“When the Saxon Began to Hate”

 

You may think you recognize the phrase in the post title. You’ll search your memory and think, “Hmm, Kipling?” And you will be close, but not correct. It is an adaptation of a repeated line in Kipling’s 1917 poem The Beginnings:

It was not part of their blood,
It came to them very late
With long arrears to make good,
When the English began to hate.

They were not easily moved,
They were icy-willing to wait
Till every count should be proved,
Ere the English began to hate.

Their voices were even and low,
Their eyes were level and straight.
There was neither sign nor show,
When the English began to hate.

It was not preached to the crowd,
It was not taught by the State.
No man spoke it aloud,
When the English began to hate.

It was not suddenly bred,
It will not swiftly abate,
Through the chill years ahead,
When Time shall count from the date
That the English began to hate.

The word “English” has been replaced by “Saxon”. Who did this? The New Zealand shooter (NZS).

I don’t remember his name and I am not bothering to look it up. It was a heinous act that all should reject. But how do I know about this phrase and his adaption/appropriation of Kipling’s poem? It is included in his 74-page manifesto. And why has he done it? That is a larger question.

NZS wants us to understand him. He claims to have written a 240-page manifesto and then deleted it in frustration. But as the date of his planned attack came closer he crafted a 74-page version that, no doubt, plums the same themes. So what are these? The best I can determine is he sees himself as a 2019 version of a Hitler Youth with a twist. He wants a world with fewer people so that they are further apart. He wants a return to a more agrarian, less industrialized world with less global marketing. He is fine with all ethnicities and races living in their own distinct geographies and none dominating one another. In that sense he is not a white supremacist, he is a racial purist. He believes it is inevitable that white people will be oppressed when they are put into minority status. And as a racial purist he sees the largest enemy as the United States of America — a society that gives the “illusion” that a plurality of races, ethnicities, religions, and politics can actually coexist and build a strong and happy nation. He wants to destroy that. He wants to give strength to the identity politics of the Left as a means of awakening white populations in the United States and elsewhere to their peril and spur them to act to protect themselves against the tyranny of democracy that precedes the oppression of the white race.

What strikes me as I read NZS’ manifesto is not that he is crazy, it is that he argues and reasons like the Left, but only as a mirror image. The Left argues that whites cannot be victims, NZS argues that whites are victims just like everyone else. The Left argues that “diversity is our strength,” NZS argues that diversity is our weakness and that homogenous societies like China should be emulated, not pluralistic societies like the USA. The Left argues that things should be managed centrally by a diverse elite since local control is just a dog whistle for “white supremacy,” NZS argues that the races should be separated and managed centrally within a racially and ethnically homogenous society.

Many of NZS’ ideas are in conflict with each other. This may have been the reason why he deleted his 240-page manifesto because he was struggling with the incoherence. But when faced with the time pressure, he dashes off a shorter version figuring that if he survived his attack on the mosques and consequent police response he will have plenty of time to polish it later. If he didn’t survive, he at least wanted it out there.

Taking NZS’ statements at face value he is not formally educated at a high level. His learning is mainly from the internet — the only trusted source for information anymore. He is not stupid. His vocabulary is pretty sound if not startlingly erudite. His manifesto is dotted with sarcasm and humor at points which likely the Left will take deadly serious.

And this brings us back to Kipling’s poem and NZS’ replacement of “English” with “Saxon.” NZS sees the modern English as a mongrelized and weak people. Like the Hitlerian ideal of the early 20th Century, NZS invokes the ancients — the people who possessed the lightly populated lands of northern Europe. If NZS were running for office his slogan might be “A Stag in Every Pot,” No doubt his favorite beverage would be mead.

Published in General
This post was promoted to the Main Feed by a Ricochet Editor at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 27 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Joshua Bissey Inactive
    Joshua Bissey
    @TheSockMonkey

    I came across the Saxonized version of the poem just a few months ago, though I don’t recall where. The below thread suggests it goes back at least a few decades (though w/o evidence).

    https://literature.stackexchange.com/questions/3215/did-rudyard-kipling-write-the-wrath-of-the-awakened-saxon

    • #1
  2. Susan Quinn Contributor
    Susan Quinn
    @SusanQuinn

    What a thoughtful post, @rodin! It shows, too, that both extreme ideologies are about power and control. In that way, they are the same. And frightening. Thank you!

