Re: Dennis Wheatley's letter to the future - was he abelard's father?
- From: Welsh Witch <ww@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2005 14:18:50 +0000
On Mon, 31 Oct 2005 06:03:10 -0800, joseph.hutcheon wrote:
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbcfour/documentaries/features/dennis-wheatley.shtml
>
> A LETTER TO POSTERITY
> FROM
> DENNIS WHEATLEY
>
> (Born Jan 8th 1897, a Naval Cadet 1908-1912, a Lieutenant of Artillery
> 1914-1918, a Wine Merchant 1919-1931, an Author from 1932, a Wing
> Commander on the Joint Planning Staff of the War Cabinet 1941-1944, and
> the owner of this property (in which I have planted over 1200 trees and
> bushes) from 1945)
> Thursday 20th November 1947
> Today Princess Elizabeth was married to Lieutenant Philip Mountbatten
> RN, the son of Prince Andrew of Greece. As the eldest daughter of the
> King, George VI (he having no male issue), the Princess is the Heir
> Apparent to the Throne of the United Kingdom and the British Empire
> beyond the seas. Should she outlive her father, and remain sane, all
> historical precedent makes it appear inevitable that, in due course,
> she will become our sovereign, as Queen Elizabeth II.
> Yet our present monarch being just over 50, and in good health with a
> normal prospect of another 25 years of life, many people would lay
> heavy odds
> against his daughter, or any other member of his family, ever being
> crowned at Westminster.
>
> I am now of an age with the King, having been born while the reign of
> Queen Victoria still had three years to run. At that time even the
> thought that one day the British Monarchy might be abolished was
> inconceivable. But in the 50 years of my life greater changes have been
> wrought in the habits and mentality of the world's population than in
> any 500 years of previously recorded history.
> When I was born electricity had been discovered but not yet adapted to
> practical every-day usage. London had no electric light or telephone
> system. Wireless, radio recording, broadcasting and gramophones were
> still unknown, and the petrol engine was still in its infancy. There
> were no motorcars; on the streets all vehicles were still horse-drawn,
> and for travelling further afield, the steam train as yet without
> corridor coaches, was the only means of transport. Liners and warships
> were generally steam propelled but a great part of the world's
> sea-borne commerce was still carried in sailing ships; and the idea of
> travelling by air was as remote and unreal with us as it was with the
> Romans.
>
> The electric age, having its infancy while I was a schoolboy, reaching
> maturity during the First World War, and becoming a dominant factor in
> all our lives from then on, has revolutionised thought wherever it has
> penetrated.
>
> In the early years of the century the vast majority of the people of
> Europe and the United States - and even more so those of the less
> progressive areas of the world - formed their opinions from personal
> contact with their fellows. The more advanced among them were neither
> lacking in intelligence or political consciousness, but their attitude
> towards their rulers was governed in the main by (1) any new laws which
> affected their personal well-being and (2) the discussion of events at
> the centres of government - declarations of war, treaties of
> alliance, court scandals, royal marriages etc. these were often
> belatedly reported but formed the staple talk wherever men were
> gathered together; in the towns, in clubs and taverns, in the country,
> in public halls and inns. Thus, in those days, the 'voice of the
> people' was in fact the consensus of opinion arrived at after a vast
> number of free debates had taken place at every level of society and in
> all parts of the country, concerned.
>
> This 'voice' was rarely raised; but when it was, rulers had good
> cause to tremble, and almost invariably, the result was a cessation of
> repression or a change of government; as the 'voice' was usually
> pregnant with both justice and commonsense.
> But the 'voice' was stilled by the coming of the electro-machine
> age, as the new inventions enabled the professional politicians of all
> parties to get into direct touch with every community, however remote.
> First came the electric press, enabling a million or more copies of a
> newspaper to be run off in a single night - and enormously improved
> arrangements for distribution. Then came the wireless telegraph -
> which swiftly developed into radio, with a five times a day news
> service which, by means of a cheap receiving set, could be picked up in
> every home. And these were followed by the cinematograph which soon
> became one of the most insidious weapons for political propaganda.
