Author : Mosley Oswald
Title : Tomorrow we live
Year : 1938
Link download : Mosley_Oswald_-_Tomorrow_we_live.zip
A BOOK of thirty-four thousand words can serve the reader only as an introduction to the spirit and policy of British Union. The subject is too great to be confined in all detail within such limits of space. But the reader who inquires further will discover in the publications of the British Union an amplitude of detail on every subject of the day. Books and pamphlets by my colleagues, whose range of abilities now cover every sphere of national life, will meet any inquiry, and further detail on some topics can be found in my own books, "The Greater Britain" and "100 Questions Answered." In these pages the reader will discover, with the exception of the chapter on Foreign Affairs, a policy suited to the character of this country and no other. British Union in whole character is a British principle suited to Britain alone. It is true that our National Socialist and Fascist creed is universal, in different form and method, to all great countries of the modern world. That was true also in their own period of every great creed, political or religious, that our country has ever known. The only difference in this respect between British Union and the old parties is that our creed belongs to the twentieth century, and their creeds to the past that conceived them. But a greater difference arises from the fact that National Socialism and Fascism is in essence a national doctrine which finds in each great nation a character, policy, form and method suited to each particular country. For this reason a far greater divergence will be found in the expression and method of the modern Movement in different countries than prevailed in the case of the international creeds of the past such as Liberalism and Socialism, or Conservatism, which, under various names, can be found in every country in the world. So the reader will find in these pages a policy born only of British inspiration, and a character and method suited to Britain alone. He will be able to judge for himself our claim for British Union that in constructive conception our policy already far transcends any previous emanation of the modern Movement. We do not borrow ideas from foreign countries and we have no "models" abroad for a plain and simple reason. We are proud enough of our own people to believe that once Britain is awake our people will not follow, but will lead mankind. In this deep faith we hold that no lesser destiny is worthy of the British people than that the whole world shall find in Britain an example. The aim of British Union is no less than this. Oswald Mosley - May 1938. ...
jeudi 27 décembre 2012
Par Balder le jeudi 27 décembre 2012, 00:27 - 203 lectures
Par Balder le jeudi 27 décembre 2012, 00:25 - 194 lectures
Author : Mosley Oswald
Title : The alternative
Year : 1947
Link download : Mosley_Oswald_-_The_alternative.zip
Born, November 1896. Served in France First World War; Royal Flying Corps and Trenches. Youngest M.P., November 1918. Minister in Government, 1929. Resigned 1930, on account of Government's refusal either to deal with Unemployment problem or accept his plan for a solution. In 1931, founded New Movement, which spread rapidly throughout Great Britain, despite great opposition from Old Parties, and a special Act of Parliament, which was designed to check it. Five years in prison and house arrest under Regulation 18B during the Second World War, with many colleagues, on account of political opposition to that war. Defended and justified his position in book MY ANSWER. (Published in 1946. Mosley Publications, Ramsbury, Wilts.) ...
Par Balder le jeudi 27 décembre 2012, 00:22 - 202 lectures
Author : Mosley Oswald
Title : My life
Year : 1968
Link download : Mosley_Oswald_-_My_life.zip
Ancestry and Childhood. WE began with 'Ernald, a Saxon', who lived in the reign of King John at Moseley, a hamlet in Staffordshire four miles from Wolverhampton. The descendants of this 'Ernald de Moseley' moved to Lancashire and other parts of Staffordshire, married Normans and later added a slight mixture of Scotch and Irish. The 'e' was dropped from the family name in deference to a Latin epigram of the erudite Queen Elizabeth when an ancestor defied the law and organised a privateer fleet against Spain. My own strong feeling that I am a European appears to have some foundation in ancestry and family experience. I have never made a close study of the family lineage, which is on record in various books of reference, but in my youth I remember a great-uncle who was a considerable authority on the subject. Facts no doubt in the course of time had become freely embroidered. It seems clear, however, that our family played a fairly distinguished part in the Civil War, though I have never tested by the record their claim to have defended Tutbury Castle until it was the last Royalist stronghold to fall in that bitter conflict. The reliable witness of my grandfather and great-uncle assured me that they had seen letters written by Cromwell when he was besieging Tutbury, threatening to burn down the nearby family home at Rolleston if we did not surrender the castle. It was in this ancestral pride that I made the daily march of a mile and a half and back from my grandfather's house at Rolleston