The River-Merchant’s Wife
After Li Po
While my hair was still cut straight
across my forehead
I played at the front gate, pulling
flowers.
You came by on bamboo stilts, playing
horse,
You walked about my seat, playing with
blue plums.
And we went on living in the village of
Chokan:
Two small people, without dislike or
suspicion.
At fourteen I married My Lord you.
I never laughed, being bashful.
Lowering my head, I looked at the wall.
Called to, a thousand times, I never
looked back.
At fifteen I stopped scowling,
I desired my dust to be mingled with
yours
Forever and forever and forever.
Why should I climb the lookout?
At sixteen you departed,
You went into far Ku-to-en, by the river
of swirling eddies,
And you have been gone five months.
The monkeys make sorrowful noise
overhead.
You dragged your feet when you went
out,
By the gate now, the moss is grown,
the different mosses,
Too deep to clear them away!
The leaves fall early this autumn, in
wind.
The paired butterflies are already
yellow with August
Over the grass in the West garden;
They hurt me. I grow older.
If you are coming down through the
narrows of the river Kiang,
Please let me know beforehand,
And I will come out to meet you
As far as Cho-fu-sa.
March 26, 1942
McARTHUR
It is a privilege to fight against gentlemen. And the European radio station seems to me to have been as ready to show respect to General McArthur, as they are, and RIGHTLY are, to show absolute and utter contempt and loathing for the war profiteers, and the gang of unmitigated newts, and vermin who have thrown the world into war in the hope of establishing a gold and money lending monopoly, and blotting out the good life in five continents. They have done this from their lust for secret and irresponsible power.
And the place to fight these syphilis bugs is NOT on the frontiers, but in the centre of your own nations.
This more than bubonic plague passes over all frontiers as Dante already perceived. It rots the heart, and the soul of the nations. It is silent, ceaseless in its action. And the PLACE to resist it is for every man LOCALLY -the means to resist it are LOCAL.
And by that fact they are hard to bring into coherence. The embezzler, working behind false laws, can mobilize quickly; the farmer, worker and peasant can not.
The embezzler sets up his papers, dailies and weeklies. That curse of God Willkie was puffed up by the Weeklies. The plague does not stop with the dailies It sets up publishing houses, it grinds down all private liberty-economic[I mean, fewer and fewer men or groups have the MONEY to run a paper. Every cranny is infested. Every college campus has a bookstore. LOOK to these bookstores. Look to the LAST vestiges of approximate freedom of the press, even the scholastic press, that gets out small editions. Communicate, Communicate, and CO MUN ICATE.
A plot was outlined years ago to blot out classical scholarship to blot out the historic sense. It went about on soft paws, making no noise, it was DEADLY.
It worked while the nations slept. A contempt for the Latin authors. The idea Greek was useless. The concentration on innocuous authors. Erotic poems and NOT the state of life as shown in the Athenian law courts.
The aesthetic angle, that the whole of my generation grew up in, all LOOKING harmless, so HARMLESS.
America was killed by the kid-glove generation, looked simple. Henry James describes these innocuous flops: on the beach at Newport, none of 'em meant any harm, after the Civil War the American people was tired. I'll say they were tired.
With reason. Killed each other off to make room for the vermin.
After Cato's death there was no Republic, says some old Roman historian. Perhaps after Lincoln's death there was no United States Republic. Bowers, the TRAGIC ERA, go read it. Johnson couldn't hold out against the infection. Civil War dragged on. WITH INTENTION. Halleck, why was he general? or at least why in command? Waaal, that is old scandal. Can't fight Antietam now. Cant' go back before Gettysburg, the very names are forgotten now. Names we, the men of my time, grew up on, but we WERE being taught to forget. Or rather the WHOLE of the history was aimed a t FORGETTING. It was top dressing, a monotony of military encounters, done with music and banner, to KEEP the nation's mind OFF the causes=off the REAL causes. Debts of the Southern states, to the bankers of New York City.
My ole great uncle had a wooden leg,
went stumpin' 'round after Gettysburg.
