Old school airborne laser.

By: Jay

Many of the modern debates we see in politics and on television revolving around social issues are themselves irrelevant.  What Obama is doing is nothing but pure theater, and the absurd tales of bin Laden’s “assassination” are scripted events that only serve to show the guillibility of the masses.   Zbigniew Brzinski’s Between Two Ages was written in 1976 and mentions weather modification and the technotronic era that would arise, at that time still largely a staple of science fiction speculations.  He writes:

“In addition, it may be possible–and tempting–to exploit for strategic-political purposes the fruits of research on the brain and on human behavior.  Gordon J. F. MacDonald, a geophysicist specializing in problems of warfare, has written that timed artificially excited electronic strokes could lead to a pattern of oscillations that produce relatively high power levels over certain regions of the earth…. In this way, one could develop a system that would seriously impair the brain performance of very large populations in selected regions over an extended period…. No matter how deeply disturbing the thought of using the environment to manipulate behavior for national advantages to some, the technology permitting such use will very probably develop within the next few decades.” -pg. 57

And in the footnote,

“As one specialist noted, ‘By the year 2018, technology will make available to the leaders of the major nations, a variety of techniques for conducting secret warfare, of which only a bare minimum of the security forces need be appraised.  One nation may attack a competitor covertly by bacteriological means, thoroughly weakening the population (though with a minimum of fatalities) before taking over with its own armed forces.  Alternatively, techniques of weather modification could be employed to produce prolonged periods of drought or storm….(Gordon J. F. MacDonald, “Space,” in Toward the year 2018, p.34). “

The public is still unaware even of weather warfare, much less other policy papers that have been written about microchipping the populace and inserting them into an actual matrix, including a microchip and/or brain implant. The document is public at FAS.org, and comes from the Air University of the Army War College.  This is a 2001 document, and even still the mainline public and academia will mock and deride anyone who mentions the existence of such things, while at the same time, other hands of the establishment announce these trends, while simultaneously selling it as a good idea.  It reads:

“Ethical and Public Relations Issues. Implanting “things” in people raises ethical and public relations issues.¹¹² While these concerns may be founded on today’s thinking, in 2025 they may not be as alarming. We already are evolving toward technology implanting. For example, the military currently requires its members to receive mandatory injections of biological organisms (i.e., the flu shot). In the civilian world, people receive mechanical hearts and other organs. Society has come to accept most of these implants as a fact of life. By 2025 it is possible medical technology will have nerve chips that allow amputees to control artificial limbs or eye chips that allow the blind to see.¹¹³ The civilian populace will likely accept an implanted microscopic chips that allow military members to defend vital national interests. Further, the US military will continue to be a volunteer force that will freely accept the chip because it is a tool to control technology and not as a tool to control the human.”

Notice as well the 1995 image includes Directed Energy Weapons, which are said to not exist, though this has been in fiction as well, for years, such as Ian Fleming’s Man with the Golden Gun, which is developed by Scaramanga.  Directed energy weapons extend back to Tesla’s work, and are even admitted on the Department of Defense’s website, back in 1997. 

Directed Energy Weapons don't exist, unless your professor says they do.

Books like Brave New World and 1984 already predicted a lot of what we are experiencing decades ago, yet academia and its command and control structure inculcate the masses with constant nonsense and distractions as a pyshcological warfare operation.  Formerly psyops were directed at enemy populations, while now, they have been turned against the population itself.   And since the mainline media and politicians don’t even discuss this recolutionary information, they are irrelevant, and function mainly as stage and theater distractions.  Not only are they distractions, they are decades old distractions that aren’t even remotely relevant to the actual praxis of the shadow government for any other reason.

The similarities are striking, including the fact that the real ship shows many signs of funny business.

And, the apocalyptic film 2012 with John Cusack also showed a luxury liner sinking in 2012:

Tragedy and Hope, which doesn't exist.

By: Jay

I had a lengthy argument with one of my professors the other day.  I was told there is no Bildergerg Group, nor is there a Trilateral Commission, and they do not plan for a world government and single world currency.  Not only is this obvious to anyone who watches even the mainstream news, for someone in academia, it’s embarrassing, inasmuch as the library I work in has an entire row of works dedicated to globalism, globalization and globalist policy.  In this exchange I happened to have Carroll Quigley’s Tragedy and Hope on me, so I took it out and promptly read the famous quote from the well-known section:

“There does exist, and has existed for a generation, an international Anglophile network which operates, to some extent, in the way the radical Right believes the Communists act. In fact, this network, which we may identify as the Round Table Group has no aversion to cooperating with the Communists, of any other groups, and frequently does so. I know of the operations of this network because I have studied it for twenty years and was permitted for two years, in the early 1960′s, to examine its papers and secret records. I have no aversion to it or to most of its aims and have, for much of my life, been close to it and to many of its instruments. I have objected, but in the past and recently, to a few of its policies (notably to its belief that England was an Atlantic rather than a European Power and must be allied, or even federated, with the United States and must remain isolated from Europe), but in general my chief difference of opinion is that it wished to remain unknown, and I believe its role in history is significant enough to be known.” - pg. 950, Tragedy and Hope (1966)

