The Injustice of Revisionism

At times it is simply unbelievable where totalitarian criminals and their spin-doctors can get away with! We did some posts recently on deontology: the field of ethics dealing with good-intent-bad-results-never-mind, the Left's permanent get-out-of-jail card.

Below we have another example. Watch the heading: it is gotspe! No one has the advantage of ignorance these days, or it must be due to the dumbing-down that passes for liberal education since roughly 1965.

The trick is reframing. Not only must we live with the false Left and Right dichotomy (which should read Left and Right Socialism), also they managed to emerge from history as the 'good guys'. This is done by inserting small snippets of text into articles such as the present:

"[they] ... founded the group at the beginning of the twenties after experiencing the horrors of war and revolution." They were the self-same people who were responsible for 'the horrors of war and revolution,' so that their vision of the collective may be build on its ashes. Instead the suggestion is dropped that these sons of peace were the actual victims of the opponent's wars!

It is unimaginable there would be such an exhib on Adolf Hitler's artistic efforts. Picture the outrage! And rightly so. Yet the crimes as a result of the central 'philosopher' of the Cologne exhibit are ongoing to this day!

Here we also have a splendid example of the Postmodern literal use of the metaphor. An entire blog dedicated to 'art as a weapon' (since 1990).

The picture is a work by Franz-Wilhelm Seiwert. Who knows what triggered his outrage of Chicago in 1887 is kindly requested to enlighten us. The Encyclopedia of Chicago surely has no idea! It cannot have been anything as bad as the Russian gulags, or the Great Leap Forward, or Cambodia's killing fields, to name but a few instances. A humane world for all, indeed ...!


Art Daily: "A Humane World for All: The Rhinelandish Artist Group the Cologne Progressives 1920-33

Thinking of the Cologne carnival and Karl Marx doesn´t come into mind immediately. Rhinelandish life style and Marx´s philosophy by Marx don´t have much in common. But the [German] philosopher published a paper in Cologne and the artists which are now on exhibition at the Museum Ludwig were both Marxists and followers of carnival.

"Progressive Cologne 1920-33. Seiwert – Hoerle – Arntz“ presents paintings and prints created by three of the most important representatives of the Cologne Progressives. Their pictures have an exceptional position in German art between World War I and II. The painters Franz W. Seiwert and Heinrich Hoerle and the printer Gerd Arntz founded the group at the beginning of the twenties after experiencing the horrors of war and revolution.

They dedicated their art to the fight for a better society. Painting was for them a "weapon". Art and politics were very closely related. The Progressives´ realism didn´t portray the world at its surface but exposed its inner structures and mechanism. With reduced forms the Progressives give a constructed view of the world and their main theme is the working class. Although rooted in expressionism the pictures don´t depict man in general but the individual as a concrete social subject. After being persecuted by the national socialists the Cologne Progressives fell (...) >>>

Ideological Archeology: Rousseau (II)

Swiss-French philosopher Jean-Jacques Rousseau's (1712-1778) personal life is marked by traits sounding awkwardly contemporary. Self-pity and paranoia play see-saw with wrong choices and deflecting blame. Man is by nature good, it is society that is the cause of corruption and vice. Iconic for Rousseauian thought is the image of the noble savage, man in his natural state before his fall from Paradise.

There is nothing ambiguous about his ethics however: he believed his 'doctrine of two substances' to be the key to the absolute quality of good and evil [Jonathan I. Israel, Radical Enlightenment, 2001, p., 2001, p. 719]. In an example in a classical setting he saw in Athenian decadence the degrading influence of reason. He preferred the cruder, militaristic Spartans, an unspoiled and nobler tribe. Their callous practice of exposing babies to nature - now in dispute - may well have inspired Rousseau to expose his own five illegitimate children to the hardships of the Paris orphanage.

Although Rousseau died in 1778, before the French Revolution, his justification of violence to power was the source of inspiration of the Reign of Terror that the Jacobins unleashed during the latter part of the rebellion. In 1792 the French 'citizen army' faced the Prussian forces at Valmy. In a psychological victory they prevented them from marching on to Paris to restore the monarchy. Earlier in the capital a mob had stormed the Tuilleries Palace. In the massacres over a thousand political prisoners were brutally hacked to death. Fabre d'Eglantine declared: "In the towns, let the blood of traitors be the first Holocaust to Liberty, so that in advancing to meet the common enemy, we leave nothing behind to disquiet us!" [Wildmonk]

After "the first Holocaust to Liberty" many more would follow. It is a specific feature, typical of Rousseau's constellation of ideas. The chief ingredients as expressed in "Profession de Foi" are a sweeping rejection of tradition, Revelation, and all institutionalized authority. [Radical Enlightenment, p. 718]

In Roussea's ideas we find the source of every anti-Liberal, violent revolution ever since the French Revolution went off the Lockean track. Rousseau is ultimately the father of many noxious and lethal traditions besides: Romanticism, redistributive Socialism, philosophical agrarianism, conservative Communitarianism, Nazism, and more to the point, the Counter-Enlightenment and postmodernism. Cultures, adopting Rousseauian ideas found in them a mirror of some aspect of their own identity. [Wildmonk]

Many have descended into the abyss of collectivist hell. In France his radical egalitarianism led to The Reign of Terror, in Germany to Left and Right Socialism with known result, in Russia and the Far East to communism, starvation and slaughter on grandiose scales. In China Mao Tse Tung's Great Leap Forward resulted in the greatest mass murder in human history and in Cambodia the Khmer Rouge's extermination campaign to establish Rousseauian agrarianism resulted in the deaths of well over twenty percent of the population. [Wildmonk] If this is not evil, frankly I don't know what is.

Why Rousseau is different
Rousseau stands apart in many respects. He marks the fault-line in Western tradition between Anglo-American and Continental lines of thought, and forms the point of departure from the Enlightenment because he is essentially anti-modern [Wildmonk]. While loosely following the traditional path of Enlightenment thought, his radical stance differs notably on the crucial issues of anti-individualism [Isaiah Berlin, "Against the Current", 2001], anti-capitalism and against private property ("Radical Enlightenment", p. 273), anti science and technology, his radical egalitarianism, and the inherent mindset in which the means are justified by the perceived noble end.

Rousseau is often quoted as the iconic philosopher of the Enlightenment, but it is quite clear he fiercely rejected all its tenets and values. No doubt, here we have the ground zero of the Counter-Enlightenment.

He was certainly no believer in mutually beneficial interaction, or the beneficial effects on society of self-interest (Bernard Mandeville (1670-1733), "The Fable of the Bees"), asserting that "society hardly needs to feed man's love for himself and his desire to be first among men." ["Radical Enlightenment", p. 273].

His radical egalitianism is echoed in the notion that rational and industrious man with dehumanizing machines would replace royalty as an enslaver of the common man, being better and more ruthless on the aggregation of material goods. He argued that the separation of the progress and dissemination of science and art from political and religious control are hazardous for society and for the virtue of the people [Bloom, 1990]. But it gets worse."

Common will" instead of freedom
In Rousseau we see the first social contract at the price of freedom and the birth of a notion called the "common will". The latter is a concept that in Rousseau's approach requires state intervention. This should not be confused with the 'common good'. It is a far more developed conception which, and unlike the former, can only be realized in the context of civil society under the state ["Radical Enlightenment", p. 720).