Ole uncle dot and carry one, and every gun was a golden egg, for the
Bankers in New York.
For the bankers in New York, OHoooooo.
No wonder old uncle Hiram wrote poems about P [J. Pierpont] Morgan, that as a kid of nine I didn’t understand. NO wonder the profit of 15 thousand on a lot of condemned rifles, looked like pretty poor stuff to men who had lost legs and eyes for the union.
After them came the kid glovers, Too refined to touch politics. THAT was and error. But you can’t very much blame ‘em Tired of five years war, of bad food, and army blankets. Also the weak’uns left, Henry James, Henry Adams, John, John Quincy, then Charles Francis in London. That part of Henry Adams “Education” is still EDUCATORY. Read it. Charles Francis Adams workin’ against Lord Russell, as cold a son of a fish as ever got into Parliament.
Then he came home, Charles Francis, and didn’t make a fight for the presidency. Possibly it would have been useless and then Brooks Adams trying to set down the real reasons.
Where is BOSTON? Damn it, is the Kike and Kahal radio station all that is left of Boston?
Is New England a midden? The war you ought to be fightin’ is NOT five thousand miles OUTSIDE Boston. Or five thousand miles outside New York, or even outside San Francisco. It is INTERNAL.
to be continued…
Jews, England & Palestine
TWILIGHT OVER ENGLAND (pgs. 80-82)
Thus the whole idea of that beneficial political integration so helpful to progress
has been lost from the British Empire, [125] and the currents of Empire-building
turned awry. Perhaps, there is no more shameful example of Jewish influence on
British politics than the policy which England has been pursuing in Palestine for the
last two years. Both Arabs and Jews were promised paramountcy in the same region
during the war. The Arabs got the promise first: but Chaim Weizmann’s power over
Balfour was such that he was soon able to extract from the British Government an
undertaking diametrically opposed to the pledge that was given to the Arabs. Nobody
was more disgusted with the treatment meted out to the latter than T. E. Lawrence,
who was mainly responsible for their having supported Britain during the war. In
fact, of the many great servants of Britain who have been disillusioned, none was ever more disgusted than he. He did not live to see the full consequences of the betrayal. During the last two years, the Arab majority in the country of Palestine has been taught the meaning of democracy, by a campaign of murder, torture, and arsoncarried out, most unfortunately, by the armed forces of the British Crown, both Jewish and Aryan. Needless to say, the civilian Jews have lent a hand in the good
work. I am not judging by reports in either the German or the British press, still less
by any partisan pamphlets which have been published, but, in the main, by the
accounts which I have had from British officers who were present during the
perpetration of these atrocities and powerless to avert them. Officers who showed
signs of an impartial attitude were very speedily removed from their command. One
officer who, in a notorious case of homicide, insisted that disciplinary action should
be taken against the servants of the Crown who were guilty of it, and shown to be
guilty of it, was removed from his post and sent on long leave. He was given full pay,
but kept away from Palestine. Further details of the case cannot here be given, lest his
position should be further prejudiced.
How far all this oppression fits into the scheme of democracy was delicately
suggested by the late Anthony Crossley in the House of Commons on May 22, 1939.
He said: “I do not believe that there has ever been a debate in this House, when this
House would have been more justified in calling to [126] the Bar an Arab speaker to
explain the Arab point of view from the viewpoint of his own countrymen and his
own country … There are no Arab members of Parliament. There are no Arab
constituents to bring influence to bear upon their members of Parliament. There is no
Arab control of newspapers in this country. It is impossible almost to get a pro-Arab
letter into the Times. There are in the City no Arab financial houses who control large
amounts of finance. There is no Arab control of newspaper advertisements in this
country. There are no Arab ex-Colonial Secretaries who one by one get up and
thunder, as they will, at the Government during the debate, because of the mistakes
they themselves have made in the past. Finally, and I want the Colonial Secretary to
pay special attention to this point, tomorrow night there is to be a broadcast. There is
to be himself giving the Government point of view. There is to be the honourable member for the Don Valley to advance what is obviously the Zionist point of view. There is to be the honourable member for Carnarvon Boroughs supporting the Zionist point of view. There will not be a supporter of the Arabs who can advance their point of view.”