    • #2
  3. She Member
    She
    @She

    Joshua Bissey (View Comment):

    I came across the Saxonized version of the poem just a few months ago, though I don’t recall where. The below thread suggests it goes back at least a few decades (though w/0 evidence).

    https://literature.stackexchange.com/questions/3215/did-rudyard-kipling-write-the-wrath-of-the-awakened-saxon

    Yes, that’s true, although I’m not sure how long ago it was.  It’s been appropriated and altered by white supremacist groups. as shown here also.  http://compositionawebb.pbworks.com/w/file/fetch/119831298/Rudyard%20Kipling.pdf  referenced on the second page.

    Doesn’t alter the main point of the OP, thought.  Ugh.

     

     

    • #3
  4. Rodin Member
    Rodin
    @Rodin

    Joshua Bissey (View Comment):
    https://literature.stackexchange.com/questions/3215/did-rudyard-kipling-write-the-wrath-of-the-awakened-saxon

    @joshuabissey, thanks for that. NZS probably found that version in his “internet education” program. I debated whether to amend the OP in light of this. But in re-reading my post I still think it is an accurate opinion of why NZS would prefer “Saxon” over “English” even though NZS was not the originator of the change. Unlike the reference at the link, NZS correctly identifies both the original poem and the fact that “Saxon” was an alteration. Thus even if he did not have the original idea he was deliberate in his inclusion of the altered version.

    • #4
  5. Percival Thatcher
    Percival
    @Percival

    Knuckleheads.

    The Saxons were invaders. The Angles were invaders. The Romans were invaders, and they brought with them riff raff from all over Europe. The Scoti were raiders, some of whom just never went home. The Celts and the Picts were there before all the others, but they came from somewhere. The Danes, the Normans (Normans were Vikings that had learned French) — so what is the point of picking just one segment of that polyglot people who eventually degenerated to the point where they drink warm beer with their cold roast beef? On purpose!

    Bah. Your “master race” just can’t be all that masterful if you’re an exemplar of it, no matter who you are.

    • #5
  6. Percival Thatcher
    Percival
    @Percival

    • #6
  7. Misthiocracy secretly Member
    Misthiocracy secretly
    @Misthiocracy

    Percival (View Comment):
    The Celts and the Picts were there before all the others, but they came from somewhere.

    According to (non-academic) histories of the Celts that I’ve read, one widely-accepted theory is that the proto-Celts originated from near the headwaters of the Danube.  Regardless of their origin, pockets of Celtic civilization eventually stretched from Ireland to Anatolia.  The Galacians of the New Testament were Celts.

    Futhermore, since the religion and culture of the ancient Celts is remarkably similar to the Hindu religion and culture, it’s fair conjecture that the proto-Celts were the most direct descendants of the proto-Indo-Europeans.

    This is all just a more long-winded way of agreeing that everybody came from somewhere.

    • #7
  8. Gumby Mark (R-Meth Lab of Demo… Coolidge
    Gumby Mark (R-Meth Lab of Demo…
    @GumbyMark

    Percival (View Comment):

    Knuckleheads.

    The Saxons were invaders. The Angles were invaders. The Romans were invaders, and they brought with them riff raff from all over Europe. The Scoti were raiders, some of whom just never went home. The Celts and the Picts were there before all the others, but they came from somewhere. The Danes, the Normans (Normans were Vikings that had learned French) — so what is the point of picking just one segment of that polyglot people who eventually degenerated to the point where they drink warm beer with their cold roast beef? On purpose!

    Bah. Your “master race” just can’t be all that masterful if you’re an exemplar of it, no matter who you are.

    And the Celts wiped out the Beaker culture people in England, and before that the Beaker folks wiped out the neolithic peoples who built Stonehenge (the big version, not the Spinal Tap one).

    • #8
  9. Randy Webster Inactive
    Randy Webster
    @RandyWebster

    Percival (View Comment):
    Bah. Your “master race” just can’t be all that masterful if you’re an exemplar of it, no matter who you are.