For the creation of a society of common will, "freedom of all the people", they need only accept the dictates of the state. This was Rousseau's essence of "true civilization." The struggle between rich and poor would then rise to a moral experience of self-restraint. [Wildmonk] With the faculty of moral choice thus abdicated and forfeited to the state, people would be free from lowly - earthly desires and reach full - ideal potential. Man is thus divorced from the social and economic context in which he lives and interacts with others. The ideal state of heaven, separated from earthly considerations.

This totalitarian approach to freedom, an abomination in every sense, was later further developed by Marx, who wrote that "capitalist, individual liberty is the most complete suppression of all individual liberty and total subjugation of individuality to social conditions" [Wildmonk: Marx, "Grundnisse", pp. 131]. "Freedom can only consist in socialized man, the associated producers, rationally regulating their interchange with Nature, bringing it under their common control, instead of being ruled by it as by the blind forces of Nature; and achieving this with the least expenditure of energy and under conditions most favourable to, and worthy of their human nature." [Wildmonk: Marx, "Selected Writings", pp. 496].

In this way man's separation from his nature and morality began. Never in human history were their worse judges of human character than Rousseau and his followers: all seek some degree of formal control over individual freedom for the purpose of creating material conditions deemed necessary for "true freedom", moralectomy in precise equal measure. Rousseau's concept of "common will" became the most savage, bloody instrument of social engineering in the history of mankind.

The Atlantic Ridge
In the United States Thomas Jefferson was the most prominent supporter of the French revolutionary achievements. Nevertheless, property rights and Enlightenment liberties were set in stone in the spirit of Locke, Montesquieu and Adam Smith. The present Democratic Party is being diverted further and further from that tradition as the sway of the postmoderns intensifies. Rhetorical style and attitude betray their influence.

While National Socialist and Communist ideas have swept America to some extent in their haydays - notwithstanding the counter culture, a product of the latter - these Rousseauian inspired ideologies remained by and large a marginal affair. Rousseau entering Locke's territory by the back- door may come as a surprise to some Americans - the wrong brand of revolution is encroaching on its most basic principles.

In Europe the situation was markedly different, as we shall see. Locke's influence remained on the whole limited to the British Isles. France and Germany have both Rousseau traditions, not Lockean. Today of great long-term concern is a possible return to some form of Rousseau inspired extreme ideology. It is chilling to see the rise of an unelected governing body on the European continent. The post-democratic elitism, combined with postmodern ideological chaos understood in the philosophical context, is an even more disquieting prospect.

Counter-Enlightenment projection* is on the order of the day and may even be consciously used as a tactic. Rousseau's brand of radical and revolutionary ideas, combined with the notion that civilization is so corrupt that it must be considered beyond salvation, makes him the father of all violent struggle in the last two and a half centuries.

Americans, tending to confuse Locke's revolution with Rousseau's, occasionally fall into the trap of supporting the wrong causes: initially the Russian Red Terror, and more recently, the covertly Islam inspired call for independence in the middle of Europe's powder keg, the Serbian province of Kosovo in the heart of the Balkans, thus providing a foothold in Europe for similarly based and equally pernicious radicalism.

The zero-sum game approach to economics also originates with Rousseau, which is giving rise to the annual media talking point that "a new report is suggesting that today's rich are getting richer, and the poor are getting poorer". This is incorrect propaganda, some reason requiring regular public re-affirmation, perhaps for that reason alone.

Rousseau and Religion
The great minds of the Enlightenment proper - Spinozists excluded - never saw Christianity as their mortal enemy. To them Church and the Enlightenment were natural allies. Rousseau was no exception, but he had only a passing acquaintance with the Christian political tradition. Therefore he dismissed the role of Christianity as a moderating force in society. He saw the faith as entirely a spiritual undertaking, occupying itself only with "heavenly things."

Rousseau's Christians are so detached from reality that they can hardly be recognized: a people so spiritualized that they display a profound disinterest if their earthly pursuits are successful or not. Rousseau's call for transcendent values to harness the energies of men towards the 'common will', coupled with the rejection of Christianity as a engine of these values, made it a central tenet of all the Rousseauian ideologies [Wildmonk].

To Rousseau religion was an imperative. "... the state cannot ... pursue a policy of toleration for disbelievers, or view religion as a matter of individual conscience. It absolutely must, therefore, reject dangerous notions of toleration and the separation of church and state." and "so fundamentally important is religion that the ultimate penalty is appropriate for disbelievers ..." [Stephen R.C. Hicks, "Explaining Postmodernism", Scholargy Press, 2004, p. 98].

Despite being so enamored with force-feeding religion, after the publication of his work "Emile" he was driven into temporary exile in Bern after a warrant for his arrest was issued. "Emile" was widely denounced as irreligious and seditious.

The Legacy
The loather of civilization Rousseau was nevertheless greatly admired by the early Counter-Enlighteners, as he is by today's postmoderns. His followers mostly selected from his work what they could use to prop up their ideologies. Marx accepted Rousseau's critique of Locke's economic man but stood solidly by the Enlightenment in his appreciation for science and technology. Marx even went so far as to describe his ideology as Scientific Marxism, basically a pseudo scientific rationalization of his aggregate of ideas.

Hegel as well as Rousseau inspired Marx' theory of dialectic materialism, in which the theme is the dichotomy of the Oppressor versus the Oppressed. Now clearly a tactic of this dialectic, Rousseau's vista of a noble, primordial world destroyed by man's egoism, might well also have sired the epidemic of Western self-loathing.

Irony
Ironically, while Rousseau was convinced that civilization was the cause of moral degradation, little did he know that his followers, by rejecting objective reality, would drop morality along with it. Despite two and a half centuries of genocidal legacy in pursuit of Rousseauian ideal society it enjoys considerable support among the Western intelligentsia, specifically in the humanities departments of academia, the media, all levels of education, contemporary arts, the political elite, advisory boards, government ministries and departments and what is loosely described as 'the corridors of power.'

The postmodern heirs remain committed to undermining free-market democracy, casting misty eyes upon the Rousseauean atrocities. 110 million dead are not vile enough to discredit 'the Party of Humanity' in the views of some of the most stubborn apologists. Considering that totalitarian societies are today's version of the tribal community he so admired, the Rousseau ideal society could well be described as an agrarian totalitarian state.

Another point of irony is that Rousseau's conviction, that reason engenders egocentrism has been falsified by every non-government sponsored humanitarian organization on the face of the planet, while Rousseau's faithful follower Hegel is responsible for the subjectivism that saw the birth of egocentrism gone mad, the 'Master of the Universe' syndrome (each individual creates his own personal version of reality: If I die overnight, will the sun still rise tomorrow?).

In France, Rousseau's ideal of small, intimate villages and a peaceful, agricultural society built on the consent of the common will has resulted in France becoming a by-word for centralized statism. Rousseau's tenet that reason caused man's fall from paradise may well be the basis of the later Counter-Enlightenment's political ideals, modelled on the re-creation of 'paradise on earth', Utopias which usually turn out to be dystopias instead.