to Tutbury each afternoon of my Staffordshire childhood under the watchful eye of my first sergeantmajor, a kindly nanny. Fortunately Cromwell did not fulfil his threat, but contented himself with removing all the lead from the Rolleston roof to make bullets. Yet the fate of this fine old Tudor house was only delayed, and it was burned down in the latter half of the last century, together with the Cromwell letters and many other treasures. I never saw it. All that remains of the house is a drawing of the Georgian facade which had been added in the eighteenth century. The main feature was reputedly a long, oak-panelled gallery which contained the best pictures, including several Van Dycks; this may well be, as the period was an apogee of family fortune, though knowledge of the breeding of shorthorns and shire horses was more conspicuous in my immediate forbears. We still have a Stubbs, which must have been tucked away in some back room; a Mosley boy, holding his horse, is accompanied by his dogs on the slopes of Tutbury Castle, perennial scene of reverent recollection and pilgrimage. The Van Dycks have disappeared without trace, except for an odd freak of fate; it may possibly prove that fire gave back what it took away. We suffered a second fire in 1954 at a house we had at Clonfert in Ireland where some of the remaining family pictures were hung. A large portrait which we always believed to be a copy of one of the Van Dycks was badly singed. It was sent to Dublin for cleaning and excision of the unimpaired centre, and in the process was pronounced original by the Irish experts. Because of the burning of Rolleston we have few relics of the Cavalier period. Still less have we any record of the next upheaval in which we were involved. It is in the manner of English families, and indeed of the British nation, that long, slumbering periods of quiet life are followed by moments of abrupt awakening and sometimes of dramatic action. There was always a tradition that we were much engaged in the 1745 rebellion of Prince Charles Edward Stuart. The only evidence of this produced to me in my youth was a pin-cushion embroidered by some ancestress with the words 'Down with the Rump and God bless Prince Charles'. We still possess this pin-cushion, but of course it clearly refers not to Prince Charles Edward of the '45, but to Charles II when he was 'on his travels' as a fugitive from the 'Rump' of the Cromwellian Parliament. I was, therefore, inclined to discount the tradition that in 1745 we were armed and ready to come out with the Young Pretender on his march south as soon as he reached our house at Rolleston. We were saved from the subsequent disaster because he and the Highlanders turned back at Derby, eleven miles to our north. This topic revived vividly when I addressed a public dinner in the thirties at which as usual I expressed my loyalty to the Crown. Sir Compton Mackenzie was present, and subsequently put the teasing question whether this declaration had any reference to the fact that Prince Charles Edward had spent the night in our family house on his secret visit to England the year before the '45. He referred later to this historical incident in a book on the subject of Prince Charles's well-concealed survey of the field of action for the following year. I had never heard this, but it was not difficult to understand how careful the family had been to destroy all record of the period. The romantic tradition of opposition and insurgence - embodied in the grace and charm of the Stuarts and their cause - evidently moved our family at this stage, but the reader would be mistaken in thinking this accounts for the course of my political career. A portentous change followed, when the Mosleys became the incarnation of contrary English qualities. Perhaps we had after all the happy quality, the redeeming grace, of learning from experience. The culmination was my great-great-grandfather Sir Oswald Mosley whose fireinviolate portrait gazes down on me in his red robes of learning with massive reassurance of English stability, albeit with a certain whimsical charm as if he almost admitted it was not quite so serious as he made out. With him we enter a very different period of the family history, an unaccounted metamorphosis from the Jacobite, romantic Tory tradition to the solid, stolid respectable Whig. We are surrounded not by emotional revolutionaries but by squires and parsons, and by professional soldiers of the orthodox variety, like my father's two first cousins who were killed in the First World War, and my own brother Ted, who spent his life in the army. This very worthy person, my great-great-grandfather, was indeed a pillar of the State in the Midland counties. It was he who appears first to have established that our Saxon family could prove its ancestry to the thirteenth century and trace it to before the Norman conquest. It seems in any case that the family is of a respectable antiquity, for works of reference and public monuments show that it was playing some role at least in Elizabethan times. My great-great-grandfather fortified his Saxon lineage by marrying an Every from a neighbouring family of Norman descent; this desirable outcross - in agricultural language - appears to have occurred more than once. Armed then with an imposing presence and