Gay Patriot Header Image

Leftists hate hearing about the socialist roots of Nazism

Posted by Jeff (ILoveCapitalism) at 11:09 am - December 9, 2014.
Filed under: Freedom,History,World History

That’s my embriefening of Daniel Hannan’s title from February: Leftists become incandescent when reminded of the socialist roots of Nazism.

Short version of this post: Hannan is awesome, so why not go read it?

Long version: I’ll tease his article for you, then add my comments. (more…)

The World Has Lost A Giant

Rest In Peace, Margaret Thatcher.

20130408-093741.jpg

-Bruce (@GayPatriot)

On Winston Churchill’s 138th Birthday

Posted by B. Daniel Blatt at 12:00 pm - November 30, 2012.
Filed under: Great Men,World History

To celebrate the anniversary of the birth of the greatest man of the century immediately preceding this one, I repost the piece I wrote three years ago to make the occasion as I revised it two years ago.

Today marks the 138th anniversary of the birth of the greatest man of the century concluded just about a decade ago. On November 30, 1874, Winston Leonard Spencer Churchill was born at Blenheim Palace. His father was Lord Randolph Churchill, his mother the former Jennie Jerome, the second daughter of the American financier Leonard Jerome. His very parentage thus embodied the special relationship between the United States and United Kingdom.

Indeed, it was Churchill himself who coined the term to describe the relations between the two powerful Anglophone democracies.

Like a red head born almost exactly 134 years after him, Churchill was two months premature. (The combination of those two characteristics must be a sign of greatness!) Like that young Californian, the great Briton had trouble sitting still, traveling to Cuba, India, Sudan and South Africa to fight for his country (and sometimes dubious causes) before his 30th birthday. He would write about his experiences; his books would earn him fame and fortune.

First elected to parliament in 1900 as a Tory, he broke with his party over tariffs, preferring free trade and the Liberals. He would rejoin the Conservative Party in 1925, staying with the Tories, through his two terms as Prime Minister and until the end of his life. Noting that Churchill “stood for Parliament under six labels,” one of his biographers, Paul Johnson wrote that “He was not a party man. . . . His loyalty belonged to the national interest, and his own.

And Churchill saw the British national interest clearly linked to that of the United States and Western democracies.

While forever associated with the two great wars of the last century, the man himself may well have enjoyed the thrill of battle, but he was well aware of the horrors of war and did his utmost to prevent it. A warmonger he clearly was not, though he did understand that war was sometimes necessary to prevent even worse evils. (more…)

Happy Birthday To The Iron Lady

Posted by Bruce Carroll at 4:35 pm - October 13, 2012.
Filed under: World History

Today is the 87th birthday of one of the 20th Century’s most important leaders of liberal democracy and the Conservative movement.

Cheers, Margaret Thatcher!

-Bruce (GayPatriot)

The Reason For The Season: Happy Independence Day!

Thanks to Dan for marking July Fourth earlier today. Here is my contribution, with a hat tip for the idea to Moe Lane from RedState.

The Schoolhouse Rock series taught history and grammar to Americans of a certain age. They are unforgettable parts of 1970s pop culture and I this was one of my favorites.

It seems there’s a lot of similarity to this story as the times we are living in today.

No More Kings, indeed!

-Bruce (GayPatriot)

The World Has Lost A Champion of Freedom & Liberty:
Vaclav Havel, RIP

Posted by Bruce Carroll at 11:29 am - December 18, 2011.
Filed under: Freedom,Great Men,World History

From the NY Times:

Vaclav Havel, the writer and dissident whose eloquent dissections of Communist rule helped to destroy it in revolutions that brought down the Berlin Wall and swept Havel himself into power, died on Sunday. He was 75.

A shy yet resilient, unfailingly polite but dogged man who articulated the power of the powerless, Mr. Havel spent five years in and out of Communist prisons, lived for two decades under close secret-police surveillance and endured the suppression of his plays and essays. He served 14 years as president, wrote 19 plays, inspired a film and a rap song and remained one of his generation’s most seductively nonconformist writers.

All the while, he came to personify the soul of the Czech nation. His moral authority and his moving use of the Czech language cast him as the dominant figure during Prague street demonstrations in 1989 and as the chief behind-the-scenes negotiator who brought about the peaceful transfer of power known as the Velvet Revolution, a revolt so smooth that it took just weeks to complete, without a single bullet fired.

