Raise The Shield Wall!

Raise The Shield Wall!

 

I say it is time to raise the shield wall.

Especially when Western civilization is engaged in a life and death struggle for its very survival and our enemies are attempting to twist the very lexicon and identity forming descriptors we have used for centuries to define ourselves, in an attempt to supposedly ‘de-toxify’ what they perceive as ‘white supremacist’ terms.

A perfect example is the disingenuous way historians like  Dr. Mary Rambaran-Olm, a fellow at the University of Toronto, who specializes in race in early England and Sherif Abdelkarim at John Hopkins University, who apparently studies Early English language, assert that “First-millennium Britain offers one glimpse into the extent to which communities mixed and flourished…. suggesting extensive exchange and assimilation among Britain’s inhabitants and settlers.”

Their colleague Paul Edward Montgomery Ramírez, a Nicaraguan-American archaeologist, desperate to exaggerate the significance of a theological expression used by Alfred the Great, “You must not oppress foreigners and strangers, because you were once strangers in the land of Egypt,” making a timely intervention (especially coming from someone who shares the same heritage as the people currently rushing America’s southern border) to remind us that Britain was always multicultural.

And please remember the International Society of Anglo Saxonists (ISAS) have only recently been forced to drop the term Anglo Saxon and the academic department at Cambridge specializing in Anglo-Saxon, Norse and Celtic, as well as the longstanding Chairs of Anglo Saxon at Oxford (most famously held by J.R.R. Tolkien) have also been attacked for using such a divisive name.

Which brings me back to my core point.

Anyone making a detailed study of early English charters will see the predominant usage of the expressions englisc and angelcynn rather than Anglo Saxon (think also of the Roman Tacitus and the word Anglii)The very term Anglo Saxon was coined in fact on the continent to differentiate between German and English Saxons.

But accuracy is tangential to the reasons behind the arguments being put forward by the likes of  Rambaran-Olm, Abdelkarim and Gonzalez, who are in fact attempting to deconstruct the very meaning of the words Anglo Saxon, arguing fallaciously that “Archaeological evidence shows that people of sub-Saharan African descent lived in early England.”

I have even heard the descriptor Afro-Saxon being used. Politically correct historians abusing the fact that the descriptor Anglo Saxon was rarely used prior to the Norman Conquest of 1066 and became more common at the time of the British Empire’s major expansion in the nineteenth century in order to demonstrate the term was being applied to imply the superiority of “white people” by the Victorians.

Today’s liberal propagandists operating in the field of medieval studies increasingly trying to cast aside the use of the expression “Anglo-Saxon” because they continually insist it denotes Western superiority with one media article related to Rambaran-Olm’s work, ignoring the acclaimed work of academics like Stenton, Hill, Crossley-Holland, Hook, Carver, Campbell, Higham, Wood and Morris and instead saying:

‘Because in their (the left wing deconstructionists) view it has more connection to white hoods than boar-decorated helmets. The record shows that myths about the past can be exploited to create hateful policies. But as perceptive readers, we can arm ourselves against hate by wielding historical precision as a weapon’.

Which is why we need to defend the use of such terms as Anglo Saxon, Norse and Celtic, until we control these centres of research and teaching because it is for us, not our anti-white enemies, to provide nuance to these identities.

Especially given the reality that our people currently recognize such expressions as they relate to their ancestors. Indeed, walk into any bookshop and you will see, for now at least, histories referring to Anglo Saxons and Celts. That must be our starting point. Our cultural outreach must begin on such familiar ground.

Especially when it so rich and fascinating, contributing to who and what we are and linking us forever to the land that is ours by right of inheritance.

 

On This Day in History: The Battle of Arogee, 1868

“Never Give Way to Barbarians” The British Abyssinian Expedition of 1868: A Matter of Honor

 

The Abyssinian Expedition of 1868 was unlike any military campaign before or since.

Today, the idea that an entire expeditionary force could be raised to invade a country on another continent and just to rescue eight people might seem unthinkable; however, that is what happened as a matter of course at the height of the Victorian age.

 

Who was behind the UK’s Race Relations Act of 1965?

Another good read on modern history.

 

Thuletide

I imagine that most people in this sphere are pretty familiar with the origins of the US Civil Rights Act of 1964. If not, you should look into the Warren Court, lobbyists like Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, and early Civil Rights movements like the NAACP. Also, bear in mind that America’s elite colleges had been infested with Leftists since the 1930s and 40s, at least.

As covered in my recent article on Anglosphere immigration laws, similar acts were passed throughout the West during the 60s and 70s as part of the wider postwar “Civil Rights” (anti-White) Revolution, which continues to this day and recently culminated in the worldwide anti-White “Black Lives Matter” insurrection of 2020–2021.

“Civil Rights” laws passed throughout the Anglosphere include the Canadian Human Rights Act of 1977, Australian Racial Discrimination Act of 1975, New Zealand Race Relations Act of 1971, and…

View original post 556 more words