Our relationship to family, and especially to children is changing for the worse. It used to be said that children should be seen but not heard, and this sentiment was eventually seen as indicating that the children were not valued. Today children are valued “ though this “valuing” of children has tragically turned too many of them into a product in our consumer-driven, “me first” society, with wealthy women from Britain and elsewhere buying babies from Mafia organizations on the European continent. Apparently babies sell for about 20,000 pounds (approximately 40,000 U.S. dollars), and are produced to order, with the criminal leaders impregnating vulnerable women in countries such as Romania, then feeding and housing them until they give birth to the product. Natalie Clarke of the Daily Mail newspaper quite rightly says this, “sounds like something that might have happened in Hitler’s Germany.”
A united Europe has long been an aspiration spanning the political spectrum. The leader of the pre-Second World War Fascists, Sir Oswald Mosley, called for “Europe a Nation,” while, only slightly later, the British Independent Labor Party worked toward a “United Socialist States of Europe.” Again, in 1945 Prime Minister Winston Churchill called for a “United States of Europe.”
I was about ten years old when my school class was asked to fill out a form regarding our religious affiliation. Sure, the one or two Catholics knew, and passed right along, but the rest of us looked at each other, confused. Commotion burst out across the room as we tried to extract the correct answer from one another. “If you don”t know what religion you are,” our teacher interrupted sternly, “then you”re Church of England.”
Most Americans are unaware of it, but in the country which gave birth to the rights which they take for granted, the home of the Magna Charta and the Mother of Parliaments, free speech is not what it used to be. Under the seemingly innocuous guise of preventing racial violence, the British government in 1976 passed the Race Relations Act, which made it a crime to “incite racial hatred.” Students of bureaucracy will not be surprised to learn that the definition of “incite” and “racial hatred” used in enforcing this law has proved extremely elastic”and served as a tool for government functionaries and activists to suppress legitimate debate.