He had not heard of Dr. Quigley, though this is a classic work of geo-politics.  I then pointed out that the Trilateral Commission’s own website discusses yearly meetings about “global economic governance.”  The reply was that I should leave the class if I am going to argue about it.  Ironically, the entire discussion started over whether education was tightly controlled from the top down, by the foundations and bureaucracies.  “Of course they are not,” he said, as I was asked to hush, and leave.   Yet Quigley’s book describes just such a control mechanism in place in all major spheres of influence.  In regard to education, R.J. Rushdoony’s The Messianic Character of American Education, as well as the work of Charlotte Iserbyte show very clearly the subversion and co-opting  of education for the purpose of mass control.  In fact, Tragedy and Hope discusses Lord Milner’s Round Table Groups, upon which the RIIA and Council on Foreign Relations are based.  Quigley writes:

“The powers of financial capitalism had a far-reaching plan, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole… Their secret is that they have annexed from governments, monarchies, and republics the power to create the world’s money…”  -Ibid., pg. 324

The globalist policy organizations like the Council on Foreign Relations and Trilateral Commission are fronts for the Round Table Groups, which are, in turn, under the mega-banks, which are also in charge of the international corporations.  This is why you see the revolving door policy of individuals moving around in the same positions.  Gordon Brown and Nicholas Sarkozy, for example, were finance ministers before taking political positions.  Furthermore, this has been the way of things for a hundred years or so, in terms of banking interests, and I have to sit here in a classroom and be insulted, and told that none of this exists, though the ascendancy of the banking power in America is a year from being hundred years old, now.  What I should have figured out sooner than I did, was that being intelligent and figuring things out is, in fact, a bad thing.

"Give us chicken feed, dear leader! Give us fake money!"

It is a basic principle of human psychology that humans want to be lied to an enslaved, generally.  Consider for example the “rape fantasy” many women have.  There is no explanation for this, other than that humans will construct their own means of enslavement.  For many of my younger years, I was beholden to the typical idealist folly that men are generally rational and can be educated and awakened to truth.  One thing college taught me was that truth is the possession of few, because it is not easily attained.  There was still a lingering egalitarianism in my praxis that made me think all humans are capable of transformation through education, but this is simply not the way of our world.  Branching out into civilization studies was the great cure for this malaise of mine, and when one steps back, getting as best one can a larger picture of the nature and tendency of man in history, objectivity takes the ascendancy in one’s worldview, over the idealism.

It is an Enlightenment assumption based on the philosophy of that time (i.e., Locke’s tabula rasa and the prevalent scientism) that man can, through education, and installment of some “system,” be it governmental, educational, or otherwise, be perfected.  This is also the foundational premise of Marxism, the perfectibility of man based on egalitarian projections and abstractions of “humanity.”  This proposition libertarianism shares with its statist and Marxist opponents.  The Enlightenment libertarian, newly awakened, is suddenly shocked to find that the world operates on financial fraud, wars, espionage, cloak and dagger operations, religious frauds, and other intrigues, yet the student of history knows these are the norm.  Intelligence agencies and spies are an ancient institution as Bible students know, hearkening to Joshua’s spies, Ehud’s assassination of Eglon, and so forth.  Empire, or global government, is not new.

"We are al equal! Even teh nasty an retardedest are gooder than the other eqwals!"

There have been numerous successive empires that sought world domination (as much of the world as they were aware of, that is).  Private banking and money-lending is an ancient institution as well, as any student of Moshe knows.  In fact, the normative state of mankind, historically speaking, is empire.  The few instances of republics and “democracies” are few and far between and are all based on that same single, fatal flaw: that man can be perfected through proper education, and become a rational, self-governing being.  This can be achieved in certain instances and examples, but not universally.   The simplest refutation of this is the numerous cultures that have tried to implement such governmental forms, and have failed, such as previously colonized lands like the Congo or Liberia.  If men are not able to govern themselves, they will obviously not be capable of progressing in their social and economic orientations.

Enlightenment libertarians are thus ignorant of human nature and anthropology, as well as genetics, and fail to grasp that the bloodline will always dominate over the demagogues and masses.  The Enlightenment libertarian-type acts as if elitism is something newly sprung on the world, as if there is naturally no hierarchy or class system, yet suddenly in our day, this mass fraud has been perpetuated! Scandal!  This view itself is the conspiracy theory approach of the Bolsheviks.  The members of the American “awakening” to political activism and anti-war sentiment are therefore deluded from not knowing history and human nature.   The entire process of the American system is not at all what it appears to be, and while this system of republic elections constantly presents itself to the people as the most just of all systems, the absurdities and incoherencies abound, daily.  Anyone who actually thinks the masses can be empowered is a moron and doesn’t know the first thing about history.  The naiveté involved in thinking man can be changed through proper education is even more deluded, and will find all of his political activism to be for naught.  All one need do to quickly realize this is do what I did: start a conspiracy website and see how well the project of “awakening the masses” goes.  In fact, I’m embarrassed I ever had that notion, but it’s typical for anyone in their twenties.

(in 80s pop falsetto) "Money, money, money, money....money!"

On the whole, these “activists” have little to no knowledge of basic economics, though they have managed to ascertain that the Federal Reserve System is one of international, foreign control.   Ironically, most activists then fight for the very thing that sustains international finance capital: Austrian economics.  All one need to do understand all this is read Ayn Rand, particularly her book of essays, Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal, which, by the way, includes articles by Alan Greenspan, who was a close friend of Rand.  The Federal Reserve is a private bank.  David Rockefeller is a private banker.  F.A. Hayek is who David Rockefeller did his dissertation on.  Do you get it now?  I am not saying, by the way, that some kind of mainline leftist, big government regulating agency can be enacted to magically change all this.  That, too, is more naive Enlightenment thinking, as if merely enacting laws alters the system.  The point is that the activists stupidly fight for the very thing they think they are opposing, and I’m not stupid.  The mature analysis of the present reality does just that–looks at the reality.

