The Burning of Notre Dame de Paris: is it symbolic?

Notre Dame, which as I write is still ablaze, is of course at the very heart of Paris and, metaphorically, France too. One could point to other buildings in that latter regard, perhaps the Sainte-Chapelle, the Sacre-Coeur, the Cathedral at Rheims, or even that of Chartres, but Notre-Dame symbolizes Paris, or did, until the secular landmark of the Eiffel Tower was constructed.

Like millions of visitors to Paris, I have been inside Notre-Dame a couple of times (as I have the Sainte-Chapelle, and the Sacre-Coeur with its unique atmosphere and where a Mass is continuously performed, 24 hours a day).

Sometimes, the burning of, e.g., a great building, is considered a symbolic event, marking a great change. One thinks of the Burning of Rome, the later Sack of Rome, the destruction of the great ancient Library of Alexandria, the Great Fire of London etc. In more modern times there was the deliberate burning of both the First Goetheanum in Switzerland (see Notes, below) and the Reichstag in Berlin.

Other catastrophic events can be —or be seen as— historically, politically or socially significant. When the Herald of Free Enterprise sank, in 1987, the very name made me wonder whether the era of “Thatcherism” was drawing to a close. It was. On a smaller scale, there was even speculation, at the time of the Marchioness disaster of 1989, as to the sociological meaning of it, if any (because so many well-heeled families in London, it was said, knew or were acquainted with one or more of the 51 people drowned and/or others on board).

Are these events causally connected in some way with the movement of history, or is it that human beings, having perhaps a premonition of coming events, attach meaning to large fires and other disasters? Was the fire at Windsor Castle in 1992 somehow connected with the events that hit the British Royal Family in 1992 and in the years after the Queen’s annus horribilis? It was certainly the case that, after hundreds were crushed to death at Khodinka Field while celebrating the crowning of Nikolai II in 1896, the “simple people” thought it a bad omen. Were they wrong?

France is facing an existential crisis still not fully accepted as such by most. The influx of Algerians, Tunisians and black Africans since the 1960s became a flood, a disastrous flood, many years ago.

France and particularly Paris is now under siege from those of non-European descent, some of which may have been born and (semi) educated in France, but who are, except in language (and sometimes even in that way) alien.

An extremely high proportion of the population of France (at least 30%) is now non-European, and that situation is worsening. At the same time, there is a pushback by the (real) French via the Gilets Jaunes movement and via support for Marine le Pen.

“President” Macron, a complete puppet of the Jewish lobby and New World Order, has instituted a “Zionist Occupation Government” in France via his pop-up “party” (facade), En Marche, which consists of random people from nowhere who were recruited almost overnight, thanks to funding from secretive sources.

Macron’s expressed policies are to ruin the French way of life and French society, and to put in its place a globalized bastard-American culture. His secret policies (the policies of those behind Macron) are no doubt worse yet. He has allowed yet more hordes of non-Europeans to flood into France. Paris itself has become a poubelle (dustbin) compared to what it was only a few decades ago.

I hope that some of Notre Dame can be saved. I wonder whether France can be, and what it might take to do it.


Update, 17 April 2019

Jews “have nothing to mourn“, says at least one Jew…

France is in state of shock, the Christian world is outraged while muslims are rejoicing on social media. Jews have northing [sic] to mourn.”

Addendum, 18 April 2019

Blood will stream over Europe until the nations become aware of the frightful madness which drives them in circles. And then, struck by celestial music and made gentle, they approach their former altars all together, hear about the works of peace, and hold a great celebration of peace with fervent tears before the smoking altars” [Novalis]

40 thoughts on “The Burning of Notre Dame de Paris: is it symbolic?”

    1. Thank you. As to your question, I think that Sarkozy is a Jew (half-Jew, I believe) and typically corrupt System politician in the “French” manner. Would not have been out of place in the 1930s and the Stavisky scandal. Macron is something else. Remarkable as an individual and, as public figure, poisonous. I blogged about him a while ago.

      Macron is the completely compromized candidate who posed as a breath of fresh air.

