Friday, 13 October 2017

Voices from Palestine 1890s-1948 - A Book Review

Normally when I review a book I put the title in the title of the post, but in this case the subtitle was more useful. The book is entitled 'A senseless, squalid war' by Norman Rose, and the quotes are in the title. The book is about the British Mandate of Palestine and how and why it ended. I thought that as the issue of Israel/Palestine comes up on the Right more than I think it deserves, that some might find this book helpful.

Norman Rose was a Historian at the Hebrew University, Jerusalem and was employed there when he wrote this book. The book is a good read and well written, normally easy to follow and informative. It deals with a roughly 50 year period starting in the 1890's when Jewish immigration to Palestine starts to become a political issue. It ends with the British leaving Palestine and the establishment of the State of Israel. What makes this book useful is that it clearly explains the sequence of events and how the issues grew from small to large. There are many personal accounts of events and thoughts which provides a greater insight.

The book looks at the three sided conflict, military, political, economic and demographic from the Arab, Jewish and British sides. On the cover is a quote from a book review in the Spectator newspaper 'Eloquent, comprehensive and even-handed, Truly excellent.' I mostly agree, but it is not quite as even handed as the reviewer thinks. It seems to me that the book is fairer to the Jews, then to the British and finally to the Arabs. But that has it's advantageous as it reveals quite clearly the internal divisions within the Jewish camp. It is not dismissive of the Arabs and it does talk about Jewish tactics and excesses. As a history I think it is quite well done and worthwhile for anyone looking for a popular history of the beginnings of the Israel/Palestine problem.

But as I was thinking about this review, it occurred to me that the way the Jews and the Arabs approached things, is very much how Liberals and Conservative approach issues. The Jews were always ready to talk, in fact they often pushed for talks to legitimize their position. Something Liberals do all the time. The Arabs however were so certain that their cause was right that they often refused to talk, which made them look like they were the cause of the problem, even though they were not. Something Conservatives do. While the Jews were always ready to talk, to practically anyone, they never compromised on anything important. And any compromise they did make was used as a bargaining chip in later negotiations. This is such a Liberal thing to do. The Arabs also never compromised on anything important, but they were sold out by Arabs who sold land to the Jews and who refused to stand up to any threat. In fact one of the reasons the Arabs lost was because so much of their leadership was more concerned with their own welfare than with their peoples. Sound familiar?

Upon Hope Blog - A Traditional Conservative Future
Another Article You Might Like?
The Loneliness Epidemic

Wednesday, 11 October 2017

The Fifty-Fifth Month

I'll keep this short but this month is down from the month before and was nearly at the same level as two months ago, only a 100 or so fewer.

The worst day in the last month was the 4th October when I had 44 visitors, the best day was the 17th September when I had 250 visitors, that last number is not rounded off.

September-October
EntryPageviews
United States
1190
Australia
422
Finland
131
Japan
97
United Kingdom
89
Canada
76
Germany
63
France
61
United Arab Emirates
40
Spain
40


August-September
EntryPageviews
United States
1737
Russia
679
Australia
395
Germany
76
United Kingdom
74
France
61
Canada
51
Brazil
48
Ireland
38
Spain
32
Australia is up and back over 400, the United Kingdom, Canada and Spain are up.

The United States and Germany are down.

France has stayed exactly the same.

Finland, Japan and United Arab Emirates are in the top 10.

Russia, Brazil and Ireland are out of the top 10, Brazil and Ireland were both in for most of the month.

I have also received visitors from the following countries: Ireland, the Netherlands, Norway, Sweden, Italy, Portugal, Poland, Greece, Ukraine, Georgia, Turkey, India, Bangladesh, China, Vietnam, Thailand, Malaysia, Singapore, Indonesia, Philippines, Nigeria, Namibia, South Africa, Barbados, Brazil, Argentina.

I hope you enjoyed your visit and I that you visit again.
Mark Moncrieff

Upon Hope Blog - A Traditional Conservative Future
Another Article You Might Like?


Sunday, 8 October 2017

What We Are Up Against

Currently in Australia there is a postal vote to gage the electorate's opinion on homosexual marriage. What is bizarre about this, I mean apart from the entire idea of homosexual marriage, is that local and state governments have stated their support for homosexual marriage. And so far 660 Australian companies and 1,715 organisations have also come out in support as of the 18th September. I encourage you to look at this link showing the logo's of these companies.

https://www.businessinsider.com.au/here-are-the-businesses-backing-the-yes-campaign-for-same-sex-marriage-2017-9

But I will remind people that in Republican Referendum to decide if Australian would become a Republic in 1999. Every TV station, newspaper and all but a hand full of radio stations supported Australia becoming a Republic, as did the majority of politicians, it failed.