Quigley again writes on pages 326-7:

“It must not be felt that these heads of the world’s chief central banks were themselves substantive powers in world finance. They were not. Rather, they were the technicians and agents of the dominant investment bankers of their own countries, who had raised them up and were perfectly capable of throwing them down. The substantive financial powers of the world were in the hands of these investment bankers (also called “international” or “merchant” bankers) who remained largely behind the scenes in their own unincorporated private banks. These formed a system of international cooperation and national dominance which was more private, more powerful, and more secret than that of their agents in the central banks. This dominance of investment bankers was based on their control over the flows of credit and investment funds in their own countries and throughout the world. They could dominate the financial and industrial systems of their own countries by their influence over the flow of current funds through bank loans, the discount rate, and the re-discounting of commercial debts; they could dominate governments by their control over current government loans and the play of the international exchanges. Almost all of this power was exercised by the personal influence and prestige of men who had demonstrated their ability in the past to bring off successful financial coupe, to keep their word, to remain cool in a crisis, and to share their winning opportunities with their associates. In this system the Rothschilds had been preeminent during much of the nineteenth century, but, at the end of that century, they were being replaced by J. P. Morgan whose central office was in New York, although it was always operated as if it were in London (where it had, indeed, originated as George Peabody and Company in 1838).”

A pyramid of paper money! The joke is on you, because it's only paper!

This is laissez-faire, free market capitalism, and to deny that it is, is to limit the freedom of individuals who choose to engage in finance capital. I am not making a moral judgment of the system, just stating a fact. Once you adopt a libertarian stance, there is no coherent reason to say it is “wrong” to establish large institutions of finance capital.  Modern activists object that this is not a productive economy, and doesn’t create products or jobs, but merely financial transactions and offshore interests.   What do you think free market means–it means free trade, and that means jobs moving offshore, as well as offshore banking interests.  Who are you to limit the freedom of those in investment capital?  Who are you to call it “evil”?  On what moral basis do you establish that this is “evil”?  Such moral assessments require a worldview within which one can consistently explicate what is right and wrong, and at least give some basis why.  In fact, they need to understand that global capitalism is itself a force for globalization.  Duh.

Yet while all this wrangling goes on by activists, the real world continues on, operating as it did for millennia, under a pyramidal structure.  In Kierkegaard’s Sickness Unto Death, he gives examples of countless lives that were wasted, such as those who built the pyramid.  The usage of the pyramid symbology there is very relevant, since that is the symbol of the elite to this day.   Kierkegaard would prepare the way for the elitist philosophy of Nietzsche, and he did so by elucidating this principle that men are afraid of their own freedom, and choose despair and a prison.  The masses who built the pyramid were, at least in some degree, complicit in the construction of their own prison, and even erected a huge monument that described their own social structure.  Slaves, slaving away to construct a monument to their own slavery.  And that is why the pyramid is on the dollar? Because the eye of the pyramid is where the eye of the pyramid is.  What do I mean?  Where is the locus of world control?  It is where the eye is.  Where is the eye? One the dollar bill.  What does that signify? The the world power is the money power, and all the while the masses battle and grovel over a completely fiat, fictitious medium of exchange, constructing their own pyramid.

A pyramid of fiat currency!

“In effect, this creation of paper claims greater than the reserves available means that bankers were creating money out of nothing. The same thing could be done in another way, not by note-issuing banks but by deposit banks. Deposit bankers discovered that orders and checks drawn against deposits by depositors and given to third persons were often not cashed by the latter but were deposited to their own accounts. Thus there were no actual movements of funds, and payments were made simply by bookkeeping transactions on the accounts. Accordingly, it was necessary for the banker to keep on hand in actual money (gold, certificates, and notes) no more than the fraction of deposits likely to be drawn upon and cashed; the rest could be used for loans, and if these loans were made by creating a deposit for the borrower, who in turn would draw checks upon it rather than withdraw it in money, such “created deposits” or loans could also be covered adequately by retaining reserves to only a fraction of their value. Such created deposits also were a creation of money out of nothing, although bankers usually refused to express their actions, either note issuing or deposit lending, in these terms. William Paterson, however, on obtaining the charter of the Bank of England in 1694, to use the moneys he had won in privateering, said, “The Bank hath benefit of interest on all moneys which it creates out of nothing.” This was repeated by Sir Edward Holden, founder of the Midland Bank, on December 18, 1907, and is, of course, generally admitted today.” -Ibid, 48-9

A religion identified as a sickness, where despair is blessedness? I'll pass.

By: Jay

In The Sickness Unto Death, Soren Kierkegaard works within the scope of an Augustinian tripartite view of man, arguing that man’s existential dilemma is one of despair. Augustine is relevant, since he also underwent his own existential crisis in the famed “tolle lege” incident, in which his world of licentious pleasures came tumbling down as he realized the finitude and emptiness of his own being. Ever since, the West has been in a dialectical battle with itself, as philosophy works out this same tension present within each man

A man confronts himself, as Kierkegaard says, the essential self is the transcendence of the self as related to itself. This self is spirit, and it’s important to notice the correction Kierkegaard thinks he is rendering to Hegel. For Hegel., the universal is the real, and the ideal alone is real. Where Kant erected a boundary between the individual mind and the noumenal realm, Hegel sought to tear down that divide by making the ideal and the ideal alone, real. This rationalist project is rejected by Kierkegaard, and turned on its head.