He was chosen as democratic Czechoslovakia’s first president — a role he insisted was more duty than aspiration — and after the country split in January 1993, he became president of the Czech Republic. He linked the country firmly to the west, clearing the way for the Czech Republic to join the North Atlantic Treaty Organization in 1999 and the European Union five years later.

All free people and those desiring to be free weep at the passing of an important moral voice to our cause.

-Bruce (GayPatriot)

UPDATE (from Dan): A great man has fallen.

Honoring Winston Churchill on his 137th Birthday

Posted by B. Daniel Blatt at 1:04 am - November 30, 2011.
Filed under: Great Men,World History

As I’m returning today from my Thanksgiving vacation, I have not had time to write an original post celebrating Winston Churchill, so will repost the piece I wrote two years ago to make the occasion as I revised it last year.

Today marks the 136th anniversary of the birth of the greatest man of the century concluded just about a decade ago. On November 30, 1874, Winston Leonard Spencer Churchill was born at Blenheim Palace. His father was Lord Randolph Churchill, his mother the former Jennie Jerome, the second daughter of the American financier Leonard Jerome. His very parentage thus embodied the special relationship between the United States and United Kingdom.

Indeed, it was Churchill himself who coined the term to describe the relations between the two powerful Anglophone democracies.

Like a red head born almost exactly 134 years after him, Churchill was two months premature. (The combination of those two characteristics must be a sign of greatness!) Like that young Californian, the great Briton had trouble sitting still, traveling to Cuba, India, Sudan and South Africa to fight for his country (and sometimes dubious causes) before his 30th birthday. He would write about his experiences; his books would earn him fame and fortune.

First elected to parliament in 1900 as a Tory, he broke with his party over tariffs, preferring free trade and the Liberals. He would rejoin the Conservative Party in 1925, staying with the Tories, through his two terms as Prime Minister and until the end of his life. Noting that Churchill “stood for Parliament under six labels,” one of his biographers, Paul Johnson wrote that “He was not a party man. . . . His loyalty belonged to the national interest, and his own.

And Churchill saw the British national interest clearly linked to that of the United States and Western democracies.

While forever associated with the two great wars of the last century, the man himself may well have enjoyed the thrill of battle, but he was well aware of the horrors of war and did his utmost to prevent it. A warmonger he clearly was not, though he did understand that war was sometimes necessary to prevent even worse evils. (more…)

Giving Thanks for the United States of America

I’m glad I stumbled upon this item in the Wall Street Journal today.

Any one whose labors take him into the far reaches of the country, as ours lately have done, is bound to mark how the years have made the land grow fruitful.

This is indeed a big country, a rich country, in a way no array of figures can measure and so in a way past belief of those who have not seen it. Even those who journey through its Northeastern complex, into the Southern lands, across the central plains and to its Western slopes can only glimpse a measure of the bounty of America.

And a traveler cannot but be struck on his journey by the thought that this country, one day, can be even greater. America, though many know it not, is one of the great underdeveloped countries of the world; what it reaches for exceeds by far what it has grasped.

<....>

We can remind ourselves that for all our social discord we yet remain the longest enduring society of free men governing themselves without benefit of kings or dictators. Being so, we are the marvel and the mystery of the world, for that enduring liberty is no less a blessing than the abundance of the earth.

Happy Thanksgiving everyone!

-Bruce (GayPatriot)

Alexander’s Erotic Impulses & Human Sexuality

To those who study history, it becomes annoying when contemporary writers, considering the sexual proclivities of great men from other eras, rush to label as “gay” any figure from the past who once enjoyed sexual relations with members of his own sex.   In the process, they both blind themselves to evidence that that individual also enjoyed sexual relations with the opposite sex and to the mores of his time.

The notion that our sexuality is fixed in one direction is relatively recent one.  Many in other cultures, particularly in the ancient Mediterranean world, even where different-sex married couples were a defining institution, accepted — and often celebrated — men’s attraction to their same-sex fellows.  They saw sexuality as more fluid than we do today. We are guilty of presentism, interpreting historical events in light of modern notions, when we ignore that fluidity.

