RSS Output
French    German    Spain    Italian    Arabic    Chinese Simplified    Russian

Letters by a modern St. Ferdinand III about cults

Gab@StFerdinandIII -

Plenty of cults exist - every cult has its 'religious dogma', its idols, its 'prophets', its 'science', its 'proof' and its intolerant liturgy of demands.  Cults everywhere:  Corona, 'The Science' or Scientism, Islam, the State, the cult of Gender Fascism, Marxism, Darwin and Evolution, Globaloneywarming, Changing Climate, Abortion...

Tempus Fugit Memento Mori - Time Flies Remember Death 


Cult of Conservative-Statism - Recent Articles

The Corona Fascism reveals the fraud of the 'Conserative' Party in the UK

The mad totalitarianism over a 0.03% IFR flu unmasks modern politics

Bookmark and Share


The UK ‘Conservative’ party is replacing Boris Johnson and will choose a new ‘leader’ and Prime Minister from Liz Truss, a former anti-Brexiteer and socialist, who is affiliated with the WEF and an Indian born globalist whose billionaire wife through her ownership of IT colossus Infosys has deep ties with the WEF and China.  There is no ‘Conservatism’ in the views of either, though both give idle promises about ‘tax cuts’ and ‘unleashing the potential of this or that’, and ‘standing up for the Ukraine’.  In essence both want endless war, neither care much about securing Brexit or the borders, and neither has an affiliation with, or sympathy for British or English history and culture.  Both view WEF policies as the future including the chimera of green energy, net zero, and medical totalitarianism in the guise of Corona or some future plandemic which Gates and the WHO have promised us, or which the climate fascists want to create.  There is no ‘Conservative’ departure from the 3-year reign of Boris Johnson, a man whose government enjoyed parties and feasts while the country was terrorised, diapered, locked down and told to avoid contact with anyone. 

In the UK there is the peculiar but common situation that a ‘Conservative’ Party has no real connection to orthodox Conservative belief, espoused from the 18th to 20th centuries in various means, including political parties starting with the Burkean Whig faction (18th century), Disraeli, Churchill and Thatcher.  The modern British ‘Conservative’ party is about as conservative or in the 19th century view, orthodox-Liberal (capital L), as the ‘Labour’ party is concerned about labour or the working man (it could care less about either).  The ridiculous monikers of ‘left’ and ‘right’ are useless attributes, purloined from the age of the pre-French Atheist revolution to characterise those who advocated reform either in part or whole and who sat on the ‘left’ in the French parliament, against those who wanted to conserve many aspects of the monarchy and Catholic heritage including history and culture, who sat on ‘the right’.  No such demarcation exists today.  Everyone in politics sits on the ‘left’.  The ‘right’ is vacant.

There are two salient features about modern ‘Conservatism’ which offends the very idea of being a Conservative.  The first is that all modern political parties subscribe to similar dogma, with perhaps at best, a slight disagreement on emphasis, depth, speed or extent of the policy or ideological issue under implementation or scrutiny.  Second, the very idea of being a ‘conservative’ is now linked with ‘right wing Nazism’ (even though Nazism was and is a socialist-communal phenomenon), white supremacism, intolerance, selfishness, anti-science ignorance, a disregard for public safety and morality, and whose members are affiliated with domestic terrorist groups, racist outfits, and subversive criminal elements.  This is a remarkable example of propaganda deployed by the Marxists and Communists within governments and their controlled media, to demonise anyone who dares to question the prevailing narrative. 