    I might.

    • #9
  10. RightAngles Member
    RightAngles
    @RightAngles

    The MSM doesn’t want you to read the manifesto because in it, he says he doesn’t like Trump and that his personal politics align most closely with Communist China.

    • #10
  11. Randy Webster Inactive
    Randy Webster
    @RandyWebster

    I don’t get the Candace Owens stuff.  Is she the evil-doer the left is making her out to be?

    • #11
  12. JosePluma Coolidge
    JosePluma
    @JosePluma

    RightAngles (View Comment):

    The MSM doesn’t want you to read the manifesto because in it, he says he doesn’t like Trump and that his personal politics align most closely with Communist China.

    Not to mention the environmentalism. 

    • #12
  13. Rodin Member
    Rodin
    @Rodin

    RightAngles (View Comment):

    The MSM doesn’t want you to read the manifesto because in it, he says he doesn’t like Trump and that his personal politics align most closely with Communist China.

    Here is the specific reference:

    Were/are you a supporter of Donald Trump?

    As a symbol of renewed white identity and common purpose? Sure. As a policy maker and leader? Dear god no. [p.16]

    • #13
  14. Rodin Member
    Rodin
    @Rodin

    Randy Webster (View Comment):

    I don’t get the Candace Owens stuff. Is she the evil-doer the left is making her out to be?

    The specific reference is:

    Is there a particular person that radicalized you the most?

    Yes, the person that has influenced me above all was Candace Owens. Each time she spoke I was stunned by her insights and her own views helped push me further and further into the belief of violence over meekness. Though I will have to disavow some of her beliefs, the extreme actions she calls for are too much, even for my tastes. [p.17]

    I frankly have no clue what he is talking about. Yes, Candace is asking blacks to examine their relationship with Democrats and the claimed benefits they get from supporting Democrats, but I am unaware of anything she has said that promotes violence. 

    • #14
  15. Rodin Member
    Rodin
    @Rodin

    JosePluma (View Comment):

    RightAngles (View Comment):

    The MSM doesn’t want you to read the manifesto because in it, he says he doesn’t like Trump and that his personal politics align most closely with Communist China.

    Not to mention the environmentalism.

    Specific references include:

    Why focus on immigration and birth rates when climate change is such a huge issue?

    Because they are the same issue, the environment is being destroyed by over population, we Europeans are one of the groups that are not over populating the world. The invaders are the ones over populating the world. Kill the invaders, kill the overpopulation and by doing so save the environment. [p.22]

    Ask yourself, truly, what has modern conservatism managed to conserve? What does it seek to conserve? The natural environment? Western Culture? Ethnic autonomy? Religion? The nation? The race? Nothing is conserved. The natural environment is industrialized, pulverized and commoditized. [p.24]

    Green nationalism is the only true nationalism

    There is no Conservatism without nature, there is no nationalism without environmentalism, the natural environment of our lands shaped us just as we shaped it. We were born from our lands and our own culture was molded by these same lands .The protection and preservation of these lands is of the same importance as the protection and preservation of our own ideals and beliefs.

    For too long we have allowed the left to co-opt the environmentalist movement to serve their own needs. The left has controlled all discussion regarding environmental preservation whilst simultaneously presiding over the continued destruction of the natural environment itself through mass immigration and uncontrolled urbanization, whilst offering no true solution to either issue.

    There is no Green future with never ending population growth, the ideal green world cannot exist in a World of 100 billion 50 billion or even 10 billion people. Continued immigration into Europe is environmental warfare and ultimately destructive to nature itself.

    The Europe of the future is not one of concrete and steel,smog and wires but a place of forests, lakes, mountains and meadows. Not a place where english is the defacto language but a place where every European language, belief and tradition is valued. Each nation and each ethnicity was melded by their own environment and if they are to be protected so must their own environments.

    THERE IS NO TRADITIONALISM WITHOUT

    ENVIRONMENTALISM [p.38]

    • #15
  16. Valiuth Member
    Valiuth
    @Valiuth

    Frankly, from your description of his manifesto (and honestly I don’t think it a good idea for such ramblings to be made generally available to the public, since it serves as a kind of promotion and validation for these wakos) it sounds like much of the same Neo-Neonazi BS that the modern white supremacists now employ. All supported by a very shallow and self serving reading of history.