Postmodernism or Rousseauism?
Rousseau can certainly be traced back as the source of all members of the postmodern coalition: environmentalists, third-worldists (Baran-Wallerstein), feminists, anarchists, 'gender, identity and sexual orientation' theorists, traditional socialists of various plumage, and 'classical' postmoderns. It is a true gathering of Rousseauians that has largely remained uninvestigated, underreported and certainly undeclared.

In the chaos of the total postmodern bankruptcy in the wake of mayhem, moralectomy and grandiose failure, there is but one purpose left. A resolve that brings these ideologies together with a tradition with which it has so much in common. We are witnessing a spontaneous feast of recognition with radical Islam.

It is truly remarkable that every prior held conviction and allegiance has by now been jilted in favour of furthering the causes of the intolerant: it's back to the Rousseau basics. The grant plan: a strategy to deconstruct Western, democratic, liberal capitalism by critical theory, and 'irrational means of the will.'

* If you think of yourself as a peaceful, loving person, while actually you are full of wrath and hatred, the psychological coping device of projection - as if by magic - transforms the object of that wratch into someone who is hateful, devisive, full of vitriol and bile, bigoted, intolerant and hatemongering.

Enter the Cabal: Towards a Common Purpose

This morning I set out to peruse two Wiki entries. Going through the one for "New World Order" doesn't engender happiness. A wild vista of paranoia unfolds before your eyes. The problem is - considering myself quite a sane person - feet firmly planted in reality - that quite independent of all these conspirationalists, some of my findings happen to coincide with a number of the least outrageous fantasies described in this entry.

Also I don't often write about my personal life, the blegosphere being already saturated with self-fixation. But the present seems a good time to say a few things about my character. I am fiercely independent, always have been. And I hate being manipulated. In fact, I am so allergic to it that I sense manipulators miles off, setting in motion a chain reaction of movements aux contraires. I'm acutely aware we're being manipulated at present.

Looking back on the roaring seventies of the last century - when most of us were to all intents and purposes, consciously or subconconciously die-hard commies - it was quite the thing to undergo sensitivity training. During those sessions the subject's psychological defences were broken down. All you believed in, or knew to be true, was rendered at least in doubt, but mostly ruthlessly ejected. In short, the subject was stripped of his psychological personality. Something was supposed to fill the vacuum, but the amateurs that dabbled in this mind-game from hell were blissfully unaware of this objective; these being usually slightly power-mad pocket potentates with a bent for 'social sciences'.

Something during the night must have triggered my memory of this, so I thought I'd look it up on the Wiki. Bear with me, here's the text:

"Kurt Lewin laid the foundations for sensitivity training in a series of workshops he organised in 1946 to carry out a 'change' experiment, in response to a request from the Director of the Connecticut State Interracial Commission ... Kurt Lewin, who met Eric Trist in 1933, influenced the work of the London Tavistock Clinic, both in its work with soldiers during the Second World War and in its later work with the Journal Human Relations jointly founded by a partnership of the Tavistock Institute and Lewin's group at MIT."

On to the entry for Tavistock Clinic we read that:

"A history of the Clinic can be found on the website of the Tavistock & Portman NHS Foundation Trust, of which it is the major part. This NHS ownership began in 1948 when the British NHS was founded, other Tavistock activities being continued by other organisations, in particular the Tavistock Institute ... John Rawlings Rees also worked at the Institute for several years prior to World War Two and became its Medical Director."

So far so good. On to the "Tavistock Institute" where Wiki states that:

"The Tavistock Institute of Human Relations (!) is a charity concerned with group behaviour and organisational behaviour. It was launched in 1946, when it separated from the Tavistock Clinic ... The Institute was founded in 1946 by a group of key figures at the Tavistock Clinic including Henry Dicks, Leonard Browne, Ronald Hargreaves, John Rawlings Rees, Mary Luff and Wilfred Bion, with Tommy Wilson as chairman, funded by a grant from the Rockefeller Foundation .... Kurt Lewin, a member of the Frankfurt school in America, was an important influence on the work of the Tavistock, according to Eric Trist, who expresses his admiration for Lewin in his autobiography."

I mean this ... if one isn't a conspiracy theorist, one becomes one. Connecting the dots? Aplenty has been written lately about the nefariousness of "Common Purpose". I'll put a file on the Database, containing my entire dossier for anyone who cares to peruse it. But two efforts are worth mentioning at this stage: kudos to Britannia Radio for a comprised overview for those as yet unfamiliar with the subject: read that and you're up to speed; and to Lord James at "nourishing obscurity" for sorting out the mess and producing an in-depth pin down of the bstds in parts (1), (2), (3) and (4). More may be in production and the project is of course ongoing.

Britannia Radio states the following in relation to above mentioned Tavistock Institute, which does seem to be fairly representative:

"... to manipulate agreement on a range of issues that then become the norm to be defended from all challenge and true diversity. It has been developed by organisations like the Tavistock Institute of Human Relations in London which was funded into existence in 1946 with a grant from the Rockefeller Foundation and is one of the Illuminati's global centres for developing the 'hive mind' mentality or 'group and organisational behaviour'. Tavistock works closely with 'public sector' (state-controlled) organisations including the UK government and the European Union and the Orwell-speak on its website could have come straight from the pages of Common Purpose."

Common Purpose is related to Tavistock and from a chart produced by "Exposing CP" pioneer Brian Gerrish, it might not be an overstatement to conclude that CP was a Tavistock invention.

Picking up the Tavistock connection with the Soviet Advanced Polit Bureau in the West, the Frankfurt School for Cultural Marxism, Gerrish writes:

"In the 1960’s we had some communist subversion in England. A dozen New Labour Ministers who are in positions of real power, like John Read and John Prescott were communist activists. Since the signing of the 1972 EU treaty the communists have switched their allegiance from the Soviet Union to the European Union, and subversion has exploded."

Between my own independent investigations conducted over a year, and this statement, isn't a millimeter of disagreement. "The techniques are broadly based on the Frankfurt School, the University department bought by the Soviet Union in 1935. The Soviets asked it for the best methods of undermining other nations so it could bring them under its control. The EU has been implementing these techniques in Britain since the early 1960's." Yes, deconstructing the Old Order is the sole purpose of Postmodernism, or Cultural Marxism.

The idea behind 'sensitivity training' was to psychologically break down the subject, filling his head subsequently with Marxist doctrine. In other words, this was originally an indoctrination or a brainwashing technique turned foul Leftist parlour game.

To connect but the last two dots in these series, which is the result of only pulling two loose ends on an average Tuesday morning, James Higham sums up the blegosphere conclusions on the founders of the Tavistock Institute of Human Relations as follows:

"One of the Tavistock founders, Dr. John Rawlings Rees, who also became co-founder of the World Federation for Mental Health, talked of infiltrating all professions and areas of society - 'Public life, politics and industry should all ... be within our sphere of influence ... If we are to infiltrate the professional and social activities of other people I think we must imitate the Totalitarians and organize some kind of fifth column activity!' 'We must aim to make it permeate every educational activity in our national life ... We have made a useful attack upon a number of professions. The two easiest of them naturally are the teaching profession and the Church: the two most difficult are law and medicine.'" At which point it may be useful to reintroduce my handy Chart II The Subversion Program.

James poses the rhetorical question, "what common purpose?", (CP) only (to) say it is "beyond authority" and when pressed as to what that means, answers that it’s to open up leadership opportunities to those not actually in positions of authority. Again, for what common purpose? They are silent."

But ask yourself: I know of only one species of humanity who are having kittens upon hearing the A-word: "Authority!" They built an entire subculture around it, as well as a pernicious dialectic that pervades the entire Western world. After decades in process they still haven't got over their fixation complex with 'Authority': the time warped Boomers, to whom any order emanating from the Frankfurt School was holy dogma. They never managed to "snap out of the Marxist dialectic".

To assume leadership "beyond authority" so as to "produce change beyond their direct circle of control" is an act of rebellion, of subversion. Ask Captain Bligh if in his book this isn't a Mutiny on the Bounty. CP's guress - Julia Middleton, author of the book "Beyond Authority" by her own admission stands for "how to lead when you haven't any authority". Here in her own words. It's the rush for the power grid and the television station, taking control of the country once the axe drops! What's on the book cover? A maze. Right, a maze! What does that tell you?

Let just for a minute sink in what the extent is of a subversive organisation, that has training programmes in every major town and city in Britain, and since 1989 is involved with more than 60,000 people, delivering 20,000 'leaders', who have completed one or more programmes, with tentacles in France, Germany, Ghana, Hungary, India, Ireland, Netherlands, South Africa, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey and United States. They have infiltrated local and regional government, including vital segments of society such as the police and the army.

The existence of a fifth column like the Communist Party ... eh CP, is entirely consistent with the disastrous situation on the ground. Don't kid yourself, it is! When I was first confronted with CP a few weeks ago my reaction wasn't one of surprise or shock, but rather "ah, there you are at last!".

The common thread that pervades everything that is touched by the cabal, seems to be the focus on "altered reality". This state of mind is necessary for lowering the acceptance threshold and increase susceptibility to suggestion: the suspension of the faculty of reason to better absorb the lie.

Neuro-linguistic Programming (NLP) is a technique of using words to re-programme the body computer to accept another perception of reality, presumable like sensitivity training", sounds like another mind-game thought up by the scions of Marx.

Subjectivism (or Relativism) is the philosophical tenet that there is no objective reality (rejecting morality in the process), only individual versions called narratives. Postmodernism (Cultural Marxism) is entirely based on this fallacy. I have written about it extensively, lastly in "Masters of their Universe". The basic message is not to trust reason based on sensory awareness as a source of knowledge. Look at the subliminal message that is conveyed here. Philosophically, the adherents have taken leave of their senses as well as of epistemology. It 's also an ideological aid to advance acceptance of the lie.

There's a virtual clinic of mental health experts blogging and podcasting away every day about the pathologies that are gripping entire countries and classes of populations: mostly Narcissism induced denial of reality.

How come - and this is only the extent of my limited knowledge - an estimated fifty percent of Dutch women live on mood levellers and mood enhancing medication? This is a country of dysfunctional zombies, who are no longer in touch with their emotions! As a consequence they have become virtual sociopaths: empathy in the interaction with others is no longer an issue. The sheer size of the scandal is unprecedented since divorced women-hood came off sherry and Valium in the eighties.

We have the obsession of the Third Way Socialists with public perception. Bill Clinton, out of whose first presidential campaign came the platitude "It's the economy, stupid" started the spin-doctoring of public perception and the media. This black art has since been taken beyond perfection by Tony Blair's New Labour cronies; as far as I am able to conclude they're also the spare time stewards of CP, given the connection of PC's Chief Executive Julia Middleton, who doubled in John Prescott's Office of the Deputy Prime Minister as his Personnel Manager.

Given the above, the conclusion is justified that the world is dealing with a particularly hostile and ruthless branch of humanity. Not only do they have the arrogance of Lucifer in deciding for themselves what's best for humanity - global, post-democratic, Socialist Super Empires run by collectivist oligarchies (transnational progressivism) - they also have no qualms whatsoever, using whatever means necessary to establish their goal, including mental manipulation. There may be other groups like Common Purpose. Retracing the origins back to the totalitarian Frankfurt School, that existed but for one purpose - culturally deconstructing the West - is very disturbing news indeed. Blair to begin with, may well be running Eurabia.

I do believe though that this lot should not be collated and confused with others working in the private economic sphere, who are on the whole in another league and far less hostile than conspiracy theorists may believe. As far as they are concerned it stands perhaps to reason that some body of people in the know orchestrates the entire global, interconnected, macro-economic, geo-political situation, given that every one's prosperity is at stake. In such case it might as well be the combined talent and experience of the Bilderbergers.

But no one has any business not declaring themselves and socially engineering humanity beyond history and the democratic process. But then, democracy is a chaotic and messy undertaking with unforeseen outcomes: not at all the thing for under-cooled planners and controllers. It is certainly not the favorite game of Narcissistic power-mad psychopaths. To them let the warning from history be, that absolute power corrupts absolutely, nothing lasts forever, and certainly not constructs based on lies.

This morning I chanced upon a telling subtitle I gave this blog a year ago: "an in-depth investigation into what social engineering from hell is destroying Western civilization as we knew it".

Related:

- The CP links dossier is available on the Politeia dBase.

- Visit the Video Collection related to this blog. There are a number of Brian Gerrish' speeches and interviews available.

- For backgrounds of the Frankfurt School, this video may provide insight.

~ Continued in Part II: Transnational Progressivism ~

Of Hive Minds and Group Souls: Marxism and Islamism

Here's a peek into the deluded world of Muslim conversion. As yet unbeknown to herself (I believe), lately I am given to follow the literary activities of a young female convert - one of 300 in Belgium alone. She has a university grade in higher Marxism, and is actually an activist posing as a journalist. (One wonders just how many of those are around!)

The first article I stumbled on, briefly appeared on the site of The Brunei Times: the word that comes to mind to describe it, is agit prop. It can now be accessed here. At present I have come across another article she authored for the Islamic press, an 'interview' with two other converts on the occasion of Belgian Convert Day, which seems to have taken place on 4th of March this year. Here's the Saudi Gazette with "My Daughter is a Muslim".

The 'discussion' - if it has actually taken place is immaterial - indicates quite nicely what the attractions of Islam are for some Leftist inclined people. I am suspecting the author is a sufferer of Narcissistic Awe, the underestimated form of Narcissism which does not mind enslaving the whole of humanity if they feel this is in the people's own best interest. Like all Narcissists they crave attention. Through identification with a victim group they can share the audience that this group is generating.

"There is not a dominant type of people that become converts. Converts come from all social and educational backgrounds. The strength of Islam is that they are all equal as Muslims."

The author doesn't seem to be aware of above psychological pathology that predisposes some people to identify with victim groups of the Marxist dialectic, or she might indeed be able point at a "dominant type of people".

"Equal as Muslims" underlines the call of egalitarian collectivism that never fails to attract the hive mind. It's as if this type of 'carbon based unit' instinctively feels the need to home back to the collective, the 'group soul' of the drove.

Apart from the aspects I mentioned in "The Unholy Alliance: Conflating the Three Great isms" this is a futher indication that the current form of Islam belongs to the family of subjectivist, collective Counter-Enlightenment ideologies (see also Chart I: The Straight Red Line), and one reason Muslims will never become "the new Joos", as some have suggested.

In a three part post on the pseudo religious aspects of the collectivist Counter-Enlightenment ideologies of the atheist variety, Communism and National Socialism, we saw that mass events were featuring highly on their indoctrination programs. The monotonous, rhythmic beat of a drum, or the cadence of a charismatic beloved leader-hierophant's prolonged speech, has the hypnotic effect that any right minded demagogue might be looking for. It is the opportunity to subliminally instill the message into the followers, a shot of ideological synchronizing of the watches, if you will. Islam's equivalents of course, are the Hajj and the blood fests associated with the Shia Day of Ashura.

Regarding the latter, Matthias Küntzel has written touchingly in "Ahmadinejad's World"; how the death cult based on Ashura (link to Time slide show) has sent half a million children into oblivion in mine fields, and wave after wave of underclass Iranians was shot to human pulp, in a way which even caused qualms in Saddam Hussein's battle hardened army.

"They come toward our positions in huge hordes with their fists swinging,” an Iraqi officer complained in summer 1982, “You can shoot down the first wave, and then the second. But at some point the corpses are piling up in front of you, and all you want to do is scream and throw away your weapon. Those are human beings, after all!”

In view of the blind sacrifices made in that war by the Basiji - the Iranian version of the Marxist proletariat - they have now been elevated to unofficial police, a sort of SA (Stormtroopers), enforcers of the Revolution and Ahmadinejad's regime apparatus. They are at present also manning the nuclear laboratories.

It is fascinating reading how the sense of 'original sin', originating in the Ashura story has been worked into today's Islamist policies of suicide bombings (the so-called martyrdom operations) and how the Muslim Brotherhood provided Sunnis with their own version.

Blood curling rather than fascinating is the Twelfth Imam dogma that underpins Ahmadinejad's apocalyptic teleology: the more the world is whipped into this Islamic version of political correctness, the sooner the Western Enlightenment notions as symbolised by the Jewish state are obliterated, the earlier this Messiah figure of the Mahdi will materialise, enabling the end game to begin.

This renders the nuclear doctrine of mutually assured destruction absolutely meaningless in this case. And this is why the political flippancy, that we'll just have to learn to live with a nuclear armed Iran, is so criminally ignorant.

The Unholy Alliance: Conflating Three Great isms

Witnessing the sad demise of democracy in front of the European Parliament building in Brussels yesterday, takes some digesting, even for one that was already aware of the realities. I will combine further comment on it with a piece I was already working on: the cooperation in the Unholy Alliance between Islam and the Left. People have often expressed their surprise over the apparent cooperation pact between two parties that - on the surface - seem to be each other's opposites. I hope to clear up that misunderstanding.

As a girl and later as a young grown-up I could never understand how - in the run up to World War II - Nazi Germany could arm itself to the teeth with no one doing anything to prevent it. Entire weapon systems were stockpiled in the Soviet Union as the arsenals and warehouses in Germany proper were stored to full capacity. Yet the furnaces and steel works were operating full steam 24/7 as unemployment rates dropped to zero percent, thanks to Hitler's National Socialist Party's 'employment policies' of everyone on the state's pay roll.

Yet Europe had influential pacifist movements (here's an brilliant take by Sanity on the subject). The U.K. had Richard "Peace in our Time" Chamberlain, and Mayoresses who promised to "not so much as darn a sock if it assisted the war effort", while 'bluestockings' and other enlightened academics conducted Peace Marches in Europe's streets.

I never understood how advanced, civil societies could let such disasters as World War II take place. That is, until yesterday. In fact, it's becoming blatantly obvious how last century's great wars, the holocaust and the enslavement of half the continent in its wake, could take place. Now, as then, we are closing our eyes to a reality that is too scary to contemplate, let alone deal with it. Yesterday in Brussels we saw the conflation of three great isms taking place before our eyes. It is very sad to see just how far indeed we have already sank into the black hole of dictatorship.

It's a bit of a pity that Stephen Hicks' explanation of Postmodernism (or cultural Marxism) doesn't get the attention it deserves. Hicks comes to another categorization of ideologies than is common. He explains that both Communism and National Socialism derive from the Counter-Enlightenment movement that started with the philosophies of Rousseau. This was a reaction to the primacy of reason that features so prominently in Enlightenment thought, of which Classical Liberalism or Libertarianism became the political offshoot (not to be confused with today's liberalism, which is Left Light).

Does the following Rousseau quotation on the ideal state strike anyone as compatible with Islam? "... the state cannot ... pursue a policy of toleration for disbelievers, or view religion as a matter of individual conscience. It absolutely must ... >>>

After theocrat extraordinaire Rousseau, both Hegel and Kant expanded on anti reason philosophy, eventually even doing away with objective reality and epistemology: man is incapable of knowing anything, to each his own universe: reality is subjective. This has provided Communism and National Socialism with their subjectivist basis.

Experts in Islam never stop to point out there is not 'one Islam'. Every Muslim has his or her own subjective perception of it (apart from the five pillars that is, presumably). I have no reason to doubt it: after Rousseau's take on the ideal state, this makes the second, basic conflation of the three great isms.

As hinted at earlier, from 1939 to 1941 Communism and National Socialism shared a history of cooperation. The German army held manoeuvres in Russia and vice versa. Both totalitarian ideologies were Socialist and differed only on its implementation: the Nazis were nationally inclined (using the ethnic dialectic of the German Volk), while the Communists favoured global subjugation (hence the 'Internationale').

After World War II the Left portrayed Hitler as the great satan. Here the dichotomy of Nazism versus Communism was born: this was however a Communist PR ploy which has worked to this day. But far from being opposites both ideologies are in fact each other's mirror image, cousins if you will, while the real opposition, the actual enemy, is Classical Liberalism or Libertarianism, rooted in the Enlightenment and in the West, which by the way wasn't originally radically atheist at all, on the contrary.

Over time and through various twists of history the two totalitarian isms also got transplanted onto Middle Eastern soil, where they gave birth to Panarabism, Arab Nationalism and Ba'athism.

Today's political correctness emanates from a revived Marxism from which the baby boom generation of the 60s cannot seem to say goodbye: their hatred of a free West is burnt onto their souls and treason has become their second nature. Some one described it aptly as "they just cannot pop out of the Marxist dialectic". It is their mindset that is our ruin today, as they now inhabit the corridors of power.

If a recently unearthed 1985 interview with KGB agent and Soviet defector Bezmenov is anything to go by, the moral compass of the 60's generation has been totally and irrevocably removed by the KGB subversion program. What that left undone, was completed by the fifth columnists at the Frankfurt School of Cultural Marxism, as the undersigned can personally attest to. (For novices, here's a commentary on Gramsci, another luminary)

The influence these intellectuals had on that generation can simply not be overstated: they prescribed how 'thinking people' should act and what their opinions should be, from the books and the newspaper they read, the friends they kept, to the movies they saw, to the brand of tobacco they smoked and the coffee they drank.

They were in no uncertain measure specifically 'present' in the bedroom, which - if they had any say in the matter, should preferably be shared by any number of people. The family a gonner as women dragged husbands through divorce courts whole-sale, Eros and Agapi were kept strictly separated as per Kinsey ukase. Children became a kind of common property, to be raised and cared for, by whoever happened to be present (if any).

Fast forward to the new millennium. The cooperation in the Unholy Alliance of the Western Left with Islamists, as the latter swap their secular subjectivism for a theological one, is simply a Feast of Recognition: egalitarian collectivism against individual liberty, totalitarian statism versus limited government at the people's pleasure, anti reason against science and technology, socialism vs. capitalism and free markets, state (which in Islam is synonymous with religion) against voluntary mutual benefit, state/divine intervention versus free will: in short, combined totalitarianism against the classical liberal values as embodied by the West: freedom and democracy.

And of course the collectivists share the dialectic of Oppressor versus the Oppressed and socially constructed victimhood. This mock epic battle is the basis of all collectivist ideologies, uniquely cultivated to keep the 'struggle' going. Communism had its classes; the Nazis the German Volk; Cultural Marxism its students, women, gays and blacks, as Islam has the true believers versus the infidel.

Multiculturalism is a later manifestation of Cultural Marxism and keeps true to the dialectic mechanism on a cultural level, while N.G.O.ism (U.N.) and transnational progressivism (E.U., N.A.U.) play the same trick on the global scale of nations and states. The same story is transposed and extrapolated on all levels. So much for defeating Marxism, fifty years overdue.

Last but certainly not least the totalitarian isms share a justification of violence to power: the Western versions' passe-partout is provided for by Messrs Rousseau and Marx; the Islamic variety is of course rooted in Koranic scripture, which in the early stages also served as a platform for the conquest of the Christian lands in the Middle East and beyond.

I have laid down the ideological histories and how the three isms relate, in Chart I: The Straight Red Line for easy reference.

But the uncovering of the close ties within the Unholy Alliance doesn't stop here. AEL's Abu Jahjah's vocabulary of choice doesn't come by accident straight out of the Marxist-Leninist handbook for Leftist dummies ... dhimmis.

Just in: Hodja has published "Postmodern Jihad - What Osama bin Laden learnt from the Left", insights into the more recent relations between Islamism and Cultural Marxism: have hardly read it myself, but I think I should share it.

Much is made of political correctness. Some interpret it as latter day Cultural Marxism itself. Personally I see it as soft social pressure, to coerce others into conforming with the Left's ideology: the 'redistribution' of freedoms and rights along the lines of the dialectic. The idea is to shift power, capital, rights, etc. from the Oppressor to the Oppressed minorities. The great trick is to treat gender and faith, on an equal footing with race. But what we have to keep in mind here, is that gender is subject to choice, while Muslims are born as such.

This can be taken very far indeed, as legislation is put in place in support of the same object. We have recently seen that played out with the SIOE demo and Brussels Mayor, Freddy 'The Toad' Thielemans. At that stage, we have de facto a totalitarian situation where dissenters are made common criminals, case need on trumped up charges of assaulting a bus driver. Baron Bodissey of Gates of Vienna is spot on in today's post "Democratic Europe R.I.P." Freddy and His Walloon Troopers made European history yesterday.

But for most, including the good people of the silent majority [1], if reality gets too scary to deal with, denial erects a impenetrable curtain of make-belief in the hope the bogey will go away. I just read this morning in a paper that the Dutch as a nation, have become happier than they were a few years back during an economic downturn. Happy totalitarian dreams every one! I hope your bank accounts grow at an even pace!

Others - like Council of Europe's Secretary General Terry Davis - have become completely deluded in their psychological pathology. To them it's simply beyond the realm of the possible - indeed, a crime! - that people might be genuinely worried about the fate of their culture and continent. This type of custodians of 'European values' have no qualm whatsoever of beating up and criminalizing civilians and politicians with whom they happen to disagree. Even manufactured charges do not seem to trigger a red-hot-moral-no-no meme with these Quislings. They have become amoral thugs, who have lost sight of their opponents humanity, and do not know it. That is what scares me to death.

Update: The New York Times is offering a fascinating view of a German officer's World War II photo album of Auschwitz. The commentary is wrong at one point, when exclaiming that this is what "antisemitism, racism and hatred" does to humans. This should actually be: "this is what happens if ideology is valued over human life".

Live Report of the SIOE Demo in Brussels

Updates on the "Stop the Islamization in Europe".

I am reporting on the demo as news breaks from a number of Belgian sites which are mostly in Flemish. I will make on the spot translations. My typing may not be hundred percent, as speed considerations prevail.

12.00 hours: Assembly now at Schuman Square.

12.10 hours: arrest have been made. Reverting. Socialist Mayor apparently issued a "No Passaran".

12.15 hours: Focus TV - Even before noon some 10 people have been arrested on Luxemburg Square. It is uncertain who they are. Apart from the neo Nazi trolls, there's also fear for Arab European League (AEL)presence. This immigrants advocacy organization is closely linked to Hezbollah. They are best described as Radical Islamicist Marxists. The secessionist Vlaams Belang political party - loosely translated as 'Flemish Interests' - were prominently around. Reverting.

12.35 hours: Brussels News Radio is reporting that the anti Islamization rally has "of course" been prohibited by the Mayor. Brussels' European quarter seems under a state of siege. Mounted police and press everywhere. About 200 Vlaams Belang (VB) people have been arrested very heavy handedly and taken away in police vans to the "Palace of Justice". Its chairman has been filmed - kicking and screaming - and shouting: "Is this democracy in Belgium?!". A number of Brussels Council members are present: mentioned were Johan Arkens, Johan Demol and Jos van Assen. Police presence is massive. At the train (or metro) station a number of Dutch neo Nazi trolls have been arrested. There are a few counter demonstrators around, yelling "racists". Of our people, no mention at all ... reverting.

First photo material: arrest of Frank Vanhecke, chairman VB:

13.00 hours: A number of Flemish and Dutch media are marginally reporting that Philip Dewinter, the political leader of Vlaams Belang, has been arrested, while shouting: "We are against the Islamization of Europe". This is bad news, folks. Our demo is being overshadowed by Vlaams Belang, who - as organization of some repute - draw most of the attention. Our message is "lumped" together with their reputation of being nothing short of "extreme Rightist" (by European crypto Marxist standards, that is). Sht!

14.15 hours: Some Belgian MSM are reporing the demo is basically over. The police tactic seems to be have been to concentrate the demo on Schuhman Sq. This was as per agreement however. I'm still screening, but this seems to be basically it ... No mention of if AEL members are around; some considered the planned counter rally by AEL a ploy, an excuse for Freddy to blackball the SIOE demo, anyway.

14.30 hours: Henrik, commentator on Gates of Vienna, reporting as follows: "My Hungarian friend now reports that they held the planned 1 minute of silence for the victims of 9/11, and that there will be a press conference at 16:30. They are at Luxembourg Square (next to the EP), no police brutality has been spotted there." They seemed to have concentrated their violent efforts on Vlaams Belang ... I'll try to find more on this press conference ...