The best outline of Conservative ideology is that espoused by the doctrines and philosophies of Edmund Burke and Winston Churchill.  Both subscribed to the ethos of what was usually termed ‘Orthodox Liberalism’ married with a need to ‘conserve’ the traditions, culture, religion, institutions, heritage and historical legacy of the UK.  The ‘Conservative’ mind does not only hearken back to tradition and the past.  It seeks to preserve what is necessary and to ‘prudently’ adapt and change to modern conditions and opportunities.  ‘Conservatism’ does not object, nor fear change and improvement, but rather embraces both in a measured, careful, and intelligent matter, knowing that civilisation and societal advancement are holistic, and that new developments must build on and support our past and the foundations of our existing order.  Tearing down everything will lead to chaos, strife and in many cases injury and death.  ‘Conservatism’ as defined by Burke and Churchill includes inter-alia:

History-A deep appreciation and regard for the past, its wisdom, learning, failures, successes and complicated development; with a profound admiration for those who built and created our cultural artefacts, institutions and legacies.

Tradition and Life-A deep satisfaction and understanding of why tradition is important, why norms which work need to be preserved, the sanctity for example of the heterosexual family, the reality of Men and Women and of Man and Wife and the preservation of life from conception to end.

Pride-Real pride is centred in an appreciation of past national achievements, successes, the creation of the modern world, and learning from mistakes and epochs which were immoral, unsavoury, or bloody and unjust.

Immaterial-A certain knowledge that religion and faith, emotions, associations, habits, cultural values, character and virtue and a balance between the material and immaterial were and are fundamental to real progress and to the holistic development of people and society.

Free speech-The ability to speak and think freely, without repression or being subjected to violence.

Individual choice-The ability to choose and to manage one’s own life, free from hate, coercion, vilification, or being enslaved or violated.

Governance-A respect for governmental separation of powers and checks and balances, either through a constitutional-monarchical system, or a clearly delineated republican system, both reliant on representative participation by the population.

Power-A distinct limitation on the size, extent, power and irresponsibility of government.  The larger the enterprise of government, the more fraud and violence is enacted over the ruled.

Fraud-An intolerance of corruption, fraud, coercion, or mendacity within government, or between those being ruled and their rulers.  

Virtue-The absolute demand for virtue in the public square, good character, common sense, truth-telling, and honesty.  Fair play and being ‘human’ prized above the corruption of morality and dishonesty.  Common sense and reality esteemed before irrational, incomprehensible gibberish, and obfuscation.

Innovation-Action, energy, and innovation to try new ideas, develop new systems, and gestate improvements and advancements, as being in the personal and national interests.

National Interests-Protection and regard for the nation state above all else in foreign affairs.  The sanctity of the state cannot be compromised in any way and independence needs to be a predominant concern.

Trade-Fair trade sometimes erroneously called ‘Free Trade’ (in reality no trade is free or without costs), which allows economic development and which benefits the local population, but which does not put the country at risk of economic subservience to foreign powers, or de-industrialisation.

This list is not exhaustive but outlines the praxis of a ‘Conservative’ and the parameters of the ideology.  There is not a single ‘Conservative’ politician in the UK, who believes in this list.  Not a single one.  The test of that assertion is simple.  Apply the list to Corona, and the Corona 2020 Act, which give the government ‘emergency’ powers, suspended Parliament, allowed the creation of an unaccountable group called SAGE to run the country, allowed the Conservative party with its parliamentary majority to shut down the country, destroyed 250.000 businesses and forced people to ingest a mRNA poison which did nothing to stop the transmission of a virus, nor reduce any symptoms, but since the December 2020 rollouts (4 now), has killed some 50.000 and injured 4 million, half seriously.  These death totals will only increase and be completely ignored.  The lockdowns may have killed 50.000 or more, with purportedly some 30.000 older people murdered in long-term-care-facilities with midazolam and other end of life drugs during April and May 2020, their deaths attributed to Corona.  Fake PCR tests were used to declare some 170.000 to have died over 2 years from Corona, when the tests only pick up DNA fragments of the common cold not SARS II.  The real dead total from Corona over 2.5 years, from and only from the virus is less than 20.000, far below an average year of flu deaths, which has now disappeared of course.  The IFR from Corona if you accept the data fraud was 0.1% or the same as the flu.  The real IFR if you strip out the fraud is and was, 0.03%.  For these rounding errors we were subjected to the most ferocious fascist assault in history.  It goes without saying that the criminal pharmaceutical industry has deep and convoluted financial ties with all governments and the media.  It goes without saying that many politicians and sundry ‘officials’ did very well from the plandemic.