More recently we have Brexit and the election of President Trump. How I remember watching the TV stations all saying that Hillary Clinton had a 98.5% of victory....thank God for that 1.5%!

To be honest I don't know which side will get the most votes, but it is becoming clear that many people are starting to question the idea's being put before them. Even with all of that opposition there is still hope.

Upon Hope Blog - A Traditional Conservative Future
Another Article You Might Like?
The Financial Economy 

Thursday, 5 October 2017

The Old Double Standard

Feminists used to argue against the double standard, the idea that it was okay for men to be promiscuous but not for women. Now promiscuity is in the long term a bad thing for both men and women, collectively and individually. However it affects men and women differently, something that was once regarded as common sense, but when was the last time you heard someone talk about common sense?

Here I want to write about how promiscuity affects men and women and why the double standard was a benefit to society as long as it wasn't taken too far.

It may not come as surprise to many but men are quite attracted to women, both individual women and women as a sex. This attraction can cause a man to be more interested in lust than love. But having said that I should also point out that men are individuals and this is not true for all men, but it is common enough. When men are serious they are attracted to a women, when they are not they are attracted to all women. And when a man decides to be promiscuous he wants to be as promiscuous as possible. But there comes a time when lust alone losses it's glamour, when a man seeks more than the physical and the impermanent. Bizarrely promiscuity can make him more attractive to women and set him up to want more than promiscuity can provide. Sadly some men never leave and others return to it, but for most men promiscuity is a phase that once over is over.

For women promiscuity is different, emotions play a much bigger part in sex than it does for a man. Most men can engage in sex without any emotional attachment, that is rarely true for women. The reason is a hormone called oxytocin, which bonds a women to the man she has just had sex with. So while in theory promiscuity should provide a women with some benefit, it doesn't. Instead what it does is causes confusion because she feels emotion for men who she shouldn't. Over time this causes a great deal of hurt and heartbreak. Women can come to feel that men are cold and heartless, and not without reason. However this does neither men or women any good in the long term. As a women gets older and decides she would like a more permanent relationship, the most natural desire in the world, how does she put aside her hard learnt emotions that men are cold and heartless? Sadly it is very hard to do so and instead you find women who do not bond with their husband and this never ends well.

I do not know why nature has decreed that men should get a benefit for promiscuity and women should not, but it seems clear to me that that is the case. There are of course other risks associated with promiscuity such as pregnancy, disease, reputation to name only some. But the above is a taste of what happens when everything works right. But even for men promiscuity has it's limits, for an interesting but extremely sad example of overplaying promiscuity read this:

http://www.returnofkings.com/129776/a-face-that-i-could-love

For some good and positive advice on building a more permanent relationship watch this:

The Consequences of "Trading UP"

Update: I wrote this a few days too early, two days after I wrote this another article has been published online with statistics and here it is:

http://anepigone.blogspot.com.au/2017/10/sluts-are-nuts.html

While the title might be off putting the statistics are quite revealing.


Upon Hope Blog - A Traditional Conservative Future
Another Article You Might Like?
The Principle of Respect


Monday, 2 October 2017

The Camp of the Saints - A Book Review

About a month or so ago I was talking to someone at a social event and he mentioned The Camp of the Saints by Jean Raspail, I replied that while I had heard of the book I had never read it. In fact I had never even seen a copy. The next time we caught up he handed me his copy, so I began to read.

For those who don't know about the book it was published in French in 1973 and translated into English two years later. It is about a fleet that arrives off the coast of France filled with a million people from the Third World, in this case Indians. Which leads to the destruction of Western Civilization and the end of the White race. Of course it has been labeled racist and ridiculous, something that could never happen. Although after having read it it is hard not to be affected by it and to not notice that much of it has happened.

On the back of the book are some excerpts, this one shows the scale of the book:

"A stream of violent controversy will swirl around this book, since it takes on a whole cluster of polemical issues -- over-population, race, the Third World, and the character of liberal thought and sentiment."

There are three great themes in the book, 1. Race, 2. Liberalism and 3. the lose of confidence within the West. Most people, certainly most critics and detractors of the book, only notice Race but the others are also very important to the story. As the author puts it in his preface much of what he puts into characters mouths are things that had really been said. It it both a strength and a weakness of the book, it means that the ridiculous sounding is not so ridiculous unfortunately it also means that characters often don't speak so much as give speeches. Sometimes that works better in some places than it does in other places.

