Joseph Sobran, 1946-2010

October 1, 2010


M. Joseph “Joe” Sobran, Jr., born February 23, 1946, in Ypsilanti, Michigan, passed away peacefully on September 30, 2010.

Joe Sobran was a prominent paleoconservative journalist and writer. He will be remembered for his great erudition, his skillful, elegant prose, and his courage and abiding integrity in resisting the pressure and calumny of the Israel-firsters who took over mainstream American conservative journalism during his career. He will be missed.


Joe Sobran received his B.A. in English from Eastern Michigan University and pursued graduate studies in English, specializing in Shakespeare. From 1969 to 1970 he taught English on a fellowship and lectured on Shakespeare.

In 1972, he went to work for National Review magazine, beginning what would be a 21-year stint, including 18 years as senior editor.

From 1979 to 1991, Mr. Sobran was a regular commentator on CBS Radio’s “Spectrum” series. Starting in 1979, his columns were syndicated by the Los Angeles Times Syndicate and later with Universal Press Syndicate and Griffin Internet Syndicate.

For 20 years, he wrote the weekly column “Washington Watch” for The Wanderer, a weekly Catholic newspaper. He has also written for numerous other publications over the years including Human Life Review, Celebrate Life! and Chronicles magazine, for which he writes a quarterly essay.

Mr. Sobran is the author of three books. Single Issues: Essays on the Crucial Social Questions was published by The Human Life Press (New York, 1983) and is now available as a data CD. His book on the Shakespeare authorship question, titled Alias Shakespeare: Solving the Greatest Literary Mystery of All Time, was released in May 1997 by the Free Press. Hustler: The Clinton Legacy, a collection of essays selected and edited by Tom McPherren (with a foreword by Ann Coulter) was published in 2000 by Griffin Communications.

From 1994 to 2007, he was editor of SOBRAN’S: The Real News of the Month. a monthly newsletter of his essays and columns.

Bio source: Fitzgerald Griffin Foundation.

Sunic to be interviewed on French radio

September 22, 2010

Tom Sunic

Tom Sunic will be interviewed on the French radio station Radio Courtoisie on Sat. Sep. 25, at 12pm CET / 6am ET. Tom will discuss among other things his recent book, La Croatie : un pays par défaut ? (“Croatia: a country by default?”).

Source: Radio Courtoisie Blog.

US judge: ‘Don’t ask, don’t tell’ unconstitutional

September 10, 2010

LOS ANGELES – A federal judge said she will issue an order to halt the military’s “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy, after she declared the ban on openly gay service members unconstitutional.

U.S. District Judge Virginia Phillips ruled Thursday that the prohibition on openly gay service members was unconstitutional because it violates the First and Fifth Amendment rights of gays and lesbians.

The policy doesn’t help military readiness and instead has a “direct and deleterious effect” on the armed services by hurting recruitment efforts during wartime and requiring the discharge of service members who have critical skills and training, she said.

The Log Cabin Republicans sued the federal government in 2004 to stop the policy. Phillips will draft the injunction with input from the group within a week, and the federal government will have a week to respond.

Government lawyers said the judge lacked the authority to issue a nationwide injunction.

The U.S. Department of Justice can appeal the ruling but the government has not announced what it intends to do.

The Pentagon on Friday referred questions on the ruling to the Justice Department, where spokesman Charles Miller said it was being reviewed by attorneys.

Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Adm. Mike Mullen — both in favor of repealing “don’t ask, don’t tell” — have said they prefer that the change wait until the military completes its review of the issue. That study, due in December, includes surveys of troops and their families to get their views and help figure out how a change would be implemented.

The Log Cabin Republicans’ case was the biggest legal test of the law in recent years and came amid promises by President Barack Obama that he will work to repeal the policy.

“This decision will change the lives of many individuals who only wanted to serve their country bravely,” said the group’s attorney, Dan Woods.

More than 13,500 service members have been fired since 1994, the Log Cabin Republicans said.

During the nonjury trial, Woods argued that the policy violates gay military members’ rights to free speech, open association and right to due process as guaranteed by the Fifth Amendment.

He said the ban damages the military by forcing it to reject talented people as the country struggles to find recruits in the midst of a war. He also used Obama’s remarks and those of top military commanders as evidence that the policy should be overturned.

The case is unique because it wasn’t based on one individual’s complaint about a discharge. Instead it made a broad, sweeping attack on the policy.

Government attorneys presented only the policy’s legislative history in their defense and no witnesses or other evidence.

Justice Department attorney Paul G. Freeborne argued the policy debate was political and that the issue should be decided by Congress rather than in court.

In his closing arguments, he said the plaintiffs were trying to force a federal court to overstep its bounds and halt the policy as it is being debated by federal lawmakers.

The U.S. House voted in May to repeal the policy, and the Senate is expected to address the issue this year.

The case moved forward slowly at first because it was assigned to a judge who had health problems and later retired, Woods said. In late 2008, it was reassigned to Phillips and went to trial in Riverside, Calif., in July.

The ruling is the second major court ruling this summer in which a California judge handed a major victory to gay rights advocates.

In August, U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker overturned Proposition 8, the ballot proposition that banned gay marriage in California. His ruling is on hold pending appeal.

Six military officers who were discharged under the policy testified during the “don’t ask, don’t tell” trial. A decorated Air Force officer testified that he was let go after his peers snooped through his personal e-mail in Iraq.

The officers who participated in the trial were “reacting emotionally because they’re so proud that they were able to play a part in making this happen,” Woods said after the ruling.

“It’ll be an interesting decision for our president to decide whether to appeal this case. He’s said that ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ weakens national security, and now it’s been declared unconstitutional,” he said. “If he does appeal, we’re going to fight like heck.”

The “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy prohibits the military from asking about the sexual orientation of service members. Under the 1993 policy, service men and women who acknowledge being gay or are discovered engaging in homosexual activity, even in the privacy of their own homes off base, are subject to discharge.

Source: Yahoo/AP.

Norman Lowell speaks out as Constitutional Court puts off decision

September 7, 2010

Norman Lowell protested outside the law courts today that the Constitutional Court had, for the fourth time, failed to hand down its decision in a case he had instituted after the Appeals Court threw out his appeal from a conviction of inciting racial hatred.

“Having a sentence put off four times is unheard of,” Mr Lowell told a press conference outside the law courts.

“The way I am being treated shows that Malta is a third world country, this is a bankrupt island which lacks a spine,” Mr Lowell said, adding that the only hope for the country was for people with moral fibre, like himself, to go to Brussels to help change the course of Europe and of Malta.

“From a sacred island, Malta has become a banana republic,” he added.

His legal counsel, Emmy Bezzina, said justice had to be seen to be done for the courts to enjoy the people’s respect.

He recalled that the case went back to May 2006 when Mr Lowell was arrested and subsequently arraigned with urgency on a Saturday afternoon. He was convicted two years later and handed a suspended jail term.

An appeal was filed, but the criminal appeals court threw it out in a seven-page decision based on technicalities.

A case was instituted before the constitutional court, which however declared that it could not serve as an appeals court over the appeals court. That decision was appealed from. Judgement had been pending for over a year but had been put off four times, without reason being given.

Dr Bezzina said the decision would also have to be put off again when the case comes up on October 29 because Mr Lowell would ask the new Chief Justice, Silvio Camilleri, not to take cognisance since, as Attorney General, he was a party in the case.

The implication of these postponements, he said, was that Mr Lowell could not yet take his case to the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg, because he has first to exhaust all local legal avenues.

The fact that the Constitutional Court was failing to hand down its decision meant that Mr Lowell was being denied his rights, he said.

Mr Lowell and Dr Bezzina regretted the fact that Dr Camilleri, as Attorney General, had failed to investigate their claims about exaggerated and illegal spending during the electoral campaign by some of the candidates for the election of members of the European Parliament, and said they would file a new request when the new Attorney General takes over.

Dr Bezzina noted that candidates in local council elections had been arraigned for failing to submit their spending declaration, when nothing was done about the case of the MEPs, even by the police commissioner. This, they said, constituted two weights and two measures.

Source: Times of Malta.

Jewish teacher suspended in France for teaching ‘too much’ about Holocaust

September 7, 2010

A high school history teacher is accused of ‘brainwashing’ her students, says French news agency AFP.

A French history teacher in Nancy, France, has been suspended for breaching the principle of secularism and neutrality after the French education ministry concluded that she was teaching “too much” about the Holocaust and spending too much time organizing trips for her students to Nazi death camps in Poland and the Czech Republic.

A high school history teacher is accused of ‘brainwashing’ her students, says French news agency AFP.

A French history teacher in Nancy, France, has been suspended for breaching the principle of secularism and neutrality after the French education ministry concluded that she was teaching “too much” about the Holocaust and spending too much time organizing trips for her students to Nazi death camps in Poland and the Czech Republic.
Auschwitz train tracks AP january 1941

1941 photo showing the railroad tracks leading to the entrance of the concentration camp Auschwitz-Birkenau.
Photo by: AP

Catherine Pederzoli, 58, was investigated by officials at the education ministry, who released a report about the matter in July. The report accused the teacher of “lacking distance, neutrality and secularism” in teaching the Holocaust, and of manipulating her charges through a process of “brain-washing,” according to the French news agency AFP.

In December, when the French Minister of Education Luc Chatel was visiting Pederzoli’s high school, several of her students staged a protest over the decision to cut in half the number of students traveling to Poland on an upcoming trip, meant to acquaint the students with Nazi camps in the region. Pederzoli was accused of inciting the protest.

The principle of secularism and neutrality in France is meant to protect the separation of church and state. The ministry’s report cites that in meeting with investigators, the teacher used the word “Holocaust” 14 times while using the more neutral term “massacre” only twice.

Pederzoli’s lawyer, Christine Tadic, said Tuesday that Pederzoli had been organizing trips to concentration camps for the past 15 years, but that a change in the school’s administration in 2007 had led to a witch hunt against her.