The Corona plandemic, whose planning antecedents date back some 20 years, is the clearest example of mass criminal governance and anti-humanism imaginable.  On every single level it was and still is, a colossal assault on free men and women, and the terrorisation of children with the attendant stabbing of the young and those at no risk to a viral disease, supersedes the worst of dystopian novels.  Yet here we are, with at least half the population in full throttle voice of support, ready to engage in violence to defend their new religious cult and imperative.  Not a single ‘Conservative’ politician had much to say about the Corona Fascism, none of the successors to Johnson discussed it, it was never debated, with the closest admission to wrong doing being a speech on freedom from disgraced former PM Theresa May who tried to derail Brexit, who surprisingly, stood up in the House of Commons and criticised lockdowns and the brutal, atavistic policies of coercion.  The rest of the Conservatives in the UK were largely silent and those in Parliament mostly useless.

Churchill was the last of the real ‘Conservatives’ with Thatcher a close imitation.  The Corona totalitarian episode, which is not over and will likely metamorphosize into the ‘Climate emergency’ revealed how compromised both the UK government and the UK Conservative party are; and how beholden to international powers (WHO, US CDC, WEF etc) and corrupt criminal industries like Pharmaceuticals they both are.  During World War II Churchill and his government allowed free speech (within reason if war plans were not compromised), free press, political opposition, parliamentary discussion, private industry and trade to proceed, and life to carry on as normal as it could.  No one from that generation including Labour leader Attlee would have considered or believed that a ‘Conservative’ government over a faux-demic would implement a totalitarian-Gestapo state premised on medical Nazism that would crush the absolute life out of society, demonise those who did not want to partake of a medical experiment and viciously assault any who dared to question the narrative.  The fact that the Conservative leadership had and still has, little to say about this, and that a Conservative government under Johnson believes that the 2.5 years of fascism and rolling out detrimental and unsafe drugs to the population 4 or more times is their greatest legacy says it all.

Conservatism in the UK has long been dead.

Jesse Norman (English MP) and ‘Edmund Burke’, a philosophical and biographical inquiry

An important book given the madness of the modern world.

Bookmark and Share


This is a great book and an education.  It spans history, philosophy, political ideology and links the current, to the early modern past of Burke and far beyond into antiquity.  There is too much in the work to justify a summation, however, the application of Burke to today’s current era by Norman is for the public at large, sadly recondite, but the lessons from Burke are not only erudite but indispensable to help resolve the maladies of a world, gone incredibly mad with non-existing Climate crises, the Corona fascism, Gender mental illness-dystopia, anti-White racism, a disavowal of the nation state, a blind hatred of Christianity and other occult movements dedicated to eviscerating Western civilisation.  How stupid we look in comparison to Burke’s insights about governance and reality.

Norman’s magnificent book includes the following observations.

Burke’s rather unprepossessing career

Political career was largely one of failure.   He and his Whig party failed to avert war between Britain and America, he failed to secure a conviction on the fraud and corruption rife within the East India company in India, against its Director Warren Hastings, his economic reforms and efforts to alleviate Irish and Catholic grievances and segregation did not succeed, his pleas for a counter-revolution against the Atheist French Revolution was ignored until after his death and with more than 30 years in the House, Burke was in office for less than two.

Politics versus vision

Norman writes that Burke was not really a politician but an impolitic observer of events and trends, usually far ahead of contemporaries.  Burke’s campaigns on America, India, Ireland, slavery (abolition), free trade, capital punishment (restrict or abolish) and France all flew in the face of popular political sentiment, especially for a representative from Bristol (for a time). 

Ordered liberty

All the causes in Burke’s life revolved around ‘ordered liberty’.  As Norman summarises, ‘Far from opposing change, Burke regards change as inevitable, and careful political reform as its natural and proper counterpart….a successful social order as the means by which individual talent and energy could find their just rewards….This demands modesty, virtue and wisdom from political leaders.’

Abuse of power

For Burke the opposite of ‘ordered liberty’ is the abuse of power.  Burke is not really a natural law believer (St. Thomas Aquinas) as much as he is an empiricist rooting his beliefs in history and circumstances.  Regarding natural law Burke does believe that a man cannot judge his ‘own cause’.  Meaning that political power cannot possibly regulate or evaluate itself, and that there must be checks and balances within a constitutional-monarchical system to reduce abuse and even terror.  Oppressive British actions in America, Ireland, India and within the slave trade are examples of the terrible abuses of government, unchecked and unable to control itself.

Orthodox Liberalism

Norman emphasises that Burke’s 18th century orthodox Liberalism (akin to today’s small government, free trade supporting Conservative), views freedom as the absence of impediment to the will; or as ordered liberty, based on laws and culture.  Burke did not believe in Liberalism’s cult of reason but in tradition, emotions, institutions and principles of culture and habit.  Liberalism in Burke’s day stressed reason and universal abstractions.  Burke always stressed facts and circumstances.  Liberalism rejected the past; Burke built his entire body of belief and career on the past.  Liberalism extols violent revolution and change.  Burked loathed both. 


Burke rejected absolutism in any form, be it governmental, political or religious.  Liberalism in many ways leads to a Benthamite view of life, in which the greatest happiness for the majority is the objective of political governance.  This puerile view of the world was deeply offensive to Burke.  Absolutism can take many forms and arrogance, selfishness and egoism of the ‘Enlightenment’ would lead to a crass, material individualism, self-service political parties, corrupt governments, and the eradication of moderation in many spheres in life (as witnessed recently with the Corona fascism). 

Purpose of Politics

Norman relates that the purpose of politics for Burke is the preservation and extension of national interests and strength.  In an age of WHO, the UN, endless transnational organisations and planned ‘pandemics’, this is anathema.  In today’s world, the national is equated with the fascistic and racist.  This ignorant view would be skewered by Burke.  Nations and people are rooted in history and tradition not faux-science, Burke would have said.  Without their history and traditions, they are rootless and society as a whole cannot prosper or progress. 

Norman gives a compelling summary of Burke, ‘As a politician he was devoted to an ideal of public service, and deplored the tendency to individual or generational arrogance, and the ‘ethics of vanity’.  His thought is imbued with the importance of history and memory, and an Orwellian detestation of those who would erase them.  His insists on the importance of human connection and identity, and on manners, sentiment…inherited not invented, and embedded in social institutions and networks. 

Burke’s ideology is the opposite of what the tyrants, the uncontrollable governments, the often-unelected power brokers want to build in our modern world.  These totalitarians, like the Atheist French Revolutionaries, want to tear down our history, culture, heritage and civilisation and create a ‘Brave New World’, in which the individual is but a slave to an unaccountable world or transnational governance, which has erased that person’s nation, their culture, their past and their memories.  Only the truly apathetic or demented would support such a program, no matter what disguise it wears, or what fake casus belli it proclaims. 


Limp-wrist cowards: Conservatives need to stand up and fight.

From a right to life, to a right for free-will, to avoiding bankruptcy. Plenty to do.

Bookmark and Share


 Conservatives need to state the obvious.




The cult of the state is the world's largest theological grouping. It is not a religion but a cult. A religion will free your mind, body and soul. The cult will enslave. Any communal project – Islam, National Socialism, Statism – enslaves its followers. The communal oppresses and coerces the individual. Free-will and rationality is replaced by blind obedience and ritual. The state as a cult, like all communal projects simply crushes the individual and imposes itself on all matters of life. The balance between an individual's obligations to himself, and to others, has been turned upside down. In modern states the relationship is uni-directional. You support the state as your main obligation. The rest is unimportant.


A simple example is the fetish for socialized health care, in which the government manages all aspects of health-care. The end result is nothing more than the management by the state of your body and health. Imagine if the state socialized the production and distribution of food. State managed health care, whether it is in the US, France or The UK, is not liberating. It is fettering. It is also quite certainly bankrupt, a system which denies price points, resource allocations, access and timely care. All such systems are bankrupt. The derivative of such mismanagement is that too many people end up dying, denied care, treatment and proper access. Or in the case of the US, government-distorted and illogically-architected health care leads to impossible prices, insurance companies avoiding pay-outs and government telling you that you cannot carry your policy across jobs or state borders.


The problem with 'Conservatives' today is that they are wimps. They never call out the 'other side' of the political debate. Too polite, genteel, afraid, mesmerized by the socialist mainstream media, fearful of public unions, bowing to the multi-cult, in denial about Islam....whatever the reasons or subject matter the 'conservative' movement, which is a varied set of ideals, is in the main very cowardly. Few if any 'conservatives' are courageous enough to look at reality and call it what it is.


Romney is an example. He is a hybrid conservative and even in lieu of his reasonably okay debate performances, which were mildly positive, but still rather meek and weak. Too many details, not enough big picture. Romney like all establishment 'Conservatives' appears terrified to call out the Obama – once a god – for what he and his friends truly are: radical Communists and Marxists who want to impose statism on all aspects of US political-economic and cultural life. The entire life story of the Obama is a long march through the madness and stupidity of extreme socialism, including membership with the terrorist May 19th Underground group, with stops at Occidental [Red Moscow], radical elements at Columbia and Harvard, Acorn, community agitation and fraud; and relationships including his marriage, with the radical, lunatic fringe of Marxism and Black power liberation/racist theology. Yet he never gets called out on the obvious imbalance in his psyche, his history, his friendships and his statist program.


For Romney the issue is not 'by what % have oil licenses declined since 2008 Mr. President'? The issue is simpler and addressed to the voters: 'do you want massive, unbridled socialism, government control, and a culture which preaches animosity to all of the ideals and virtues which built the American colossus?' this is what Obama et al. represent – a socialist takeover. It really is that simple. Romney is too weak, diplomatic or mild-mannered highlight and emphasize the obvious. But he should. The issue is not budgetary minutiae, arcane policy, or debating points; but more importantly the actual and visceral annihilation of America by a gang of hard-core socialist thugs.


Romney highlights the limp-wrist effeminacy of conservatives. Romney is a social conservative informed by his faith and good works. This is a positive, especially since he does not impose his social views on others. But he never makes the case as to why JC culture and the doctrine of spirituality build civilization. He is a foreign policy conservative which is positive and means he will support Israel, ignore the Useless Nations, take the fight to 'extremist' Islam, defend the trade routes of the world, and make sure that the geo-political balance supports the West. But he never makes the case as to why these endeavours are necessary, even though they are the basics of any intelligent-rationalist foreign policy. He is most likely a fiscal conservative who understands finance, budgets and productivity. This is extremely positive but he never makes the case why at this point in history, it is mandatory to reduce spending and government size. He does not paint the right picture. It is not about unemployment, or even the $100 billion wasted on green-nonsense each year; but the viability of the US as a state. That is the crux of the matter.


Conservatives allow the lame-brain socialist media, the leftists and hardcore Greenies and Communists set and frame the debate. This is dumb. Most conservatives allow themselves to be shoved around, called names, and mocked. Cowards. This era has to end and end soon. The socialists and Marxists are delusional, suffer from some serious psychological impairments and ignore reality and history, not to mention facts, common sense and JC cultural attributes. If those who are right will not stand up to these statist bullies the implosion of the nation state, in which real debts are 5-8 x the size of any economy will ensure bankruptcy. But long before that point is reached, the culture, the mores, the system itself will have ceased to function and civilization will long be in decline. That is always the legacy of the cult of the communal. Socialized death and destruction.