The actual universal confronted by man is death, and man’s confrontation with death demonstrates to the individual his own finitude. Finitude and the infinite eternality of death or the next life, is thus a dialectical struggle for man. In The Sickness, the self is spirit, and appears to be modelled after the Augustinian conception of the trinitarian analogue of man’s being, which is based on the relational definition of the divine persons. In that Augustinian and Thomistic scheme, Person is relation, but for Kierkegaard, the true self is that which transcends the dialectic of self in relation to itself, which is held captive by the determination of despair, occasioned by an outside force being allowed to determine the self.

This will clearly lay the ground for Sartre’s distinction between being in itself and being for itself, where the individual is condemned to be free, and must not hide behind various collectivist masks and facade identities, exteriorly determined. Despair is the means by which one reaches this conversion, if you will. Part of the difficulty here is the desire for man to escape from a philosophy in which he is determined, and his own being is conceived of as inherently evil. This notion derives from Manichaeanism, and characterizes the belief system of the younger Augustine, prior to his conversion to Catholicism.

Manichaeanism posits an inherently evil created physical existence, and an ideal, disembodied good existence, the kingdom of light, that is thought. Here, there is a matter/spirit dualism that is retained in Luther’s own psychological issues and determinism, but also in the rest of Western man’s angst. The determinism/free will debate comes into dialectical opposition as much as does the spirit/matter and self/other dualities. The Hegelian approach was to seek a rationalist synthesis where the Universal Mind worked itself out in a grand historical process, while Kierkegaard rejects this as rationalist folly, as mentioned. From a theological perspective, it is interesting to note that these are many of the same issues raised to the fore by Eastern Orthodox critics of the Western tradition, as made evident in Dr. Joseph Farrell’s God, History and Dialectic. 

For Luther as much as for these thinkers, man is a determined creature, entirely determined by divine predestination, as Luther argues at length in Bondage of the Will, in response to Erasmus. What retains the primacy in Luther, as it eventually emerged in his master Augustine, is the primacy of volition over reason. For Augustine, the heart was what mattered in the long run, and this prepared the way for Luther’s introspective mental act of “sola fide.” This is the milieu in which Kierkegaard, a Danish Lutheran, proposes the idea of self transcending self versus itself duality, and freedom as an action against an Augustinian and Lutheran determinism, as well as rejecting the spirit/matter dualism.

What is retained, however, is the self reaching self-consciousness by the act of willing itself, and not by being determined.  However, what this all demonstrates is the absurd frustration that western man created for himself by adopting a bizarre philosophy in which dialectics are sought to be overcome by adopting a philosophy of Christianity, where God becomes man, and man becomes God, and the meaning of happiness and blessedness is despair and misery.  No wonder Kierkegaard despaired, and no wonder Nietzsche would reject this religion.

Tripod sound the same as the "strange sounds"

By: Jay

I noticed listening to the videos of the strange sounds that have been happening all over the globe, that in many instances they sound just like the Tripods in Spielberg’s version of War of the Worlds.  Since this blog examines the interplay between fiction and reality in film and literature, this connection should not be tossed aside.  And, to those who pay attention, it won’t be.  When we consider the continuum that is the totality of the fictional world (including modern film especially, and the real world (which encompasses) the fictional, we see, as Umberto Eco has explained, a reciprocal relationship between the two. 

Since those at the top have been aware of this for a long time, control of fiction and then foisting this into the real world is a tremendous tool of social engineering.  In this instance, when we look at the fictional story, it is an apocalyptic alien story that is chosen because H.G. Wells was a globalist visionary who helped plan the coming New World Order.  In the narrative, the aliens end up killing a good portion of the earth. 

Population control is central to the elite plan, so it’s entirely possible that the populace is being told by the standard “hidden in plain sight” approach to look to H.G. Wells and the coming war of the worlds, which, has several levels of meaning.  One one level, it’s a possible third world war, and on another level, the war of the elite against the masses, signifying a coming bio-release or some other mass weapon. 

This then suggests a human origin to the sound for the purpose of psychological warfare and the engineering of an attitude of perpetual fear and paranoia.  Psychological warfare is geared toward making the enemy lose in his mind first, before the battle begins or continues.  In the film Hugo, there are all kinds of symbolic and esoteric messages being sent (an analysis is forthcoming), but one interesting element is that it takes place in Revolutionary France, and the focus of the revolutionary impetus converges in the film director. 

Kingsley’s character plays a director who decides again to love the art of film that he himself pioneered.  The revolutionary element recalls the Illuminati, and the Eiffel tower figures prominently in the film, as well as the revolutionary flag.  For the globalist, the overturning of the present order, and the rise of technocracy means the final revolution, and the final revolution includes a great culling–a great depopulation.  Could this be the meaning of the strange sounds, as well as the added smoke and mirror effect of it being 2012 (which is another psy op)? 