Perhaps, the greatest example of this presentist worldview is how all too many treat Alexander the Great.  He had to be “gay,” they claim because he and Hephaestion were lovers.  And, to be sure, some historians, eager to show that no great man could have sexual proclivities toward his own sex, write off allegations of his same-sex relations as historians’ embellishments or perhaps just metaphorical descriptions of intense emotional bonds forged in the heat of battle.

In his biography, Alexander: The Ambiguity of Greatness (a book which explains what its subtitle describes), Guy Maclean Rogers addresses the ambiguous nature of Alexander’s sexuality:

But modern sexual categories such as “homosexual” and “heterosexual” cannot be usefully applied to describe the sexuality of Alexander.  He belonged to a culture in which the erotic impulse (eros) was not necessarily assumed to be confined to feelings or acts directed to either men or women that, if they were consummated, thereby placed individuals in one category or the other.  Rather than striving to fix Alexander within one modern sexual camp or another, it is far more illuminating to examine the evidence for the trajectory of the erotic impulses he acted upon. (more…)

When Hatred Defines Your Worldview

Posted by B. Daniel Blatt at 5:40 pm - May 18, 2011.
Filed under: Bibliophilia / Good Books,World History

In the past few years, I have been reading pretty regularly about certain great historical figures who have long fascinated me, notably Julius Cæsar, Charlemagne, George Washington, Abraham Lincoln and Winston Churchill. Earlier today, I started John Lukacs‘s The Duel: The Eighty-Day Struggle Between Churchill and Hitler, having previously enjoyed the author’s Five Days in London: May 1940 about how that great Briton came to become Prime Minister in the early days of World War II.

In the second chapter where the historian contrasts the “decisive turning point” in the life of the Nazi leader to a similar transformation in that of Charles de Gaulle — how each man found the resolve to lead his nation, Lukacs notes:

In de Gaulle’s prose there is the essence of a bitter love of his nation, a love that was stronger than his hate of his enemies.  With Hitler the opposite was true.  No one can gainsay Hitler’s love for Germany; but that love was only implicit, subordinated as it was to his hatreds of what he saw as his enemies, external and internal ones.

In the margin, I wrote, “sounds a lot like Al Qaeda.”  Instead of harkening back to the great days of Islamic civilization, Baghdad at the turn of the second millennium of the Common Era, its leaders dwell on their hatred of Western civilization in general and the United States in particular.  No wonder they devote themselves to destruction and cheer at the murder of civilians.

But didn’t Rome fall before the invention of the internal combustion engine?

Posted by B. Daniel Blatt at 4:12 pm - January 14, 2011.
Filed under: Climate Change (Global Warming),World History

Study: Climate change contributed to rise and fall of Roman empire

FROM THE COMMENTS: gastorgrab quips, “When will Roman Centurions learn that a single horse chariot is enough, and that they need not compete with the Maximus family?”

Obama the Apostate

Posted by B. Daniel Blatt at 7:24 pm - December 23, 2010.
Filed under: Big Government Follies,World History

One wonders how “pagan” (i.e., those who still worshipped the Olympians and associated deities) Roman aristocrats felt when just eighteen years after the death of Constantine, the first Christian Emperor, Julian (AKA the Apostate) was named Cæsar.  That nephew of Constantine was determined to restore that ancient Roman religion.  Perhaps, those aristocrats felt that the Constantinian dynasty’s embrace of Christianity was just a passing fad. And the old days were returning.

So, I assume, must liberals have in 2008 when Barack Obama won election as president with his fellows Democrats capturing huge majorities in both houses of Congress.  They felt that the rise of small-government conservatism where, in time of crisis, people, as per the Gipper, believed “government is not the solution to the problem, government is the problem,” was just a passing fad.  And the old days when people turned to the government in times of crisis were returning.

But, as Michael Barone has noted repeatedly throughout the year, most recently this past Saturday, December 18, this has not been not the case:

Pelosi and Obama predicted that Obamacare would become more popular as voters learned more about it. Those predictions were based on the theory that in times of economic distress Americans would be more supportive of or amenable to big government policies.

That theory has been disproved about as conclusively as any theory can be in the real world, and most of the Democrats who provided the key votes for Obamacare were defeated on Election Day.

