Whom does England’s power benefit? Does it benefit the peoples united in the Empire, or if not them, at least the British people? No. The power of the British Empire benefits only a thin, rich upper class in England, which has stayed the same for centuries. However, it does not serve the Indians, the South Africans, the Canadians, nor the Australians. Nor does it benefit the English people, who even today live under much worse conditions that the peoples of other, poorer, nations.
One may imagine the British system as a huge vampire with its fangs sunk into every part of the world from which it can suck wealth. Well, no people is obligated to arrange its life and culture in the shadow of a distant, foreign vampire. And it is also clear that the age of vampirism is over.
Europe is the living space for a group of highly gifted white peoples who live next to each other. In the past, it has seen England as the most serious problem it faced, without until today being able to find a solution. Time and again, it has fallen victim to British intrigues, which have whipped up its peoples against each other. France is the best and most tragic current example. Germany will see to it that it is in fact the last such example.
It is illuminating to see that African Negroes are more easily governed by force than the white peoples of Europe. England, however, has not realized that. It stupidly and stubbornly insists on its right to be the sole organizer and ruler of Europe — at least according to its views of such matters. That is true, even though as this investigation has shown, it is less suited to it than any other European nation. England is now making its last attempt to persuade the European peoples that the Continent can only be happy if it takes on the English lifestyle. The British call that democracy.
It is enough to note that democracy has been defined over the course of long and diligent historical investigations, and that, unfortunately, those conclusions do not fit what the British call democracy. Democracy means the rule of the demos, that is, the people or the citizens. A democracy does not have a hereditary king as the English have, much less vice regents, emperors of India, peers, or lords. England is a monarchy with a financial aristocracy possessing many advantages, and a mass of people with far fewer rights.
A monarchy that claims to fight for democracy is either ridiculous, or it lies.
We have long since decided on the proper name for the British system: we call it plutocracy, the rule of the money bags. And the facts prove it.