Tadic claimed that “had the teacher been Christian, no one would have accused her of brainwashing.” Furthermore, she asked whether Pederzoli is in fact being blamed for being Jewish.

Also on Tuesday, Tadic filed for an injunction over the teacher’s suspension. According to AFP, the court has 15 days to rule on the matter.

Source: Haaretz.

Irish ministers fight EU bid to give Israel data

September 7, 2010

The Republic of Ireland is to vote today against an EU plan to allow sensitive personal data on European citizens to be handed over to Israel.

A crucial meeting to determine whether the plan should go ahead is taking place in Brussels.

A special European Commission committee was forced to call the meeting after Justice Minister Dermot Ahern blocked a bid to push through the plan “on the nod” without consultation with government ministers from EU states.

The commission is comprised of officials from the 27 member states and Ireland will be represented today by a senior official from the Department of Justice.

Before yesterday’s Cabinet meeting, Mr Ahern met Foreign Affairs Minister Micheal Martin to discuss the Brussels talks and the two men agreed that Ireland should push for a vote by the committee and then oppose the plan.

The committee wants to include Israel on a list of ‘third’ countries that are already deemed to have adequate data protection safeguards to allow them receive personal data on European citizens.

The list already includes countries like the US, Switzerland, Canada, Argentina, the Isle of Man and Guernsey.

The Republic will today ask the committee to explain if steps were taken to establish what data protection safeguards were in place in Israel, whether the data protection commissioner there was independent of the Israeli government, and if any enquiries were made about the use of Irish and other EU passports by Israelis agents, blamed for the murder of Hamas activist, Mahmoud al-Mabhouh, in a hotel in Dubai.

It is not yet clear how much support Ireland will receive for its stance from other EU states.

Despite the furore over the use of British passports by the Israeli agents, the government in London has not yet voiced any concerns about the data issue.

The plan can be approved by a majority vote.

The initial findings of the committee were circulated to officials in all governments and a failure to respond to their report would have been interpreted as approval for the recommendation.

Ministers fight EU bid to give Israel dataBut the controversial measure was spotted by Mr Ahern and he raised Irish worries over the move at a meeting of the justice and home affairs ministers in Brussels in July.

He discovered that a number of the ministers had not been aware of the plan.

He pointed out that the measure was being pushed through at a time when the Irish public and Government were outraged at the use of forged Irish passports by those alleged to have been involved in the Dubai assassination.

An Israeli diplomat was expelled from Dublin in June in retaliation for the passport abuses.

Mr Ahern explained that Ireland could not be expected to accept the granting of access for the Israeli authorities to a raft of personal details on Irish citizens while at the same time publicly criticising Israeli abuses of private passport information.

Source: Belfast Telegraph.

Sued by Feds, ‘toughest sheriff in America’ comes out swinging

September 2, 2010

(Sept. 2) – The federal government today sued Arizona sheriff Joe Arpaio, the self-styled toughest sheriff in America, for failing to cooperate with an investigation into allegations that his department discriminated against prisoners with limited English-language skills.

Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio reads over an Associated Press news report at a news conference Thursday. The U.S. Justice Department is suing Arpaio, saying the Arizona lawman refused for more than a year to turn over records in an investigation into discrimination allegations against his department.

Arpaio didn’t respond quietly to the Obama administration’s charges.

“These actions make it abundantly clear that Arizona, including this sheriff, IS Washington’s new whipping boy,” he said in a statement released this afternoon. “Now it’s time to take the gloves off. … It’s time Americans everywhere wake up and see this administration for what it really is. Calculating, underhanded at times and certainly not looking out for the best interests of the legal citizens residing in this country.”

The suit filed by the U.S. Department of Justice contends that Arpaio and his staff in Maricopa County refused to hand over information relating to an alleged “pattern or practice of discriminatory law enforcement conduct.” It is illegal for any program receiving federal funds to practice discrimination.
Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio reads over an Associated Press news report at a news conference, stating the U.S. Justice Department is suing Arpaio.
Ross D. Franklin, AP
Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio reads over an Associated Press news report at a news conference Thursday. The U.S. Justice Department is suing Arpaio, saying the Arizona lawman refused for more than a year to turn over records in an investigation into discrimination allegations against his department.

The feds had been trying to gain access to the information, and to law enforcement personnel, since March 2009, the complaint says.

“The actions of the sheriff’s office are unprecedented. It is unfortunate that the department was forced to resort to litigation to gain access to public documents and facilities,” Thomas E. Perez, assistant attorney general for the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division, said in a statement.

Arpaio responded by saying that the federal government was disingenuous and trying to cover up the fact that it had no evidence of discrimination by the sheriff or his office.

“The Obama administration intended to sue us all along, no matter what we did to try to avert it,” Arpaio said. “They smiled in our faces and then stabbed us in the back with this lawsuit.”

The complaint is the latest salvo in a battle between the federal government and Arizona over immigration. In July, the feds sued the state over its controversial new immigration law, which required police to inquire into the immigration status of people they detain.

The feds said this was taking on powers that belonged to the federal government. Later in July, a judge blocked key portions of the law.

Arizona. Gov. Jan Brewer said the decision gave the federal government “relief from the courts to not do their job.”

Robert Driscoll, Arpaio’s attorney, said the federal government had been promised cooperation as recently as last week.

“We were awaiting a response from DOJ, and this lawsuit is apparently it,” Driscoll said in a statement. “This lawsuit is nothing more than an attempt to obscure the fact that DOJ still has no case.”

Today’s lawsuit, which is filed against Arpaio, the Maricopa Sheriff’s Office and Maricopa County, refers specifically to the treatment of people with limited English-language skills in the county’s jails. It has been widely reported that Arpaio is conducting crime sweeps through Latino neighborhoods, where arrested individuals have been asked about their immigration status. Critics say this amounts to racial profiling.

“America’s toughest sheriff” has become an icon of the movement calling for tougher immigration enforcement along the U.S. southern border. His hard-nosed stand on law enforcement and regular media appearances have made him a household name.

But the Department of Justice suit could end up costing the region millions of dollars in federal funding — some of which goes directly to the sheriff’s office.

Sponsored Links
The complaint says that taking these funds obliged the agencies, and Arpaio personally, to cooperate with the federal government’s requests for information. If they continue their stance of refusing to hand over documents, that funding could be cut off.

The sheriff’s office “signed contractual assurance agreements as a condition of receiving federal funds, and promised that it would cooperate with investigations of alleged discrimination,” the government said in a statement.

The suit asks the court to declare that the defendants breached the law by refusing to cooperate with the investigation, and to compel them to do so.

“Defendants’ refusal to cooperate with reasonable requests for information regarding the use of federal funds is a violation of defendants’ statutory, regulatory and contractual obligations,” the complaint says.

Source: AOL News.

Glenn Beck 8/28 rally – the death rattle of mainstream conservatism

September 2, 2010

By James Edwards

Glenn Beck

Glenn Beck’s big rally at the Lincoln Memorial a couple days ago is the talk of the news media and the internet. Liberals are denouncing it, conservatives are walking on air, while tens of millions of people are completely mystified. And with good reason – if Seinfeld was a show about nothing, this massive gathering was a rally about nothing. And while it may have looked impressive, in reality it shows just how impotent and adrift the mainstream conservative movement has become.

Nobody is really sure what it was even about. Beck, who is only famous because he has spent hours a day for the last decade ranting about politics, says it had nothing to do with politics, even though Sarah Palin was the keynote speaker.

It was about “restoring honor” or something, whatever that’s supposed to mean.
Or it was a way of supporting the troops, depending on which day you listened to Beck.

Then it turned into a rally to reclaim the Civil Rights movement, and give it back to the people who Beck swears pioneered the Civil Rights movement, right wing conservatives. Yes, that’s what Beck actually claims to believe. Leave it to Glenn Beck to make white-hating black columnist Leonard Pitts look sane and reasonable.

It also has something do with honoring all those unsung heroes of the American Revolution, the numerous black Founding Fathers, whose existence (until Beck came along to set the record straight) has been covered up by “liberals” who are trying to divide us by race. Yes, Beck actually says this, too.

And Palin? She was asked what Martin Luther King would’ve thought of the rally. This was a great opportunity to tell it like it is for all of America to hear. She could’ve said something like: “Martin Luther King? I’m white – why would I give a damn what Martin Luther King would’ve thought about this rally? At any rate, he no doubt would have disapproved, as he was a radical left wing socialist whose movement was all about increasing the size and power of the federal government, and using it to take rights and resources from white people and give them to non-whites. Hell no he wouldn’t have approved, and I couldn’t be more proud of that fact.”

But did she say anything like that? Of course not. Instead, she talked about how she could “feel his spirit” in this place that MLK’s presence had turned into “sacred ground” and that he would’ve heartily approved because the rally was all about “equality”, which is what he stood for. And “conservative” National Review was so proud of her words they posted the video.

(Of course, none of this idiotic pandering did anything to convince liberals and non-whites that Beck, Palin, and the hundreds of thousands of white people who showed up at the rally are anything but despicable racists and Nazis.)

As it turned out, the rally was actually a huge revival meeting, in which Beck implored America to turn back to the god(s) of our Jewish-Christian-Muslim-Hindu-Mormon-Voodoo-Sikh-Zoroastrian heritage that made America great. He had over 200 members of the clergy on the podium, and he stressed that they were from “all faiths” and it didn’t matter which god we pray to, as long as we pray to something or someone, singular or plural. Just pick a higher power and go with it. In other words, it was the largest Alcoholics Anonymous meeting in history. Listen as Beck tells the crowd to “go back to your church, your synagogue, your mosque” and get to work on “refounding America.”