The above passage is worth reading again and again. Mr. Crossley did not
observe that there was also no Arab Secretary of State for War to give instructions to
the troops in Palestine: but he went as near as he dared to delineating the Jewish
control of Britain. At any rate, his analysis is a striking commentary on the freedom
of speech which democracy permits.
Now let us see what the Chosen People were saying. There was neither reserve
nor delicacy in their remarks. The Daily Herald of July 17, 1939, contains this report:
‘An appeal to the British people over the heads of the Government is to be made by
Jews. This was decided on at an emergency meeting of the Zionist Federation of
Great Britain and Ireland … Several hundred delegates, summoned by telegram from
all parts of the country, attended the meeting. The Chairman, the Rev. M. Perlzweig,
said the Jewish people were in conflict not with the British people but with the British
Government … Professor Brodetsky, head of the [127] political department of the
Zionist organization, said the terrorized Jews of Europe had either to accept this
decree of death or defy it and live. They would do everything in their power to make
the Government’s policy impossible to carry out …”
The “decree of death” was the Government’s open proposal for compromise
between Jews and Arabs. Some sort of gesture had to be made in a desperate attempt
to save the face of democracy: but of course the Government could not be expected to
stand up to the threats of Professor Brodetsky. Every such speech as he made was the
signal for a renewed outburst of violence against the Arabs in Palestine: and just to
show that Jewry was in earnest, some of the confraternity in Palestine shot British
soldiers and police—only, of course, those who were not hostile to the Arabs. It may
be recollected with some humour that Mr. Malcolm Mac Donald increased the
proportion of Jews in the Palestine Police with a view to facilitating the restoration of
order. Chaim Weizmann was a little more polite than Brodetsky. He said, on May 18,
at the Kingsway Hall: “Far be it from me to use language which suggests a threat, but
it is my duty to utter a warning against the inevitable effects of this policy.” The
warning, of course, took effect: and the lot of the Arabs became harder than ever. The
Government, with Hore-Belisha grinning all the time, had made that feeble little
gesture of affected impartiality which the Public School tradition demands: it had
been misunderstood: and accordingly there was nothing for it but to defer to the
wishes of Sir Samuel Hoare’s favourite people.
Space does not permit us to give details here of the hard lot that the Arabs have
had to endure. But anybody who wants to know the truth will at least take the trouble
to consult some representative Arab from Palestine as well as his Jewish opponent.
Unless the reader is prepared to take this step, he should refrain from assuming that
the Arabs have no cause for discontent.
Wm. Joyce – TWILIGHT OVER ENGLAND (1940)
Pages 75-76
The whole tragedy of the Empire lies in the democratic preference for extensity
over intensity. The great portion of the earth over which King George VI, Defender of
the Faith, rules has not been economically developed to more than 10 per cent of its
available capacity for development. Yet there is starvation of the most abominable
nature in India, there is unemployment in Britain, and 55 per cent of the total
population of the Colonial Empire is suffering from malnutrition. England had the
opportunity of developing intensively the greatest estate that the world has ever seen.
That opportunity was sacrificed to the interests of international finance. More and
more territory was sought for the purpose of gratifying the Jewish merchants: but no
thought was given to the full development of natural resources for the benefit of the
inhabitants. For example, the Boer wars were not fought in order that every inch of
South African territory might be made to yield up its store of natural wealth. They
were fought in order that the Jews of Jo’burg might gamble in gold and diamonds, at
the expense of the agricultural population. It may be taken as an absolute rule that
throughout the vast extent of the Empire for many years, international finance has
skimmed the profitable surface and spurned that honest wealth below, which means
hard work rather than quick profits. Truly the City of London has created an Empire
of Jewels in which men die for lack of bread. And mark you, when the hungry
complain, they are given, just like the hungry at home; not bread but democratic
principles. Just as Liberal Capitalism encouraged the ideology of democracy in
England, so it has done in the Empire, with the result that many poor, simple peoples
have been led to believe that if they only get Parliaments as good as that at
Westminster, their troubles will be over. Poor, innocent creatures! It is impossible to
lay too much emphasis on the fact that most of the so-called democratic movements
in the Empire are welcomed by the international financiers, and for these reasons:
[117]
1. These financiers hate political coordination in reality. They prefer to weaken
the bonds of authority, lest authority should demand justice.
