We live in the darkest of ages and the subject of animal welfare should be paramount in our work. The treatment of animals in this era is nothing less than atrocious and since mankind has a duty and responsibility to consider life as sacred we urgently need to address the problem of cruelty to animals. I am going to list what I consider to be the main problems and give answers as best that I can. There can be no instant solution to this problem since we do live in the darkest of ages, and mankind has lost all touch with the natural world and with fellow creatures. A new heathen religion for the English would certainly solve this problem in this country.
Battery Hens -
This may seem to be a much less important form of animal cruelty but nevertheless it is cruel because the hens are put in a very small cage together and they are so stressed that often the feathers are torn out which must cause pain and suffering. Here again we need to tread with caution for 'free range' eggs from supermarkets and other outlets need not necessarily be what they are since there is nothing to say that they cannot be held in larger cages and marked 'free range'.
The answer to this is to buy from a small local greengrocer who can verify that they are bought from a local supplier and who can verify that they are not caged hens. There are many local egg-suppliers whose premises can be seen and checked, and although caged hens eggs are cheaper (and thus bought by most people) hens that are housed in a large hen-house and allowed to roam around this lay better eggs in far better conditions. The one way to ensure that the eggs are free range is to keep hens yourself. Not everyone will wish to do this but if most people switch from battery eggs to free range eggs (bought locally and not from supermarkets) the supermarkets would be forced to stop this barbaric practice. It is unfortunate that people do have a choice but so far they have not taken the right one. If we all start to move towards non-supermarket produce (which we can do even if not totally) then we can make a difference.
Cruelty to pets -
This is perhaps the most complex subject to tackle and one that has little chance of changing under the liberal humanitarian regime that we are living under today. I think we need to understand the problem from a different angle to see why some people do treat their pets cruelly. Firstly, animals have been domesticated for thousands of years, but there is one vital difference between the ancient world and their use of animals and today's world which has one fundamental difference - in the ancient world, and up until very recent times they were 'working-animals' whereas today we see mainly 'pets'. The word 'pet' gives the clue - 'any animal that is domesticated and fondled'. The word was then developed into children being 'treated like pets' and this today is the crux of the whole problem - there are far too many people who have animals as a substitute for children, rather than their true role as working animals.
We need only look at the world of dogs to see what has gone wrong today, for most breeds of dogs were originally to be used as working dogs - a sheep-dog used on the sheep-farm, the German Shepherd was originally a sheep-dog but developed into a guard-dog since it has the right characteristics for this role. A husky was bred to pull a sledge on the snow, and was ideal for this purpose. Many dogs were bred especially to hunt and to aid man to get food from the wild (I shall leave out fox-hunting until later and comment upon this). What happens when such dogs are bred for 'pets'? The answer is that when these dogs cease being used as working dogs many breeds must lose their inbred characteristics, and we can see what is happening today when such breeds are bred for 'pets'.
Since many breeders are no longer concerned with breeding the right characteristics to obtain a specific working dog their only concern is to breed for profit and gain. This lets into play the unscrupulous element that always arises in an era like ours and many breeds of dog become unsound due to being bred for gain and profit, and the bad characteristics will then pass on to the next generation. Basically, the same happens to dogs as it has to mankind - the species degenerates and becomes worse and worse until it will finally disappear altogether.
Then there are the dogs bought as 'Christmas presents' for kids, despite all of the warnings that a 'Dog is for life - not just for Christmas'. At first the animal may be treated alright, until the novelty wears off and it is no longer wanted, even a hindrance to the family. Then it is abandoned to some form of 'shelter' where these animals are taken, and needs to be found a new home. This is all because a dog is bought as a 'toy' for the kids, to amuse and to keep the child occupied. This cannot be the right way to see any animal.
One thing that is not considered and that is the role of vets in fuelling the cruelty to animals; this may seem a strange statement but from my own experience some vets make a good deal of money from their work and can contribute to the problem even though they are not aware of this. Like doctors, vets are today little more that legalised drug-dealers, dealing out expensive drugs to their clients and making huge profits for the drug companies - rather than merely making a living. An example - some years ago I had a German Shepherd dog which was prone to the stupid habit of snapping at wasps that got near it. One day he must have done this, though I did not see him do it. The whole of his face swelled up and his eyes were almost closed, so the same evening I took him to the local vet. The vet assumed (as I did) that he had been stung by a wasp or something like that and gave him an injection - the bill was £30.00. He said to bring the dog back the next day to let him see if this had any effect. The next morning the dog's face was normal but I took him to the vet just to check. The result was yet another injection 'to make sure' - the cost £30.00. This resulted in a bill for £60.00 for a wasp sting.