Now, normally, evangelicals would be horrified at this pantheism of “America needs to turn back to god, but it doesn’t matter which god” on full display Saturday, at a huge revival meeting led by America’s most famous Mormon. But not anymore. Judging by the posts and comments on the website of America’s biggest Christian news magazine, they ate it up. One columnist pretty much compared Glenn Beck to Jesus:

We arrived an hour late. The entire reflecting pool area of the National Mall was packed. The adjacent fields were packed, and the tide stretched toward the Washington Monument. The Associated Press has reported that “tens of thousands” were there. That kind of cynical numbers-downplaying reminded me of Heidi’s Romans 8:28 observation and made me glad that every lie will come out in the wash eventually. They lied about Jesus the whole of his ministry. And after he was raised, which was the ultimate vindication, they paid off soldiers to spread the rumor that his body had been stolen. But as the Bible says, “No weapon forged against you shall prosper” (Isaiah 54:17).

Neither Beck nor his other speakers (among whom, Sarah Palin) mentioned a word about Mr. Obama. This concerted decision to steer clear of politics and hatefulness robbed the Huffington Post of the ability to dub the affair “political,” forcing them to settle for the accusation that it was “religious.” This is like when the Pharisees called Jesus a glutton and drunkard when he ate and drank, and a madman when the crowds thronged Him so that he couldn’t eat—the damned if you do and if you don’t approach that makes me glad for the sovereignty of God and Romans 8:28.

Toward the end, Glenn Beck told the attentive crowd that if we don’t go home and let our revival meeting change our lives, by drawing near to God and by telling the truth in our daily living, then all we will have had was a good time on a Saturday afternoon.

Notice how she accepts the liberal premise that criticism of Obama is “hatefulness.” Then she calls the rally a “revival meeting”, after complaining that the media was calling it “religious” in nature! If Beck comes across to normal people as a complete nutcase, it’s because he knows his audience.

Another columnist for World also wrote about the rally. His 72 year old mother attended, in spite of recently having a hip replacement. Which was no doubt paid for by Medicare, which probably doesn’t even phase her when she agrees with Beck and the Tea Parties that “government should get out of health care.” Anyway, his 72 year old mother must also be a member of the lying liberal media, because she too said the rally was all about god:

I called my mother to see if the stories were accurate. “Mom, what was the rally like? What was the tone?” I asked. “Beck’s speech was primarily all about God,” she said verifying the news reports of the giant Tea Party. There wasn’t any focus on politics. It was about recognizing God.

Clearly, Beck’s rally was a vague, confused jumble of meaninglessness. Or, if you prefer, a hot ghetto mess. Yet many conservatives are excited and thrilled, and think that 8/28/10 will forever be remembered as some kind of turning point, as the day when the huge task of “taking America back” formally got underway. In reality, it was the exact opposite. I’m convinced that one of these days, we’ll look back on this as the nadir of the mainstream conservative movement, as its death rattle, as the day the conservative movement gave up the ghost. Hundreds of thousands of white conservatives spent millions of dollars to travel to DC, to stand around and do nothing, for no reason in particular, after being ordered not to bring any signs to express themselves, while Beck and Palin lectured them on the glories of The Reverend Doctor Martin Luther King, Jr., and the importance of getting back to the fundamentals of the Christian-Jewish-Muslim-Hindu-Sikh-Mormon-Voodoo faiths.

Meanwhile, back in reality, the world they’re desperately trying to preserve, but can’t, because they’re desperately afraid to even name it, just keeps disappearing. In fact, the very next day the New York Times published an article about the death of conservatism in Orange County, California, which used to be the epicenter of political conservatism in America.

Orange County has been a national symbol of conservatism for more than 50 years: birthplace of President Richard M. Nixon and home to John Wayne, a bastion for the John Birch Society, a land of orange groves and affluence, the region of California where Republican presidential candidates could always count on a friendly audience.

But this iconic county of 3.1 million people passed something of a milestone in June. The percentage of registered Republican voters dropped to 43 percent, the lowest level in 70 years.

It was the latest sign of the demographic, ethnic and political changes that are transforming the county and challenging long-held views of a region whose colorful — its detractors might suggest zany — reputation extends well beyond the borders of this state.

At the end of 2009, nearly 45 percent of the county’s residents spoke a language other than English at home, according to county officials. Whites now make up only 45 percent of the population; this county is teeming with Hispanics, as well as Vietnamese, Korean and Chinese families. Its percentage of foreign-born residents jumped to 30 percent in 2008 from 6 percent in 1970, and visits to some of its corners can feel like a trip to a foreign land.

The demographic changes that have swept the county reflect what is happening across the state and much of the nation. It has happened slowly but surely over the course of a generation, becoming increasingly apparent not only in a drive through the 34 cities that fill this sprawling 789-square-mile county south of Los Angeles, but also, most recently, in the results of a presidential election. In 2008, Barack Obama drew 48 percent of the vote here against Senator John McCain of Arizona. (By comparison, in 1980, Jimmy Carter received just 23 percent against Ronald Reagan, the conservative hero whose election as California governor in 1966 and 1970 was boosted in no small part by the affection for him here.)

The demographic changes that have transformed Orange County are also transforming the rest of America. The process may be further along in Orange County, but it’s happening everywhere. Thanks to immigration, sixty percent of the babies being born in Texas are non-white, and it’s only a matter of a few more elections before Texas’s electoral votes go to the Democrats, and when that happens, the GOP can forget about putting one of their own in the White House ever again. And there are many other cities and states that are right behind Texas, and lots more where the process will take a few more decades to have the same effect, but all of America is on its way to turning into Orange County, California.

That’s why the Beck Heads and Tea Partiers are losing their country. Not because they don’t attend their local mosque often enough. But they can’t admit that, because that would be “racist”, and losing your country is a lot better than being called “racist.”

But a conservative movement as willingly impotent as the crowd that came to DC on Saturday can’t go on much longer. At some point it’s going to dawn on them that no matter how much they grovel to MLK and praise his holy name, or how many “conservative” imams, shamans, and witch doctors they pack their podiums with, they still get called racists and Nazis, and their country just keeps slipping further down the tubes.

When that finally sinks in with conservatives, and it may be sooner than we think, things will start to get interesting.

Source: The Political Cesspool.

Ludwig Klages on Judaism, Christianity and Paganism (Excerpts and Aphorisms)

August 29, 2010

Ludwig Klages

Translated and edited by Joseph D. Pryce

Ludwig Klages (1872–1956) was a prominent German philosopher associated with the intellectual movement known as ‘vitalism’ (Biozentrismus). He seems to have been a solitary child, but he developed an intense friendship with a Jewish classmate named Theodor Lessing, who would himself go on to achieve fame as the theorist of “Jewish Self-Hatred,” a concept whose origins Lessing would later trace back to passionate discussions that he had had with Klages during their boyhood rambles on the windswept moors and beaches of their Lower Saxony home. Shortly after the NSDAP seized power at the beginning of 1933, one of Klages’s disciples established the Arbeitskreises für biozentrisches Forschung (Working Group for Research on Vitalism). From 1938 onwards, when Reichsleiter Dr. Alfred Rosenberg delivered a bitter attack on Klages and his school in his inaugural address to the summer semester at the University of Halle, the official party spokesmen explicitly and repeatedly condemned Klages and his friends as enemies of the National Socialist Weltanschauung. Yet many prominent NS officials and many influential German academics in the Third Reich and after WWII had a very high opinion of Klages’ work.

The following material is derived from two sources:

Hans Eggert Schroder’s book: Ludwig Klages, Die Geschichte Seines Lebens (Ludwig Klages: The Story of His Life) (Bonn: 1966,1992), hereafter GL

Ludwig Klages’ book Rhythmen und Runen (Rhythms and Runes) (1944), hereafter RR.

The quotations from RR ‘disappeared’ after the WWII in subsequent German editions.

* * *

Mankind and Race

We must draw a sharp distinction between the man who sees the world as divided between the “human” and the “non-human,” and the man who is most profoundly struck by the obvious racial groupings of mankind (Nietzsche’s “masters”). The bridge that connects us to the Cosmos does not originate in “man,” but in race. (RR, 245)

Sin and the Pagan World

The idea of “sin” was quite alien to the pagan world. The ancient pagans knew the gods’ hatred as well as their revenge, but they never heard of punishment for “sin.” The ancient philosophers did understand something of the “good,” but when they employed this expression, they were certainly not endorsing the concept of the “sinless.” Quite the contrary: they were actually speaking of the pursuit of every type of excellence. (RR, 317)

The True Master of Secret Societies

In the forefront of our secret societies, we have the Rosicrucians, the Illuminati, the Freemasons, the “Odd Fellows,” and B’nai B’rith. The educated classes are provided with such recent varieties as … the Einstein cult and Freudianism. For half-educated fools we have H. P. Blavatsky, Anny Besant, Rudolf Steiner, and Krishnamurti. For the poor in spirit, there’s the Christian Science of Mrs. Eddy, the Oxford Movement, and biblical fundamentalism. All of these groups, along with innumerable lesser organizations, are humanitarianism’s masks. Jewry is the center from which they are ruled. (GL, 1345)

Christianity and Wakefulness

Even in the garden of olives Christ begged his disciples to remain awake by his side. The saints indicate by their sleeplessness that nothing can harm them. Christianity is the war against sleep and dreaming, two states for which a reviving elemental life will always be yearning. Against the activity of astral wakefulness, elemental life places consummation and the pagan feeling for fate. True pagans regard sleeplessness as the most monstrous conceivable evil. In addition, the wakefulness of the Christian manifests a slavish impulse: the lurking wariness and prudence of submissive souls. (RR, 253)

From A Letter Re: “Anti-Semitism”

I’ve never endorsed the claim that the Nazi Bonzes [big-wigs] belonged to a superior race. However, I must also add that I have consistently refused to accept the claim of a certain other race to be the “chosen people.” The arrogance is identical in both cases, but with this significant distinction: after waging war against mankind for more than three thousand years, Jewry has finally achieved total victory over all of the nations of the earth.