2. They are interested not in political development but in economic
exploitation.
3. When “nationalist” movements resort to force, the excuse arises to use
military measures for which there would be no pretext otherwise. These
measures can generally achieve a certain economic object much more quickly
than patient negotiation or good government.
4. If the nationalism of the Imperial peoples can be safely diverted into the
channel of democracy, it will be as harmless to international finance as every
democratic system must necessarily be.
In India, for example, the nationalist movements have received encouragement
from many English politicians: and, in theory at any rate, many concessions have
been made to the idea of democratic autonomy: but I do not know of one prominent
English politician who has proclaimed the necessity for a financial revolution as a
necessary preliminary to the solution of India’s problems. So long as Indians are kept
talking about representation, councils, responsibility, federation, democratic
machinery and all the rest of the democratic Mumbo-Jumbo emanating from
Westminster, so long will all their agitation fail to bear on the real troubles of their
land. The same is true, in principle, of Scottish Nationalism. There are honourable
exceptions: but most of the Scottish Nationalists seem to think that their battle will
be won when Scotland has a Parliament of her own. They might have made more
progress had they not laid emphasis on their desire to create at Edinburgh something
as revolting to common sense as the assembly that sleeps at Westminster. When they
talk quite worthily of the national aspirations of the Scots, they usually omit to say
what they propose to do with the Royal Bank of Scotland, which has so many intimate
associations with international finance.
A healthy feeling of Nationalism is both natural and desirable: but it is hard to
resist the impression that the [118] Jewish Lords of Finance are seeking to exploit this
feeling in certain places, in order to distract attention from the need for economic
revolution. History has shown that, in certain circumstances, it is quite possible for
different races to belong in concord to a common system and to accept discipline
under it. Such a condition may, in time, develop into an integral unit and the world
profit thereby: but this conception of Empire demands both economic justice and
economic progress. If neither exists, complaints are bound to arise: and, when they
do arise, it is much easier for the architects of evil to talk about new experiments in
government than to remedy the fundamental grievances by abandoning the system
that causes them.
International finance is, unhappily, the master of the British Empire and has
been for some years. The consequence is that whilst the financiers have reaped a rich
harvest, the whole structure has been politically disintegrating for the last twenty
years. As a general rule, conditions are worse in proportion to the power that
Whitehall exercises in any particular part of the British Commonwealth of Nations.
This fact is sad: but it must be faced.
March 23, 1942
It was not the present speaker, but an Englishman, I believe an absolutely loyal Englishman, a sort of Royalist, not Mr. Eliot, but at any rate a King’s man, and so far as I recall a man who had no Fascist or Nazi sympathies, who on May 11th, 1939 uttered the statement I am about to repeat to you. Get the date, May eleventh, 1939.
There is NO mystery whatsoever about the disappearance of Mr. Litvinov form the political scene. The Soviet Foreign Minister vacated his office because he failed to deliver “the goods” demanded by the masters of Wall Street and Moscow. New methods to secure these “goods” will now assuredly be given a trial.
What are these “goods?” Nothing other than great Britain, captive and in chains. Great Britain stripped of her empire, above all Great Britain, ruined financially by the collapse of the Pound Sterling and the system called “barter trading” which is based upon that money.
There, gentle Briton, you have it. Your own heroes have told you. And your own true men you have heard NOT. You have not heard your own true speakers. You have lain down and died in the gutter because you would not hear your OWN friends; your own loyal speakers.
