Pupils in British schools are to be taught the history of multiracial Britain.  It is reported that the OCR GCSE History syllabus will include a module on immigration.

There has of course been a lot of immigration to the British Isles over the last two millennia.  The Romans came, built their temples and sewers, and then returned to sunny Italy.  Various Germanic people – Angles, Saxons, Jutes, and maybe some Franks – came, and colonised almost the whole of England.  Their language survives, with some modification, as the English we speak today.  Then the Scandinavians came.  They raped and pillaged and introduced the word law to the English language.  They were followed by their cousins the Normans, who formed a ruling elite, but failed miserably in their attempt to get us all speaking French.

Over the following centuries, Britain sometimes attracted refugees, notably the Huguenots (French protestants) who came here around three hundred years ago and established colonies in such places as Canterbury and London.  For many years they maintained an independent identity, for example having their own churches, but over time they blended into the landscape.

Something almost all of these people have in common is that they were white.  Non-white people do have a history in this country, but it is easily exaggerated.  Apparently the OCR examiners believe that there may have been as many as fifteen thousand black people living in London in the year 1750.

Really?  How many black people are depicted in the paintings of Hogarth?  I can think of one (the little boy in the fourth painting in the Marriage A La Mode series).  Are there any black characters in the novels of Jane Austen?

I will accept the word of academic Miranda Kaufmann that there were more than three hundred Africans living in the British isles between the years 1500 and 1640

There would doubtless have been more Africans in Britain in the eighteenth century because of slavery, and we know the names of several freed slaves, such as Jonathan Strong, James Somersett, and Olaudah Equiano.  Nevertheless there is no reason to think that there were many non-whites living in Britain prior to the arrival of the MV Empire Windrush in 1948.  Fewer than five hundred black people came to England on that ship.  If it were still in existence, then there would be a case to be made for renaming it the MV Thin End of the Wedge.

In short, while it is not wrong in principle to teach school pupils about the history of multi-racial Britain, it is hard to avoid the conclusion that it will amount to making a proverbial mountain out of a molehill.  I also wonder whether or not the OCR wants pupils to be taught about the negative impact of immigration.  I will leave you with a quote from the Magna Carta (from the year 1215):

We will dismiss out of our kingdom all foreign soldiers, bowmen, serving men, and mercenaries, who come with horses and arms to the nuisance thereof.

Back when Christianity was first becoming known in Britain, there was no conflict between it and the so called paganism that had gone before. The people at the top of British society, the Arch Druids, became the Arch Bishops of the Celtic Church. Christianity was looked upon as the natural evolution of the British people’s spiritual doctrines. The idea that Christians would be opposed to Druids because the Druids were ‘Pagan’ was not something that was even countenanced. The Druids and the Christians were the same people, obeying the same laws and part of the same society. If Christianity had meant one half of society being against the other half, it would never have been accepted in the first place. As it was, it was decided to change from being a ‘Pagan’ nation to a Christian one in the second century in Britain and the idea for that came from the King and his Druid advisors and was warmly welcomed by the people. This would not have happened if it had not been seen as a positive development.

People that wish to denigrate Christianity or attack it as being foreign really have no faith at all in their own abilities as White people, or even in their own ancestors. White people pick up lots of things from around the world and if they are useful, then they get appropriated and adapted to White people’s tastes and needs. There is no way that our ancestors would have accepted a foreign religion and no way that after being a White religion for 1500 years, it would not exclusively show the spirit of the White man within it. I say 1500 years as it was after that time that the Jews started to have an influence on it from within, culminating in the hideous monstrosity that goes by the label of Judao-Christianity today.

National Socialism saw that Jewish influence, recognised it for what it was and sought to fight back by promoting what they called Positive Christianity. This meant accentuating the parts of Christianity that were most relevant to the struggles that the nation were involved in at the time. That meant concentrating on the Jews being the children of the Devil and the Antichrist and the Aryan qualities of Jesus, who Adolf Hitler spoke about, as a role model for Aryans, as he knew full well that Jesus was not a Jew. He spoke about the way that Jesus heroically threw the Jewish usurers out of the temple, highlighting the courage of this act and the way that the Jews reacted to it.

Today it would also mean concentrating on the Biblical laws against race-mixing and sodomy, both of which were nowhere near as prevalent in the early 20th century as they are in the 21st. Today’s Churches try to pretend those laws do not exist or that they meant something else, in the same way as they have twisted the love for your neighbour law. It goes without saying that love for your neighbour and being prepared to die for those you love had always been interpreted to mean love for your nation and being prepared to die defending it, up until the modern church twisted it to mean love for the Antichrist and his army of barbarians.

All the best of our earlier beliefs were incorporated into Christianity, giving rise to much of our Christian customs and iconography, as well as our festivals. The ancient gods began life as our ancestors and we never stopped honoring them until today. Christianity commands us to honour our ancestors and it helped keep them alive for us by recording their exploits so that they could be passed down to later generations. Christian monks would painstakingly copy out the classics of our past, documenting our previous beliefs so that we might remember the early years of our race. They educated the people so that they might understand our history and contribute to the continuing story themselves.

Attacking Christianity does not help our cause. It shows a lack of knowledge about our first millennium history as recorded by our own people and shows a great disrespect to our ancestors who lived and died for it. It inspired them to create the most amazing works of art and architecture, some of the finest high culture that the world has ever seen. Its laws formed the basis for our societies and enabled them to become stable enough for us to form world conquering empires. Now we have rejected it our people lack the faith to wish to die defending their homeland. They lack the love for their own people that should have prevented the Muslims from ever setting foot on our shores. They lack the moral fibre to stand up against the promotion of homosexuality and promiscuity. Without it our nations have become weak and easy prey for the Jews and the hordes of untermenschen that they have invited in.

The whole Pagan against Christian  mind-set is a distraction from what really matters and is like arguing over who was better, you as a child or you as an adult. There is much that is inspiring about the Pagan myths and that is because they are ours, the same as Christianity is ours. Just like Christianity is being warped and universalised, our Pagan myths are too, with the gods being turned into gay transvestite comic book characters and Jesus being turned into a Negro. This is unacceptable, both are a part of our history, both belong to us and came from us and both need defending from the dogs and the swine seeking to trample them. To join them in attacking our heritage like that is to go against everything that made us what we are today.

Instead of attacking Christianity, we should be promoting the parts of it that are most needed in our struggle, just as the National Socialists did. To do anything else means accepting defeat and handing our inheritance over to the enemy.