The Sun Sets on the Union Jack
sun never sets on the Union Jack! This was the frequently-heard saying
in the 19th and, up to World War II, the 20th century alluding to the
reality that the British flag flew in an empire stretched around the globe.
After 1918 a war-weary Britain preached, and practiced, disarmament, while
Hitler came to power, rearmed Germany to the hilt, and began his aggressive
Hitler saw Britain's pacifism under Chamberlain as "decadence,"
and this view entered into his calculations and helped tip his decision
toward war. He anticipated an easy victory over his enemies and looked
forward to dividing the British Empire among himself and his allies. But
When finally the English awoke to the danger they replaced Chamberlain
with Churchill and, after taking a lot of punishment, during which they
thought their island might be invaded by the Germans any day, they reversed
the tide and with our help finally won the war. Hitler was entirely wrong
in his assessment of the mettle of the British. Or so it seemed at the
In fact post war developments give material to any who may want to argue
that his only mistake was in foreseeing the future and mistaking it for
the present. As the war ended the British population couldn't waitthey
just could not waitto move toward socialism. Having won the war
and not needing the warrior Churchill any more, they dismissed him and
plunged in. Now the long term results are in and have been sketched for
us by the columnist Paul Craig Roberts.
As he puts it, "One hundred years ago Great Britain was the world's
only superpower. Today, even its culture is disappearing. The nation that
stood up to Napoleon and Hitler has been overcome by the welfare state."
Marriage, once the cornerstone of British society is dwindling and illegitimacy
is soaring. The London Times reports that "What were once conventional
norms of behavior are being overturned across the board, and [the government]
is more concerned with gay issues than the collapse of the traditional
It gets worse, if that's possible. Roberts reports Tony Blair's Labour
(i. e. socialist) government plans to give the same estate tax exemptions
to gay couples that are given to legitimate couples. And then there is
the proposed treatment of those people called "travelers." These
are roving bands who have no fixed address. They will be permitted to
vote in just whatever district at which they may whimsically show up on
election day. Never mind that they just came to town for the first time
in their lives the night before and know nothing about the history, culture,
or problems of the district and its people. They may vote then and there.
Under this rule a Gypsy caravan could, of its own volition or under the
pay of some politician not necessarily benevolent, target a local district,
wheel in and spread their tents the night before, and take over with the
coordinated pull of the requisite number of levers on election day. Blair
also wants to empower prisoners to vote, according to Roberts. Does this
mean, could it possibly mean, that prisoners could take over a small district
in which there was located a large prison? Surely the Mother Country,
while possibly verging on insanity, still has enough wit to reject such
an absurd idea.
Roberts concludes that "British culture has disappeared because the
British government can tell no difference between those who carry the
burdens of society and those who burden society."
Herr Hitler was wrong in his assay of the British people of 1940. He thought
that England would not fight but they did. But if his opinion were taken
as a prediction for the future rather than as a conclusion applicable
to his war plans of that day, he may not have been entirely wrong. The
British have sunk into the decadence of socialism, and today when the
sun goes down over London it sets on the Union Jack.