>
> The result was that instead of forming their opinions by quiet thought
> and reasoned discussion, the bulk of the people took them ready made
> (from so called 'informed' sources) and, in consequence, in the
> short space of the first two decades of the 20th century an almost
> unbelievable change took place in the mental attitude of the masses all
> over the world. The immense speeding up of means of communication
> brought the national and international picture so swiftly before them
> that it filled their thoughts to the exclusion of local conditions and
> the well-being of their own communities; political ideologies and
> abstract theories of government usurped in their minds the place which
> had previously been occupied by the selective prosperity of local
> industries and the prospects of crops. Worst of all, the masses came
> under the immediate influence of the political demagogues who labelled
> themselves as the 'representatives of the people', who held that
> 'all men being equal' all power should be vested in the majority
> rather than in the intelligent minority, as had been the case in the
> past.
>
> For many centuries power had been vested in Priest-Kings who were
> usually members of an hereditary ruling house - but the authority of
> such rulers was nearly always circumscribed by a group of elders, or a
> feudal nobility, whose say in matters varied in accordance with the
> strength of personality of the reigning potentate. It was generally
> recognised that a throne could be permanently maintained only if it
> were the apex of a solidly supporting pyramid of aristocracy and thus
> as a general rule the Priests/Nobles/Senators exercised a power at
> least equal to that of the Priest-Kings. In the event of the ruler
> proving irresponsible or despotic they usually succeeded in either
> overthrowing or placing a check upon him - as was the case when the
> Barons of England forced King John to sign Magna Carta. Moreover, the
> Priesthood or Nobility was constantly being added to by the rise of men
> of exceptional ability and talent among the masses, as witness King
> Henry VIII's great minister Cardinal Wolsey, who began life as a
> butcher's boy.
>
> Thus, until the dawning of the new age, the lives of the vast majority
> of the people in all countries were ordered in accordance with the will
> and beliefs of a comparatively small ruling-class - mainly composed
> of the boldest, cleverest and most energetic individuals in each
> nation.
>
> Yet from time immemorial, idealists of all races have supported the
> doctrine that 'all men are equal'. Saints and martyrs have preached
> it in all ages, the outstanding example being Jesus Christ, whose creed
> largely owed its far-reaching acceptance and prominence to the fact of
> its appeal to slaves and underdogs.
> For two thousand years at least this conception has waged a mainly
> unsuccessful war against its opposite - the belief that the direction
> of human destinies should remain vested in a limited number of
> individuals who are, on average, better educated and more intelligent
> than the masses.
>
> The aristocracies of Egypt, Greece and Rome, clearly had no doubts at
> all that they were better fitted to govern than any committee composed
> of representatives of the common people. In the middle ages, both the
> Princes of the Church of Rome and the temporal Kings whom they so
> greatly influenced also took this view. In later times the European
> sovereigns and the supporting hierarchies of nobles likewise accepted
> the authority to rule as a natural commitment of this order. Yet it
> gradually came to be admitted that the Third Estate had a right to a
> voice in the direction of affairs, and more particularly, in how the
> money taken from them in taxes should be expended to the determination
> of 'those who paid the piper to call the tune'. In the early
> seventeenth century the commercial classes of the Kingdom brought about
> the Great Rebellion and cut off King Charles I's head. This drastic
> culmination of the revolution was, however, far from having the
> approval of the great majority of the people, and the resulting
> dictatorship by a bureaucracy proved so distasteful to them that 14
> years later, in 1660, they gave overwhelming support to the restoration
> of Charles II.
> Nevertheless, as a result of these troubles a new balance was achieved,
> and it became recognised that the best means of governing the realm lay
> in a fair distribution of power between King, Lords and Commons. For
> the following 200 years the balance was reasonably well maintained and,
> during them,
> Britain knew a greater well-being and prosperity that any nation since
> the fall of Rome.
>
> But from the latter part of the 19th century this balance gradually
> became undermined. The coming of the machine age enabled the
> politicians of the 'all men are equal' school to get into
> ever-closer touch with the masses. Under the banners of liberation they
> preached against every form of privilege, thus making the masses
> discontented with their lot; and later, as socialists, they openly
> advocated equality in all things. The English race, which has led the
> way in most things, was the first to give full expression ...[text
> illegible] ...with supreme power vested in the House of Commons.
>
> By the opening of the 20th century this new political consciousness in
> the multitude, coupled with the long disuse of the power of veto by the
> Monarch, had already reduced the Throne to a cipher; and in 1911 a
> liberal majority in the commons passed a bill that reduced the power of
> the Lords to a negligible quantity. It was not, however, until the
> elections of 1945, that the 'all men are equal' propaganda resulted
> in the return of a Socialist majority to Westminster, where, the other
> two factors having been virtually eliminated, it has, in the past two
> years, given Britain her first taste of government by the
> representatives of the underdog, free from all unilateral or higher
> control.