I would like to give two excerpts from the book itself, one short, the other long.

Most of the book is set in France, but this scene is in New York with an adviser speaking to the Mayor on the telephone and in it you can see the first and the third themes:

"And the wolf is tired of being a wolf, is that what your saying? Well, do like me, Jack. Have yourself another drink, and run your fingers up and down your wife's white skin, nice and slow, like something very precious. And wait. . . " (page 22)

This next scene is in the Belgian consulate in India before the fleet sets sail and he is addressing a group of Western Liberals who have set the events in motion:

"You know," the Consul went on, "there's a very old word that describes the kind of men you are. It's 'traitor.' That's all, your nothing new. There have been all kinds. We've had bishop traitors, knight traitors, general traitors, statesmen traitors, scholar traitors, and just plain traitors. It's a species the West abounds in, and it seems to get richer and richer the smaller it grows. Funny, you would think it would be the other way around. But the mind decays, the spirit warps. And the traitors keep coming. Since that day in 1522, the twelfth of October, when that noble knight, Andrea d'Amaral, your patron saint, threw open the gates of Rhodes to the Turks. . . Well, that's how it is, and no one can change it. I can't. I'm sure. But I can tell you this; I may be wrong about your results, but I find your actions beneath contempt. Gentlemen, your passports will not be renewed. That's the one official way I can still show you how I feel. And my Western colleagues are doing the same with any of their nationals involved."
One of the statues sat up. The one who had mused about the ocean. He was, in fact, the atheist philosopher known in the West by the name Ballan.
"Passports, countries, religions, ideals, races, borders, oceans . . . " Ballan shouted. "What bloody rubbish!" (page 31)

The book is best when it concerns the West, when it shows how Liberal piety works in theory and in practice. How it eats away at the centre until all that remains is a soft outer crust that looks much more solid than it really is. How it inverts the good in us and perverts it to evil, how humility is made into contempt, how cowardice is portrayed as heroism, how the high call of morality and ethics are made into the sirens call that leads to immorality and self destruction. How the claim that the individual is God leads to defeat for the individual and all he holds dear.

Race is not backed away from in the book, it is a very openly pro-White book. But having said that everything that happens in the book is the fault of Whites and the author does not hide that fact. He never states it, but he doesn't have to. It was Whites who created the technology for the Third World to come here, in the book the ships that make up the fleet. It is Whites who told the peoples of the Third World that we are all equal and that they have every right to live as we do. It was Whites who encouraged them to leave their homelands and invade the West. It was Whites who refused to stop the fleet even though it had multiple chances to do so. The West fell because Whites refused to defend it.

The Camp of the Saints is a tragedy, an important book and a wake up call.

Let us defend the West!

Upon Hope Blog - A Traditional Conservative Future
Another Article You Might Like?
The Stages of Liberal Reform

Wednesday, 27 September 2017

Levels of Political Involvement

Recently I was having lunch with a friend of the blog and he told me that he believed that there were six levels of political involvement. As I listened I thought his insight was on target, so I asked him to write out his thoughts as soon as he got back to work, which he did. He then gave me permission to publish them here. The only thing I would add is that I would include even doing part of a level, so for example if you didn't do one or two things in a particular level but you did most of the others I would put you at that level of involvement.

Levels of political involvement

1.    Online involvement – Using Social Media and Discussion Forums.

2.    Basic real-life involvement – Attending private meetings occasionally.

3.    Advanced real-life involvement – Regularly attending private meetings and also contributing financially.

4.    Basic real-life activism – Regularly attending private meetings, contributing financially and doing leafleting, stickering and postering.

5.    Advanced real-life activism – Regularly attending private meetings and public meetings, going to public rallies and doing leafleting, stickering and postering.


6.    Publicly being a known-person in activism – Regularly attending private and public meetings, going to rallies and doing leafleting, stickering and postering and also giving public speeches and being interviewed by the media etc. 

I would put myself at 5, I wonder where you would put yourself?

Upon Hope Blog - A Traditional Conservative Future
Another Article You Might Like?

Sunday, 24 September 2017

Raising Your Own Children

Recently I saw a video of a British couple who were allowing their 4 year old boy to dress as a girl. In their words they were "raising him to be gender neutral". But that's not raising is it?