Therefore, I will have nothing to do with the contemporary kowtowing on the part of almost the entire civilized world before the haters of all mankind (Tacitus spoke of Christians, but he certainly meant the Jews, as will be obvious to every alert reader of his works). I despise all this kowtowing to the Jews as an utterly mendacious tactical ploy. (GL, 1350)

The Prophecy of a Jewish Friend

I might easily fill ten pages…with anecdotes concerning the life of Richard Perls. He was born a Jew, but he eventually abandoned Judaism, a religion that he had come to hate. One year before his death, which occurred, to the best of my recollection, in 1897, he said to me: “Herr Klages, the ancient world was destroyed by Judaism, just as the modern world is about to be!” When I voiced my skepticism as to the accuracy of his prophecy…he merely responded: “Just wait—you will live to see my prophecy fulfilled!” (GL, 196)

The Great Deceiver

To the Jew, everything human is a sham. One might even say that the Jewish face is nothing but a mask. The Jew is not a liar: he is the lie itself. From this vantage point, we can say that the Jew is not a man. … He lives the pseudo-life of a ghoul whose fortunes are linked to Yahweh-Moloch. He employs deception as the weapon with which he will exterminate mankind. The Jew is the very incarnation of the unearthly power of destruction. (RR, 330)

How Yahweh Expresses Himself

Yahweh’s medium of expression is the gesture. The meaning of all of his gestures, so far as they actually possess any metaphysical significance, can be interpreted as an ever-deeper subjugation of one principle at the hands of an ever-loftier one: consecration, blessing, etc., on the one side, and repentance, contrition, and adoration on the other. Semitic religiosity is restricted to adoring worshipper and the adored deity. When this religiosity attaches itself solely to the personal, the emblem of worship becomes the individual person. Only the Semitic religions bow to the “One God.” In adoration, the believer achieves the non-rational form of ego-consciousness. Pagan rationality glides right past the god to the ego; in the Semitic “service of God,” however, the transcendental “One” brings destruction to the world of “appearances.” Apollo is, so to speak, an ethically developed Dionysus; he works on the soil of blood-thinning. Yahweh is the all-devouring nothingness; he works on the soil of blood-poisoning. (RR, 321)

The Cult of the Christ

It is impossible to conceive of a more fatal blindness than that of the cult instigated by this Jewish sectarian and his apostles and camp followers. Torn from the bonds of nature and the past, man must now direct his gaze at the wasteland known as the “future”; into that desert he stares, paralyzed by dread of the vengeful Jew-God. And before this insane masquerade of the “kingdom come,” the “last judgment,” and “eternal punishment” can be consummated, the true heroes and the real gods must first be made to grovel before the cross! (RR, 285)

Joseph Pryce (email him) is a writer, poet and translator. He is the author of the collection of mystical poems Mansions of Irkalla. Mr. Pryce was born in Brooklyn and studied for the Roman Catholic priesthood for three years (Redemptorist Order) and then attended Brooklyn College. He says for himself; “I was a musician for many years and recorded several CDs, but literature has always been my first love (especially poetry). I live with my wife, 30,000 books, and a dog and four cats on Long Island.” His translation of the German philosopher Ludwig Klages’ work will be published shortly.

Source: TOO.

French revisionist imprisoned for writings

August 24, 2010

In France, a writer, father of eight, is in prison for his historical research. And the so-called free press says nothing about it!

With a wife and eight children, the Frenchman Vincent Reynouard, aged 41, is a chemical engineer by training, a graduate of the ISMRA (“Institute of sciences of atomic matter and radiation”) in Caen (Normandy). He readily presents himself as a traditionalist Catholic and does not hide his ultra-conservative political opinions. But, most important, he publicly disputes, in his DVDs and writings, the conventional version of Second World War history. He is one of those researchers who declare themselves to be “revisionists” and who are called “deniers” by others because they do not believe in the existence of homicidal gas chambers in the wartime German concentration camps.

In 2005, Reynouard wrote and sent to numerous tourism offices, museums and town halls a 16-page brochure entitled “Holocaust? Here’s what’s kept hidden from you…”, in which he took a view altogether opposite to that of academic history. French justice immediately pounced upon him.

His trial in 2007 at the criminal court in Saverne (Alsace) resulted in a sentence of one year’s imprisonment, a fine of 10,000 euros and an order to pay damages of 3,000 euros to the antiracist league “LICRA”. In June 2008 the court of appeal in Colmar upheld the prison sentence and ordered him to pay a total of 60,000 euros (a 20,000 euro fine, damages, mandatory publication of the ruling and court fees). Severity as never seen before.

Since he resides in Belgium, France launched a European arrest warrant for Reynouard in order to make him serve the prison sentence ordered by the Colmar court. On July 9th he was imprisoned by the Belgian police, pending his extradition to France. All of which leads him to say: “When people can think of no other way but imprisonment to get rid of a verbal opponent, it’s because they have no arguments.”

Conclusion: A 41-year-old father of eight is currently in prison for his historical research, because of the Gayssot Act.

This Act of the French parliament (“article 24bis” of the law governing the press), having come into effect upon publication in the Journal Officiel on July 14th 1990, prohibits the “disputing (…) of the existence of one or more crimes against humanity as defined by Article 6 of the Charter of the International Military Tribunal [known as the Nuremberg Tribunal] in annex to the London Agreement of August 8th, 1945. ”

In my book Sarkozy, Israël et les Juifs (Oser Dire publishers, [Belgium], 2009), I recall that this freedom-killing law has been strongly criticised in the past by such personalities as the French academician Simone Veil; the Permanent Secretary of the French Academy, Hélène Carrère d’Encausse; the government ministers Jean Foyer, Jacques Toubon, Alain Peyrefitte; the historians Henri Amouroux, Pierre Vidal-Naquet, Annie Kriegel, Francois Furet, Alain Besançon, Jacques Willequet and François Bédarida; the founder of the Hannah Arendt Research Institute, Chantal Delsol; the 1988 Nobel laureate for economics, Maurice Allais; the writers Michel Tournier, Louis Pauwels, Michel Houellebecq, Philip Murray, Jean Daniel, Vladimir Volkoff, Michel Rachline and Alain Robbe-Grillet; the judges Philippe Bilger, Alain Marsaud and Raoul Béteille; the legal scholars Olivier Duhamel, Anne-Marie Le Pourhiet, Emmanuelle Duverger, André Decoq and Guy Carcassonne; the lawyers Jacques Vergès and John Bastardi Daumont; the philosopher Paul Ricœur; the comedian Bruno Gaccio; defenders of the freedom of expression like the founder of Reporters Sans Frontières Robert Ménard (who denounces it as a “thought police”) and Gabriel Cohn-Bendit; the journalists Dominique Jamet, Delfeil de Ton, Alain Rollat, Albert du Roy, Philippe Tesson, Jacques Julliard and Ivan Rioufol; also by the former president of the Ligue des droits de l’homme, historian Madeleine Rebérioux. Abroad, the American linguist Noam Chomsky has declared himself an absolute opponent of it. For the Belgian physicist and intellectual Jean Bricmont, “the Gayssot Act is a legal regression of several centuries”. As for Presidents Hugo Chávez and Mahmoud Ahmadinedjad, they have strongly condemned the repression resulting from this law.

Henceforth it falls to us to defend free expression in deed and not just in theory. Why is no one heard publically denouncing the present fate of Vincent Reynouard? What are Reporters Sans Frontières, Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch doing? No organ of the media, either French or foreign, has informed public opinion of this case. Such silence is abnormal.

Personally, I have decided to act as a historian and as a citizen, and to make it known, through this press release, how appalled I am at the fact that, in our country, we have a man thrown into prison for his opinions, however unusual, shocking and controversial they may be. Such treatment is not worthy of France or her intellectual tradition. It is not for the law to say how historical truth is set down: in a free country, that is the task of historians. The Gayssot Act, which restricts the historian’s freedom, is unworthy of a democratic State; it is a wicked law. I therefore ask for its immediate repeal.

I hope to be joined soon by dozens, hundreds, thousands of other people unable to remain indifferent in the face of a scandal that seriously harms the image of France and flouts the spirit of the Republic.

Those who wish to sign this communiqué along with me can send me their names and contact information at the address It is not a question of supporting Vincent Reynouard’s religious, political or historical ideas but of defending his right to express them. To challenge them, an open, democratic, fair and honest debate will suffice.

We shall go over the results of this request for signatures towards the end of September.
Meanwhile, thank you for circulating this text to the utmost extent.

Paul-Eric Blanrue,
Founder of the research group Cercle Zététique,
Author of Sarkozy, Israël et les Juifs (Oser Dire publishers, [Belgium], 2009)

Source: Sarkozy, Israël et les Juifs [This link directs to the original post, written in French. What is posted here is one of the English translations floating around the 'Net. -Ed.]

Philadelphia demands bloggers pay $300 business license

August 23, 2010

It looks like cash hungry local governments are getting awfully rapacious these days:

An new iPad owner syncs the device with his laptop computer while visiting a Starbucks Coffee location April 3, 2010 (Photo by Tom Pennington/Getty Images)

Between her blog and infrequent contributions to, over the last few years she says she’s made about $50. To [Marilyn] Bess, her website is a hobby. To the city of Philadelphia, it’s a potential moneymaker, and the city wants its cut.

In May, the city sent Bess a letter demanding that she pay $300, the price of a business privilege license.

“The real kick in the pants is that I don’t even have a full-time job, so for the city to tell me to pony up $300 for a business privilege license, pay wage tax, business privilege tax, net profits tax on a handful of money is outrageous,” Bess says.

It would be one thing if Bess’ website were, well, an actual business, or if the amount of money the city wanted didn’t outpace her earnings six-fold. Sure, the city has its rules; and yes, cash-strapped cities can’t very well ignore potential sources of income. But at the same time, there must be some room for discretion and common sense.

When Bess pressed her case to officials with the city’s now-closed tax amnesty program, she says, “I was told to hire an accountant.”

She’s not alone. After dutifully reporting even the smallest profits on their tax filings this year, a number — though no one knows exactly what that number is — of Philadelphia bloggers were dispatched letters informing them that they owe $300 for a privilege license, plus taxes on any profits they made.