> Up to the end of the last century the difference in condition between
> the very rich and the very poor was obviously too great to justify on
> any count, but much had been done to bridge the gulf long before the
> socialists came to power. Successive governments had brought in
> ever-higher rates of income tax with a sharply rising scale according
> to income; so that by 1940 the great bulk of all taxation was borne by
> the moderately well off and richer classes. In fact, a married workman
> with 4 children could earn up to £400 a year without paying any tax at
> all, whereas a millionaire with an income of £50,000 had to surrender
> £44,000 in taxation. Again, under the old system there were
> many abuses of power, particularly through economic pressure, whereby
> workers were often compelled to labour overlong hours in unhealthy
> conditions; but here again, during the first 40 years of the present
> century an enormous amount had been done to redress these evils.
> Education and health services had been made free to all, hours of work
> restricted, minimum wages set for all types of labour, insurance of
> workers against accident made compulsory on employers, and both
> unemployment pay and old-age pensions assured to all below a certain
> income level.
> It was far from being a perfect world, but the masses were no longer at
> the mercy of chance or the caprice of their masters, and were fully
> protected from either calamity or want. No one would seek to deny that
> the worker's own representatives and the trade union movement played
> a great part in bringing about these reforms; yet the fact remains that
> the laws concerning them were mainly introduced and passed by
> just-minded and humane legislators drawn from the old ruling classes.
> However, having agitated for such reforms for so long, the 'all men
> are equal' advocates were far from content and are now in the process
> of lightening the natural burden of the workers to a point where the
> wealthy and even the stability of the nation is threatened. Employers
> are now no longer allowed to run their businesses as they think best
> but have become the bond slaves of socialist state planning. The school
> leaving age has been put up to 16, and a 5 day working week has been
> instituted in the mines, the railways and many other industries.
> This means that while workers are being protected and provided for,
> whether employed or not, from the cradle to the grave, they are no
> longer putting in a sufficient number of working hours to pay for the
> benefits they receive. To continue on these lines can only end in
> national bankruptcy, or a reversal of policy by which, as in Soviet
> Russia, the vast majority of the theoretically
> classless society are compelled to work appallingly long hours to
> maintain the state bosses and a huge non-productive bureaucracy.
> The doctrine of ensuring every child a good start in life and equal
> opportunities is fair and right, but the intelligent and the
> hardworking will always rise above the rest, and it is not a practical
> proposition that the few should be expected to devote their lives
> exclusively to making things easy for the majority. In time, such a
> system is bound to undermine the vigour of the race. If the rewards of
> ability and industry are to be taken from those who rise to the top,
> they will cease to strive, and if the masses are pampered too much they
> will regard protection from all the hazards of life as their right, and
> become lazy. There is only a limited amount of wealth in each
> nation's resources. If it is not added to year by year by vigorous
> enterprise, made possible by the majority of the people doing an honest
> day's work, but instead, gradually drained away in bettering the
> condition of the masses without their making an adequate return, the
> nation that follows such a policy is bound to go into a decline; then
> the general standard of living will fall, instead of becoming a Utopia,
> as the 'all men are equal' theorists fondly imagine.
> And this is the slippery slope to which the new socialist government
> 'of the people, by the people, for the people' has now brought a
> once rich and prosperous Britain.
> Socialist controls now make it impossible for any ambitious young man
> to start his own business. Socialist taxation operates against any man
> of initiative immediately his efforts place him in a higher income-tax
> group. Socialist laws actually forbid workers in all the great national
> industries to work overtime or better themselves by changing their
> employment. Socialist 'planning' forbids any man to kill his own
> sheep or pig, cut down his own tree, put up a wooden shelf in his own
> house, build a shack in his garden, and
> either buy or sell the great majority of commodities - without a
> permit. In fact, it makes all individual effort an offence against the
> state. Therefore, this Dictatorship of the Proletariat, instead of
> gradually improving the conditions in which the lower classes live, as
> has been the aim of all past governments, must result in reducing
> everyone outside the party machine to the level of the lowest, idlest
> and most incompetent worker.