Instead we have arrived at a point on the Liberal road that Conservatives have warned about for so long we have forgotten when it was first warned against. Liberalism believes in the Autonomous Individual, someone who is self made, free to invent themselves. Free to choose everything about themselves. So this trend fits in perfectly with the greater aims of Liberalism. After all if you can choose your religion or nationality, why shouldn't you be able to choose your own gender?

And there is why we should reject the idea of gender, you and I are not social constructs we are biological creatures, therefor we have a sex. We are either male or female and we are unable to choose which, as biology has made that decision for us. But to Liberalism being unable to choose our own destiny is not freedom and freedom without constraint is at the very heart of Liberalism. So while I and nearly every other person thinks that the parents of that 4 year old boy are bad parents, and they are. They are the future of Liberalism, bad parenting is the future of Liberalism.

Because good parenting involves raising children, it involves setting limits, it involves discipline and saying no. Those things are slowly being removed from parents by Government. In some countries it is already illegal to spank your children. Many parents do not want to be the bad guy, they want their children to like them. If you raise your own children you might do something that makes them not like you, better to let them raise themselves. To let children set their own limits. However children hate this, sure they might like the idea but they hate the reality. Because they are not capable of living in such a world, they are children. The world of a children is small, as adults we can forget that. But even traveling a few streets away from where they live can seem like an alien place, a place of adventure or scary. To you or I that's not true, but we are adults.

Children need to be exposed to the world little by little, they do not need to be exposed to the adult world. They need stability and certainty not confusion, but being told that they can choose their own gender is not stability nor is it certainty. And you think to yourself well that's their business how they raise their child, it doesn't affect mine, but it will. When that children attends childcare or school, your child will be expected to treat them not as freaks, which is sadly what the parents have made him. But as just another child who one day is a boy and the next a girl and that's perfectly normal. Except it is not perfectly normal, it's weird but neither you or your child is allowed to notice. Your child is being lied to and they are never allowed to say so, neither are you!

This effects all of us, it is not just some freaky parents, it is about making us say things that we know both to be untrue and ridiculous. In Communist countries people were required to say things that they knew to be untrue. It destroys peoples belief in themselves, once you have publicly said something that you know to be false then how do you continue to believe in your own integrity? How do you trust your neighbours integrity when you have heard him say something that you both know is untrue?

This isn't about freedom, because the freedom of Liberalism is slavery. You are free to be anything you want as long as you betray who you really are. A boy is free to become a girl and then we must all lie and agree, that is not freedom. The freedom of Liberalism is a lie.

Upon Hope Blog - A Traditional Conservative Future
Another Article You Might Like?
The Principle of Defence

Friday, 22 September 2017

Melbourne Traditionalists in October 2017

Early next month the Melbourne Traditionalists will be meeting up again. If you enjoy good political conversation along with good food and drink and your in Melbourne, Australia, then get in contact.

uponhopeblog(at)gmail.com

Guiding Principles of the Melbourne Traditionalists

1. Loyalty to the Crown of Australia

2. Loyalty to our British and Western heritage

3. Loyalty to the Family, Husband and Wife, Mother and Father and their children

4. Opposition to Liberalism, Right Liberalism, Left Liberalism and Feminism

5. Opposition to the destruction of White Australians, opposed to Multiculturalism, Mass Immigration and Diversity

Upon Hope Blog - A Traditional Conservative Future
Another Article You Might Like?
The Real Enemy is Liberalism

Monday, 18 September 2017

Why Same Sex Marriage is Wrong

Currently in Australia there is a postal vote to gage the voters opinions on same sex marriage. Now we were promised a Plebiscite, as voting is compulsory in Australia it would have provided a very clear gage of the voters opinions. Within the Parliament there is overwhelming support for same sex marriage, but enough do not support it and this has been as good as we can currently hope for. Now even if the majority vote against it in the postal vote, the Parliament can still vote to implement it, but probably won't. Traditional Conservatism has three guiding principals, Tradition, Order and Family and all of them are opposed to same sex marriage.

 Here I will spell out why each principle is opposed to same sex marriage.

Tradition

Marriage is so old that we don't really know how old it is, but considering that the marriage of one man and one women is near universal it must be old. Even Australian aborigines who have been in Australia for tens of thousands of years and for most of that time have been isolated from the rest of the world have marriage. And only one form of it, one man and one women for life. Now there have been variations, but it has always involved men and women because only one man and one women can create life. Marriage is traditional because it connects the past, the present and the future.