      Sarkozy wanted to destroy the French way of life post-1945. Macron is doing it. Meanwhile, the barbarians are not only at the gates but breeding like rabbits within the gates.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. Yes, he did that. David Cameron-Levita, then UK PM, joined him in that enterprise. Oil may have been a factor, but both “leaders” were part-Jew, both were very pro-Israel, and both wanted Gaddafi gone. Both posed as “war leaders” for a short time, but their efforts only created chaos in Libya, not to mention an unprecedented flood of sub-Saharan migration-invaders across the Med to Europe. That continues.

        Liked by 1 person

  1. In regards to “Gaddafi” or “Saddam Hussein” – it amazes me to think how demonized they were. Although far from perfect, they did have some interesting – almost “social nationalist” policies and to pretend that anything like “liberal democracy” could ever work in places such: as the Middle East or North Africa – particularly with the influence of militant Islam, not to mention historical clan conflicts is nothing short of folly!

    Liked by 1 person

      1. Precisely and it is because Hussein was perceived to be a threat to Israel that the supremely evil Blair effectively murdered some of our nation’s best people ie our servicemen and women on a lie. Where was eternally drunk Tory ego trip boy Farage whilst this was happening? NOWHERE! I don’t recall him saying a single word against that disgraceful invasion of Iraq! He was too frightened of attracting the attentions of the powerful Zionist Lobby in Britain. So much for this phoney man’s alleged British patriotism! Even a couple of the more IQ endowed and decent Tory MPs were against the invasion such as Richard Bacon MP.

        I really wish Farage would eff off and count his ill-gotten gains from sitting in an EU parliament he supposedly hates yet is also very desperate to be an MEP in! All Farage is good for is splitting the vote in favour of EU remainers. In fact such is this Tory gobshite’s skill at this that it is entirely possible that the EU elections could be a triumph for remainers if they can get a higher turnout, engage in intelligent tactical voting etc and as these people are lefties in the main they have experience of tactical voting and are good at organising it. If only cirrhosis of the liver would get him then we wouldn’t have to put up with the fact he only manages to solidify naive members of the public behind parties that can only help the British political Establishment rather than political vehicles which will genuinely challenge them such as those in France and Germany.

        Farage is a wrong ‘un, always has been, always will be. MI5/MI6 must be delighted with him.

        Liked by 1 person

      2. One of the UKIP MEPs, an eccentric Scottish one whose name escapes me right now, used to exchange tweets with me, mostly about music (he favoured the strictly classical composers such as Mozart, Beethoven etc, whereas my favourites are late-19thC, 20thC and 21stC ones, such as Wagner, Bruckner, Rachmaninov, Vaughan Williams, Shostakovitch, Bax, Khatchaturian, Ivanovs, Rautavaara etc). I correctly predicted that person’s election as MEP in Scotland. A Jew complained to Farage about a UKIP MEP tweeting to a “Nazi” or “neo-Nazi” and Farage must have told the MEP not to tweet to me (though, to his credit, he continued to follow my account). Farage is part of the System, a minor part, though anti-EU genuinely (imo…), and wanted UKIP to be a System party. The System, globally, and in terms of NWO/ZOG, transcends the EU matrix.


      3. To be honest i don’t know much about “Idi Amin” – a bit before my time, although i wonder if the “lurid” stories about “cannabilism” were in response to his anti-Israeli policies or the expulsion of Ugandan Asians?


      4. I recall those days well. I was 19/20 in 1976. Uganda invited Israelis to help develop infrastructure etc. The Jews ripped off the Africans. Quelle surprise. See, eg, “By Way of Deception” by one-time MOSSAD “katsa”, “Ostrovsky”[1989].

        Then there was the Entebbe hijack and the (speaking in technical terms) very impressive Israeli operation to free the hostages.

        As to cannibalism, Amin may have indulged, ritualistically. Other African tyrants have (Equatorial Guinea, Central African Republic etc: see

        Re Amin:

        Amin had syphilis, like many Africans. I suppose that, today, he would probably have contracted AIDS. He was all but mad at the end, but was given asylum under strict conditions by the Saudis. Assange is lucky not to have had asylum there!

