THE GREATER AND LESSER LUNACIES
 
If Belloc were alive today, I feel he would jubilantly categorize the The Greater and Lesser Lunacies of the Age. Since he was a staunch Catholic we should not of course agree on what they are, but we do share the same sense of idiocy.
 
For what, 40, 50 years now the so-called Left has attacked reason, literacy, learning, freedom, intelligence where’er it finds them. 
 
Yay, I look forward to the phoney wringing of hands at the consequences.
 
All four Labour grandparents turning in their flaming graves.
 
The denizens of London medicine have had the best part of 20 years to smash my arguments with their giant intellects and display their vastly superior grasp of language, to display indeed the smallest of intellectual virtues, concern for fact, adherence to reason, the capacity to independently investigate and form and express their own views.  Wordless, mindless assault was their sole response.  They’re feral.
 
Privilege is having parents who read and wrote.  I could read when I was 3.  When I was 7 I was assessed as having a reading age of 14. How does a slum-child catch up?  On the whole he/she doesn’t.  Since we are not yet in the world of Fahrenheit 451 there isn’t a lot the fascist fake Left can do about that, apart, I suppose, from the opposite of what it has done: encourage the masses to read until their eyelids droop.  Anything, everything.  When I was about 8, my mum found me peacefully reading James Bond and she didn’t think that was entirely suitable.  It broadens the mind, you know, reading.  Labour in its infinite unwisdom decided academic achievement was the product of your parents’ bank balance.
 
By the way, not that I haven’t told you this before, I went to 11 schools.  Literary types, you know, bit more erratic in their life-plans than the straights.  The best secondary was The English School of The Hague.  The best primaries were Seaton County Primary and Walberton and Binsted CofE County Primary School. 
 
Of course one may not have any moral virtues, either.  They ain’t depraved, degraded, degenerate, despicable, slimy, sly, dishonest, bestial, criminal.  These are normal.  Probably means they’re normal in the holes those valiantly defending them crawled out of and the animal didn’t get where it is today without them so there can’t be anything wrong with them.  In those holes of course violence against women is normal.
 
In particular of course the primal worm of obedience gave a last convulsion and died in 1945 in the civilized world but these creatures do not inhabit the civilized world.   Thus the disgusting slave-slut is untroubled by questions of principle, of integrity, of whether its conduct accords with its conscience.  It does what it’s told and is therefore a good person.
 
Handpicked of course, the mutt-pack for their criminality, their willingness to do anything, and thus all the more precious to be protected, upheld. 
 
Yea, people must not feel bad about themselves.  Having a clear-eyed view of one’s talents and inabilities is not feeling bad about oneself.  We’re all equal, see, gotta be equally stupid, equally illiterate, equally ignorant, equally criminal, equally thuggish, equally cunt-for-brained; the one crime is to be better, cos that’s elitism, innit, that’s privilege, innit, that’s fascism, innit.
 
Can’t know things, Can’t reason, can’t use the language as opposed to be used by it, cos then you’re a threat to the garbage they drool, ain’t yer. 
 
Busy little minds: of course they have to learn basic reading and writing to learn their trades and function in the world, but we don’t want enquiring minds and we don’t want the capacity to find out things, examine their own ideas or ours and we certainly don’t want them to think that sort of thing is in any way superior.  I know: we’ll give them all degrees.
 
Get our sort into position of power.
 
Christ, there’s some fucking upper-class cunt at UCH with a stupid arty-farty degree, you know the type, oh aren’t we superior, aren’t we bleeding precious, claims there’s something wrong with her back.  Believe that, you’ll believe anything.  I had my way, get all the fucking cunts like that doing heavy manual work.  There’s a good bloke there, Rowley, definitely our sort.  He’ll wreck her.
 
“What is a law, Pericles?”  No, it is not something immutable supposedly dictated by ‘god’, it is something decided by humans which can be changed by humans.
 
That being the case, they could have ‘moved on’ more readily than the societies that followed.
 
And indeed did Roman villas in England had a form of central heating.  You know that.  Because they had largely open minds instead of being in a world in which everything was fixed.  If it was bloody cold in Londinium you solved it.
 