15.20 hours: First images, a sort of slide presentation (scroll down a bit!) on "Het Belang van Limburg", a provincial news outlet. What it comes down to, is the molestation of VB people, VanHecke and Dewinter, by the police. Further on more VB people in tees and blacks bags over their heads. The elderly gentleman shown at the end of the presentation looks like he just had his first demo. It doesn't look good at all, folks ... reverting.

15.30 hours: International Herald Tribune: "Police arrest 2 far-right Belgian leaders at anti-Islam 9/11 protest" >>>

16.15 hours: Baron Bodissey at Gates of Vienna reporting as follows: "Italian Euro-Deputy Arrested in Brussels" - From the feedback section at the Brussels Journal - Belgian police have stopped the Euro Deputy of the “Lega Nord” Mario Borghezio before an anti-Islam protest. Borghezio in person told that in a phone call, he told he was in a police van and denounced beatings from police officers. He’s supposely being held with another 20 people."

16.25 hours: Vlaams Belang (VB) website reporting without further details, that French MEP Carl Lang is also one of those arrested.

16.55 hours: More pics on Yahoo News: undisputed First Prize ... Cum Laude (above): Solvit! Indeed ...
Update: this bound, gagged and molested gentleman turns out to be the Vice President of the Flemish Parliament, Luk Van Nieuwenhuysen.

17.05 hours: Dutch Socialist news rag De Volkskrant has an article which describes the typical European attitude that will be our undoing: "The Belgian media criticised the heavy handed police actions; Dewinter and Vanhecke can now present themselves as martyrs. "It's correct that Europe and its values are in danger", reacted Secretary General Terry Davis of the Council of Europe in Strasbourg. "But the danger is not emanating from Islam. Our common European values are undermined by demogogues and radicals, both Islamic and Islamophobe, who are exploiting fear and bigotry for their own political profit". ... for the time being it's unSolvit, or more probable: deSolvit! And one more observation: I suppose very few are aware of just how fascist their mindset has become, least of all the Belgian media.

19.00 hours: Vlaams Belang (VB) website has a video running of today's disturbing goings-on in front of the Euro Parliament Building in Brussels. One conclusion from this war zone and its preparations is undeniable: there are three parties calling the shots in Belgium (and this is probably true for Europe as a whole): crypto Marxists, neo Nazis and Islamists: the unholy totalitarian threesom. More on this happy all-in-the-family in tomorrow's post.


Image: courtesy Atlas Shrugs

The Marxist Revival (9): Why the Mayor of Brussels Gags Free Speech

~ Continued from Part 8: Hysterically Moving the Goal Posts ~

In the present series on the intricacies of Postmodernism (Pomo, or crypto cultural Marxism) we are looking at the use of language, speech in particular. In the preceding posts we discussed a number of the peculiarities that are the result of the Postmodern way of looking at language: not as a vehicle for the transmission of objective data, but to convey a personal version of reality.

In this instalment we'll go further into what the consequences are for the application of Pomo speech: the restriction of free speech by the apparent changing of the rule book in mid-play, as witnessed at present by the Socialist Mayor of Brussels in prohibiting an independent, Paneuropean, grassroots demo against the Islamization of the continent.

In an article adapted from a lecture address given by Stephen Hicks at The Objectivist Center during the 2002 Summer Seminar we find our answer. Hicks uncovers the Left's totalitarian designs on free speech, which they find must be 'redistributed' like tax payer's money.

Hicks, in explaining the idea, uses the analogy of a largely American policy, which has proved useful during the early years of civil rights movement: positive action (or affirmative action, or positive discrimination), and a practical example from the world of sports: shooting hoops with a star basketball champ, who's been lumbered with ankle weights to equalize the chances.

As in some sports, this Marxist vehicle to multiculturalism posits to fit out the stronger, established groups with a similar 'handicap'. The weaker cultural, social and ethnic groups - the subjective minorities, or oppressed victims - are compensated in a measure approximately proportionate to their inequality. Thus the playing field is levelled.

As a temporary policy positive action may have served its purposes, but it has created institutionalized inequality instead of eradicating it. It now comes back to haunt us: the Left is using the same principle to suppress speech rights for the established, supposedly stronger majority.

The collectivist, subjective set of measures is the expectant mother of many evils, but a potentially devastating consequence is, that it may turn the Western world into an intellectual graveyard as individual freedom to pursue knowledge through debate, critique and free enquiry, is being suppressed.

Hicks provides a few samples of speech code which we've all come to know very well, potentially turning perpetrators into veritable criminals:

"Any behavior, verbal or physical, that stigmatizes or victimizes an individual or a group on the basis of race, sex, religion, color, creed, disability, sexual orientation, national origin, ancestry or age of the individual or individuals, etc. etc. ...... "

... which acts as a handicap for the established, stronger social groups. Moreover, Postmodern Leftists have literally taken leave of their senses, making no distinction between speech, and act, as Classical Liberalism has always made a point of doing.

Speech may have the intent to hurt. Sound waves beating against the other party's eardrums are just as bad as hitting him over the head with a baseball club. Therefore, the symbolic date of 9/11 for the Brussels demo, lumped the process of Islamization together with a terrorist act on that date!

That's why, in the International Herald Tribune Burgomaster Freddy goes on the record as saying that in a secular democracy "it cannot be that women and men are ... suspected of having committed the worst crimes" simply because they are Muslims, while in fact the demonstrators are not committing any such crudity! All they want is equality and Roman law, not Sharia.

The moving of the goal posts - declaring the rules applicable to one side only - works in tandem with the above surreal confusion of terms. It is one of Marxism's concepts to win power - or destruct. We've seen it at work in the persistent calling for tolerance, to which we should add: "yes, but that only applies to you, stupid!", as it acts as an equalizing ankle weight for the establishment: they are to practice tolerance, they may not generalize, are not allowed to stigmatize, or discriminate.

The Left on the other hand, and by extension all the weaker, oppressed minority groups which they portent to represent, are above such conventions and can breach the rule book for all they are worth. And we, stupid objectivists, still thinking there's just one set of rules for the whole of humanity ...!

It's a decades old invention of the grandfather of the Frankfurt School of Western Marxism, Herbert Marcuse. It's called repressive tolerance. The Socialist Mayor of Brussels is simply applying cultural Marxism to the entire continent of Europe!

For daily purposes the Left imposes their one-sided rules by the social pressure of political correctness. In other cases a verdict by an independent court* is required. That court will apply the Belgian Anti Racism Act.

While redistribution of capital used to be the favorite means to Utopia for economical Marxism, in this case the redistribution of speech rights is the pet vehicle to cultural egalitarianism (multiculturalism). As for the Muslims, success breeds conceit: they're supposed to be the new gays!

* Update 31/8 23:55H: A post on Brussels Journal provides the latest news on the 9/11 Stop Islamization of Europe demo, throwing as well an interesting light on the state of independent courts in the Kingdom of Belgium. The movement is gathering pace. The VLD students are also in, as they should be! The MSM are roaring increasingly louder, a sure sign this cannot be ignored anymore! Don't forget to sign the petitions!