Even if, as with Sean Barry, that profit is $11 over two years.

To say that these kinds of draconian measures are detrimental to the public discourse would be an understatement.

Source: Washington Examiner.

Israeli Zionists teach course on editing Wikipedia

August 22, 2010

A first-of-its-kind course opened this week in Jerusalem: “Zionist Editing for Wikipedia.” The patriotic “Yisrael Sheli” (My Israel) organization, which recently organized the demonstrations outside the Turkish Embassy after the flotilla incident, was motivated to open the course in order to address Israel’s public relations problems.

The course, which was organized with the help of the Yesha Council, conducted a one-day seminar, and will continue online.

The strategy and goal of the course is to educate and enable an ‘army’ of editors of Wikipedia, giving them the professional skills to write and edit the online encyclopedia’s content in a manner which defends and promotes Israel’s image.

The participants of the course were chosen from a long list of candidates, with 80 students in total slated to participate.

Seminar workshops were led by professionals and senior Wikipedia editors, and included an overview of the Wikipedia project and practical training on web editing, writing, and values.

Organizers said the initial seminar was a success, and there is a great demand for more meetings in the future.

Source: Israel National News.

France sends Gypsies back to Romania

August 20, 2010

Dozens of Roma (Gypsies) have arrived back in Romania after being repatriated by France under a controversial policy backed by President Nicolas Sarkozy.

France’s Roma
  • Roughly 12,000 Roma migrated to France after Bulgaria and Romania’s accession to the EU

  • Many have no work permits, so live in camps and resort to begging

  • Separately, at least 400,000 people are designated “travellers”, mostly French nationals with Roma origins

Some 86 Roma left France and hundreds more will follow in the coming weeks after their camps were shut down.

The French government says it is a “decent and humane” policy of removing people from deplorable conditions.

But rights groups say the Roma are being demonised, and Romania has warned France against “xenophobic reactions”.

“We understand the position of the French government. At the same time, we support unconditionally the right of every Romanian citizen to travel without restrictions within the EU,” Romanian President Traian Basescu said.

However, Mr Basescu added that he was prepared to send police to France to help implement the repatriation scheme.

A deportee named Gabriel told the AFP news agency in Bucharest that life had been “very tough” in France, but he would not rule out returning because there was no work in Romania.

Another man said that in Romania “we don’t have any chance, no jobs, nothing”.

“Today, 86 people left France on the basis of what are called ‘voluntary returns’, 61 from Lyon on a special flight charted by the French Immigration and Integration Office, then 10 and 15 on two separate commercial flights from Roissy,” said Immigration Minister Eric Besson on Thursday.

Another 139 were due to be flown out on Friday, he said, and hundreds more by the end of the month.
Exploitation claims

The Roma are EU citizens, mostly from Romania or Bulgaria, but French law requires them to have a work permit and prove they have the means to support themselves if they intend to stay for more than three months.

They complain that the permits are difficult to get, and so they are often forced to live illegally.

Roma who agree to leave have each receive 300 euros (£246; $384) and an additional 100 euros for each child.

The French government says it plans to shut down 300 illegal Roma camps in the next three months.

The controversial plan was put in place after clashes last month between police and travellers in the southern city of Grenoble and the central town of Saint-Aignan.

The Roma were not involved in all of the trouble, but the government said travellers’ camps were sources of “illegal trafficking” and “exploitation of children for begging, of prostitution and crime”.

Some 51 camps have already been demolished by police and the residents have been moved into temporary shelters or accommodation.
Popularity booster?

The operation has been condemned by human rights groups, who say it is deliberately stigmatising a generally law-abiding section of society to win support among right-wing voters.

Last week, members of the UN’s Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination criticised the tone of political discourse in France on race issues, saying racism and xenophobia were undergoing a “significant resurgence” there.

But France has insisted that the actions “fully conform with European rules and do not in any way affect the freedom of movement for EU citizens, as defined by treaties”.

Foreign ministry spokesman Bernard Valero told AFP that an EU directive “expressly allows for restrictions on the right to move freely for reasons of public order, public security and public health”.

The European Commission said it would ensure none of the bloc’s rules were being broken.

France repatriated some 10,000 Roma last year and other European countries, including Germany, Italy, Denmark and Sweden pursued similar policies.

Mr Sarkozy’s political opponents have accused him of using the Roma issue to shift public attention away from corruption and on to crime.

The BBC’s Christian Fraser in Paris says that the president’s poll rating is sagging and there are some who accuse him of using the recent unrest to boost his own popularity.

Some of the Roma living in France are part of long-established communities of travelling people who are French nationals.

In addition, there are an estimated 12,000 Roma who are recent immigrants from Central Europe.

“Some of these families have been in France for five, seven or 10 years and 300 euros is not enough to help them settle in Romania. They will return in the coming weeks,” Malik Salemkour, the vice-president of the French Human Rights League, told the Reuters news agency.

Source: BBC.

Ted Nugent commends Dubuque, Iowa for being White

August 20, 2010

It was bad enough that rock musician Ted Nugent made racially insensitive remarks on stage last week in Dubuque. What made it worse was that audience members cheered. [O, the horror! -Ed.]

Anybody who thinks racism is in Dubuque’s past had better think again.

Nugent commented approvingly that he saw so many white people in the audience. He commended Dubuque for being a “white town.” The crowd — not just a few fans here and there — cheered. (That is not to say that everyone in the audience was a Dubuque resident and that everyone cheered. But no expression of disapproval was heard, either; hopefully, some were too shocked to respond.)

People who attend performances, whether they are stand-up comics or musicians or the like, might expect some political comments to be interjected during a show. But Nugent’s remarks crossed the line.

This wasn’t a first for Nugent. For example, there was the Texas governor’s inaugural ball in 2007. A newspaper reported that Nugent, whose conservative politics and pro-gun beliefs are well known, “appeared on stage wearing a cut-off T-shirt emblazoned with a Confederate flag and shouting unflattering remarks about undocumented immigrants, including kicking them out of the country.”

Enter Ted Nugent’s name in Google and you’ll be treated to many racist and sexist gems. Here’s a Nugent rant delivered at a National Rifle Association conference : “Remember the Alamo! Shoot ‘em! To show you how radical I am, I want carjackers dead. I want rapists dead. I want burglars dead. I want child molesters dead. I want the bad guys dead. No court case. No parole. No early release. I want ‘em dead. Get a gun, and when they attack you, shoot ‘em.”

Officials at the Diamond Jo Casino, who booked Nugent here, said they won’t censor a performer. Other venues who book talent, also asked about it by the TH, said much the same. We get it: Freedom of speech and all that. But venues also have the freedom to not book acts, especially ones whose on-stage comments are known to include hate speech.

Certainly, there are comedians who play local stages who might offend some audience members with crude humor and explicit language. But Nugent’s comments went beyond a question of taste. It’s fodder for career-crippling YouTube videos and audiotapes.

That type of talk, delivered to audience members who have been drinking, could spark a confrontation between audience members. Does the venue have a plan for how to handle that? What about a venue’s employees — should they be expected to work in that environment?

And then for the local crowd to cheer Nugent’s remarks? It is an outrage and embarrassment.

Editorials reflect the consensus of the Telegraph Herald Editorial Board.

Source: Telegraph Herald.

Nothing short of nukes will work -Gwynne Dyer

August 20, 2010

When Admiral Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the highest-ranking American officer, was asked recently on NBC’s Meet The Press show whether the United States has a military plan for an attack on Iran, he replied simply: “We do”.

Joint Chiefs Chairman Admiral Mike Mullen (R) accompanied by Defense Secretary Robert Gates. Photo / AP

General staffs are supposed to plan for even the most unlikely future contingencies. Right down to the 1930s, the US maintained and annually updated plans for the invasion of Canada – and the Canadian military made plans to pre-empt the invasion.

But what the planning process will have shown, in this case, is that there is no way for the US to win a non-nuclear war with Iran.

The US could “win” by dropping hundreds of nuclear weapons on Iran’s military bases, nuclear facilities and industrial centres (cities) and killing five to 10 million people. But short of that, nothing works.

On this we have the word of Richard Clarke, counter-terrorism adviser in the White House under three administrations.

In the early 1990s, Clarke said in an interview with the New York Times four years ago, the Clinton Administration had considered a bombing campaign against Iran, but the military professionals told them not to do it.

“After a long debate, the highest levels of the military could not forecast a way in which things would end favourably for the US,” he said. The Pentagon’s planners have war-gamed an attack on Iran and they just can’t make it come out as a US victory.

It’s not the fear of Iranian nuclear weapons that makes the US Joint Chiefs of Staff so reluctant to get involved in a war with Iran. Those weapons don’t exist and the whole justification for the war would be to make sure that they never do.

The problem is that there’s nothing the US can do to Iran, short of nuking the place, that would really force Tehran to kneel and beg for mercy.

It can bomb Iran’s nuclear sites and military installations to its heart’s content, but everything it destroys can be rebuilt in a few years.

And there is no way that the US could actually invade Iran.

There are some 80 million people in Iran and, although many of them don’t like the present regime, they are almost all fervent patriots who would resist a foreign invasion.

Iran is a mountainous country and big: four times the size of Iraq.

The Iranian army currently numbers about 450,000 men, slightly smaller than the US Army – but unlike the US Army, it does not have its troops scattered across literally dozens of countries.

If the White House were to propose anything larger than minor military incursions along Iran’s south coast, senior American generals would resign in protest.

Without the option of a land war, the only lever the US would have on Iranian policy is the threat of yet more bombs – but if they aren’t nuclear, then they aren’t very persuasive. Whereas Iran would have lots of options for bringing pressure on the US.

Just stopping Iran’s oil exports would drive the oil price sky-high in a tight market. Iran accounts for about 7 per cent of internationally traded oil.