        The British governments of the 1970s were softer in protecting their citizens: Callaghan went to Amin and all but kow-towed (in fact I think that he actually did) in order to have released a Brit who was in fact an adventurer and anti-white nuisance (though possibly a source for SIS):


  2. I believe I am correct in stating that Lord Tebbit once said Nigel Farage’s role in British politics was not to get Britain out of the EU but to PREVENT OTHERS from doing so ie he was there to harmlessly channel the British people’s increasingly anti EU feelings into a useless political cul de sac which was then UKIP and is now his personal vanity trip of the ever so imaginatively titled Brexit Party. Needless to say, this ‘party’ has no policies on anything apart from Brexit, wont stand in elections for the House of Commons ie the ONLY place in the UK where a genuine EU withdrawal policy can be enacted from and certainly can’t be compared to GENUINE broadly-based parties like LE Pen’s National Rally in France or Germany’s AFD.


    1. I tend to agree, though I think that Farage is genuinely anti-EU, at least the EU as it now is. That, if so, does not mean that your analysis is wrong. Higher or deeper-indoctrinated persons and forces may have manipulated Farage and so UKIP (UKIP without Farage is almost a nullity, most of its other leading members being pretty idiotic; my view is that Batten is the best of a very poor bunch indeed).

      UKIP did not destroy the BNP, but it was part, an unwitting part, so be it, of a campaign by the System to do so. Not that I have ever held a brief, in any sense, for the BNP, but am just being objective. The one truly social-national party of any importance in 40 years (since the mid-1970s) was undermined and demeaned by a clever ZOG campaign which culminated in 2010.


      1. Interesting point about the BNP -the leaking of the membership list didn’t help either. In-fact some people accuse wikilieaks and Assange of involvement in that!


      2. Yes. Nick Griffin recently tweeted about how Assange/Wikileaks revealed to the public the BNP membership list. Many had unpleasant experiences as a result: bricks through windows, telephone harassment etc. I wonder whether Wikileaks did not have State help in that. It was a direct assault on the thousands of “ordinary people” who were BNP members. Many probably left because of it.

        Wikileaks did to some extent wake up people to Zionist manipulations etc, but (sad to say) most people are either too stupid or too lazy or too uncaring to bother much about Israeli moves on the world stage, or even interference in UK politics. If Hitler was in the end disillusioned about the German people, what can we say about the present-day British?


  3. I think the MEP you were referring to is David Coburn. Batten isn’t the most capable politician in the world and, of course, he isn’t much in the way of a political thinker as if he was he wouldn’t be involved with UKIP but as you say he is the best they have got. To my mind, he comes across as pretty normal unlike Farage who is just an arrogant, and supremely egotistical spoilt brat. I am longing for the day when an MEP from another country in Strasbourg takes this arrogant tosser down after hearing one of his long winded rants at them. Farage gives a very poor impression of our country in the EU parliament for someone who continually bleats about his alleged British patriotism. Since WHEN exactly has it been TRUELY BRITISH behaviour to insult or mock other countries least of all those ones located in Europe? By doing this deplorable behaviour he insults and demeans our country. He is no better than a common football hooligan. It’s time the snake oil salesman came to an end not least for the fact the lazy git doesn’t even do much to represent his constituents in the South East of England. It is sad this repulsive character isn’t booted out by them.


    1. You are right. Coburn was his name (not an MEP now, I believe).

      Yes, Farage is typical of what the City of London was back in the “loadsamoney” days of the 1980s, when it was first “globalized” (in today’s sense) via the “Big Bang”. That ruined the City and later, by boosting globalism and via the legislation then passed, also legal London, allowing in American (mainly) law firms, destroying the basis of the independent Bar etc. Farage is/was not exactly a “barrow boy” City type, but he is hardly the more traditional type either. A hybrid, as in his politics.

