus”: real socialism."

A come-back for Priests and Tsars, of course, is exactly what all genuine right-wingers would demand for Russia! Accept no substitutes. Nazism, like all modern political evils, was basically a perversion of Leftism, as the great Erik von Kuehnelt-Leddihn long argued. The only true Right is the Right of Altar and Throne. There has been no legitimate German government since November 1918 and no legitimate Russian government since March 1917. Down with all republican regimes, "Right" or Left! Christian Monarchy Forever!!!

Tuesday, April 7, 2015

HRH Crown Prince Kardam of Bulgaria (1962-2015)

I am saddened to learn of the death of the Crown Prince of Bulgaria, Prince of Tirnovo, who never recovered from a 2008 car crash. May HRH rest in peace.

Wednesday, April 1, 2015

SKCM 2015

Yesterday I received my copy of the DVD of this year's Society of King Charles the Martyr mass at New York's Church of the Resurrection, which I unfortunately could not attend in person in January, and promptly watched it, all two hours. Setting: Haydn Lord Nelson Mass, with the chancel (which is not that big, yet somehow there's an orchestra there). This was not the sort of liturgy that Congregational Participationalists (though there were some wonderful robust hymns) or Humble Simplicityists (or, of course, Low Church Roundheads) would approve of. I loved it. You can read Fr. Swain's excellent sermon, which also discusses Louis XVI of France and Nicholas II of Russia, here; the DVD is available at the aforementioned American SKCM website. (Readers may also be interested in this 2000 address on the same subject by David Flint of Australians for Constitutional Monarchy.)

Monday, March 30, 2015

Economists endorse Monarchy...sort of.

A new paper by a professor at the London School of Economics and his colleague in Barcelona concludes that "hereditary monarchs with lots of legal power choose better policy than other systems do, including democracies, non-hereditary dictators, and weak hereditary monarchs, and this is reflected in higher growth." Despite this, they can't bring themselves to accept the implications of their own conclusions. Why? Well, because a lot of famous people since 1776 haven't liked hereditary monarchy and have said mean things about it, and we wouldn't want to go against them, would we?

"Of course, they're not saying they actually favour hereditary monarchy!"

Of course. Heaven forbid.

Sunday, March 29, 2015

On Anglicanism

This was written by a Roman Catholic as a caricature of what Anglicans love about Anglicanism, but I sort of like it anyway:

"I can understand anyone wanting to belong to the Anglican Church with its Dickensian niceness of manners, its pleasing hymns, its dreaming spires, the village green, the rose cheeked boys framed in frills, the romance of the cemetery, the cheerful order of rank, the reliable connection to Queen and state. Who wouldn't want to share an ancestry with ladies in poke bonnets carrying posies with their dainty Book of Common Prayer? To be able to weep tears of pride at the thought of Jerusalem built on England's green and pleasant land?"

I met some of those "rose cheeked boys" on Thursday evening when the Choir of King's College Cambridge (founded by King Henry VI) performed (beautifully) at my Dallas parish, Church of the Incarnation: