During the trial scene in Act Four of Shakespeare’s The Merchant of Venice, Bassanio points out that Shylock has been offered thrice the amount of the original bond, yet he has refused it because he still wants his pound of flesh. In Bassanio’s eyes Shylock’s refusal of thrice the money constitutes malice, and he urges that the case should be thrown out. It’s not that easy, but eventually Shylock does lose his case. And his malice aforethought is punished:
The law hath yet another hold on you.
It is enacted in the laws of Venice,
If it be proved against an alien
That by direct or indirect attempts
He seek the life of any citizen,
The party ‘gainst the which he doth contrive
Shall seize one half his goods; the other half
Comes to the privy coffer of the state;
And the offender’s life lies in the mercy
Of the duke only, ‘gainst all other voice.
In which predicament, I say, thou stand’st;
For it appears, by manifest proceeding,
That indirectly and directly too
Thou hast contrived against the very life
Of the defendant; and thou hast incurr’d
The danger formerly by me rehearsed.
Down therefore and beg mercy of the duke.
Of course Shakespeare is no utopian. He knows that more often than not malice does bear down truth. But The Merchant of Venice is a comedy, not a tragedy, so we get to see God’s will prevail. And really that is the whole point of The Merchant of Venice. It is God’s will that the law should encompass justice, mercy, and faith. The law should not be used as an instrument of malice. Shylock, with malice in his heart, wants to use the letter of the law to violate the spirit of the law. He is thwarted, and justice, true justice, triumphs.
It is not a little thing that, however imperfectly realized, Portia’s Christian exposition of the law was the ancient European peoples’ vision of what the law should be. Even when the vision is honored more in the breach than in the observance it is something to have the proper vision.
What is the liberals’ vision of the law? Their vision of the law is the Shylockian vision of the law. They have no faith in Christ, so they have no mercy. They seek justice. But justice without faith and mercy becomes malice. And that is what liberal justice consists of: malice and only malice. Shylock did not fear justice because he, like the liberals, saw himself as devoid of sin. If his trial was held today he would be awarded his pound of flesh.
The legal systems in all the European countries are Shylockian legal systems. They exist to extract their pound of flesh from the white Europeans. It is useless to try to obtain justice in the liberal courts because, like Shylock, the liberals have hardened their hearts. They hate the light:
I pray you, think you question with the Jew.
You may as well go stand upon the beach
And bid the main flood bate his usual height;
You may as well use question with the wolf
Why he hath made the ewe bleat for the lamb;
You may as well forbid the mountain pines
To wag their high tops and to make no noise,
When they are fretten with the gusts of heaven;
You may as well do anything most hard,
As seek to soften that–than which what’s harder?–
His Jewish heart:
It’s a great tragedy that the post World War II conservatives did not see the shifting sands under their feet. They quoted old tomes from Europe’s Christian era when the law was justice, mercy, and faith while ignoring the truth staring them in the face: the law had become a ravenous wolf out to devour the European people. The liberals’ malice aforethought was obvious to all those who were not too blind to see. Every liberal lie was brought to light. Let’s start with the lie of the poor, disenfranchised black man. The liberals claimed they sought only to help the downtrodden black, not to destroy the white. But in Africa when the whites were disenfranchised and black rule made life unbearable for blacks as well as whites, did the liberals say, “We were mistaken, we must re-establish white rule so that black and white can be better off?” Of course they didn’t. They remained obdurate in their hatred of the white. “Better that all black men should live in squalor and misery so long as we can destroy the white man.” In no country is the malice of the Shylockian liberals more manifest than in South Africa. Do you remember when the liberals claimed to be opposed to apartheid? Well, there still is apartheid in South Africa. The whites have been herded into all-white ghettoes without running water, proper shelter, or food.(1) “Serves them right,” the European conservatives say. “It couldn’t happen to us, we’ve been good to our black brothers.” It will happen to you, Mr. Conservative, just as soon as the black barbarians no longer need white votes to elect an all-black government. But mere self-interest, “it could happen to me,” should not be the primary reason that the white European should be concerned about the white South African. He should be concerned, passionately concerned, because the white South African is of the same blood as the white European. Fluellen tells Henry V that, “all the water in Wye cannot wash your Majesty’s Welsh plood out of your pody, I can tell you that.” So it is with the European. Wherever he goes he takes his nation with him, it is in his blood.
Once the racial lie, which proclaims white men to be evil and racist, has been established as dogma, all other liberal lies can be institutionalized as well. Sexual permissiveness is advanced as a therapeutic improvement on “Victorian repression,” and savage matriarchies are presented as “enlightened governments which respect women’s rights.” The lies are unchallenged because the Christian European males who were born to oppose such lies have been discredited by virtue of their ‘racism’: “It’s not surprising that the white male is sexist because he is also a racist. We must eradicate the white male.” So say the feminists who were spawned by the “Civil Rights” movement, which was in reality a movement to establish the negro as the supreme deity in the Kingdom of Babylon.