Keep in mind that in Hugo, the director is presented as a great wizard.  He is a the new and true wizard, at the top of the pyramid, in that narrative.  In the perspective of the power elite, the real world is like  a film: the masses are actors, and the nations pieces in a grand chessboard.  Psychological warfare can then adopt the methods and usage of the mass media and film industry complex to pull a complete mindfuck on the public.  Some are speculating that this has to do with ‘Project Bluebeam’ and a staged alien invasion, using holograms.  Whether that is related to this incident or not (and it is basically a real plan, as this shows), the theatrics point, in my estimation, to a human origin.  Remember that the Orson Welles staged alien invasion used War of the Worlds! And that incident, many researchers claim, was itself a social engineering test. The fake alien propaganda story goes back to precisely the H.G. Wells era, and who but another film director, the modern wizard, to carry on the other Welles’ tradition? I vote for a human psy op, using Tesla-type technology.

In the immortal words of Merrill from Signs….

“Morgan, this crop stuff is just about a bunch of nerds who never had a girlfriend their whole lives. They’re like thirty now. They make up secret codes and analyze Greek mythology and make secret societies where other guys who never had girlfriends can join in. They do stupid crap like this to feel special. It’s a scam. Nerds were doin’ it twenty-five years ago and new nerds are doing it again.”

Oswald Spengler's classic, The Decline of the West

By: Jay

I am frustrated.  For years, I have dedicated a large portion of my time to research, and am constantly lectured by the clueless on topics of which they are clueless. This is especially true if you are in academic circles.  However, I understand that this is part of learning the world and how it works.  Nevertheless, though I spent years studying theology and religion, which was then supplemented with philosophy and history, I have branched out into espionage and tradecraft, geo-politics, race and economics.  The last few years have been spent immersing myself in those last four, and to be perfectly honest, I am particularly adept at gaining mastery of subjects very quickly.  I would in no way claim to have mastered these last four, as they are immense subjects.  Within three years, though, I have already read several key works in all four, and so I’m comfortable discussing them openly.

The point of this post is not to brag: I don’t have to. The point here is to mention that, as a remedy to frustration and as a means of growing in knowledge and interaction on more pertinent subject matter than merely films (though the film analyses will continue), I’ll be discussing new issues.  I am going to write more freely on my thoughts on a variety of issues, expanding that title “analysis.”  I do not at all profess mastery of these subjects, but I am becoming fluent in them.  On top of that, I am sick of being lectured by those who haven’t even branched out of their own narrow field of study.  All things are related, and all these subjects, as well as life experience, are interrelated.  Modern education is fragmented and no longer teaches a “worldview,” which was the whole meaning behind the word “university,” as Newman wrote.  Because all things are related, analysis should therefore include as much as one can fluent write about.

As I dove into geo-politics and race, I began with standard libertarian and conservative works back as far as 12 years ago, but in the last three years branched out into much more technical and numerous classical works on statecraft and civilization studies.   Aldous Huxley was instructive, insofar as The Perennial Philosophy makes lucid the kind of globalist philosophy he envisions.  Also relevant was Hegel’s work on the state, which point to a monolithic positive theory of absolutism wherein the individual is an atom of the whole to such a degree that personhood is not accorded to those outside the state.  Philosopher Charles Taylor has some good assessments of Hegel’s political theory, which can be seen as the precursor to modern absolutist fascism, as well as Marx’s statist stage of communism.  Marx was, of course, a Young Hegelian.  Collectivism seems ingrained in the mass man.  Indeed, Mussolini wrote defining “fascism” in regard to this “positive” action on the part of the state (as opposed to the Enlightenment liberal idea of the state’s existence being “negative,” merely restraining forces):

“ The foundation of Fascism is the conception of the State, its character, its duty, and its aim. Fascism conceives of the State as an absolute, in comparison with which all individuals or groups are relative, only to be conceived of in their relation to the State. The conception of the Liberal State is not that of a directing force, guiding the play and development, both material and spiritual, of a collective body, but merely a force limited to the function of recording results: on the other hand, the Fascist State is itself conscious and has itself a will and a personality — thus it may be called the “ethic” State….

…The Fascist State organizes the nation, but leaves a sufficient margin of liberty to the individual; the latter is deprived of all useless and possibly harmful freedom, but retains what is essential; the deciding power in this question cannot be the individual, but the State alone….” (source)

Dwight’s Mussolini speech.

Fascism is marked by the merger of the private sector and the state, as well as a fanatical nationalism or imperialism.  Our modern era is turning back to this from democracy as Spengler prophesied, yet in the form of a Third Way, and not an overt caesarism.  Alasdair MacIntyre’s work on communitarianism is also interesting, given that his philosophy of virtue has many good points, but collectivism is fraught with difficulties, not the least of which is the dismal track of central planned economies, such as the Soviet Union.  MacIntyre, in my opinion, is a much better philosopher, particularly in his work Whose Justice, Which Rationality? and on linguistic narratives.  This is relevant, insofar as modern trendy libertarians often pop up and lecture me on basics I came to ten years ago, and moved out of–particularly the fact that so-called libertarianism, or classical liberalism, is an Enlightenment philosophy that is itself wrought with problems and difficulties.  The purpose of this article, however, is not to devolve into Robert Nozick or Ron Paul.  The point here is that delving into racial studies and geo-political/civilization studies has emerged for me as a crucial  arena which is hidden from most people.  Francis Parker Yockey was invaluable in this regard, though I needn’t mention that I obviously disagree with much of the book, particularly his national socialism and fascism.  What is relevant is that the book is one of the best introductions to geo-politics one could envision.  Prophetic as well, it describes the track of the twentieth century, based on his perspicacity as a cultured imperialist.  In a way, it is like a technical Aeneid, which was a Roman lyrical version of geo-political lessons. 