The ancient Greeks originally developed central heating. The temple of Ephesus was heated by flues planted in the ground and circulating the heat which was generated by fire. Some buildings in the Roman Empire used central heating systems, conducting air heated by furnaces through empty spaces under the floors and out of pipes in the walls—a system known as a hypocaust.[2][3]
The Roman hypocaust continued to be used on a smaller scale during late Antiquity and by the Umayyad caliphate, while later Muslim builders employed a simpler system of underfloor pipes.[4]
After the collapse of the Roman Empire, overwhelmingly across Europe, heating reverted to more primitive fireplaces for almost a thousand years.
In the early medieval Alpine upland, a simpler central heating system where heat travelled through underfloor channels from the furnace room replaced the Roman hypocaust at some places. In Reichenau Abbey a network of interconnected underfloor channels heated the 300 m² large assembly room of the monks during the winter months. The degree of efficiency of the system has been calculated at 90%.[5]
In the 13th century, the Cistercian monks revived central heating in Christian Europe using river diversions combined with indoor wood-fired furnaces. The well-preserved Royal Monastery of Our Lady of the Wheel (founded 1202) on the Ebro River in the Aragon region of Spain provides an excellent example of such an application.
 
Yup, they’ve got a book. It’s not just how many books there are now, it’s how many books there were then.
 
The history of Chinese literature extends thousands of years, from the earliest recorded dynastic court archives to the mature vernacular fiction novels that arose during the Ming Dynasty to entertain the masses of literate Chinese. The introduction of widespread woodblock printing during the Tang Dynasty (618–907) and the invention of movable type printing by Bi Sheng (990–1051) during the Song Dynasty (960–1279) rapidly spread written knowledge throughout China. In more modern times, the author Lu Xun (1881–1936) is considered the founder of baihua literature in China
 
Preclassical (800 BC-500 BC)[edit]
The Greeks created poetry before making use of writing for literary purposes. Poems created in the Preclassical period were meant to be sung or recited (writing was little known before the 7th century BC). Most poems focused on myths, legends that were part folktale and part religion. Tragedies and comedies emerged around 600 BC.[2]
At the beginning of Greek literature stand the works of Homer; the Iliad and the Odyssey. Though dates of composition vary, these works were fixed around 800 BC or after. Another significant figure was the poet Hesiod. His two surviving works are Works and Days and Theogony.
Classical (500 BC-323 BC)[edit]
During the classical period, many of the genres of western literature became more prominent. Lyrical poetry, odes, pastorals, elegies, epigrams; dramatic presentations of comedy and tragedy; histories, rhetorical treatises, philosophical dialectics, and philosophical treatises all arose in this period.[3]
The two major lyrical poets were Sappho and Pindar. Of the hundreds of tragedies written and performed during this time period, only a limited number of plays survived. These plays are authored by Aeschylus, Sophocles, and Euripides.[4]
The comedy arose from a ritual in honor of Dionysus. These plays were full of obscenity, abuse, and insult. The surviving plays by Aristophanes are a treasure trove of comic presentation.
Two influential historians of this age are Herodotus and Thucydides. A third historian, Xenophon, wrote "Hellenica," which is considered an extension of Thucydides's work.[5]
The greatest prose achievement of the 4th century BC was in philosophy. Greek philosophy flourished during the classical period. Of the philosophers, Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle are the most famous.
 
‘Old books’ don’t matter?  Maybe every Labour MP should be asked to speak on why the Koran and the OT are exceptions to this
 
Follow that up with 10,000 words on what the Abrahamic faiths ever did for anyone.  Sure the ancient world had slavery and other barbaric customs – and was open to the possibility of change.
The ‘Abrahamic world’ merely enshrined slavery and other barbaric customs as the will of almighty god.
 
Sure indeed the central heating was only for the rich.  Any change there from Londinium in 1800?
 
References to human sacrifice can be found in Greek historical accounts as well as mythology. The human sacrifice in mythology, the deus ex machina salvation in some versions of Iphigeneia (who was about to be sacrificed by her father Agamemnon) and her replacement with a deer by the goddess Artemis, may be a vestigial memory of the abandonment and discrediting of the practice of human sacrifice among the Greeks in favour of animal sacrifice.[citation needed]
In ancient Rome, human sacrifice was infrequent but documented. Roman authors often contrast their own behavior with that of people who would commit the heinous act of human sacrifice. These authors make it clear that such practices were from a much more uncivilized time in the past, far removed.[24] It is thought that many ritualistic celebrations and dedications to gods used to involve human sacrifice, but have now been replaced with symbolic offerings. Dionysius of Halicarnassus[25] says that the ritual of the Argei, in which straw figures were tossed into the Tiber river, may have been a substitute for an original offering of elderly men. Cicero claims that puppets thrown from the Pons Suplicius by the Vestal Virgins in a processional ceremony were substitutes for the past sacrifice of old men.[26] After the Roman defeat at Cannae, two Gauls and two Greeks in male-female couples were buried under the Forum Boarium, in a stone chamber used for the purpose at least once before.[27] In Livy's description of these sacrifices, he distances the practice from Roman tradition and asserts that the past human sacrifices evident in the same location were “wholly alien to the Roman spirit." [28] The rite was apparently repeated in 113 BCE, preparatory to an invasion of Gaul.[29] They buried both the Greeks and the two Gauls alive as a plea to the Gods to save Rome from destruction at the hands of Hannibal. When the Romans conquered the Celts in Gaul, they tortured the people by cutting off their hands and feet and leaving them to die. The Romans justified their actions by also accusing the Celts of practicing human sacrifice.[30]
According to Pliny the Elder, human sacrifice was banned by law during the consulship of Publius Licinius Crassus and Gnaeus Cornelius Lentulus in 97 BCE, although by this time it was so rare that the decree was largely symbolic.[31] The Romans also had traditions that centered around ritual murder, but which they did not consider to be sacrifice. Such practices included burying unchaste Vestal Virgins alive and drowning hermaphroditic children. These were seen as reactions to extraordinary circumstances as opposed to being part of Roman tradition. Vestal Virgins who were accused of being unchaste were put to death, and a special chamber was built to bury them alive. This aim was to please the gods and restore balance to Rome.[24] Human sacrifices, in the form of burying individuals alive, were not uncommon during times of panic in ancient Rome. However, the burial of unchaste Vestal Virgins was also practiced in times of peace. Their chasteness was thought to be a safeguard of the city, and even in punishment the state of their bodies was preserved in order to maintain the peace.[32]
 