This was not the end of the matter because the silly dog must have done the same again (like us they never learn) and his face swelled up just as before. But this time I learned by the first mistake and did nothing at all the first day; by the next morning the dog's face had gone back to normal, and the cost - nothing! Now, I do not wish to attack all vets because there are no doubt many that truly care for animals and wish to do all they can, but I do see this example (from a chain of vets in the area) as profiteering somewhat. Unfortunately some people cannot afford the fees to use a vet (which can be astronomical in the case of operations and 'pet funerals') and they allow their pets to suffer needlessly because they have no money to pay. Yes, there is pet insurance, but again this is yet another form of making money out of people - and in this case money out of nothing!
Another problem that is today compounding those already described is the growing trend for couples to have pets as a child-substitute. We can see this escalating when we notice the shift towards the US mentality over the 'petting' of dogs which is today yet another growing trade here in England (we always follow like sheep). All sorts of crazy things are now being done to 'pets' and mainly because the people have them as a substitute for having children. Even the most basic animal (or plant) knows that it has to reproduce itself if the species is to continue - so why then do we have so many human idiots in this nation! This process would - like many things - not be an accident but done by design in the great fever to destroy our Folk forever.
There is only one answer to the problem of not being able to afford to look after an animal or to pay the vet's fees and that is for people never to have pets that they cannot afford - that was my answer in the end I am afraid, though I have always loved dogs. The answer to the problem of breeding is that a drastic change in society is needed where dogs are no longer mere 'pets' but are bred for use as they were in the first place, and then bred for their characteristics rather than for profit and gain. If a dog is bred for a specific purpose there can be no valid reason why it should ever be mistreated, for to do so would be to make it useless as a working dog anyway. Of course, a change in mankind would be needed too, creating a much more responsible breed of humans that are in touch with Nature and the Natural Order.
A same and just society would make the worst animal cruelty cases punishable by death which would eliminate the worse type of human beings. Here lies the problem because this liberal humanitarian society cannot possibly make such laws.
Animal Experiments -
I see no reason whatever to allow any form of animal experiment that can cause stress and suffering to any animal, no matter how people see this as advancing the cause of curing illness in humans, or testing cosmetics (or anything else for that matter) on. Unfortunately the main opponents of animal experiments are the 'anarchists', many of whom are doing this for the wrong reasons - to break down all forms of authority and the hated 'state'. In doing so, with their violent tactics, they have alienated a good deal of the public who would probably have listened better to reasoned argument and healthy debate.
Every one of us can do some small bit to stop this, since many of these animal experiments are used for cosmetics. Steer totally clear of anything that has been developed using animal experiments. Do not buy anything that has been developed using animal experiments. In regard to the use of animals to test drugs on, or as guinea-pigs for experiments on human illness this would need a new form of leadership where this was banned - and again punishable by death should such a ban be ignored. A new heathen religious outlook would also help this process since the Judaeo-Christian religion is based upon the false assumption that everything on this planet was put there by 'God' for the use of man - this is made clear in Genesis for anyone to read.
Fox Hunting -
Here my views are perhaps going to be more controversial, since I have never come out in favour of a ban on fox-hunting. I have to state that I am not happy with the idea of the hunting of animals for sport and feel that hunting for food and clothing is a far different thing. The reason why I have not come out in favour of a ban on fox hunting is because of the 'side-effects' that were bound to happen were this imposed - as it was by a Labour Government, and probably partly for the reason that they saw this as an 'upper-class sport' even though that is nonsense since many people of varying persuasions were involved in this area. (As I will show later there was likely a far more sinister aim behind this ban.)
The most obvious side-effect of such a ban has been proven right, for foxes are now becoming a pest in some areas of the urban areas since they now see man not as a predator but as something harmless to them. The effect of this will only be seen in full should these wild animals (that is what they are and not 'tame' as some people see them now) contract rabies and pass this around to other animals and humans. People who keep chickens will have seen how 'harmless' these animals can be, for they will kill chickens just for the 'sport' of it. There is also the fact that foxes will lose their predators - man - and will thus no longer be subject to being hunted which ensured that only their fittest survived. The result could be their degeneration and final demise due to the weakening of their genes - this we would not see in our time so we cannot really foresee the true results of the ban. We have seen this result in our own Folk where our gene-pool today is at an all-time low, and the degeneration is clear for any intelligent person to see.
There is also the question of what happens to the hounds who were bred specifically to hunt the fox, for they cannot be suddenly changed into 'pets' since this was never bred into them. I doubt if those who imposed such a ban without more careful thought would have ever considered the welfare of the hounds. Myself I feel that this was really the problem, the people who took up this crusade did so without seeing any of the future consequences, nor did they allow time for this to be fully looked into and find a solution that may have proven better for all of those concerned.