The reason I continue to tout the work after disagreeing with much of it was its ability to make clear that statecraft and geo-politics do not operate on ideals and petty moralisms.   The masses, however, especially in the modern world, suppose that democracy is a real thing and that their “vote” matters, despite voter fraud, electronic voting machines and mass stupidity.  And it should be noted that this was also an Enlightenment ideal–that of voting for, and electing leaders.  Yockey’s Imperium accurately notes that the Enlightenment was dead in his day, but that for the populace to catch up, it would take decades.  His foresight here was correct, inasmuch as the continued existence of the American republican system is, in the mind of common Americans, a real entity.  The reality is quite the opposite: the American ideal of government by the people has never existed, aside from possibly the early colonies.  Certainly no superstate run by international corporations and banks that are larger than many nations’ GDPs can honestly still be viewed as an Enlightenment progeny. 

Zbigniew Brzezinski's "The Grand Chessboard" is a great starting place for modern geo-politics.

The reality is, the Enlightenment was both a success for progress in some regards, and a failure in others.  For one, it failed to understand the human nature cannot be universalized cross-racially.  The era was somewhat inconsistent in this regard, since slaveholders existed simultaneously with so-called liberals that touted the indefectibility of human reason.  No doubt reason is an invaluable tool, but it is not had universally.  The British adopted eugenics and population control, as well as Darwinism within this strand of thought with Malthus, Galton, Huxley, and others, which then gave way to Fabian socialism and Bertrand Russell which is the height of what Rene Guenon calls the “reign of quantity.”  Mankind is conceived of as a collective entity subject to numerical ratiocination and pure scientism.  But it is a scientism that is merely a return to gnosticism and classical barbarism in many respects.  Sociology, with August Comte and the Comte de St. Simon would take French Revolutionary and Illuminist thought into the collectivist realm, and combine it with the “reign of quantity” to produce a rationalized (in the Weberian sense), abstract absolutist state which, through panoptic surveillance, can constantly spy on the Orwellian animal farm.  Numericalized and bestialized mankind has now replaced the divine, Promethean idea that the Enlightenment originally birthed. 

Yockey, following Spengler’s lead, was correct in his analyses of these areas, as well as the faulty reductionism in Freudianism, Marxism and Darwinism.  All three attempt to collectivize man into a single conceptual notion for the purpose of efficient production.  There is sexual man, homo economicus and animal man.  All other forms and relations are excluded, and this relates back to the point of educational reductionism and discreet fragmentation mentioned above, where no one discipline has any relation to any other.  In an age of homo economicus, it is evident that economics is what dominates man due to number being demythologized from a sephirotic emanation to a nominalistic linguistic token.  The modern era is one of the dominance of techne, as Ratzinger correctly explains in Introduction to Christianity, where man’s ideals and modus operandi are all geared towards the ever-increasing efficiency of technological processes; a kind of mechanical Kali-yuga. 

From Locke's blank slate is birthed the propositional American nation.

Thus America comes into being as a nation supposedly conceived rationally, as if nations can be created propositionally. In this regard, the naive, Enlightenment rationalism evident in the founders’ minds was somewhat of a mixed notion in that the platitudes about man’s inmate rights and dignity was proposed with no real philosophical basis other than Protestantism and natural laws, which are faulty pillars if ever there were any.  It is like the Calvinist dogma of the invisible church, where the “true” church of the elect is propositional, and not the same as the “visible” church that actually is, within history.   In short the error in all these positions, be it Enlightenment rationalism, Laissez-faire free market capitalism, classical liberalism, American exceptionalism and expansionism, democracy, liberalism, communism, socialism, statism, and all the assorted “isms” of the past three hundred years, is their idealization.  I don’t mean ideal in the sense that no one can have ideal beliefs, but the notion of constructing a rational system that can then be pasted onto reality, as if the world itself was a tabula rasa.  Indeed, it is itself the Enlightenment which conceived of man as a tabula rasa to be environmentally steered in whatever direction the state or social engineer desired.  Christianity itself treats man and the world in this same way, as if it were a blank slate that a rationally adopted system can magically be made to conform to. 

But the discovery of DNA in 20th century laid all that to rest, as well as all positions based on egalitarianism.  Unfortunately, the libertarians for the most part haven’t figured this out, and still operate on the notion that men are all the same.  Men are not all the same, and certainly race effects economics, since economic performance will obviously correlate to IQ, social standing, talents, abilities, etc., which are directly connected to DNA and genetics.  Where the free market was right was in realizing the incredible potential that could be released in societies where individual freedoms and rights are guarded by the rule of law.  It is important to not bifurcate on America as something either good or bad.   Nothing in life is so easily classified and it is itself an immature and phony idealism that still thinks in these  categories in geo-politics, where moralisms do not exist.   It is only partly due to the good aspects of the Enlightenment that America rose to such power and prominence, as well as racial issues.   Sub-saharan Africa could never have produced the wealth and creativity that America did in two hundred years, simply by implementing some governmental form.  This is the chief error of the Americanists and libertarians, who act as if they literally don’t know anything about race and history (though they often talk to no end like they are the intellectual masters of both).  

Having been reduced, then, to homo-economicus in the modern world, it is therefore necessary to understand global capitalism and its socialist dialectical opposite.  Another fact that libertarians and “constitutionalists” fail to understand is the globalizing nature of capitalism itself.  In fact, The Road to Serfdom contains an entire essay by Hayek on internationalism and global authority, despite the fact that the libertarians and free market capitalists never talk about it.  Global capitalism is precisely what went forth as an iconoclastic force for destruction, in terms of localized economies and traditions.  If anyone doubts this, all one has to do is look at deregulation and free trade, as well as something like John Perkins’ Confessions of an Economic Hitman.  Joseph Stiglitz has also written about this, as well as even Marx himself.  