Captured enemy leaders were only occasionally executed at the conclusion of a Roman triumph, and the Romans themselves did not consider these deaths a sacrificial offering.[citation needed] Gladiator combat was thought by the Romans to have originated as fights to the death among war captives at the funerals of Roman generals, and Christian polemicists such as Tertullian considered deaths in the arena to be little more than human sacrifice.[33] Over time, participants became criminals and slaves, and their death was considered a sacrifice to the Manes on behalf of the dead.[34]
Political rumors sometimes centered around sacrifice and in doing so, aimed to liken individuals to barbarians and show that the individual had become uncivilized. Human sacrifice also became a marker and defining characteristic of magic and bad religion.[35]

Burning people at the stake is not human sacrifice?  Not to mention bad religion.
Then of course there’s or was the Library at Alexandria.  Half a million bloody books?  Oughtn’t to be allowed.

Library of Alexandria, the most famous library of Classical antiquity. It formed part of the research institute at Alexandria in Egypt that is known as the Alexandrian Museum (Mouseion, “shrine of the Muses”).

Alexandria, Library ofIllustration of the ancient Library of Alexandria, Egypt.
Libraries and archives were known to many ancient civilizations in Egypt, Mesopotamia, Syria, Asia Minor, and Greece, but the earliest such institutions were of a local and regional nature, primarily concerned with the conservation of their own particular traditions and heritage. The idea of a universal library, like that of Alexandria, arose only after the Greek mind had begun to envisage and encompass a larger worldview. The Greeks were impressed by the achievements of their neighbours, and many Greek intellectuals sought to explore the resources of “Oriental” knowledge. There is literary evidence of Greek individuals visiting Egypt especially to acquire knowledge: e.g., Herodotus, Plato (particularly in Phaedrus and Timaeus), Theophrastus, and Eudoxus of Cnidus (as detailed by Diogenes Laërtius in the 3rd century ce).
Against that background of avid hunger for knowledge among the Greeks, Alexander launched his global enterprise in 334 bce, which he accomplished with meteoric speed until his untimely death in 323 bce. His aim throughout had not been restricted to conquering lands as far from Macedonia as India but had been to also explore them. He required his companions, generals, and scholars to report to him in detail on regions previously unmapped and uncharted. His campaigns resulted in a “considerable addition of empirical knowledge of geography,” as Eratosthenes remarked (as reported by Greek geographer Strabo). The reports that Alexander had acquired survived after his death, and they motivated an unprecedented movement of scientific research and study of the Earth, its natural physical qualities, and its inhabitants. The time was pregnant with a new spirit that engendered a renaissance of human culture. It was in that atmosphere that the great library and Mouseion saw the light of day in Alexandria.
The founding of the library and the Mouseion is unquestionably connected with the name of Demetrius of Phaleron, a member of the Peripatetic school and a former Athenian politician. After his fall from power in Athens, Demetrius sought refuge at the court of King Ptolemy I Soter (c. 297 bce) and became the king’s adviser. Ptolemy soon took advantage of Demetrius’s wide and versatile knowledge and, about 295 bce, charged him with the task of founding the library and the Mouseion.
The “Letter of Aristeas” of the 2nd century bce reveals that the institution was conceived as a universal library:
Demetrius…had at his disposal a large budget in order to collect, if possible, all the books in the world;…to the best of his ability, he carried out the king’s objective. (Letters 9–10.)
The same claim was reiterated more than once: Irenaeus spoke of Ptolemy’s desire to equip “his library with the writings of all men as far as they were worth serious attention.” Undoubtedly, however, the largest amount of material was written in Greek. In fact, judging from the scholarly work produced in Alexandria, it seems likely that the whole corpus of Greek literature was amassed in the library.
One of the major acquisitions for the library was the “books of Aristotle,” concerning which there are two conflicting accounts. According to Athenaeus, Philadelphus purchased that collection for a large sum of money, whereas Strabo reported that Aristotle’s books passed on in succession through different hands, until they were later confiscated in 86 bce by Sulla, who carried them away to Rome. The two accounts perhaps deal with two different things. Athenaeus may be referring to the collection of books that Aristotle had amassed at his school in Athens, which Philadelphus was able to purchase when his former tutor, Straton, was head of the Lyceum. Strabo’s account may be dealing with the personal writings that Aristotle had bequeathed to his successors as heads of the Lyceum, until they were confiscated by Sulla. In support of the latter understanding is Plutarch’s remark that “the Peripatetics no longer possess the original texts of Aristotle and Theophrastus, because they had fallen into idle and base hands.”
The hunt for books