    • #16
  17. Hank Rhody, Meddling Cowpoke Contributor
    Hank Rhody, Meddling Cowpoke
    @HankRhody

    Rodin (View Comment):

    Randy Webster (View Comment):

    I don’t get the Candace Owens stuff. Is she the evil-doer the left is making her out to be?

    The specific reference is:

    Is there a particular person that radicalized you the most?

    Yes, the person that has influenced me above all was Candace Owens. Each time she spoke I was stunned by her insights and her own views helped push me further and further into the belief of violence over meekness. Though I will have to disavow some of her beliefs, the extreme actions she calls for are too much, even for my tastes. [p.17]

    I frankly have no clue what he is talking about. Yes, Candace is asking blacks to examine their relationship with Democrats and the claimed benefits they get from supporting Democrats, but I am unaware of anything she has said that promotes violence.

    My assumption is that he was just trolling. At least with the Candace Owens stuff. Although if anyone can point me to her writings on how the white race needs to increase it’s birth rate to keep up with the rest of the world I’m prepared to revise my opinion.

    • #17
  18. Hank Rhody, Meddling Cowpoke Contributor
    Hank Rhody, Meddling Cowpoke
    @HankRhody

    Rodin: And this brings us back to Kipling’s poem and NZS’ replacement of “English” with “Saxon.” NZS sees the modern English as a mongrelized and weak people. Like the Hitlerian ideal of the early 20th Century, NZS invokes the ancients — the people who possessed the lightly populated lands of northern Europe. If NZS were running for office his slogan might be “A Stag in Every Pot,” No doubt his favorite beverage would be mead.

    Again with the simplest explanation, I’m thinking he’s replacing one group with another in order to encompass more white folks. If you assume ‘white’ means English/Germanic/Northern European types then it’s hard to come up with a good two syllable word to describe them. When the White Man began to hate? Seems a bit off. Also for all the reasons it’s terrible.

    While I’m at it, his taste in poetry reinforces my opinion of the merit of the poem Invictus.

    • #18
  19. Randy Webster Inactive
    Randy Webster
    @RandyWebster

    Hank Rhody, Meddling Cowpoke (View Comment):
    At least with the Candace Owens stuff

    It’s not the only criticism of Candace I’ve read.

    • #19
  20. Rodin Member
    Rodin
    @Rodin

    Randy Webster (View Comment):

    Hank Rhody, Meddling Cowpoke (View Comment):
    At least with the Candace Owens stuff

    It’s not the only criticism of Candace I’ve read.

    @randywebster, could you elaborate?

    • #20
  21. Randy Webster Inactive
    Randy Webster
    @RandyWebster

    Rodin (View Comment):

    Randy Webster (View Comment):

    Hank Rhody, Meddling Cowpoke (View Comment):
    At least with the Candace Owens stuff

    It’s not the only criticism of Candace I’ve read.

    @randywebster, could you elaborate?

    Sorry, I didn’t pay that much attention.  But I thought her CPAC speech got some criticism.  I just think it’s weird, because she seems to be on our side.

    • #21
  22. Hank Rhody, Meddling Cowpoke Contributor
    Hank Rhody, Meddling Cowpoke
    @HankRhody

    Randy Webster (View Comment):
    Sorry, I didn’t pay that much attention. But I thought her CPAC speech got some criticism. I just think it’s weird, because she seems to be on our side.

    I don’t follow her either. But when the freak says “I find some of her ideas too extreme, even for me!” and then goes on a politically motivated shooting rampage, well, one has to wonder what views exactly he would balk at, and if someone prominent espoused such views then there ought to be a record of such things from the shock alone.

    • #22
  23. Rodin Member
    Rodin
    @Rodin

    Randy Webster (View Comment):

    Rodin (View Comment):

    Randy Webster (View Comment):

    Hank Rhody, Meddling Cowpoke (View Comment):
    At least with the Candace Owens stuff

    It’s not the only criticism of Candace I’ve read.

    @randywebster, could you elaborate?