Seems that in trying to recall the old order of Emperor Roosevelt the Great, Obama is much like Julian, hearkening back to an era that, to borrow an expression, is gone with the wind.

This. Is. Cool.

(h/t – Instapundit)

Just realize how much of the movement to wealth & health of the world from 1948 to 2009 is in large measure thanks to the influence of the United States of America.

Coincidence?  Hardly.

-Bruce (GayPatriot)

Honoring Winston Churchill on his 136th Birthday

Posted by B. Daniel Blatt at 2:40 am - November 30, 2010.
Filed under: Great Men,World History

As I’m returning today from San Francisco where I celebrated the 2nd anniversary of the California red-head mentioned in this post, I have not had time to write an original post celebrating Winston Churchill, so will repost the piece I wrote last year to make the occasion.  At the end, I added a bit about his first day as Prime Minister.

Today marks the 136th anniversary of the birth of the greatest man of the century concluded just about a decade ago.  On November 30, 1874, Winston Leonard Spencer Churchill was born at Blenheim Palace.  His father was Lord Randolph Churchill, his mother the former Jennie Jerome, the second daughter of the American financier Leonard Jerome.  His very parentage thus embodied the special relationship between the United States and United Kingdom.

Indeed, it was Churchill himself who coined the term to describe the relations between the two powerful Anglophone democracies.

Like a red head born almost exactly 134 years after him, Churchill was two months premature.  (The combination of those two characteristics must be a sign of greatness!)  Like that young Californian, the great Briton had trouble sitting still, traveling to Cuba, India, Sudan and South Africa to fight for his country (and sometimes dubious causes) before his 30th birthday.  He would write about his experiences; his books would earn him fame and fortune.

First elected to parliament in 1900 as a Tory, he broke with his party over tariffs, preferring free trade and the Liberals.  He would rejoin the Conservative Party in 1925, staying with the Tories, through his two terms as Prime Minister and until the end of his life.  Noting that Churchill “stood for Parliament under six labels,” one of his biographers, Paul Johnson wrote that “He was not a party man. . . .  His loyalty belonged to the national interest, and his own.

And Churchill saw the British national interest clearly linked to that of the United States and Western democracies.

While forever associated with the two great wars of the last century, the man himself may well have enjoyed the thrill of battle, but he was well aware of the horrors of war and did his utmost to prevent it.  A warmonger he clearly was not, though he did understand that war was sometimes necessary to prevent even worse evils. (more…)

CNN Takes Note of “Draw Muhammad Day”

I must admit, I’m stunned….

CNN.com Cover Story:  “My Take: Everyone chalk Mohammed?

There is a difference between making fun of religious or other ideas on a TV show that you can turn off, and doing it out in a public square where those likely to take offense simply can’t avoid it. These chalk drawings are not a seminar on free speech; they are the atheist equivalent of the campus sidewalk preachers who used to irk me back in college. This is not even “Piss Christ,” Andres Serrano’s controversial 1987 photograph of a crucifix in urine. It is more like filling Dixie cups with yellow water and mini crucifixes and putting them on the ground all over town. Could you do it legally? Of course. Should you?

In Muslim culture, there is a longstanding tradition that to put something on the ground, where people step on it, is “the ultimate diss,” indicating “I hate you, you disgust me,” as I was told by Ingrid Mattson, president of the Islamic Society of North America

To this add the fact that after 9/11 hate crimes against Arabs, Muslims and “those perceived to be Muslim” increased 1,700 percent in the United States, according to a report by Human Rights Watch. Large numbers of innocent Muslims in the U.S. have been harmed or intimidated simply because they share a religious tradition with extremists. Can we reasonably suggest they not be reminded of this upon seeing their prophet, the most revered and admired person in their cultural tradition, underfoot?

CNN iReport -

There is a huge fight on the internet especially facebook about May 20th Draw Muhammad Day. I have thought long and hard about whether to draw Muhammad and I have decided that I will. I do not think people of certian religions should be able to tell other people not of that religion what they can and cannot do. I do not draw Muhammad out of malice but out of protest because I do not think it is acceptable for our artist to recieve death threats over cartoons. I understand that drawing Muhammad is offensive but many things in America are offensive. Republican and Democrats make signs all the time that are offensive too each other this is free speech to be able to say and expression our opinions to people we do not agree with. Drawing Muhammad does not constitute hate. I am doing this neither out of Malice or hate. If there are terrorist acts because of people drawing pictures I hope that America will wake up and see that people are killing over cartoons and that we should not give up freedom for security.