Fabulous stories circulated about the lengths to which the Ptolemies would go in their avid hunt for books. One method to which they reportedly resorted was to search every ship that sailed into the harbour of Alexandria. If a book was found, it was taken to the library for a decision as to whether to return it or to confiscate it and replace it with a copy made on the spot (with an adequate compensation to the owner). Books acquired in that manner were designated “from the ships.”
Another story (reported by Galen in the writings on Hippocrates) reveals how Ptolemy III managed to obtain the original texts of the great dramatic poets Aeschylus, Sophocles, and Euripides. The precious texts were safeguarded in the Athenian state archives and were not allowed to be lent out. The king, however, persuaded the governors of Athens to permit him to borrow them in order to have them copied. The enormous sum of 15 talents of silver was deposited in Athens as a pledge for their safe restitution. The king thereupon kept the originals and sent back copies, willingly forfeiting the pledge.
Those irregular methods of collection were supplemented by the purchase of books from different places, especially from Athens and Rhodes, which sustained the largest book markets of the time. Occasionally, the library’s collectors bought different versions of the same work—for example, in the Homeric texts that came “from Chios,” “from Sinope,” and “from Massilia.”
Of languages other than Greek, Egyptian had the largest section. Ptolemy I is said to have encouraged Egyptian priests to accumulate records of their past tradition and heritage and to render them available for use by Greek scholars and men of letters whom he had invited to live in Egypt. Best-known examples from each group were the Egyptian priest Manetho, who had good command of Greek, and the Greek author Hecataeus of Abdera.
Other languages

Beside the bulk of Greek literature and a full corpus of Egyptian records, there is evidence that the library incorporated the written works of other nations. Early in the 3rd century bce, a Chaldean priest named Berosus wrote (in Greek) a history of Babylonia. His book quickly became known in Egypt and was probably used by Manetho. According to Pliny the Elder, Hermippus in Alexandria wrote a voluminous book on Zoroastrianism. Buddhist writings would also become available, as a consequence of the exchange of embassies between Ashoka and Philadelphus. The translation of the Pentateuch from Hebrew into Greek was a practical necessity for the large Jewish community in Alexandria, already Hellenized by the end of the 3rd century bce. The translation of the Septuagint was executed piecemeal during the 3rd and 2nd centuries bce, rendered possible in Alexandria because of the abundance of research material available at the library. The Septuagint has survived as the most valuable work in the history of translation and continues to be indispensable to all biblical studies.
Growth of the library

The association of the library with the Mouseion, whose scholars required a reliable resource, helped the library to develop into a proper research centre. Its location close to the harbour and within the royal palace’s grounds placed it under the direct supervision of the kings. Those circumstances aided the rapid growth of the library’s collection. Within half a century of its foundation circa 295 bce, the collections of the Royal Library had exceeded the space allotted to contain the accumulated books. It was found necessary to establish an offshoot that could house the surplus volumes. To that end, Ptolemy III (246–221 bce) incorporated the branch library into the newly built Serapeum, which was situated at a distance from the royal quarter in the Egyptian district south of the city.
Estimates of the total number of books in the library vary. The earliest surviving figure, from the 3rd century bce, is reported as “more than 200,000 books,” whereas the medieval text of John Tzetzes mentions “42,000 books in the outer library; in the inner (Royal) Library 400,000 mixed books, plus 90,000 unmixed books.” A still higher estimate of 700,000 was reported between the 2nd and 4th centuries ce.

But yes, of course, they’ve got THE books, the only ones that matter.  The way these peeps go on, you’d think the literate, civilized world began with their damn’ books.  It didn’t