Note that I am not attacking capitalism or saying it is “bad” or entirely “good.”  Again, in terms of geo-poltics, the conern is what is, not what should be.  Every man may, and will, have is ideals and may work for those ideals as he lists, but what matters in the end is what is.  I might believe Byzantium was the greatest form of government, and strive to create New Byzantium or move to Russia and seek to revive the Third Empire, but the student of history who has read his Spengler knows that empires have an organic lifespan and are never resurrected.   History, like it or not, does not work that way.  Now, certainly there are movers and shakers in history who do have ideals and do work tirelessly to see them enacted, and do achieve legitimate change.  However, is it still erroneous to assume that this means an entirely rational system can be cut and pasted onto the world.  In terms of geo-political analysis, again what matters is what is.  Capitalism is a fascinating phenomenon and much of what Ayn Rand writes in her book Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal is correct.  The rise of the individual is the story of western man, from ancient Greece and Judaism, to the Magna Carta, to the U.S. Constitution.  The presupposition here is the rule of law and the right of the individual, allowing him the freedom to flourish.  This form of elitism is correct, and admittedly more just, though there are positive things to be said for monarchy, as per Otto von Habsburg. 

In short, I am sick of the narrowness with which the modern debate has been framed.  The average intellectual hops online, and has an entire milieu of completely irrelevant positions to choose from, most of which have been completely made irrelevant by the Internet alone.  Anyone seeking to rebuild Byzantium through blogs hasn’t a clue about how the world really works, and is stuck in the propositional rationalizing I mentioned above.  What does matter in the world is religion, economics, technology and geo-politics.   The perspective here taken is one of the objective analyst, not the passionate apologist.   I still have passionate views on matters, but I am also mature enough to realize that I can separately and objectively (as objectively as possible) analyze the current state of affairs.  For example, if an analyst fails to take into account race and DNA, and academic studies like this, one of the most important discoveries of the previous centuries, one may rest assured they are marginally relevant as a commentator, and likely still operating on dated Enlightenment presuppositions.  

Even though racial distinctions are real and associated with IQ distribution as the chart above makes clear, they aren't because DNA doesn't exist, even though it does.

This is not to say my interest aren’t still theological and religious. They are, but insofar as I aspire to analyze, I expand into other fields.   I have learned that it is small-minded and petty persons who will discourage you from mastering other fields, and often it is out of their own jealousy that they do so.  Particularly amongst religious and academic persons have I heard the endless mantra and complaint about my own excessive love for debate and mastering the opposing position, whatever that may have been.  But these small-minded persons simply could not grasp Aristotle’s dictum that an “intelligent man can understand a position without adopting it,” to paraphrase.  That is what analysis is about, and it is supposed to be what education is about, despite the fact that many of the worst persons I have dealt with were dishonest intellectuals and quackademics.  So expect the ante to be upped, from my side, and the topics here to get more hardcore and serious.  If that’s offensive to you, then go back to your new Byzantium feminist blog and don’t let the mouse hit you on the way out.

Teen millworkers of the world, unite!

By: Jay

Baconista: n., A dance, dance revolutionary.

Footloose is fabulously absurd: a butt-cut Kevin Bacon is swept up into a revolution that overthrows church and state. However, this is no classical union of the proletariat: this is a revolution fueled by music. The Beatles? The Sex Pistols? Metal? No, a revolution of Kenny Loggins, Shalamar and Foreigner. The absurdity lies precisely in this—the adults in this near-Denver town are afraid of soft 80s pop.

Note, however, that the town chosen is somewhere near Denver. I have mentioned elsewhere the importance of the Denver locale in certain films and novels, and my reading of Footloose is essentially that of a vague formula for revolution through music. Kevin, “The Bake,” arrives from Chicago and mystifies the locals with his cavalier attitude and free-flowing gymnastic jocularity. In fact. The Bake is able to dance like no one’s business when alone in a factory at midnight (following upon one beer and one cigarette). The film was actually shot in the Mormon-named city of Lehi, Utah.

The Bake gets a job at the local mills, so we know he is a working class revolutionary, and not part of the bourgeoisie. This gives him the requisite time to practice his flips and snag the town hotty, who happens to be the daughter of Rev. Lithgow who has a thirst for near death experiences and making out. Her name is Ariel, and Ariel is of course a reference from Isaiah for Israel. So the daughter of the male authority/patriarchy/God figure is Ariel, who is led astray by Pan, as a kind of pied piper. The pieces of the puzzle begin to fall in place. Pan is the ancient Greek god of woods, flute dancing, and sex. And dancing is a metaphor for sex. So Pan seduces the Ariel and overthrows the established order. Bacon’s character is named “Ren,” which is the Confucian expression of rightness, or a kind of golden rule. The Bake even teaches his redneck friend Chris Penn how to snap to a beat. Are there actually people who can’t snap?

(You also fry Bacon in a pan!)

So Ren/Pan represents equalization and “justice” against a supposed despotic Baptist theocracy that controls the establishment to the point of local cops being able to write tickets for teens attending rock concerts (?). Are there are any Baptist towns on theocratic lockdown? How is that actually possible, since Baptists believe in strict separation of church and state? I can’t imagine having to drive out-of-town to see Foreigner, and for that matter I can’t imagine seeing Foreigner, period. Meanwhile, Rev. Lithgow listens to Haydn, which we are supposed to believe is boring. Seriously? Kenny Loggins is superior to Haydn?