Maybe Nick was right — if CNN wakes up, perhaps today did change history.  Time shall tell.

-Bruce (GayPatriot)

Islam: The First Cut Is The Deepest

I highly recommend Mark Steyn’s Washington Times column this weekend.  He lays out a chilling case that those interested in advancing Political Islam are winning the ideological struggle hands-down.

Islam smells weakness at the heart of the West. The post-World War II order is dying: The European Union’s decision to toss a trillion dollars to prop up a Greek economic model that guarantees terminal insolvency is merely the latest manifestation of the chronic combination of fiscal profligacy and demographic decline in the West at twilight. Islam is already the biggest supplier of new Europeans and new Canadians, and the fastest-growing demographic in the western world. Therefore, it thinks it not unreasonable to shape the character of those societies – not by blowing up buildings and airplanes, but by determining the nature of their relationship to Islam.

For example, the very same day that Mr. Holder was doing his “Islam? What Islam?” routine at the Capitol, the Organization of the Islamic Conference was tightening its hold on the United Nations Human Rights Council - actually, make that the U.N. “Human Rights” Council. The OIC is the biggest voting bloc at the U.N. and it succeeded in getting its slate of candidates elected to the so-called “human rights” body – among them the Maldives, Qatar, Malaysia, Mauritania and Libya.

But along with the big headline victories go smaller ones. These days, Islam doesn’t even have to show up. The Metropolitan Museum of Art has quietly pulled representations of Muhammad from its Islamic collection. With the Danish cartoons, violent mobs actually had to kill large numbers of people before Kurt Westegaard was sent into involuntary “retirement.” Even with “South Park,” the thugs still had to threaten murder. But the Metropolitan Museum caved pre-emptively – no murders, no threats, but best to crawl into a fetal position, anyway.

Last week, the American Association of Pediatricians (AAP) noted that certain, ahem, “immigrant communities” were shipping their daughters overseas to undergo female genital mutilation FGM). So, in a spirit of multicultural compromise, they decided to amend their previous opposition to the practice: They’re not (for the moment) advocating full-scale clitoridectomies, but they are suggesting federal and state laws be changed to permit them to give a “ritual nick” to young girls.

So, our own Attorney General couldn’t even utter the words “Radical Islam” last week during a Congressional hearing.  And liberals/feminists are silent about the chilling of free speech and mutilation of young women due to the PC-handling of Islam.

Enough said.  Read the whole thing.

-Bruce (GayPatriot)

National Review Reader: “You Know We’re In Trouble When…”

…the president of France makes more sense on national security than the president of the United States.

Why this comment on The Corner?  Because of this statement of reason by French President Sarkozy today.

WASHINGTON – France will not give up nuclear weapons because doing so would “jeopardise” its security, President Nicolas Sarkozy said this morning as global leaders gathered for a summit on nuclear security.

“I cannot jeopardise the security and safety of my country,” Sarkozy told CBS News here hours before US President Barack Obama opened the landmark summit of 47 nations in Washington.

The French leader said he could not abandon his nation’s nuclear weapons programme “on a unilateral basis in a world as dangerous as the one in which we live today”.

The Corner reader added to Jonah Goldberg that, “Sarkozy’s announcement on nukes demonstrates that we’ve crossed some sort of line, and not a good one.”

Obama is no Reagan.

-Bruce (GayPatriot)

A “Tragedy Upon Tragedy” for Poland

Posted by B. Daniel Blatt at 12:50 pm - April 10, 2010.
Filed under: World History

In modern history, few nations have suffered as much as Poland.  Once the dominant power in east central Europe, the nation was carved up as Prussia and Russia expanded, its people persecuted.

Today, the nation suffered what law professor William A. Jacobson billed a “tragedy upon tragedy“; virtually the nation’s entire leadership was wiped out in a single plane crash:

The President of Poland and much of Poland’s military and civilian leadership were killed when the presidential plane crashed in Russia on the way to commemorate the massacre of 22,000 Polish officers by the Soviets in 1940.