a weighty erudition in his own sphere, he entered the House of Commons in the Whig cause during the Reform Bill period. Apart from this concession to progress he showed little sign of possessing a radical frame of mind. I have often been reproached in my political life with the rough part the family played in repressing the Chartist riots in Manchester, although I was never able to understand why I should be held responsible for events so many years before I was born. After all, Peterloo was a mild exercise in violence compared with some of the British doings in India and elsewhere during subsequent years. For all they knew, my indignant interlocutors on the alleged performance of my ancestors might themselves have been able to trace descent from those who during the Indian mutiny bound Sepoys to the muzzles of guns for the purpose of blowing them into the next world in unidentifiable pieces, thus robbing them not only of life but of their chance of paradise. Many of us Europeans would be in for a thin time in this world or the next if we were held responsible for all the dark deeds which adorn our family trees. The real matter of regret and reproof is that our generation has not progressed beyond the wickedness of our antecedents, and has even regressed by comparison with some of mankind's more enlightened periods. The offence of our family's more impetuous members in restoring order in Manchester by a yeomanry charge rather than by persuasion was, of course, aggravated by the ownership of considerable wealth in the area. This was derived from the agricultural land on which Manchester was built, not entirely by the direct exertions of the family. From my point of view they made one disastrous error when they sold leaseholds for 999 years instead of for 99. That extra nine unhappily made the difference between our wealth and, for example, that of the Grosvenor family, who occupied a similar position in the development of London, but granted shorter leases which fell in sooner. Reflecting upon what might have happened in British politics if I had had so much money to spend, my contemporaries may consider that they can count their blessings. The virtual sale of this land cut both ways, for we lost control over it. It was therefore again wide of the mark when I was frequently attacked in my political life for the subsequent development of Manchester. Not only did this occur before I was born, but the family could not have altered the course of events once they had granted these careless leases. Our last effective influence in Manchester ceased with the sale to the Corporation of the Lord of the Manor rights early in the nineteenth century, this time for quite a tidy sum in a shrewd bargain which left some resentment. These rights, strangely, we had shared from early times with the De La Warr family; strangely, because the present Lord De La Warr was a fellow-member of the 1929 Labour Government. When I last looked, our coats-ofarms were still side by side in the remnants of our old family house at Ancoats; a quaint premonition. These events, and also the cavalier romance, seem well established by the research of forbears. It is difficult for us today to understand this obsession with family trees. I am glad to know that I come from an old English and British family, but there my interest ends. It was different in the last century, when my great-great-grandfather in particular appeared to have shown an inordinate pride in his lineage. During his time in Parliament he is reported to have refused a peerage with the observation that an ancient baronetcy was preferable to a mushroom peerage. Although he was evidently a man of some intellectual attainments and considerable personal prestige, what he had done to merit a peerage is not entirely clear. Still more dubious is the remark concerning the ancient baronetcy, for he was only the second in the line. It appears however that this was the third Mosley creation of a baronetcy, which in earlier years had lapsed because the succession was insufficiently direct. The first creation dated from the reign of James I, so to say it was ancient may have been moderately justified. The story of our family in the Elizabethan period is for the most part clear. Sir Nicholas Mosley was Lord Mayor of London under Queen Elizabeth, and a fine monument testifying to this fact still stands in Didsbury Church near Manchester. A more beautiful monument to another member of the family in a slightly later period can also be found in Rolleston Church. This marks the division of the Mosleys at that time between the earlier Lancashire branch and the migrants to Rolleston, Staffordshire, in the late Elizabethan period. They all seemed to have joined together a little later for the Civil War in the Royalist cause. Throughout, a certain diversity occurred between the Staffordshire owners of agricultural land with a substantial farming tradition and the remaining Lancashire family who seem to have been largely engaged in the early cotton trade. There remained however considerable interplay of interests, for the Rolleston branch derived most of their money from the land on which Manchester was built, and the Lancashire family still carried on farming in the Didsbury and Chorley area. The old family house at Houghend still stands, though