Our Proud and Fascist Heritage 134


Yesterday’s revelation that Prince Charles sees Cabinet Office memoranda denied to most ministers did not spark as much public outrage as might be expected. Part of that is because of the view that, by and large, Charles is a fairly decent old stick with some surprisingly progressive opinions.

The problem is, of course, that with a monarchy you have no choice what you get. The defence deployed yesterday across all media was that this is a longstanding practice, in place for many decades. What they did not tell you is that it was instituted at the insistence of the Prince of Wales who was the future Edward VIII, and at the very least sympathetic to fascism. Strange how the media omitted that bit, don’t you think?

I am given to understand that William has very much the private political opinions you would expect from an extremely rich and not very bright person educated at St Andrews University, that strange foreign neo-con enclave perched on the Neuk of Fife. The only university with not one but two professors on the board of the Henry Jackson Society.


134 thoughts on “Our Proud and Fascist Heritage

1 3 4 5
  • Iain Orr

    My marking of the Craig v Yesindyref2 cruiserweight bout, which seems now to have reached round 7, puts Yesindyref2 ahead by 5 to 1 with one round even. I should declare interests, on both sides, as a St Andrews graduate from a Scottish State School (Kirkcaldy High)and as the manager of Craig’s office during the Norfolk North by-election.

    So,let me throw in an ad hominem argument in defence of St Andrews – any university that has the good sense to make John Burnside a professor (of Creative Writing at St Andrews) should be immune to mean-spirited attacks from north of the Tay, reflecting poorly on what Craig picked up from reading the Beano during his own undergraduate days there.

  • fedup

    Adjudicator general, as well as the chief acting rabbi for the keyboard settler brigade blurts;

    That was an egregiously silly post. The subject I suggested (not ordered) may not interest you

    suffering the slings and arrows of the senility, has forgotten that it has already been at it earlier on ;

    Sorry to say so but this is not one of your better posts. I shall forgive you by thinking it was in the way of a space-filler, designed to put an end to the bickering which had unfortunately started again on the previous one thanks to the usual trouble-makers.

    This of course is the settler way of life, constantly in search of the expansion of the war on Islam, as well as expansion of the settlements, third reich did it, so the zionist reich does it, and by default the vanguard of the settlements do it!

    All the while endorsing the soon only zionist threads, and only zionist replies, as stated in the latest acting rabbi says;

    perhaps because even you might find it difficult to tie some of your oet obsessions into it – but it might interest others.

    There you have it, which it all ends by the customary zionist epithet, conveying the degrees of disdain!!!

    Although the ending with a Homer Simpson, is the triumph of the acting rabbi and ought ot be picked up by the beebeecee as with the case of ; “all light and no heat” phrase!!!!

    Are you trying to tell Craig that he should NOT post on it?

    What a tangled web these settlers weave?

  • Mark Golding

    Who is licking USA’s arse?

    MOST IMPORTANT

    I have reliable information from RAF Akrotiri officers mess that Britain is integrated and harmonized with NATO to attack and murder Syrian government unified forces using US satellite data. Operation NOTIS is an ongoing end of line attempt to impair the capability and efficiency of Assad’s forces in the battle against Saudi and alliance terrorists.

    I would expect that information is contained within Cabinet Office memoranda denied to most ministers as Craig restates. I have once again informed the Russian government.

  • Habbbakuk (combat cant)

    “I would expect that information is contained within Cabinet Office memoranda denied to most ministers as Craig restates. I have once again informed the Russian government.”

    _____________________

    Mr Golding, do you ring up President Putin using the services of BT or have you had a personal, satellite=enabled hotline installed?

  • N_

    @ yesindyref2 2.11pm

    Those figures that you quote, from the QS rankings, support my case. Well, they support it for St Andrews University not being “great”. They don’t support it for its being a joke. But it is a joke anyway. Sure, they might have a few leading academics in certain fields, but so have scores of universities in Britain.

  • N_

    yesindyref2

    “Problem with private schools is they do concentrate and have facilities to push educational success, which is why their success rate for uni entrance is higher.”

    Make the bastards pay tax then. Remove their charitable status. Spend the extra tax on the rest of the population.

    But don’t you think another factor is that those in charge of university admissions, and of universities, would, generally speaking, rather that their successors in one and two generations’ time spoke like them, and didn’t speak like the hoi polloi?

    But no, all we fucking hear from these hypocritical bastards and their propagandists is how they bend over backwards to encourage applications from the offspring of the proletariat, and even to admit such knuckle-draggers as students, and oh, their hands are so tied by social circumstances they’d be so keen to change.

    What a load of old bollocks.

    Inherited privilege doesn’t perpetuate itself. It’s perpetuated socially through the deliberate actions of individuals.

  • N_

    Most elites in the world lick the USA’s arse, send a proportion of their more capable offspring to big-brand US universities, etc.

    There are some exceptions.

    Putin was really flapping when he insisted that his daughters, rather than living abroad, maintain their “permanent homes” in Russia.

    Goodness, how magnanimous of them! I doubt they’d experience much heat in Monaco, Zurich or London, but they certainly won’t be having the tax police batter their doors down in Russia

    But never mind how many days out of 365 they spend in Russia. What currency do they hold most of their money in? Or hasn’t anyone put a value on their kryshy and other trusts yet?

  • N_

    @Jkick – Nice post, but you omit to mention the influence big business wields in universities by controlling research grants and by controlling the academic journals, publication in which is the measure of an academic’s achievements.

  • Brian

    where did you expect to see the public outrage expressed, Craig? Not in the MSM, online perhaps? Would such an expression of outrage make any difference. No, most certainly not. I think most good thinking people realise that the Establishment has a firmer hold than ever, so what would be the point. My blood boils at the thought of these unelected spongers getting access to these documents, but can I do anything about it? No. Would writing to my MP about it make a difference? No.

  • Habbbakuk (combat cant)

    N_

    You have made a couple of pertinent points, one of which I share and the other to some extent. My own thoughts on the problem (assuming it is a problem)pay due attention to them.

  • Rose

    What I cling on to is that out of all the back-scratching, back-stabbing ugly egotistic chaos of the upper (sic) echelons, something positive for humanity does sometimes emerge – Percy Byshhe, George Orwell, Tony Benn for example.

  • Ba'al Zevul

    @Jkick – Nice post, but you omit to mention the influence big business wields in universities by controlling research grants…

    Up to a point. Also by providing research funding, directly, to an extent which the gummint simply can’t afford. Now you may say that this unduly favours big business interests, and that it is unfair that research into, say, genetic engineering is better-funded than environmental science, and I can agree with that*. But who’s got the money, and who wants the results? And it’s serious money. In the early 20th century, you could still do useful research with string, sealing wax and a rented basement in Manchester. That stuff’s all been done now. Research costs.

    …and by controlling the academic journals, publication in which is the measure of an academic’s achievements.

    Bollocks, IMHO. Evidence of editorial interference in the peer review process, please. A much more potent source of crap papers is the requirement by your department head that you publish x papers per year, which leads to ingenious ways of rehashing the same material or writing up stuff which doesn’t warrant a paper. Easy enough to get that through the review process.

    *But not if you think History of Art should be better funded…

1 3 4 5

Comments are closed.