Order

Marriage is at it's heart about life, and only one man and one women can create life. Life is part of Order. Order means that everything has it's rightful place and also a wrongful place. For example I live in a house, but I don't live in your house, so if you open the door to your house and I'm there I am in a wrongful place. For me to assess my bank account is rightful, for me to access your bank account is wrongful, even if it was lawful. Because it is not Order. Everything should be in it's rightful place and that includes marriage. For people who cannot create life to marry is wrongful.

Now there are two arguments against that, firstly men and women who cannot have children marry. But in the past there was no way of knowing if they were unable to have children. Tradition now says that they can marry, furthermore no one is arguing that they should not marry. The second argument says that homosexuals can use artificial means to have children or that they can adopt. Nature has provided that one man and one women can create life, and in the vast majority of cases to raise them together. A child should have both a mother and a father, that is Order. Homosexuals cannot provide that.

Family

For one man and one women to create life is natural, it is Tradition, Order and Family. Because the birth of a child creates a new family. Marriage provides the best social environment in which to raise children. Because Marriage is about binding together one man and one women and their children. A family is not a social construct that is flexible and changeable. The family remains what it has always been. Same sex marriage seeks to disconnect that, to pretend that family is endlessly malleable, that it can be forced into any shape and that it will still fit. That it is both evolution and unchanging, but that is not true because it cannot be true. Once marriage is changed from it's timeless meaning then it will be corrupted and corruption is never a good thing.


Instead of helping working class men to get and keep jobs, instead of discouraging unwed mothers, we have a political class that actively supports unemployment and children growing up without fathers and now homosexuals getting married. We have a political class that actively attacks the Family and therefore the future. As we should have learnt from our own experience and from overseas experience, change will mean more change. It never ends, it is endlessly destructive, is that really what you want?

Upon Hope Blog - A Traditional Conservative Future
Another Article You Might Like?
The Scarlet Pimpernel - A Book Review

Monday, 11 September 2017

The Fifty-Fourth Month

Blogging sure is a roller coaster ride!

You would think that the amount of visitors to a site would be more or less constant, but that really isn't true. Another month were I have been sick, I've had a bad year this year with flues, although considering 10 people have died from the flue in Victoria in the past month maybe I shouldn't be complaining!

So in March I had 3,894 visitors, which is better than the previous two months and going back up. However I had three worst days, 47 visitors on each day the 21st, 22nd & 26th of August, my best day was the 13th August when I had 355 visitors.

My Australian visitors are down below 400, I haven't had Australian numbers that low since July 2016 which is disappointing.

I have been blogging now for 4 1/2 years and every six months I give out a list of the ten most read articles on the site. The total number of times they have been viewed is in brackets.

(5216) What Do Traditional Conservatives Believe?

(3201) Free-Trade Versus Protectionism

(2683) Why Don't the Poor Marry?

(2519) Why Do Conservatives Believe in Different Social Classes?

(1928) Feminism, Why We Are Not Feminists

(1925) What is More Important, the Past, the Present or the Future

(1403) Housewives, Good for the Economy and Society

(1228) The Balanced Society

(1166) The Problems of Monarchy

(1158) The Discrimination of Anti-Discrimination

In the Fifty-Four months this blog has been running I have had over 54,000 Americans, 21,000 Australians and 10,000 Russians visit this blog.


August - September

EntryPageviews
United States
1737
Russia
679
Australia
395
Germany
76
United Kingdom
74
France
61
Canada
51
Brazil
48
Ireland
38
Spain
32

July-August
EntryPageviews
United States
1871
Australia
478
Puerto Rico
114
Canada
92
United Kingdom
89
Germany
65
France
60
Brazil
55
Ireland
48
Belgium
34


Germany and France are the only countries that went up...and France only went up by 1!

The United States, Australia, the United Kingdom, Canada and Brazil all went down. 

Russia and Spain have rejoined the top 10.

Puerto Rico and Belgium have left the top 10.

I have also received visitors from the following countries: the Netherlands, Denmark, Sweden, Finland, Switzerland, Italy, Hungary, Romania, Ukraine, Saudi Arabia, U.A.E., Bahrain, Pakistan, India, Bangladesh, China, Hong Kong, South Korea, Malaysia, Singapore, Indonesia, the Philippines, Morocco, Zambia, South Africa, Argentina,  

I thank you for visiting and I hope to see you again soon.
Mark Moncrieff

Upon Hope Blog - A Traditional Conservative Future
Another Article You Might Like?