Malice has borne down truth because the white European conservatives are not conservatives. Their vision is a bureaucratic one. They see, in their mind’s eye, a democratic, egalitarian world of all races and all sexes, united in the common pursuit of riches dispensed by the most intelligent of the bureaucrats, which they believe themselves to be. The conservatives do not see the satanic malice of the liberals because they have lost their vision. They no longer see life feelingly. The bureaucratic mind can only organize the things of this world, it cannot see past the things of this world to His sacred fairy tale world of Arden, of Narnia, of The Wind in the Willows. Once the vision of Christ’s Europe is lost the liberals have won because conservatives in church and state will only make mild policy protests, they will not oppose the satanic liberal malice which permeates the modern liberal states of Europe.
Currently the ongoing debate between conservatives and liberals is over who can best manage the affairs of Liberaldom. The absolute necessity of Liberaldom’s destruction is never mentioned by the conservatives and certainly not by the liberals. The liberals are the demonically possessed swine heading for the abyss. The conservatives are Shropshire sheep grazing in a nearby pasture. As the swine rush by, the conservative sheep go over the abyss with the swine, because they don’t want to appear prejudiced against swine by refusing to join them in their mad rush to destruction. What a wonderful bunch of go-along type of guys those Shropshire sheep are! But why should the conservative grazers capitulate to evil? They cave in because they have no sustaining vision of their place in God’s grand scheme of things. They see themselves as Satan wants them to see themselves: as a subordinate race of people who can only live their lives second-hand through the good offices of the negro. If they can come up with a better way to serve the negro than the liberals, then they can sit in the seats of the liberals and play Atticus Finch. Of course the liberal will never relinquish his seat to the conservative, but that is the pathetic hope of the conservative. If we have hope in that type of ‘conservatism’ only are we not of all men most to be pitied?
Shylock’s hatred of the light was not just a Jewish thing even in Shakespeare’s time. There were a few liberal gentiles in old Europe. But now the few have become the dominant many, and Shylock’s hatred of all European Christians has become institutionalized in church and state. If we look at the history of some of the liberal hate organizations, we can see the great Judaizing movement unfold. For instance, at its inception the American Civil Liberties Union was approximately 90% Jewish. In recent years the organization has built up a majority membership of Catholics and Protestants. This synthesis was inevitable. The Jews are an organized body opposed to the light of the world and the Christian churches have become organized bodies opposed to the light of the world. And if you tell me that the churches have not become hostile to the light of the world, that they have simply removed the European cultural accoutrements from the churches, I will tell you that the Europeans’ vision of Christ was not an ‘accoutrement’, it was the faith. Syncretistic negro worship is not Christianity, it is a religion of malice, without faith, hope, or charity. Walk into any Christian church, and you will feel an overwhelming sense of malice. Malice directed at me and thee, the white Europeans.
There is an old Greek legend – I first read it in a Thomas Mann novel – that describes the timid and cowering European’s stance vis-à-vis the world and the liberals. A Greek servant is in the market place buying food for his master’s dinner when he sees Death. Death makes what appears to the servant to be a threatening glance at him. The servant then runs back to his master’s house and starts packing his belongings in preparation for a trip.
“Where are you going?” his master asks.
“I’m going to Crete.”
“Why, what has happened?”
“I saw Death in the market place and he gave me a threatening glance. So I must go to Crete without delay. Good-by.”
The master then runs to the market place looking for Death. When he finds him, he confronts him. “Why did you make a threatening glance at my servant?”
“That was not a threatening glance, it was a look of surprise. You see, I didn’t expect to see him here in Athens, because I have an appointment with him in Crete.”
The postwar conservatives who were afraid to defend their race lest they be linked to Hitler, the Southern segregationists who caved in to integration lest they be branded ‘racist,’ and the white South Africans who ended blessed apartheid in an endeavor to avoid the hatred of the liberal world, all caved into heathen liberalism to avoid the hatred of the liberals. But they are still hated! No European can avoid his destiny. He is the Christ-bearer. If he refuses to champion the Christ he will be hated for his ancestors’ sake, who did bear the Christ child across the river. But why not embrace our destiny? Why court the friendship of the wicked? If we look past Liberaldom to Christian Europe, we will not be left without comfort. We will have a sustaining vision: “If ye were of the world, the world would love his own: but because ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you.” The heathen will rage against us and the Shylockian liberals will hate us. Is that such a fearsome thing? It is nothing compared to the loving approbation of our honored dead and the risen Lord. +
(1) All of my adult life — and for most of my childhood for that matter – I have heard sermons preached about the poor, starving black Africans, and I’ve seen thousands of widescreen, horrific images of the poor starving black Africans. No one ever says that the black Africans are poor and starving because black Africans have no concept of charity. Instead the plight of the black Africans is always blamed on the white man, despite the fact that the blacks in white-controlled sections of Africa were not poor and starving, because the white man does have charity.
Now the formerly white sections of Africa are controlled by the black man and the South African white people are poor and starving. Why don’t I hear sermons preached about the poor and starving whites of South Africa? And why don’t I see poor and starving white children on my television screen with heart-rending appeals for mercy. “Just five dollars a month can feed a hungry white child.” Yes, I am being disingenuous. I know why I don’t hear sermons on the plight of poor starving whites in South Africa, and I know why I don’t see pictures of and appeals for aid to the poor and starving whites of South Africa. I do not hear and see such appeals for white people, because the liberals — Jew and gentile — hate the white European with all their heart, mind, and soul. We can only deal with such inhuman wretches at sword point: nothing else will avail.