LAST DITCH OF DEMOCRACY - Majority Rights

tradition. One complains that it is a moth-eaten tradition: a shadow with
small present substance. The series of outrages committed by British
governments in the past. Chesapeaken Leopard, etc. are in history. That
Bright protested, etc. during the United States Civil War, is in history.
What the B.B.C. does NOT care to admit is the profound resemblance
between England’s divide et impera during our United States Civil War,
and her policy on the continent of Europe.
All of which is most keenly analyzed in Mein Kampf, a book as
slandered in England and as much obscured by press mud as any other.
It is the points to WHICH British free speech does not APPLY that we
want to hear about. Free speech has been cornered. We complain that the
British press was rotten, and had been for over a century. My memory
goes back considerably further than Mr. Bridson’s, whatever Winnie said
in 1936: I can match it. I remember the pavements of London “WE
WANT EIGHT” back before the other war started.
Winston was allus shoutin’ for gun sales, high pressure salesmanship of
blood, cannon, and slaughter. BUT at the same time upholdin’ a usury
system which made it impossible to deliver the cannon. Hence bringing
slaughter on Europe.
It is not the question of British chauvinism, but the mixture of
chauvinism and absolute utter dishonesty, and a refusal to look at the
economic causes of war that disgusts the foreign observer. That some
Englishmen dislike being betrayed needs no argument. That the English
people did NOT desire the war needs no argument. The point is they
kept on having governments that insisted on having a war. The British
people are NOT represent ed. The B.B.C. may run a very good (up to a
point) retrospect about Free Speech in England. BUT to couple that with
the unholy alliance with Russia does not convince the opponent of
England’s bona fide, rather of idiocy and dishonesty.