Kevin Bacon professes to be an atheist, and now we know why: the repressive regime of Rev. Lithgow. The Bake should have tried other traditions of theism, rather than confining himself to American fundamentalist evangelicalism. Rev. Lithgow adopts theological liberalism at a certain point, and stops the book burning. Yet with the newfound soft heart of Rev. Lithgow, I detect a deeper conspiracy afoot. Strangely, the town’s establishment rebels (who have Pink Floyd sticker, yet seem to only play Kenny Loggins) mysteriously reject the Bake, when the Bake is bringing the sansculotte victory they’ve been after.

David Bowie and Che Guevara would have been much more potent icons for dethroning the old fogies.

The incumbent rebels toss a brick into the Bake’s window that says “burn in hell”! The only way to make sense of this is to see it for what it is: a false flag terror attack run by Rev. Lithgow himself. No one but the Rev. had the motive to run the attack, and the anarchic Kenny Loggins-obsessed youths would not have turned on their pied piper, the Bake, unless they were establishment “rebels” – agent provocateurs. In sum, Footloose is a recipe for a successful revolution: screenshots full of Bacon ass in Jordache mom-jeans, lots of 80s adult contemporary pop (something along the lines of Hall & Oates should really stir the system), and a few committed 25-30 year-old “high schoolers” that know a couple of verses from Psalms and Samuel. (You also need a Walkman, some double As, and unlimited access to factories and train depots). Within a couple of days, the entire town’s youth will, by one degree of osmosis (and not the classic six degrees of Kevin Bacon arcana), be footloose.

You can't bitch about the means of production, when you've got Jordache mom jeans and a VW Bug. Those are timeless corporate inventions.

Ghost Protocol Poster

By: Jay

Mission Impossible 4: Ghost Protocol is one of J.J. Abrams’ best productions so far, a close second to Star Trek (directed by Brad Bird).  It’s also a stunning revelation of real-world cloak and dagger geo-politics if ever there was one (on film).  Not only is the plot centered around agents engaged in transnational plots, the fourth installment’s story centers around real British eugenics operations.  Eugenics is the science of racial health, and dates back to ancient Greece and Plato’s Republic, and culminates in the time of Sir Francis Galton and Thomas Malthus and others, whose works on population control and race would come to the fore as one of the central pivots upon which the modern world turns: that of DNA and genetics.

However, in MI4, the antagonist is a Swedish-born, British-accented mathematical genius, Kurt Hendricks, who seeks to initiate the next stage in human evolution through nuclear war.  This is consonant with the Nordic, Aryan trend that comes to the fore in Mein Kampf. This is the actual type of war gaming that has occurred in places like the Rand Corporation, of which Dr. Strangelove is a parody.  The love of the bomb almighty is a cult that has won admirers in reality: you think rightly of the Planet of the Apes sequel.   That chaos and apocalypticism can be initiated to speed up “evolution” is itself the revolutionary philosophy at base.  It it based on the mistaken notion that chaos and disorder are actual, substantial entities.  In MI4, Hendricks stages a bombing of the Kremlin that is blamed on the IMF team and America.  Russia is then implicated in second false flag terror attack perpetrated by Hendricks through a satellite in Mumbai, India, when he launches a nuclear missile from a Russian sub, aimed at the U.S.

The IMF team successfully rescues the world from staged nuclear disaster, but this brings up an interesting element I’ve noticed of late: several films portray, not just false flag terrorism, but secretive transnational groups using staged terror to provoke a war between the U.S. and Russia.  In The Sum of All Fears, that is what happens, and it is post-war Nazis that have organized it, as well as in the recent X-Men: First Class, where Kevin Bacon was an S.S. officer who wanted to provoke a nuclear war to wipe away the humans so the mutants could continue on to the next stage of ”evolution.”  Also shown in X-Men on a map is Denver as a possible nuclear attack area. The CIA began in the mid-2000s to move its operations there. 

Colorado also features prominently in Atlas Shrugged, Red Dawn, Stephen King’s The Stand, Justin Cronin’s The Passage, and the television series Jericho (which dealt with false flag nuke attacks).  Are these signals from the power elite?  If previous terror attacks are any gauge, they would seem to be.   Watchmen has a similar plot, with nuclear war supposedly being the path to world peace, as Hendricks proclaims at the end of MI4. As a side note, another interesting scene in MI4 is the final nuke launch, which is aimed at San Francisco, and which Peter Parker has already exposed here.

Hendrick’s secret codename is “Cobalt” because cobalt is the only chemical element that naturally gives off radioactive isotopes.  This is fitting, as Hendricks argues that radioactive death is “natural” and nuclear war is merely a deterministic effect of a series of causes.  One thinks of Herman Kahn, for example.  This is, of course, the natural result of adopting a Darwinistic, reductionist, materialistic worldview.  Even more curious is the ending scene where Ethan Hunt discovers that the new network he must take down is “The Syndicate.”  As I showed earlier, Ethan Hunt is based on E. Howard Hunt, and the X-Files’ ‘Cigarette Smoking Man” is as well.  And in the X-Files, what group does the Cigarette Smoking Man head up? The Syndicate.

The Syndicate!

Cormac McCarthy's "Blood Meridian"

By: Jay