But it could also block another 40 per cent of global oil exports just by sinking tankers coming from Iraq, Saudi Arabia and the other Arab Gulf states with its lethal Noor anti-ship missiles.

The Noor anti-ship missile is a locally built version of the Chinese YJ-82. It has a 200km range, enough to cover all the major choke points in the Gulf. It flies at twice the speed of sound just metres above the sea’s surface and has a tiny radar profile. Its single-shot kill probability has been put as high as 98 per cent.

Iran’s mountainous coastline extends along the whole northern side of the Gulf and these missiles have easily concealed mobile launchers. They would sink tankers with ease and, in a few days, insurance rates for tankers planning to enter the Gulf would become prohibitive, effectively shutting down the region’s oil exports completely.

Meanwhile, Iran would start supplying modern surface-to-air missiles to the Taleban in Afghanistan and that would soon shut down the US military effort there. (It was the arrival of US-supplied Stinger missiles in Afghanistan in the late 1980s that drove Russian helicopters from the sky and ultimately doomed the whole Soviet intervention there.)

Iranian ballistic missiles would strike US bases on the southern (Arab) side of the Gulf and Iran’s Hizbollah allies in Beirut would start dropping missiles on Israel.

The US would have no options for escalation other than the nuclear one, and pressure on it to stop the war would mount by the day as the world’s industries and transport ground to a halt.

The end would be an embarrassing retreat by the US and the definitive establishment of Iran as the dominant power of the Gulf region. That was the outcome of every war-game the Pentagon played and Mike Mullen knows it.


John Bolton Says Three Days Left to Attack Iran

August 20, 2010

Former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, John Bolton, told Israel Radio today that there are only three days left for Israel to attack Iran if it wants to stop the Islamic Republic from manufacturing nuclear weapons.

On Friday, Russia announced that on August 21st, it will start loading nuclear fuel into the Bushehr reactor. Bushehr is Iran’s first atomic power station. Bolton said that once the reactor, also built by Russia, becomes operational on Friday, it will be too late to attack, because the attacking it would result in fallout of radioactive material as far as the Persian Gulf and hurt Iranian civilians.

Bolton also expressed pessimism that the U.S. administration would lead an attack against Iran, saying, “I would be very surprised if there are any circumstances in which the Obama administration would use force against Iran’s nuclear program.”

Earlier in the week, Bolton said, “If Israel wants to do something against the reactor in Bushehr, it must do so in the following eight days.” Today he revised his estimate to even less time. He said that in the absence of an Israeli attack, Iran would complete its goal of the establishment of a functioning nuclear reactor.

Bolton was skeptical of the possibility that Israel would attack Iran in the coming days. “I do not think so, I fear that Israel has lost this opportunity,” he said.

Already during his tenure in the Bush administration, Bolton stood out due to his approach advocating an attack on the regime in Tehran. He reiterated the danger for Israel and the world, and called on his government to deal with it firmly. Bolton has repeatedly stated that everything must be done to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon, including a military attack.

Source: Israel National News.

Announcement: Registration now required for writing comments

August 19, 2010

Note: User registration is again enabled.

Due to abuse by some, VoR has decided to make user registration required for writing comments; we regret the inconvenience. Some notes:

  • Register here.

  • You need a functioning email account. A password will be automatically sent to you. (If you want a different password, email me, but please choose a good password.)

  • Your first comment will be moderated. Please be patient.

  • Comments must follow our Guidelines (In a nutshell: Be civil, constructive & on-topic).

  • Multiple accounts are not allowed. Choose your username carefully. It will be your display name on this blog unless you request otherwise.

  • Breaking or circumventing rules will result in being banned.

  • If you have any question or problem, email me.


Who benefits from the War in Iraq and Afghanistan? -Tom Sunic

August 17, 2010

The following article is the slightly edited version of the speech that Dr. Sunic gave on Aug. 7, 2010 at the festival-conference of the NPD (National Democratic Party), near the town of Goerlitz, Germany as previously announced.

The original title in German is Wem nutzt der Krieg in Irak und Afghanistan?”.

Related links:

  • The audio archive of Dr. Sunic’s live speech in German can be found here.
  • The German language transcript can be found here.
  • The German language transcript was also published as an article was also published at Deutsche Stimme.

The text that follows was translated into English by the author.

Who benefits from the War in Iraq and Afghanistan?

Ladies and gentlemen, dear colleagues, dear friends. Thank you all for being here. Many thanks for the invitation to our friends, the NPD chief Mr. Udo Voigt and Mr. Gerd Finkenwirth. Also many thanks to a lovely young lady Silvana for her professionalism and her kindness. I’d like to extend also my best greetings from my friends in the USA and from my colleagues from the American Third Party Position, our Chairman, William Johnson, Prof. Kevin MacDonald, the radio host of Political Cesspool, James Edwards, and many, many other valiant members. Our recently launched party shares many similar ideas and pursues similar goals.

* * *

Instead of raising the question “who benefits from the war in Afghanistan and Iraq,” one might just as well ask the question: Who was the instigator of these two wars? The latter question does not sound very specific and provides a treasure trove for various conspiracy theoreticians. Wild speculations about the true motives of these wars are of no interest for us despite the fact that some of these conspiratorial allegations may be true. What we wish to find out is how these two wars were justified from the standpoint of international law and how they were legitimized by public discourse.

By the way, conspiracy theories, often ascribed to proverbial right-wingers, are not only the hallmark of right-wingers. The ruling class in the West does not shun using different types of conspiratorial vocabulary whose prime purpose is to demonize and criminalize the political foe. In addition, the liberal system resorts frequently to conspiracy theories in order to justify its military interventions. Months before the invasion of Iraq, many American politicians, including the media had in all seriousness ranted about the “Iraqi weapons of mass destruction.” It soon turned out that the Iraqis had no such weapons, which was later conceded by the very same politicians.

From my own experience I could give you some firsthand illustrations of this conspiratorial vocabulary. As a young man in communist Yugoslavia, I witnessed daily the endless verbal demonization of fictitious political opponents. The Yugo-communist system used the words “Nazi and fascist threat” in order to legitimize its repression against its critics. Although there were no more fascists in communist Yugoslavia in the aftermath of the Second World War, the system and its scribes had to dig up fictitious Nazi-Croats in order to justify its shortcomings and its terror. Back then we used a joke, which soon became iconic all over ex-communist Europe: “Even when a fly farts the Yugo-communist judiciary will not level criminal charges against the fly, but will instead apprehend the proverbial ‘Nazi-Croats.’” Similar linguistic escapades have now become part and parcel of the official vocabulary of the European Union, whose politicians dish out their propaganda under the elegant cloak of “freedom of speech” and “human rights.”

It is important to analyze how the liberal politicians and their warmongers manipulate public discourse. On the one hand we are bombarded by a litany of horrific labels, such as “war on terror”, “Islamo-fascism”, and “Al Qaeda terrorists”; on the other, we must daily stay tuned to their sentimental utterings such as the “fight for human rights,” “multicultural tolerance”, or “freedom for Afghan women.” The German Chancellor Angela Merkel did not sound credible at all when she recently rendered homage to fallen German soldiers and the enduring commitment of German troops in Afghanistan, “which serves the interest of our country.” The entire address by Chancellor Merkel was teeming with theatrical verbiage, better known in Germany as “cemented language” (Betonsprache), once commonly used in former communist East Germany.

Regardless of the hyper-moralistic lexicon used by the Western ruling class, empirical evidence regarding the true motives for the US commitment in Iraq and Afghanistan is very sparse if not completely absent.

A Balance Sheet

The war in Afghanistan was launched 3 weeks after the terror attack on September 11, 2001 in New York. Even a halfwit can tell that a long-term military strategy for Afghanistan could not be readied in three weeks. The plan to overthrow the regime in Afghanistan and Iraq had already been waiting in the wings. The first indications of the upcoming war in the Middle East and Central Asia had been put on paper by pro-Zionist academics in America in the early nineties, namely, after the first indecisive Gulf War in 1991. Many American pro-Israeli journalists and many well-known Jewish-American scholars had began drafting a long term plan for the reorganization of the region — “regime change” in the Middle East and Asia. Especially important was the role of the American Enterprise Institute and the launching of “the Project for the New American Century.” Many important names participated in these projects, names that later came to be associated with the code term “neoconservatives.” September 11, came to them as if sent by God.

Any war anywhere in the world must be always preceded by cultural warfare. The US neocons understood that very well. The war in Afghanistan and Iraq began first as an academic dispute — largely spearheaded by neocon journals, such as Commentary and The Weekly Standard. Today however, the language of “weapons of mass destruction” has replaced its bellicose denominator with the euphemism of “fighting for democracy.” In retrospect, one must raise the question whether one could also draw parallels between the fraudulent motives for the current war in Iraq and the Allied motives for their WWII commitment in Europe and the subsequent “reeducation” of the German people.

Even after nine years of war in Afghanistan, even after seven years of Iraq, the security climate in the Middle East and Afghanistan, or for that matter in the entire West, has not improved. It has deteriorated. There is far more terrorist threat today than eight or nine years ago. One can argue that the risk of Islamic terrorism in Europe and the USA grows in proportion to the continuation of war in Iraq and Afghanistan.

And what happened with European politicians during that time? In 2001, during the deployment of US troops in Afghanistan, as well as two years later during the invasion of Iraq, the consent of the European allies was difficult to come by. European NATO members, apart from their servile policies toward Washington, knew well that no quick war results were at hand. Official Germany and France were skeptical because they have twice as many Muslim immigrants than the entire U.S., and in addition, they have different visions about how to fight terrorism. For Germany, as a valiant US ally and a NATO member, it was not easy to openly defy the Americans. It is not worth talking about this post-World War II German subservience now. In order to grasp German foreign policy somersaults over the last 60 years one must first delve into the Allied laundering of the German character and the process of massive reeducation which is still part of the German media landscape.