There is one more point that I would like to say about the issue of fox-hunting and the ban imposed by the Labour Government of the time. The heartland of the Labour party is, and always has been, the cities, and this is where their supports comes from. The ban on fox-hunting had a very much deeper meaning - it was an attack on Rural England, the heartland of the true English! This did not go unheeded since half a million rural Englishmen (including myself and other WF Activists) took part in the Countryside March which was described by one newspaper as a 'sea of Anglo-Saxon faces'. But it was far more than that too, for throughout the march were effigies of Tony Blair and his regime - this was reminiscent of the age-old 'Raising of the Stang', for this was a 'Peasant's Revolt' of the Rural English Folk. (*)
Half a million English Folk took to the streets in a new form of Peasant's Revolt, people from all walks of country life too. Opposed to this massive show of strength was a small contingent of RSPCA and a handful of bongo-beating lefties. Unfortunately this massive march was not followed up by anything as strong and healthy; whether this was due to the 'Countryside Alliance' I do not know, but this seemed more of an 'Old Boy's Club' than a new revolutionary movement for the regeneration of Rural England. This march was far more than a support for fox-hunting, it was a cry from Rural England for help in the face of an onslaught that sought its total destruction. There were minor militant actions by some farmers and countrymen but this was not given the full support of the leading organisations, and had little effect.
(*) As heathens we must also consider that the hunt is a mimic of the Wild Hunt, for even the colours (red-white-black) are those of Eternal Germania and the Wild Hunter-God, as well as the cry 'Tally Ho' which stems from an invocation of the Wild Hunt. The hunting-horn is symbolic of the Horn of Awakening. What was once a chase after animals that could fight back - such as the boar or stag - became one whose target was the fox, which could not. There is also the old 'Prophecy of the Fox' that described the destruction of English values and the land trod by the footsteps of an invader - but it also describes the reversal of this and the final victory of the English. Perhaps this ban will have an end result that was never dreamed of by those who backed it! Indeed, maybe the Wild Hunt will now turn upon those people that set out to destroy the English Folk! Indeed, only when the hunt rides again will the English Awakening come.
Halal and Kosher Meat -
Although I do criticise the RSPCA for their support in the ban on fox-hunting, not because I back these blood-sports as such but because I feel that this ban had a more sinister side to it as I have shown, I can only commend them on their drive to ban the slaughter of animals for Kosher and Halal meat which is done by cutting the throat while the animal is conscious. The killing of animals without stunning them is absolutely barbaric, and this is done within the Jewish and Islamic communities. Here the animal has its throat cut and is bled to death, videos of which show the animals being hung upside down with their heads nearly cut off altogether, writhing in pain. Our own ancestors - the Anglo-Saxons - without the use of modern equipment, stunned the animal and rendered it unconscious before the throat was cut. There can be no excuse for the barbaric practice of not stunning the animal, and especially one hidden by the name of 'religion'. Under English Law our people are not allowed to do this so we may ask the question as to why outsiders can do so. As with many other things in this rotten society there is one law for us and another law for them.
The answer to this would seem to be that we do not buy any form of meat that is either Halal or Kosher; this is not quite as simple as it seems because Halal meat has been introduced into some of the supermarket meat already, and there is no doubt that it has been put in processed foodstuffs where it is harder to find. We could switch to buying locally produced meat, but again that is not quite as simple as it seems. There are many 'farm shops' who buy in from outside, even though they may state otherwise. Unfortunately it is not just the supermarkets and big business that deceive the public and there are just as many small businesses that seek to make a quick profit. Thorough checking can be the only answer until we are in a position to change the situation nationally. Again, a return to a Heathen England would stop this altogether since we would revert to our own ways of killing animals for eating, and there are far better ways today perhaps than there were a thousand years ago.
The transport of live animals -
We live in an era where Globalism (and all its inherent evils) has embraced the whole of the Earth and with it comes the problem of global trade and thus global transport. The idea of regional and local trade has not only given way to national trade but global trade, and that means the traffic of live animals abroad. Some countries do not allow this, and we should take notice of their steps to halt this because the shipping of live animals abroad has to make them stressed, and the conditions must be cruel to them.
The answer must be a total ban on the shipment of live animals abroad, and this can only be done by replacing the insane global society with a national society, and even then there is a need for further steps.
Even when a national government is put into place here in England the shipment of live animals across the country would need to be looked at carefully. When there were small localised slaughterhouses no doubt this shipment was minimal, and over short distances, but with the growing trend towards larger slaughterhouses this has to mean the shipping of live animals further and further.
These large slaughterhouses are yet another part of the trend towards globalism and centralisation, and the rules set by the EU have done more harm than good in this sphere. What we need is not only a return to a national government but also the revival of regionalism which would shift the emphasis back upon local trade as far as possible. Each area would become self-sufficient on whatever it produced, which would certainly mean the reduction of long-distance transport which would take place only where necessary. An end to the profit and gain type of society would need to take place.