      Farage stood out by reason of his fairly good oratorical skills and his general sense of personal style etc, whereas most UKIP MEPs were/are provincial ex-councillors. The msm loves a politician who is superficially not boring. Even complete fakes, liars, incompetents and freeloaders are given plenty of rope by the msm if they are “different”: look at Boris Johnson, poseur and charlatan par excellence.


  4. Farage is a person that represents the worst character faults that our public schools sometimes produce and those that many socialists give as their reasons to abolish private schools in this country. Frankly, Farage has nothing to boast about as Dulwich College is quite lowly in the rankings of English public schools, has produced relatively few illustrious alumni and is nowhere near as prestigious as the likes of Eton, Harrow, Charterhouse, Westminster or a Winchester.

    It is a great shame that when the Labour Party chose the electoral system for the EU parliament they adopted the worst form of party list PR ie what is called ‘closed list’ PR instead of ‘open list’ PR. Closed List PR means people can only vote for parties and therefore have to accept the order of the candidates on a particular parties list so they can’t give an individual party candidate their specific vote. If we had open list PR then the voters in the South East could get rid of this rude man whilst still giving their votes to his so-called ‘party’.


  5. Ian, Hitler would have been well-disillusioned with the British and not just at the end of a brutal and bloody war in which the country had been very heavily bombed as Germany was BUT AT THE START of his dictatorship. As a Brit, I find it utterly shameful how politically naive so many of my fellow countrymen and women are and this is demonstrated when they follow around people like Farage just because he has a small measure of charisma and is pushed by the Zionist globalist media we are afflicted with. Truely, some Britons are so damm THICK politically speaking if Tory/Farage supporting rags like the Daily Express told them to go and jump off Beachy Head they would go and do it. I wish I didn’t have to share either this land or the ballot box with these GORMLESS LEMMINGS.

    If only we had an electorate aware of different political philosophies like the French and Germans to take just two electorates in our part of the world.


    1. Yes. All true. One example: I heard, recently, an elderly lady complaining that her late husband had written a few years ago to his (Conservative) MP re. government policy on a health matter that affected him directly and seriously. The MP, a useless creature in a sickeningly safe Con seat, did not even bother to reply. Not even a brief pro forma reply. Despite that, and despite having been disgusted by the MP’s lack of diligence and absence of compassion, that lady has actually gone out in 2015 and 2017 AND VOTED, NOT ONLY “CONSERVATIVE”, BUT FOR THAT SAME USELESS SLOTHFUL DRONE! “Against stupidity, even the Gods struggle in vain”!


  6. The Germans and French both have their good points and their bad points as all people’s do but, by god, at least they can say they have electorates with at least a small modicum of understanding of politics and this can go a long way for a country. Britain, sadly, doesn’t and this goes at least part of the way towards understanding why we alone in Europe, apart from the a Republic of Ireland, don’t have a viable nationalist party.


    1. …and why the British tolerate the “Royal Family”, despite their obviously part-Jew origins (Princess Margaret would have fitted in perfectly in Israel from the point of view of physiognomy), their mostly ghastly attitude and manners, their lack of culture, education and intellect, their failed marriages, their Commoner (and, indeed, “common”) wives, and now (creme de la creme), the Royal Mulatta…


      1. Wasn’t Princess Margaret said to have some ‘anti-Semitic’ attitudes on the quiet? The late Queen Mother is also alleged to have been, “not keen on Jews”. To my mind, her in particular, the Queen and Prince Phillip were/are the last real Royals.

        Like most Brits, I was a small R Royalist but now I can say I am pretty indifferent towards them in the sense that I don’t lie awake at night actively hating them but just don’t care much for them.

        If Jeremy Corbyn ever become PM and this doesn’t look now to be a wholly absurd scenario and announced a referendum on the Monarchy’s continuation I think I would just not bother to vote.