Unlike Germany and France, the Bush administration had no problem drumming up support among Eastern Europeans for their foreign expeditions. Here are two reasons:

Only two decades ago all East European countries were allies of the Soviet Union; they became NATO members just a decade ago. The political and cultural mimicry of Americanism — albeit with a broken Slavic accent — in this part of Europe is more widespread than in Germany or in France.

The other reason is that the bulk of politicians and academics from the Baltics to the Balkans, is made up of rebranded communist apparatchiks and their progeny. In order to cover up their own criminal past, or for that matter their former communist terror policies, they needed to become more Catholic than the Pope, i.e. more Americans than the Americans themselves.

Hence the reasons Eastern Europeans politicians can now be far better manipulated and are far easier to bribe into political servility than Western European politicians — with the exception of Russia. Once upon the time East European politicians made obligatory pilgrimages to Moscow, Belgrade, or Havana. Today, their mandatory places of pilgrimage are Washington and Tel Aviv.

American Political Theology

The beneficiaries of these two wars were, at least at the beginning of the hostilities, US neoconservatives and the state of Israel. But it is wrong to blame them only. To understand the deep-seated motives of U.S. foreign policy, one has to delve into American political theology — the conviction of many American politicians of their country’s divine chosenness. The architects and beneficiaries of these wars are motivated by secular political consequences, but the root causes of these wars have a theological dimension. These two cannot be separated. Uri Avnery, an Israeli leftist writer, remarked some time ago that “Israel is a small America, the USA is a huge Israel.”

Sure, it goes without saying that an Israeli journalist, but also many left-leaning Jewish American scholars, such as Noam Chomsky or Norman Finkelstein can easily get away with such an anti-Israeli rhetoric. Its is questionable what type of grammar, let alone language structure a non-Jewish intellectual, or some “right-winger” would need to use in order to express the same judgments.

Over one hundred years US politicians and their advisors have tapped into the Old Testament in quest of their notion of the political. Many American politicians have adopted their political conceptualization from the ancient Hebrew thought. One hundred and fifty years ago it was the ante bellum secessionist South which became the symbol of absolute evil; later, at the beginning of the 20th century, the symbol of the absolute evil became the “bad German” and shortly afterwards the proverbial “Nazi.” During the Cold War it was temporarily the role of Communists in the Soviet Union to play the bad guys. As there are today no more Communists, no more Fascists, no more Southern Segregationists, some substitute had to be urgently looked for. So for many American Bible do-gooders the Ersatz was to be found among the so-called Islamo-fascists, or Islamic terrorists.

Soon this new category of absolute evil expanded to include the Palestinian Hamas, the Lebanese Hezbollah and “rogue states”, like Iraq, Syria and Iran. Geopolitically, these states, including Israel, are of no importance to America’s security whatsoever. But America’s metaphysical ties to Israel make many American politicians perceive Israeli’s enemies as their own.
It is wrong, therefore, to solely blame the Israelis and US neoconservatives, or for that matter the Jews for these two wars. They were or may still be the beneficiaries, but much of the popular support for this “make-the-world-safe-for-democracy” political theology comes from the millions of Christian-Zionists.

Their spirit of chosenness has had its offshoot in a secular ideology of human rights, taken now for granted as something humane and indispensable by the entire world. Yet it is in the name of human rights that the worst mass crimes are often committed. It is in the name of “human rights” that many non-conformist intellectuals can be easily shut up. When a self-proclaimed democrat talks about human rights, one should raise a critical question: “What happens then to those who do not fit into the category of humans or democrats?” Logically, they must be tagged as beasts and animals and therefore, cannot be re-educated, but must be physically wiped out or shut down. Let us try to picture what was crossing the mind of young American pilots who flew over Cologne and Hamburg in the summer of 1943. They had no remorse firebombing these cities below. They viewed the creatures down below as the embodiment of the absolute evil, as the most dangerous beasts that needed to be exterminated for good.

Christian-Zionists bear some of the responsibility for these two wars. Their self-serving idea of some special divine election does not lead to better understanding among different nations and different races, but to endless and futile wars.

Tom Sunic (Web sites: [1], [2]) is an author, former political science professor in the USA, translator and former Croat diplomat. He is a VoR radio host and the author of Against Democracy and Equality: The European New Right (1990, 2002) and Homo americanus: Child of the Postmodern Age (2007). Email him.

Source: TOO.

Without a revolution, Americans are history -Paul Craig Roberts

August 16, 2010

The United States is running out of time to get its budget and trade deficits under control.  Despite the urgency of the situation, 2010 has been wasted in hype about a non-existent recovery.  As recently as August 2 Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner penned a New York Times column, “Welcome to the Recovery.”

The United States is running out of time to get its budget and trade deficits under control.  Despite the urgency of the situation, 2010 has been wasted in hype about a non-existent recovery.  As recently as August 2 Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner penned a New York Times column, “Welcome to the Recovery.”

As John Williams ( has made clear on many occasions, an appearance of recovery was created by over-counting employment and undercounting inflation. Warnings by Williams, Gerald Celente, and myself have gone unheeded, but our warnings recently had echoes from Boston University professor Laurence Kotlikoff and from David Stockman, who excoriated the Republican Party for becoming big-spending Democrats.

It is encouraging to see some realization that, this time, Washington cannot spend the economy out of recession. The deficits are already too large for the dollar to survive as reserve currency, and deficit spending cannot put Americans back to work in jobs that have been moved offshore.

However, the solutions offered by those who are beginning to recognize that there is a problem are discouraging. Kotlikoff thinks the solution is savage Social Security and Medicare cuts or equally savage tax increases or hyperinflation to destroy the vast debts.

Perhaps economists lack imagination, or perhaps they don’t want to be cut off from Wall Street and corporate subsidies, but Social Security and Medicare are insufficient at their present levels, especially considering the erosion of private pensions by the dot com, derivative and real estate bubbles. Cuts in Social Security and Medicare, for which people have paid 15 per cent of their earnings all their lives, would result in starvation and deaths from curable diseases.

Tax increases make even less sense. It is widely acknowledged that the majority of households cannot survive on one job. Both husband and wife work and often one of the partners has two jobs in order to make ends meet. Raising taxes makes it harder to make ends meet–thus more foreclosures, more food stamps, more homelessness. What kind of economist or humane person thinks this is a solution?

Ah, but we will tax the rich. The rich have enough money. They will simply stop earning.

Let’s get real.  Here is what the government is likely to do.  Once  Washington realize that the dollar is at risk and that they can no longer finance their wars by borrowing abroad, the government will either levy a tax on private pensions on the grounds that the pensions have accumulated tax-deferred, or the government will require pension fund managers to purchase Treasury debt with our pensions. This will buy the government a bit more time while pension accounts are loaded up with worthless paper.

The last Bush budget deficit (2008) was in the $400-500 billion range, about the size of the Chinese, Japanese, and OPEC trade surpluses with the US. Traditionally, these trade surpluses have been recycled to the US and finance the federal budget deficit. In 2009 and 2010 the federal deficit jumped to $1,400 billion, a back-to-back trillion dollar increase. There are not sufficient trade surpluses to finance a deficit this large. From where comes the money?

The answer is from individuals fleeing the stock market into “safe” Treasury bonds and from the bankster bailout, not so much the TARP money as the Federal Reserve’s exchange of bank reserves for questionable financial paper such as subprime derivatives. The banks used their excess reserves to purchase Treasury debt.

These financing maneuvers are one-time tricks. Once people have fled stocks, that movement into Treasuries is over. The opposition to the bankster bailout likely precludes another. So where does the money come from the next time?

The Treasury was able to unload a lot of debt thanks to “the Greek crisis,” which the New York banksters and hedge funds multiplied into “the euro crisis.” The financial press served as a financing arm for the US Treasury by creating panic about European debt and the euro. Central banks and individuals who had taken refuge from the dollar in euros were panicked out of their euros, and they rushed into dollars by purchasing US Treasury debt.

This movement from euros to dollars weakened the alternative reserve currency to the dollar, halted the dollar’s decline, and financed the US budget deficit a while longer.

Possibly the game can be replayed with Spanish debt, Irish debt, and whatever unlucky country is eswept in by the thoughtless expansion of the European Union.

But when no countries remain that can be destabilized by Wall Street investment banksters and hedge funds, what then finances the US budget deficit?

The only remaining financier is the Federal Reserve. When Treasury bonds brought to auction do not sell, the Federal Reserve must purchase them. The Federal Reserve purchases the bonds by creating new demand deposits, or checking accounts, for the Treasury. As the Treasury spends the proceeds of the new debt sales, the US money supply expands by the amount of the Federal Reserve’s purchase of Treasury debt.

Do goods and services expand by the same amount?  Imports will increase as US jobs have been offshored and given to foreigners, thus worsening the trade deficit.  When the Federal Reserve purchases the Treasury’s new debt issues, the money supply will increase by more than the supply of domestically produced goods and services. Prices are likely to rise.

How high will they rise? The longer money is created in order that government can pay its bills, the more likely hyperinflation will be the result.

The economy has not recovered. By the end of this year it will be obvious that the collapsing economy means a larger than $1.4 trillion budget deficit to finance. Will it be $2 trillion? Higher?

Whatever the size, the rest of the world will see that the dollar is being printed in such quantities that it cannot serve as reserve currency. At that point wholesale dumping of dollars will result as foreign central banks try to unload a worthless currency.

The collapse of the dollar will drive up the prices of imports and offshored goods on which Americans are dependent. Wal-Mart shoppers will think they have mistakenly gone into Neiman Marcus.

Domestic prices will also explode as a growing money supply chases the supply of goods and services still made in America by Americans.

The dollar as reserve currency cannot survive the conflagration. When the dollar goes the US cannot finance its trade deficit. Therefore, imports will fall sharply, thus adding to domestic inflation and, as the US is energy import-dependent, there will be transportation disruptions that will disrupt work and grocery store deliveries.

Panic will be the order of the day.

Will farms will be raided? Will those trapped in cities resort to riots and looting?

Is this the likely future that “our” government and “our patriotic” corporations have created for us?