Now as I keep on tellin’ you, my friends and/or acquaintances in England, were not of any one group. There were a few of ‘em Fascists; but the most of ‘em were IDIOTICALLY anti-fascist. They were most of ‘em plum stupid about the Italian regime. I am not offerin’ you the ideas of a sect, I am as the strength is vouchsafed to me trying to remind you or tell you of a few home truths, that you COULD have learned not only from me, but from dozens of Englishmen.
Seems like it must have been more like HUNDREDS of Englishmen, trying to tell you for the past twenty-two years.
Now WHY did ou not listen? Well, if that implies retrospect, bring it down to the true British question: W’ere do we g’ae frm ERE? I ask you.
I ask you still more HOW do you [go] from here. I can’t see that any other white race in Europe is going to be very anxious about Anglo Saxon survival. I belong to what is usually regarded as a branch of that race. Racially, English went to America along sometime after 1600, 1632-38, along up til 1700.
I think you lose by not thinking about this problem as RACIAL.
Yes, I know I went at it from the economic part of the picture. Brought up on American principles; no prejudice against any man for race, creed, or color.
Waaal, the chemist is not supposed to have prejudice against any particular chemical; in the laboratory some stink and some do not. Some explode and some do not-chemist’s business-chemist in American sense, not the man in the drug store; say the chemical experimenter or chemical engineer is supposed to look at different chemical elements with a fair eye and mind.
So I do’t reckon to go along my road as with prejudice. I have tried to see the thing straight.
Birth control, bad national health, neoMalthusian preachin’, scarcity economics, all workin’ Britain’s downfall. Question is : Ain’t you fallen down about FAR ENOUGH?
Can’t you stop somewhere at least near the TOP of the dung heap, without having the whole midden flop over on top of ye?
And HOW are you going to do it? That is what I ask: HOW are you going to do it?
You certainly are NOT going to do it by abolition of all ARYAN ownership, and the mortaging of all England to a half hundred Kikes in New York. That is NOT going to give you a new British order.
CAN you understand, can any of you understand, that a few of you must club together, and at least try to find out what you BELIEVE?
You do NOT believe in the abolition of ownership/ You do NOT believe that you should be ruled from abroad by Kuhn, Loeb, and Warburg, of the dregs of the ex-ghettoes of Europe, now planted on the neck of the American people.
Have you any hold on the country? Let us say on the Land?
I see it is increasingly difficult for any two men to meet outside London. who meets INSIDE London/ Do they still disagree about EVERYTHING? Do three social credit parties instantly arise whenever two social creditors gather together?
I there ANY common bond, apart from hysteria induced by your jew-papers? Or the common interests of men who hire their “seats.”
I mean SEATS in the Commons. Difference between those seats and a seat on the New York Stock Exchange is that in New York the men BUY their seats, and in Westminster the members rent ‘em. The New York Stock Exchange system has an advantage; it may even be more democratic. I never heard democracy discussed in this connection.
But a man BUYS his seat on Change, openly and the price is known, I believe in most cases.
Whereas a member of Parliament is a renter, he is said to pay in an indefinite sum per year, to DEFRAY.
Defray is, I think, the word used, defray party expenses. Contribute to the funds of the party.
That is democracy. Is it? It has never been the American IDEAL of representative government.
I have murmured on the ambient air, now and then a few soft words about my own splay footed country. Real representation when the place was more or less agricultural. Method of geographic division O.K. when many people were engaged in growing the crops of one sort or another, and the seaboard in tradin’, and fishin’.
Rough sections still kept in the United States but no one havin’ any say now, but the banks and the Warburgs. People who FEED the lot always voted down by the RULERS. Naive blokes, populist, subject to caricature. All lead up to GUILD organization.
Which does NOT appeal to abject NON-producers. Does not appeal to exploiters, that is the rub. Early socialists were boneheaded; didn’t dig down into problem of money.
I donno how far you now KNOW what the same men took twenty years tellin’ you, and that your press took those same twenty years keepin’ from you.