> Realising that, many thousands of our young people are planning to
> leave Britain for the dominions, colonies and other countries overseas,
> where unshackled by the bureaucratic socialist octopus, men are still
> free to carve out a fortune for themselves, and enjoy the rewards of
> hard work and enterprise.
> Man began as a member of a herd. He became different from the animals
> only when the urge to become a real person - an individual - gave
> him the courage to back away from the herd. The desire to remain free
> and independent forced him to think and act for himself. In the process
> he developed his imagination, his ability to reason, his strength of
> purpose, his audacity, his powers of concentration, and his expectation
> towards a still greater freedom in some afterlife more perfect than the
> present. As an individual, often subject to the orders of others, but
> rarely reduced to a mere part in a soulless machine, men achieved a
> variety of great civilisations - a feat beyond the bounds of all
> probability had he always been regimented and had his thoughts moulded
> for him into a uniform pattern by state propaganda.
> The triumph of communism means the reconverting of civilised men back
> to the herd. That has been proved in Russia where, since the revolution
> of 1917, in which the noble, moneyed and intellectual classes were
> almost entirely eliminated by organized massacres, the communist party
> has wielded absolute power. For the past 30 years, the truth about the
> past and about
> everything which goes on outside the borders of Russia, has been either
> deliberately falsified or withheld from the people. Even their party
> men have become only slightly larger cogs in the state machine. All but
> a very few are ignorant of the fact that the standard of living to
> which communism has reduced the Russian people is the lowest in the
> world; and they dare not express a doubt as to its rightness or
> efficiency, as to do so could cost them their lives. There is not a
> shadow of liberty left. Everyone is compelled to labour to the limit of
> their endurance in return for their bare subsistence. They can be
> arrested and imprisoned or shot without trial. There is no justice and
> no freedom of either thought or action. Few have any conception of the
> joys that go to make life worth living. The Russian people now know no
> other form of life than that of state slaves. Day after day they labour
> on like harnessed animals. From their dreary lot there is nothing to
> look forward to, no future and no escape.
> And this is the ultimate outcome of the false, pernicious doctrine that
> 'all men are equal'. Socialism is but a halfway house.
> Therefore, if when this document is discovered, the people of Britain
> are bound to a state machine, my message to posterity is REBEL. All men
> are not equal. Some have imagination and abilities far above others. It
> is their province and their right to take upon themselves the
> responsibility of leading and protecting the less gifted.
> We are sent into this world to develop our own personality - to use
> such gifts as we have been given and to set an example to others by our
> courage, fortitude, sympathy, generosity and self-reliance. Any state
> which controls the lives of the people and dictates where they shall
> live, what work they shall do, what they shall see, say, hear, read and
> think, thwarts the free development of personality, and is therefore
> EVIL.
> It will be immensely difficult to break the stranglehold of the
> machine, but it can be done, little by little; the first step being the
> formation of secret groups of friends for free discussion. Then numbers
> of people can begin systematically to break small regulations, and so
> to larger ones with passive resistance by groups of people pledged to
> stand together - and eventually the boycotting, or ambushing and
> killing of unjust tyrannous officials.
> Your life does not matter, but your freedom does. The age-old wisdom
> tells us that death is not to be feared, for it is but a release from
> life, leading to rebirth, and if one has lived and died courageously,
> as a finer, stronger personality. Therefore, if need be, fight for your
> RIGHT to live, work and love, how and where you will. If need be die
> for it. Your death will be an example to others that it is better to
> die fighting for your freedom and happiness than to live on as a slave.
> May the courage and wisdom of the Timeless Ones, who order all things,
> be your support and guide. They will never fail you if you have faith
> in yourself.
> Blessings be upon you; freedom and love be with you.
> Dennis Wheatley
******************************
Is this the Dennis Wheatley...the real Dennis Wheatley?
Such a powerful writer that on reading one of his books on my own in
my flat in Tite Street. London, I took such fright that I chased off to a
train back to Wales...without a ticket...had to ask the station master at
Welshpool to get my father to come to pay my fare. D.W.certainly fuels the
imagination to those in possession of one :-)
******************************
.
- Prev by Date: Re: Can you pass a citizenship test?..some further insight....
- Next by Date: Re: NEEDED - PATRIOTIC PRO ENGLISH POLITICAL PARTY
- Previous by thread: Re: Can you pass a citizenship test?..some further insight....
- Next by thread: Re: Hitler on race
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
