The Glory of Imperial Russia

19 July 11

This has to be one of my all time favourite videos of the Royal Martyrs and serves as a beautiful window back in time…

And for those interested if you pause it at 1:25 you can look at the very left of the video and see a picture of the Grand Duchess Elizabeth after she had entered monastic life as a nun. I always say a prayer at this point because of how special she is to my family. 🙂

On the Feast of the Martyrdom of the Royal Family (17 July 1918)

17 July 11

My prayer is that we might hear this anthem sung throughout the streets of Holy Russia in my lifetime. God save the Tsar!

The 50th Birthday of the Princess of Wales

1 July 11

Today would have been the 50th birthday of Diana, Princess of Wales. May Her memory be eternal.

The Radical Tory Manifesto

4 October 10

Repost and from here.

We, the undersigned, unite together with burning concern for the future of our country, with firm loyalty to her institutions, and firm hope for our future.
With burning concern, we note the state into which our country has fallen. We see the breakdown of family life, the loss of confidence in our institutions, the decay of public and private virtue, and the attack by an ideologically driven and squalid oligarchy on the common good. We refuse to swim with the tide, taking our stand instead on the solid ground of the Permanent Things, to which we pledge ourselves, and from the foundation of which we defy and transform our culture.

We recognise the inate dignity of every human being, as God-given, from conception to natural death.

We strongly affirm the integral place of the natural family in our common life, affirming marriage and family life as the foundation of society. We consider that the natural family, and the marriage which binds it together, is entitled to the highest consideration and the protections of the civil government.

We declare our allegiance to custom, convention and continuity, even in reform, and joyfully receive the rights of free Englishmen guaranteed us by Her Majesty our Queen, under Magna Carta and the Act of Settlement. We affirm that the civil and religious rights guaranteed by them lie at the heart of our national life.

We deny the vapid utopianism of our political masters, recognising that human beings are imperfectible. We further recognise the variety of social conditions in human society, affirming that true equality is only possible before the Courts and before God. Thus, we oppose government-driven attempts at levelling, while affirming our desire to seek Justice.

We uphold the role of the pillars of social order; that is, Her Majesty the Queen, the Police, the Armed Forces, and the other agents of the civil government in its proper, limited sphere. We uphold the institutions of civil society and moral order, such as the Church and the voluntary institutions which make up the Community, and deny the impulse of the collective.

We recognise our duty to each other, and reject moral and social individualism. We recognise the need for restraints upon power and passion, and therefore support the balanced Constitution and the rule of law.

We, who stand at the cusp of the Third Christian millennium, are the inheritors of the trust of our ancestors, who spilled their blood in defence of freedom and our Most holy faith. We who have received the burning torch from them, will not let it die, but will pass it stronger and brighter to those who will come after us. We will strive to be worthy of their trust.

In token of which, and with trust in God, we have this day set our names.

William Pitt the Younger (originally posted by Pitt here)

Taking Breaks on Keeping Silent

10 September 10

So. It has been a few days since I wrote anything. Almost a week actually. The only difference between this little vacation and the ones that usually get taken by me is that this one was intentional. I wanted to write, but I was prevented from doing so, by no one other than myself.

This passed week, after several conversations of a political nature, to a point where I was/am just done. I am done talking to people who can’t manage to separate the person from the politics. Conversations would begin on topics of differing political thought and by the end of it I felt as if I had gone 8 rounds with Joe Lewis. It was really disheartening when the person or people that this happened with was a friend and that title alone did not stop them from stomping me to the ground.

Yeah so it finally came to a stopping point, or better yet I had to create one. I imposed a moratorium on political conversation of all types and topics when we hang out partially because I was getting to a place where it was either that or I just did not want to hang out with them anymore.

I could go off on how I think politics is a cult propogated by the devil himself, but venting about that would serve no purpose. Besides we all know its true. 🙂 What makes me livid, however is that people seem to think that there is a difference between politics and friends and when the politics starts there is no more room for friends. This has been shown to me on more than one occasion and it truly is a sad situation.

I am not mad or angry in any fashion, mostly disappointed, but when I got to this point it made me stop and think about the fact that when I was posting things online I was doing it secretly wanting to debate, but at the same time not wanting to lose friends. When I realised that the other side didn’t seem to care about friends when it came to politics I had already lost.. thankfully only the debate.

Being A Monarchist In America: A Little History Lesson

2 September 10

It seems that the cause of monarchy is not taken seriously at all by those that do not take the time to understand it. This is not surprising, however, when you would think that if someone is going to have an opinion about something they might as well be educated on the topic to some degree. Apparently not.

As much as I cant stand the snide comments, the outright insinuations and the fact that my choice to be a Monarchist is seen by others to be nothing but a complete joke I think what gets me the most is that with all of this, at the very same time these people know little to nothing about the history of the events leading up to, surrounding, interwoven with and the environment under which all of this took place.

They talk of taxation without representation even though they were represented by colonial governors and a parliamentary legislation. Interestingly enough, the Colonists were represented in a very similar manner as we are now. Interesting how the Insurrectionists were unhappy with that just as people are now…

The talk of taxation in and of itself is a joke (in and of itself). The taxes that the Crown levied (as was His right) were caused in whole by the colonists greedy and contemptuous activities. These activities included piracy, theft, etc. (We will go into detail about this later.) One of the biggest issues is that of unlawful expansion westward on the colonial mainland. The end result of this is the French and Indian War. What the anti-monarchists don’t tell you is that the taxes imposed by His Majesty were totally legitimate. The colonials were told not to encroach on Indian territory and yet they did so rather joyously. In doing so, however. They also forced England into a War that cost them 40 million dollars. Where does the crown look for reimbursement of this money? From the same people that put the Crown in the position to have to spend it. And this is wrong, how?