It is as if that very forest where the plane went down harbors an animus to Polish leadership:

The crash came as a stunning blow to Poland, killing many of the country’s top leaders and reviving, for some, the horror of the Katyn massacre.

“It is a damned place,” former president Aleksander Kwas’niewski told TVN24. “It sends shivers down my spine. First the flower of the Second Polish Republic is murdered in the forests around Smolensk, now the intellectual elite of the Third Polish Republic die in this tragic plane crash when approaching Smolensk airport.”

Jacobson had really written about the Katyn Forest massacre, an event at the outset of World War II that often doesn’t get much attention–as it puts out Soviet allies in a bad light, a very bad light.

Our hearts — and prayers — go out to the Polish people.

Happy Birthday, Winston Churchill!

Posted by B. Daniel Blatt at 4:18 am - November 30, 2009.
Filed under: Great Men,World History

Today marks the 135th anniversary of the birth of the greatest man of the century concluded now nearly a decade ago.  On November 30, 1874, Winston Leonard Spencer Churchill was born at Blenheim Palace.  His father was Lord Randolph Churchill, his mother the former Jennie Jerome, the second daughter of the American financier Leonard Jerome.  His very parentage thus embodied the special relationship between the United States and United Kingdom.

Indeed, it was Churchill himself who coined the term to describe the relations between the two powerful Anglophone democracies.

Like a red head born almost exactly 134 years after him, Churchill was two months premature.  (The combination of those two characteristics must be a sign of greatness!)  Like that young Californian, the great Briton had trouble sitting still, traveling to Cuba, India, Sudan and South Africa to fight for his country (and sometimes dubious causes) before his 30th birthday.  He would write about his experiences; his books would earn him fame and fortune.

First elected to parliament in 1900 as a Tory, he broke with his party over tariffs, preferring free trade and the Liberals.  He would rejoin the Conservative Party in 1925, staying with the Tories, through his two terms as Prime Minister and until the end of his life.  Noting that Churchill “stood for Parliament under six labels,” one of his biographers, Paul Johnson wrote that “He was not a party man. . . .  His loyalty belonged to the national interest, and his own.

And Churchill saw the British national interest clearly linked to that of the United States and Western democracies.

While forever associated with the two great wars of the last century, the man himself may well have enjoyed the thrill of battle, but he was well aware of the horrors of war and did his utmost to prevent it.  A warmonger he clearly was not, though he did understand that war was sometimes necessary to prevent even worse evils. (more…)

Unfairly Lionizing Lionheart?

Perhaps, it was reading stories about Robin Hood as a boy that I first came to admire Richard the Lionheart, King of England from 1189 until his death ten years later.  He was the noble ruler who, when returning from the Crusades, removed his usurping brother John from the throne and undid that pretender’s repressive measures, restoring law and order, furthering freedom and ushering in a Golden Age for England.

Only later, would I learn that that usurper would succeed Lionheart as King.  Of his decade on the throne, Richard was only in England a few months, perhaps spending the lowest percentage of his reign in Great Britain of any English monarch.  He may not even have spoken English.  (Wikipedia says he “spoke very little English“.)

Maybe had he spent more time in England, he could have made sure his edicts were enforced.  He had issued a writ allowing Jews to live free from state (and church) interference and even ordered the execution of Christians who persecuted and murdered Jews–quite an enlightened act for the Middle Ages.  He could not prevent the massacre at York in 1190, indeed many historians believe that his crusading zeal generated the religious fervor of those who perpetrated the crime.

All that said, sometimes, I wish I didn’t so love history so much; my knowledge sometimes detracts from my enjoyment of movies.  Whenever I watch the wonderful 1938 Adventures of Robin Hood, I want the wicked Prince John (another masterful Claude Rains performance) to get his just desserts, but I know that, in real life, John would succeed Richard, reigning for seventeen years.  Instead of remaining in England to preside over a new Golden Age after he ended John’s tyrannical rule, Richard was off to France to fight for his lands there.

And the irony of all this:  in many cases, it’s the historically inaccurate movies which sparked my interest in the history behind the legends.