        The younger Royals like the privileges of being Royal but don’t like the responsibilities as Prince Harry graphically illustrates. Just what is that man thinking? Some courtier needs to tell him quietly that he isn’t just a rich person in London/Windsor who can do as he wants but a member of a state institution that has deep historical and symbolic roots in this country. Yes, he is a man who is now getting on a bit in dating terms, is desperate to get his leg over a piece of female meat and is ginger haired which many women don’t like even on rich men but going with that women from the USA is beyond belief. It isn’t so much she is a half-caste as at least Harry could have chosen a non white from a country with historical and constitutional links to Britain ie a Maori girl from New Zealand but no he goes and chooses a completely classless ex porn actress from Yankland who will never manage to act like a proper Royal. Talk about rubbing it in our faces! Frankly, Wallis Simpson had class compared to this example of Yank trailer park trash!

        He, whether he likes it or not, is PUBLIC PROPERTY and I find his choice ( if indeed this wasn’t an arranged marriage) frankly a GROTESQUE INSULT to the British people and something which in the fullness of time could lead to their abolition and Britain becoming a Republic.

        The Courtiers are reported to find her behaviour increasingly exasperating so who knows what fate may befall Duchess Difficult! I would avoid dodgy Mercedes Benz cars if I was her!

        At least Japan’s Monarchy still has a bit of class and dignity!


      2. Both the tame thick princelings strike me as being, as the Americans say, “cucks”, despite their “royal” status. They both are very obviously under the thumbs of their not-so-royal consorts. That may come from having been brought up by doting women, esp. the mother.

        As for Margaret etc, she may well have been somewhat anti-Jew. Karl Marx was, too…

        Royalty depends on blood. The “Windsors” are rumoured to have had an admixture from a Jewish source via Prince Albert (whom I concede freely was one of the better “royals”, someone with vision and who had social concern). Now, one princeling has married a complete commoner aand the other a commoner who is not only from a country where there are no royals or designated aristocracy but who is of partly non-European origins, and otherwise unsuitable.

        In the contemporary phrase, the royals are beyond their sell-by date.


  7. Of the two, I was more favourably disposed towards Prince Harry but certainly not now he has made ‘The Firm’ a worldwide laughing stock and us as a country with it. He now disgusts me.

    Princess Diana started the rot in the family and that has continued with her sons, particularly Harry though in his defence it can be said his mother’s death probably affected him more badly as he was younger at the time.

    This country needs to reclaim its independence not just from the EU but also a cultural independence from the trash can USA where the baleful influence of Duchess Difficult unsurprisingly emanates from.

    The Yanks don’t even like us anyway as they continually prove what with the latest threat from them they won’t consider a trade deal should we ever leave the EU as we can’t be trusted apparently not to supposedly break Tony Bliars treasonous Good Friday Agreement yet we as a country are stupid enough to take that despicable attitude from the Yanks on the chin and allow this trailer park trash imposter from that country to worm itself into our Royal Family and potentially destroy the institution.

    This country seriously needs to get off its knees and stop kowtowing to threats either from the EU or our supposed Yank ‘allies’.


    1. I agree. As to Harry, yes…he seemed to be a cheerful, down to earth fellow (though obviously as thick as two short planks). Also, one willing to serve in action. Now, he comes across as a petulant, spoiled little princeling and A1-grade “cuck”


  8. Apparently Harry and Meghan have insisted on not revealing the “child” to the waiting media (as protocol) for a month, why is that – so Clarence house can get it’s story right in-case the newborn is identifiable non-White?


      1. Sad though the passing of Queen Elisabeth The Queen Mother was in 2002 it is good to know she is now no longer with us. If she was still here she would have been utterly appalled with her great grandson and his ‘choice’ (if indeed it was his choice and not that of some mental PC globalist Courtier of the sort that like those political advisors to the misnamed Conservative Party think an old institution has to appear ‘modern’ and ‘right on’ to unappeasable Guardian readers) of wife. Undoubtedly, being a lady of impeccable class and breeding, she would have deemed the classless trailer park Yank trash that is Meghan Markle an entirely unworthy addition to the family and a threat to the institution’s survival. The poor old lady could well have died of a stroke or had an heart attack to see what Harry had brought home to Windsor Castle or Buckingham Palace.