Another intriguing aspect of this situation is when you look at the Colonists and their tax “burden” based off of per capita income. According to the numbers at the time England was paying almost triple that of the Colonists in taxes. The Colonists were also making a good deal more than the average British taxpayer. So the idea that the Colonists were at some sort of financial hardship or disadvantage to pay these taxes is a bit off the deep end as well.

Despite the colonists being comparatively wealthy, with some very wealthy, the cost of this protection was nearly all being borne by the British taxpayer and the seven-year war had added 150 million pounds ($280,500,000) on top of an already crippling debt, incurred while defending Hanover from the French, Austrian, Saxon, Swedish and Russian Alliance.
This deficit was made worse by corruption in the colonies actually causing tax revenue to cost Britain £8000 in order to collect £2000 tax, and this at a rate of only sixpence a year each.
The British had repeatedly tried to get the colonists to pay towards their protection, by introducing various taxes, but all were unpopular.
So after the seven-year war the British had a massive debt with few ways to reduce it, so they had to limit expenditure and as the colonists had been the beneficiaries, it was decided:

1. The settlers were to stop taking more and more Indian land, to limit spiralling defence costs and adding to the debt burden
2. The settlers were to stop murdering the Indians (many of which had helped defeat the French), so as not to upset the only money maker in America, that of trading for Furs
3. They had to stop endemic corruption such as smuggling and bribery, that was costing the exchequer so much money
4. They had to find a way of introducing a tax system that worked to help with the debt burden.

No taxation without representation, the rebels said, but they did have representation through the colonial legislature/governor and had only been paying one twenty-sixth of the tax that a British tax payer paid, who were effectively subsidizing them by bearing the burden of their protection.

Despite its notoriety, the objection to tax levied on tea was a ruse; the real issue was the British had, in an attempt to curtail their activities, under-cut the price of tea offered by smugglers, so it’s not surprising that most of the revolutionary leaders were in fact smugglers. But what is less well known is these same leaders had become wealthy dealing with the enemy during the Seven-Year-War, while fellow Americans were fighting to help save the colonies from the French.
Another reason not often mentioned is that the local legislatures for their own ends, kept devaluing their currencies to the point of making them virtually worthless. This cheated creditors out of money; but also created large numbers of debtors in the colonies.
The money owed wasn’t theirs to lose, so by promising to absolve these debts, the rebels devised a powerful incentive for support.
The British had also drawn a proclamation line along the Appalachian Mountain peaks, honouring agreements to limit further encroachment onto Indian land and arrest the spiralling cost of protecting the colonists from Indian reprisals.
Therefore those that settled beyond this line were the cause of a lot of problems as not having any money; they just became adept at murdering the Indians in order to take their land. Such people put extra strain and expense onto the British defences and were of course the natural allies of those powerful colonists, such as George Washington who wished to benefit from Indian land speculation.

The rebel leaders or founding fathers (all quasi-atheists e.g. Deists) only represented about 27% of two and quarter million colonists (although they said it was 33%), but even if this was correct they knew they would have never won power through a referendum, so as they possess considerable propaganda skills, they called themselves Patriots, contrived incidents like the so called ‘ Boston massacre’, portrayed their own vested interests as philanthropic ideals, and incited a reign of terror, aimed at civil authorities to disrupt society.
In reality Hancock was a very wealthy smuggler, but the British had undercut his overpriced business and summoned him to appear in court at a time he and Samuel Adams were known to have been in Lexington, where the shots of unknown source were fired at both sides resulting in several Militiamen being killed.
The others including Sam Adams (a failed businessman accused of embezzlement), Allen, Paine, Franklin, Jefferson, and Madison were bitter men, who for various reasons held grievances against the British.
The British only really wanted the smuggling and bribery to stop.

End Part I

Not As Small As We Think We Are

1 September 10

It is interesting to note that when I first started to have thoughts of transitioning from Republicanism to Monarchist thought one of the most deafening self-comments was how alone I was going to be in this ideology. The truth of the matter is, however, quite the opposite.

The more active I am in propagating this stance and its ideals and principles, the more and more random people begin to come out of the woodwork in support of Monarchy. Some, granted, who live within the blessed Dominion of Her Majesty’s Commonwealth, but there is a growing swell of supporters here in this country as well. As good of news as this is, though, there are issues that come with it.

At last count last night there are at least 6 groups on Facebook advocating a return of the American continent to the British Crown. This is a great thing and it in and of itself goes to prove the growing advocation of Independence (correctly this time)… The problem is that we, as supporters of Her Majesty are split and fractured. This will never work and none of us will accomplish anything. We need to unite and begin to work together to use the tools of social networking in all forms to create a single cohesive group of Loyalist supporters regardless of location wherein we can accomplish goals that benefit our cause.

The only issue I see standing in our way is getting this off the ground. The creation of a system where the ultimate goal is propagation of the Crown in this country. We could do this with a multi-blog where we have supporters draft documents, historical documents, commentaries and other pertinent information that is readily available to be used in conversations with Republicans, or other antiMonarchist groups. We could also have open debates with those that oppose our viewpoint, as I know there are others who are more intelligent on the matters of history and monarchy, succession, English politics etc than I am.

I propose all of this and offer a refuge wherein this can begin. I have created, with a small group of monarchists a website called

It is still very new so bear with us. Sign up for a Contributor Account and share your knowledge.

God save the Queen!