in a very dilapidated condition. It was abandoned long before my time, no doubt on account of the approach of Manchester which disturbed the rural habits of these countrymen. When I rediscovered the house it was sadly deserted, open to the wind and rain and stripped of panelling, staircase and all decoration or suggestion of a home. I wandered through the deserted stables and outhouses, which evidently came right up to the front door in the style of the smaller French chateaux. The only living thing appeared to me in the dusk as a ghostly shadow of a peacock perched on a cow-stall. I came nearer, and thought the motionless bird was stuffed, the only remaining relic of the old family life. I stroked it, and the live head turned towards me with a steady, tragic gaze of faraway memories; perhaps we should never have left? How Sir Nicholas Mosley's diverse energies and interests carried him from this quiet country background to the position of Lord Mayor of London is a matter of legend. The job seems to have required a considerable variety of function and of quality in the incumbent. He is reported to have fitted out a privateer fleet against the Spaniards at a time when Elizabeth was at peace with Spain. The Lord Mayor's flagrant breach of the prevailing law was said to have been forgiven to him when the fleet returned with considerable booty, a substantial proportion being placed at the disposal of the pacific queen. Again according to legend, when he appeared before her in some trepidation to explain the situation and to offer a share in the swag, she delivered to him a family motto instead of delivering him to the axe he had merited. The motto was Mos legem regit, which was understood to mean 'Our custom is above the law' and has been proudly held ever since. If the legend is untrue, some explanation is required for this strange device which is, of course, so much at variance with my own habit as the present family representative, who not only keeps the law but has had frequent recurrence to the courts to require others to do the same. The legend is fortified by the Queen's considerable reputation for erudition and wit, which in those days was often expressed in Latin punning. Play on the family name of Mosley is reputed to have given her such satisfaction that she forgot to be angry. It may be that the material recompense of the booty reinforced the purely intellectual pleasure. Who knows? To what extent do truth and legend coincide? Perhaps the most that one can say is that there was probably something in it. ...
Par Balder le jeudi 27 décembre 2012, 00:19 - 195 lectures
Author : Mosley Oswald
Title : Fascism 100 questions asked and answered
Year : 19*
Link download : Mosley_Oswald_-_Fascism.zip
CHALLENGE. That ringing word summarises the personality of Oswald Mosley. Through the hesitant decade of the 'twenties', in the presently complacent 'thirties', this ex-airman has symbolised the challenge of his generation to all the accepted values of a senescent civilisation. Oswald Mosley's political life has been one consistent challenge. He challenged the Terror in Ireland in the Coalition Parliament of the post-war profiteers. He challenged the domination of the banks in the years when the Gold Standard was still an article of faith with the leaders of Labour. As a Socialist Minister he challenged the lack of courage and the lack of leadership in the Socialist Party—deficiencies which involved, inevitably, the catastrophe of 1931. The collapse in one miserable week of the whole policy towards which half a century of working-class effort had been directed, convinced Mosley of the utter inadequacy of the Social Democratic methodology to meet the problems of the modern world. To him, the surrender of the Labour Movement in the moment of capitalist crisis, anticipated by Marx and prophesied from thousands of Labour platforms, was as ridiculous as if the Salvation Army were "to take to their heels on the Day of Judgment." As Mussolini, the only Italian Socialist for whom Lenin had respect, turned from Marxism to seek the expression of the Latin soul through a disciplined national movement of the Italian people, so Mosley now sought within himself and among the unknown soldiers of the fields and factories of Britain, for an inspiration which would raise men from out of the muddy complacency of a vulgar materialism to those Promethean heights whence man may see the steel-white dawn of the revolutionary future. In the autumn of 1932 the British Union of Fascists took form, with Oswald Mosley as Leader. It was a challenge to all the most powerful forces of the established order in Britain. Mosley challenged the system of financial capitalism, by which the great banks and insurance companies had fastened their grip upon the whole economic life of Great Britain. He challenged the expert dogma—accepted by all the "Old Gang" parties —whereby the fabric of international capitalism was considered of more importance than the individual and collective well-being of the workers of Britain. He challenged the corrupt working of the so-called democratic system, whereby party machines with colossal monetary resources were enabled to establish "caucus-regimes" utterly unrepresentative of any of the integral social elements in the country. He challenged the so-called "free press" dominated by millionaire company-promoters who were themselves subordinate to the great financial and advertising interests on whom their revenue depended. He even dared to challenge the covert but all pervading influence of the Jews on the life of the community. Mosley's challenge was answered by a storm of vituperation and hysterical misrepresentation such as no man and no movement has ever before raised in this country. The very force of the opposition, the very savagery and persistency of the abuse, the virulence and malice of the misrepresentation were indicative of the extent to which Mosley's challenge had struck at fundamentals. Within a few months of the beginnings of the development of the Fascist Movement in Britain, a second great wave of the modern spirit in Europe had carried Hitler to power in Germany. While Modernism versus Social Democracy became the great issue in international politics, Mosley's challenge in Britain jostled together into one panicking "corral" all the heterogeneous products of the decomposing democratic system. Society and the Commons, the Beaverbrooks and the Laskis, the Sieffs and the Sainsburys, the Baldwins and the Pollitts, all combined to attack and to abuse Italian Fascism and German Nazis and the Modern Movement in Britain. The Tory Party surrendered the historic principles of British foreign policy in order to conciliate the Jews who hated Germany and the Internationalists who aimed at the overthrow of both the German and Italian regimes. The T.U. movement in Britain, the Communists even, virtually abandoned any distinctive internal social policy in order to secure "a united front" upon which might ultimately be based a European democratic coalition for the defence of the frontiers of Communist Russia. Throughout this prolonged storm—which as each month passes becomes more menacing to the peace of the world—the British Fascist Movement has steadily grown stronger. The very force and violence of the opposition to Fascism on the part of all the great vested interests, from the Trades Unions to the millionaire newspapers, has made the average man suspicious. "Methinks m'lord protests too much" is the traditional reaction of the man in the street to an exaggerated propaganda. And behind all the massed propaganda what do the established parties offer to the men and women of Britain ? At home a continuance of the capitalist system varied by the unattractive alternative of "the class war." Abroad, another great war—this time "to make the world safe for democracy" against the Fascist-Nazi powers. The great outstanding fact which the man in the street appreciates is that Britain has been brought nearer to war than she has ever been since 1914. The Jews are shouting for a war of revenge against Germany; the pacifists are clamouring for war, one year with Japan, the next with Italy. The Jews who came out of the Napoleonic Wars, the Boer War, and the Great War with vast profit and enhanced prestige! Oswald Mosley challenges the whole war psychology. The modern Movement in Britain— a Movement largely of ex-service men can understand movements of similar growth and calibre in Italy and Germany. Europe is approaching a period of social and spiritual crisis paralleled only by the first decades of the Reformation. Catastrophe can only be avoided by the exercise of the qualities of understanding, vision and sympathy in all the countries involved. And the supreme importance of Mosley and his Movement at the present juncture is that they stand for a policy of patience, restraint and reason in European affairs. At home there is an economic and social transformation to be carried through which amounts to scientific revolution. All our resources and all our strength is needed for that transformation. Its character is suffiently illustrated in the present book, in which everyday problems of policy and of outlook which trouble the average man and woman are set out in the form of question and answer. In order to face up to our own problems and the problems of the British world communion, we need peace and discipline, not foreign war. Oswald Mosley stands for those qualities of peace and discipline, of reason and restraint, without which the people of Britain can neither master the forces of anarchy and self-interest within their own country, nor conquer their destiny in the world of the Twentieth Century. In this book Mosley attempts to answer the sort of question which the average man has actually put to him in the hundreds of mass meetings he has addressed. All who do not intend to have their minds made up for them by the millionaire press should read and digest this book. ...
Par Balder le jeudi 27 décembre 2012, 00:10 - 185 lectures
Author : Mosley Oswald
Title : Europe Faith and plan A way Out from the Coming Crises and an Introduction to Thinking as an European
Year : 1958
Link download : Mosley_Oswald_-_Europe_Faith_and_plan.zip
The object of this book is to suggest that the complete Union of Europe with European Government is now a necessity. Both the arrangements made by the six countries for the gradual introduction of a common market, and the even slower and more hesitant methods proposed by the governement of Britain, will prove completely inadequate in face of the economic crises of the next few years. ...