Even supposin’ you do NOW begin to see something, how are you going to GIT OUT of your present trilemma? If SOME Englishman could see where England’s course was leading back before this war started more of them ought by now to be seeing it, seeing that Singapore is no longer called by that name. What was the Sassoonery is now Shonanko. How do you save your homes? Revolution behind the scenes in the palace? A group of officers of the Army? Or guild formation? Movement coming up from the mines or the land?
You can NOT eat minerals. And then HEROES? The reformers all used to take it so easy. The new bright world was to be arranged over the tea cups. Why DIDN’T you settle it over the tea cups? DID any one care for England enough to rattle the teaspoons, or risk cracking a saucer? AND now your politicians talk of CONDUCT of the war. Don’t you realize that the only men with brains enough to conduct a war are the men who foresaw what the war would be; the men who tried to keep you OUT of it, and who would now try to CONDUCT you out of it? You have NOT made it a war of honor. You could have made a hopeless stand, a forlorn despair of an expedition into Poland, and been defeated with honor. Of course it would not have been right at bottom, because the guarantee to Poland was faked. It was not to or FOR Poland. But even so, you could have made a gesture and been defeated with honor.
Can you not see that the outrage of the bombardment of Paris is but one of a series of attepts to make ral peace impossible, and to prepare for the war after this one? Needless hate-sewing the SEEDS of hate for tomorrow. Does it mean nothing to you that in this war you ave inflicted more and worse wounds on your Allies than on the people you said were your enemies? Can these things go on forever without some glimmer of light reaching the British mind, to show the real causes of the conflict-the real forces IN conflict? Usury against peasantry, usury against the farmland, usury against every man who does a day’s work, physical or with his mind.
Ah, against consciousless exploitation, against monopoly, against bank deals and swindles. Against EVERY race in Europe that takes the responsibility for being a nation and administering openly, as a government in the eyes of the people.
Against the crawling slime of a secret rule, a secret and IRRESPONSIBLE rule, that takes NO responsibility for the welfare of races, and nations, but eats like a cancer into the heart and soul of all nations. Even that whereof its central staff is composed.
William Joyce, (1906-1946)
“Whilst on the subject of propaganda, we must refer, in parentheses, to the
slimiest of Hebrews, Victor Gollancz, who with his Left Book Club and his publishing
house, did as much for the cause of war as the Ostrers with their poisonous “news-
films.” – Twilight Over England (pg.69)
Victor Gollancz “A dirty bit of meat” -EP
Victor Gollancz (1893-1967)
Gollancz formed his own publishing company in 1927, publishing works by writers such as Ford Madox Ford and George Orwell (though Orwell went to Secker and Warburg from Homage to Catalonia on). While Gollancz published The Red Army Moves by Geoffrey Cox on the Winter War in 1941, he omitted some criticisms of the USSR.
Gollancz was one of the founders of the Left Book Club. He had a knack for marketing, sometimes taking out full-page newspaper adverts for the books he published, a novelty at the time. He also used eye-catching typography and book designs, and used yellow dust-covers on books.
In addition to his highly successful publishing business, Gollancz was a prolific writer on a variety of subjects, and put his ideas into action by establishing campaigning groups. His 1943 pamphlet ‘Let My People Go’, which called for an attempt by the Allied powers to rescue Jews under threat of extermination in occupied Europe, reached a mass audience in 1943, following widespread coverage in the British media in December 1942 of the Nazi’s extermination policy. A subsequent pamphlet, published by Gollancz later on in the war, failed to reach a mass audience. By then the British media had almost entirely ceased coverage of the story of the Nazi attempt to exterminate European Jewry, after it had become clear that the western powers were unwilling to respond to popular British sentiment at the end of 1942 and early 1943 in favour of an attempt to rescue Jews in occupied Europe, which would have meant siphoning resources from the war effort. Along with Eleanor Rathbone, Gollancz was the the foremost British campaigner during the Second World War on the issue of the Nazi extermination of European Jewry. – Wikipedia