    Sorry, I didn’t pay that much attention. But I thought her CPAC speech got some criticism. I just think it’s weird, because she seems to be on our side.

    I just reviewed the CPAC speech and a different thought struck me. NZS may well have been trolling Candace, but it also may be that he was “radicalized” in the sense that he saw Candace’s message as a threat. His view is not racial harmony based on individuality; it is racial separation organized under socialistic but racially homogenous societies. That is the opposite of what Candace is promoting and to the extent it is effective it will defeat his plan.

    • #23
  24. Arizona Patriot Member
    Arizona Patriot
    @ArizonaPatriot

    Rodin: And as a racial purist he sees the largest enemy as the United States of America — a society that gives the “illusion” that a plurality of races, ethnicities, religions, and politics can actually coexist and build a strong and happy nation.

    We don’t seem to be a strong and happy nation right now.

    I utterly reject the ideology of racial purity.  However, I am not optimistic about the prospects of a nation characterized by wide diversity of ideology (broadly defined to include philosophical, theological, political, and moral conceptions).

    I think that e pluribus unum got it right.  Right now we’re heading toward more and more pluribus, and not much unum.  I don’t see how you hold a country together without a common culture, and if you broaden the culture enough to accommodate all ideologies, I am concerned that it will end up a mile wide and an inch deep.

    • #24
  25. Arizona Patriot Member
    Arizona Patriot
    @ArizonaPatriot

    By the way, I think that the explanation of, and the remedy for, our current problems are contained in another Kipling poem, The Gods of the Copybook Headings.

    • #25
  26. Henry Castaigne Member
    Henry Castaigne
    @HenryCastaigne

    Rodin (View Comment):

    JosePluma (View Comment):

    RightAngles (View Comment):

    The MSM doesn’t want you to read the manifesto because in it, he says he doesn’t like Trump and that his personal politics align most closely with Communist China.

    Not to mention the environmentalism.

    Specific references include:

    Why focus on immigration and birth rates when climate change is such a huge issue?

    Because they are the same issue, the environment is being destroyed by over population, we Europeans are one of the groups that are not over populating the world. The invaders are the ones over populating the world. Kill the invaders, kill the overpopulation and by doing so save the environment. [p.22]

    Ask yourself, truly, what has modern conservatism managed to conserve? What does it seek to conserve? The natural environment? Western Culture? Ethnic autonomy? Religion? The nation? The race? Nothing is conserved. The natural environment is industrialized, pulverized and commoditized. [p.24]

    Green nationalism is the only true nationalism

    There is no Conservatism without nature, there is no nationalism without environmentalism, the natural environment of our lands shaped us just as we shaped it. We were born from our lands and our own culture was molded by these same lands .The protection and preservation of these lands is of the same importance as the protection and preservation of our own ideals and beliefs.

    For too long we have allowed the left to co-opt the environmentalist movement to serve their own needs. The left has controlled all discussion regarding environmental preservation whilst simultaneously presiding over the continued destruction of the natural environment itself through mass immigration and uncontrolled urbanization, whilst offering no true solution to either issue.

    There is no Green future with never ending population growth, the ideal green world cannot exist in a World of 100 billion 50 billion or even 10 billion people. Continued immigration into Europe is environmental warfare and ultimately destructive to nature itself.

    The Europe of the future is not one of concrete and steel,smog and wires but a place of forests, lakes, mountains and meadows. Not a place where english is the defacto language but a place where every European language, belief and tradition is valued. Each nation and each ethnicity was melded by their own environment and if they are to be protected so must their own environments.

    THERE IS NO TRADITIONALISM WITHOUT

    ENVIRONMENTALISM [p.38]

    Nazis have always loved environmentalism.

    • #26
  27. Rodin Member
    Rodin
    @Rodin

    Henry Castaigne (View Comment):
    Nazis have always loved environmentalism.

    @henrycastaigne, just so. I don’t think a lot of people are aware of many of the aspects of utopianism that the Nazis believed in. Their world view was a perfect agrarian society of perfect and healthy bodies with healthy minds untouched by what they saw as filth genetically or in any other way. And, the sun always shone. Hitler truly was a loon. But he was not alone.

    • #27
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.