To borrow from Lenin, “What can be done?”

Here is what can be done. The wars, which benefit no one but the military-security complex and Israel’s territorial expansion, can be immediately ended. This would reduce the US budget deficit by hundreds of billions of dollars per year.  More hundreds of billions of dollars could be saved by cutting the rest of the military budget which, in its present size, exceeds the budgets of all the serious military powers on earth combined.

US military spending reflects the unaffordable and unattainable crazed neoconservative  goal of US Empire and world hegemony. What fool in Washington thinks that China is going to finance US hegemony over China?

The only way that the US will again have an economy is by bringing back the offshored jobs. The loss of these jobs impoverished Americans while producing oversized gains for Wall Street, shareholders, and corporate executives. These jobs can be brought home where they belong by taxing corporations according to where value is added to their product. If value is added to their goods and services in China, corporations would have a high tax rate. If value is added to their goods and services in the US, corporations would have a low tax rate.

This change in corporate taxation would offset the cheap foreign labor that has sucked jobs out of America, and it would rebuild the ladders of upward mobility that made America an opportunity society.

If the wars are not immediately stopped and the jobs brought back to America, the US is relegated to the trash bin of history.

Obviously, the corporations and Wall Street would use their financial power and campaign contributions to block any legislation that would reduce short-term earnings and bonuses by bringing jobs back to America. Americans have no greater enemies than Wall Street and the corporations and their prostitutes in Congress and the White House.

The neocons allied with Israel, who control both parties and much of the media, are strung out on the ecstasy of Empire.

The United States and the welfare of its 300 million people cannot be restored unless the neocons, Wall Street, the corporations, and their servile slaves in Congress and the White House can be defeated.

Without a revolution, Americans are history.

Source: XXXXX.

Leadership and the Vital Order: Selected Aphorisms by Hans Prinzhorn, Ph.D., M.D

August 8, 2010

Translated and edited by Joseph D. Pryce

The enduring fame of German psychotherapist Hans Prinzhorn (1886–1933) is based almost entirely upon one book, Bildnerei der Geisteskranken (Artistry of the mentally ill), that brilliant and quite unprecedented monograph on the artistic productions of the mentally ill, which appeared in 1922. Sadly, it is too often forgotten that Hans Prinzhorn was the most brilliant and independent disciple of Germany’s greatest 20th-Century philosopher, Ludwig Klages (1872–1956).

Although Prinzhorn himself would have protested against the oblivion into which his mentor’s life’s work has fallen, it is a fact that Prinzhorn is still a major presence in the technical literature, whilst his hero, paradoxically, has been “killed by silence.” One should be thankful for even the smallest mercies.

Prinzhorn is even now a not inconsiderable presence in the field that he made his own, and he will remain a major figure, albeit a controversial one, in the field of psychology, as long as his discoveries are cherished and his insights developed as a living heritage by those who recognize, and are willing to repay, at least some small portion of the debt that scholarship still owes to his memory.

Humanitarian Demagogues, Egalitarian Rabble.  Whether today’s mechanistic and atomistic experiments with human beings originated in the Orient or in the Occident, the result is always the same: the tyranny of a clique in the name of the equality of all. And it is from this very tendency that the fantastic pipe dream of human individuals being reduced to the status of mere numbers arises. This wishful thinking is a symptom of the nihilistic Will to Power that conceals its true nature behind the cloak of such humanitarian ideals as humility, solicitude for the weak, the awakening of the oppressed masses, the plans for universal happiness, and the fever-swamp vision of perpetual progress. All of these lunatic projects invariably result in a demagogic assault on the part of the inferior rabble against the nobler type of human being. These mad projects, it need hardly be said, are always concocted in the name of “humanity,” in spite of the fact that decades earlier Nietzsche had conclusively demonstrated that it was the ressentiment, or “life-envy,” of those who feel themselves to be oppressed by fate that was at the root of all such tendencies. Indeed, it is even now quite difficult for the select few who have no wish to enroll themselves among the oppressed mob to understand the realities of their situation!

The Goals of Socialism.  When we set our goals in the direction of socialism, whether in the sphere of politics, of welfare work, or of the ideal community, the fanaticism that inspires the socialist is customarily tinged with Christianity. Thus the socialist urges the citizen to progress from wicked egoism to a more social attitude. Even when we ignore the social, religious, or political nature of the ideologue’s desiderata, there is one positive aspect to this development, for socialism at least directs our attention away from the tyrannical ego and towards the world that surrounds us, thus calling upon the only one of socialism’s fundamental motives that we can regard as positive and biologically sensible.

Characterological Truth vs. Psychoanalytical Error.  The most extensive, pleasant, and (one might even say) amusing effects wrought by the application of the psychoanalytic treatment depended on the fact that the most wretched and feeble blockhead was now able to convince himself that he was equal to Goethe in that the instincts that played so decisive a role in the cretin’s development were identical with those that were operative in the case of Goethe, and it was only a malicious practical joke on the part of Destiny that permitted Goethe to find in poetry a congenial sublimation of his sexuality.

The Psychopath and the Revolution.  We can hold out no hope whatever for the successful creation of the sort of community that is constructed by ideologists on the basis of purely rational considerations, for the projects that are hatched out in the mind of the rationalist are most definitely not analogous to the development of living forms in nature, no matter how often the contrary position has been proclaimed by false prophets. Thus, the delusive hopes that are cherished for the successful implementation of the simple-minded schemes of our socialist and humanitarian ideologists must fail in the future as they have always failed in the past. The only tangible result of these schemes has been to intoxicate the isolated psychopath with an egalitarian frenzy, from which his tormented ego awakens, more desperate than ever, in order to plunge once again, with ever-increasing violence, into his political ecstasies, into bellowing his eulogies to those nameless “masses” who are so dear to the ideologue that he has appointed them to be the sole beneficiaries of his activism, now that he has been made sufficiently mad by a nebulous and insatiable longing for “liberation.” But the “sham” anonymity, which functions effectively as the cloak for politicians who pretend to act in the name of “the masses,” can only benefit clever, robust, and willful politicians, such as those who rule the Soviet Union; the real psychopath, on the other hand, who often possesses a taste for novel sensations and who, perhaps, may also be seeking personal publicity, will never be able to conform to the prescriptions of such an icy, strict self-discipline.  As a result, he “breaks out,” and is soon overwhelmed by calamities from which he thinks he can only escape by resorting to even more violent attempts to achieve “liberation.” From the standpoint of psychology, the history of revolutions is very helpful to those who wish to increase their understanding of the “everyday” behavior—as well as the political actions—of his fellow human beings, not least to the physician who seeks enlightenment as to the nature of the motivations that drive men to perform violent deeds in situations to which they lend the halo of freedom, equality, and fraternity.

Heredity as Destiny (and Tabula Rasa as Sheer Nonsense).  The life-curve of an individual’s development is a single event, which arrays itself along the lines of irrevocable changes. Strictly speaking, therefore, every occurrence, no matter how insignificant, involves an irrevocable change: in life nothing can be reversed, nothing repudiated, nothing ventured without an attendant responsibility, nothing can be annihilated: that formula constitutes the biological basis of destiny. Just as the individual must accept his biological heritage as a whole, whether he likes it or not, in precisely the same fashion must he accept the pre-ordained pattern of obscure rhythms transpiring within him.

Today we have become tragically unconcerned with our biological destiny, to say nothing of the fact that we refuse to feel the slightest reverence to the sphere of life, to which we owe everything. …That very attitude accounts for the success that has greeted the claims advanced by Alfred Adler and his followers, who advance the dogma that the hitherto customary views on heredity are fundamentally false, since man is born as a tabula rasa whereon his environment makes impressions that, by means of education, one can direct at will, and according to the capacity of that will, toward any desired goal. Adler compounds his felony by claiming that there is no such thing as inborn talent or traits of disposition. …

It would be impossible to reject the principles of biological theory more absolutely than Adler and his cohorts have done. Even that which we understand by the old, almost obsolescent name of “temperament”—that which represents the sum-total of the somatically connected, permanent tendencies of an individual—even this link between the purely psychological and the purely somatic view is repudiated by Adler in his grotesquely teleological and hyper-rationalist construction. … Since there is no biological basis whatsoever for his stupendous assertions, one must seek for such a basis in another sphere, viz., the author’s ideology. Sure enough, we learn that Adler is a fanatical believer in the coming Utopia of socialism, and, as we all recognize, no Utopia can prosper until a faceless equality of disposition has been forced upon every individual by the ideological zealots who will run the show. Therefore I denounce the politically tendentious World-View that Adler and his apostles put forward as “science,” for it is a perfect example of nihilism passing itself off as scholarship, and no cloak of pedantic and prudent caution can hide the fact.

Genetic Endowment and Environmental Conditioning.  Upon his entry into individual existence, the human being’s development as a psychosomatic creature is determined as regards substance, capacity for expansion, and direction, in the first place by his genetic endowment as a whole; in the second place by his pre-natal environment; and lastly by the circumstances of his birth. That almost all the active factors rise and fall in varying phases, makes a rational interpretation and estimate of the state of things at any given moment impossible in the strictest sense of that word.

But the fact that such an admission of the difficulties that arise due to methodological limitations is exploited by false prophets in order to deceive the world as to the real nature of biological facts—usually in order to breathe some life into the defunct heresy of the infant born as a tabula rasa—is either a sad indication of their childish mentality or additional evidence that they are indulging their ideological proclivities in the wrong place. What Goethe described as “the law under which you entered the world,” what Kant, Schopenhauer, and others called the “intelligible character,” is the first unavoidable actuality that we must accept as the destiny of our being, and as the starting-point of all investigation and thinking that relates to the human being. All experience and all reasonable thinking drives us back to this basic fact.

Joseph Pryce (email him) is a writer and poet and translator from New York. He is author of the collection of mystical poems Mansions of Irkalla. His translation of the German philosopher Ludwig Klages’ work will be published shortly.

Source: TOO.