    1. What colour did the irredeemably dim and desperate to get his leg over some form of female meat Duke of Sussex think it would be? White? There is still time to get an abortion even though this is a practice I normally find to be abhorrent and morally wrong in the majority of circumstances. The Royals have access to the very best doctors, nurses and surgeons money can buy so why not make use of them?

      Failing doing this course of action they could always do what the Royal Family have done in the past and lock the child up in a tower on one of their estates or otherwise hide it away from the world. There was a Prince they did this too though I can’t recollect the name.


      1. I don’t like to say it but it would not surprise me if the breaking news is: “Prince Phillip rushed to hospital” during the next few days or weeks – which is the time the new “royal” is expected to emerge!


  9. Ian, it will stand as a living reproach to the Royal Family’s increasingly steep descent into the banalities of ‘celebrity’ as represented so well by the Yank trailer trash girl, their turning their backs on the serious business of providing a constitutional monarchy for this country we can look up too as the Japs still have with Emperor Akihito and very soon to be Emperor Naruhito and an increasingly valid argument as to why Britain should have a national referendum on becoming a republic.

    The British Royal Family will go out with a whimper rather than a bang because they allowed a completely classless Yank ex porn actress into their midst and didn’t stand up to Yanks who wanted to demean our Royal Family and turn them into a version of Dynasty or Dallas.

    In short, a rubicon will have been crossed.


    1. What will finish the “royals” will not be a Yekaterinburg or a guillotine, but indifference on the part of the “plebs”. Once you become a “celebrity” (and there are thousands in the UK now, of almost all of whom I have never heard) you in fact *lose* your uniqueness. For royals, that is fatal.


      1. I agree.To my mind, what makes Duchess Difficult’s membership of ‘The Firm’ so potentially dangerous to the institution’s survival isn’t just the fact she can’t and shows no tendency whatever to act Royal but that even if she did there is no way on earth she can perform an essential attribute of this state institution ie being able to reflect its long history back to the nation with deep historical roots thereby giving our nation some sense of itself. A half-black woman from the trashiest parts of a Republican country can’t do that even with the best will in the world and she looks determined not to be pigeonholed into that role in any case. Even a Non white Maori girl might, in the fullness of time, be able to do that coming from a Commonwealth country with the Queen as its Head of a State but a trashy non white Yank never will.

        Duchess Difficult will be the death of the a Royal Family I predict.


      2. I think that you meant to write “republican country” and not “Republican”, California (and especially Hollywood) being firmly Democrat.

        The trump card of the royals in the UK is that they can point to an *almost* unbroken royal history (leaving Cromwell aside). Thus they are embedded psychologically, in a way that is not the case in Germany or France, where people know that “royals” are not necessary now. However, as you say, the “royal” star is waning. As I implied earlier, I think that royalty in the UK will go out with a whimper and not a bang.


  10. A picture paints a thousand words is the famous saying, is it not, and my those ones really do paint a picture! Enough said! I really can’t fathom the thought processes of the Royals when they allowed this trashy character to join them. I seem to recollect Prince Harry saying he didn’t want to be a Royal. Well, you are always free to go into exile to Yankland with this thing so there is no need to attempt to bring down the institution with you.

    Do they seriously think Meghan is in anyway going to endear the Monarchy to people who read The Guardian? No, it won’t because the Republicans who read that rag oppose the INSTITUTION and NOT the people it is comprised of. I can only think there must be a few Royal courtiers who have the same faulty thought processes like those so-called polling experts etc who have advised the Conservative Party to be more ‘progressive’ and ‘modern’. Yeah, following their advice has really helped the CONS, hasn’t it? When was the last time the Tories won a decent victory? More than 30 years ago in 1987!

    I agree with your point about the Royal Family being embedded physchologically in our national life. How, in the name of God, can Meghan really fit into that?
    Her portrait on the walls of Windsor Castle, Buckingham Palace ect won’t really compliment naturally those of people like George V, George Vl, Queen Victoria, Prince Albert etc.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s