Update 1/9 17:15H: Up Pompeii reports that "The whip for Italy's anti-immigrant Northern League party in the European Parliament, Mario Borghezio, issued a statement in Brussels on Thursday condemning the court ban on the planned protest."Banning SOIE's protest, which is intended to commemorate the victims of '9/11' and oppose the perilous Islamisation of Europe, violates the fundamental rights of the European Union," Borghezio said."The risks to public order invoked by the mayor are a clear strategem to ... >>>

Update 1/9 17.50H: Here the latest from HQ on the legal status and some instructions for the rally.

(If the video refuses service, here's a link.)

Blurring the Border between Reality and Perception (3)

This is the third and last instalment in a series of posts on the effects of Postmodernism (Pomo, or cultural Marxism, or Subjectivism, or relativism) on journalism and the MSM. If you've read the preceding two instalments you might want to skip this introduction and jump to "Continued from Part 2" four paras down.

To remind ourselves of the heart of the trouble: it's the basic fallacy of the industry's pet philosophy that objective reality does not exist. The danger of this deliberate mistake is, that the line between reality and perception becomes blurred, causing any amount of confusion.

One consequence is, that fact - which is based on objective reality - is also rejected as a result, which is a bit of a problem if you're dealing with facts on a daily basis, as is the case in journalism. So what we see reported by the media aren't so much cool, detached facts, as much as the reporter's personal version of reality.

Another, moral consequence of the rejection of reality is, that good and bad, right and wrong, truth and lie, are denied in the same way; or to put it in another way: everybody is 'right' from his or her own particular point of view, and anything 'bad' is called 'bad', only because it doesn't fit into our present, defective idea of society.

The spectacle of pretended journalistic objectivity has run for a long time, until quite recently - at last, pretence was dropped altogether. But the objective realists are now starting to fight back. Lists are appearing with facts, detailing when, why and how the facts were manipulated to conform with somebody's particular 'narrative', attempts at disinformation, censoring, fraud, spin and counter-spin, fibs and lies, fabrication, selective emphasizing, manipulation and censoring, the whole dishonest spectrum.

~ Continued from Part 2 ~

I recently reported, and made some work of, an example of the typical modern activist in the person of a young Belgian convert to Islam. Eva Vergaelen is academically trained in higher crypto Marxism and obtained a degree in Neo Imperialism (or, How to Ruin the Third World and Retain a Clean Conscience) at Antwerp University. She expresses an interest in Identity and Gender Politics. In short, she is a glorified activist posing as a journalist, producing work on Islamization and Multiculturalism that is stripped of anything even remotely approaching balanced objectivity.


In the recent showdown in Brussels involving the institutionalised forces of Subjectivism as represented by Socialist mayor Freddy Thielemans on the one hand, and the Paneuropean organization "Stop the Islamization of Europe" on the other, she joined forces with the radical Hizbollah affectionate, Dyab Abu Jahjah of the Arab European League, in producing a thoroughly toxic article that was filled to the brim with lies and revisionism. It was briefly published on the site of The Brunei Times, but has since been removed. The sole purpose of such invective can only be the poisoning of the atmosphere against the West within the Dar-al-Islam. One wonders just how many Eva Vergaelens roam the tortured land.

Rummaging further through my archive yielded:

- Douglas Hanson's article "The Real Lesson of the Beauchamp Affair" (there may be another such an affair in the making). The Hanson article not just lists that recent scandal, but also throws another light on the Abu Graib scandal, which he terms a "high quality disinformation operation" that played off Iraqi and Arab historical ethnic, racial and cultural biases, indicating that this was run by seasoned professionals in journalism and their government 'sources';

- Tito's bunkers in Iraq, containing the illusive WMD;

- The NIE report;

- The Hamari atrocities, as covered by independent journalist Michael Yon, and ignored by the MSM;

- The Haditha Massacre is another case in point: read the whole article on Accuracy in Media "Haditha Massacre: Media and Terrorist Hoax", which prompted NewsMax to a spot of impromptu fund-raising to cover the legal expenses of the accused;

- Or the reporting on the Beslan massacre. On the same link you will find how normal, professional journalism has become so rare, that it is covered in laurels!

Inconvenient facts are preferably spun into favourable public perceptions, or they are reduced to 'somebody's personal opinion'; alternatively they are suppressed altogether (voluntary or otherwise), or - case need - dealt with through the courts.

These days we have Leftist inspired hatred laws at the expense of free speech and freedom of conscience. These laws are little else but legal back up for political correctness, in other words, the Left's soft social pressure to conform with their morality and political agenda, which they share with their partner in the Unholy Alliance, institutionalized Islam. Read "Stop Forum Shopping Terrorism" by Flanders Fields for a very important case. Said Rachel Ehrenfeld was recently the guest of Pamela Geller's at BlogTalkRadio. The broadcast is available here.

Consider this from Doug Giles' recent article on Townhall: we are "bamboozled into believing that Islam is a peaceful, Little House on the Prairie religion being temporarily hijacked by jihadist renegades".

The combined, cultural egalitarianism of the Unholy Alliance may have prompted a commentary in Examiner by John R. Thomson "Whose Genocide Will it Be": "America is berated for heinous crimes, minimizing whatever may have been done by the regimes of Adolf Hitler, Joseph Stalin, Pol Pot, Saddam Hussein and, currently, Sudanese President and Field Marshal Omar al-Bashir".

Let me stress at this point that all these totalitarian dictatorships are based on the rejection of reality fallacy (see Chart I: the Straight Red Line), sharing the same Counter-Enlightenment heritage as originated by Rousseau.

Giles again: "Simultaneously, the accusations are calculated to inflame the credulous Arab/Muslim street, in order to justify murderous Muslim terrorism, to recruit gullible suicide bombers and to attract covert support from Saudi Arabia, once a stalwart U.S. ally." Hm, the 'inflame' part reminds me of Eva and The Brunei Times ...

"This propaganda campaign seeks to distract the world’s attention from the real murderers, the true ethnic and religious cleansers. For the truth is, the perpetrators to an overwhelming degree are the Muslims themselves." To make the sinister list:

- Indonesia 500-600.000 - Bangladesh 1.4-2 million - Somalia 600.000 - Sudan 5-6 million and counting - Afghanistan's Soviet invasion 1.5 million, "the American invasion in 2001 created perhaps 10,000 fatalities" - the Iran/Iraq war 1.5 million on the side of Iraq, and 450-970.000 Iranians - in Iraq, Saddam's war on his own people, another 1 million deaths - Syrian fratricide in Syria 20.000, and in Lebanon 130.000 - The article further mentions Chad, Jordan, Mauretania, Morocco, Niger, Nigeria, Turkey, Yemen and Zanzibar.

The apocalyptic figures are only rivalled by the hecatombs piled up by the heirs of Marx on the same altars of egalitarian collectivism! This, of course, is no coincidence. Both vistas enjoy an inherent justification to violence, and an end-justifies-the-means mentality.

I have no doubt whatsoever that any Pomo activist with an agenda would gladly counter those figures with the perversity of the Iraq Body Count (go ahead: check it!) - and "the Christian counterpart of the Iraqi fratricide", the Irish Troubles (4,000 fatalities), just so that things are put into perspective!

It's only appropriate to wrap this post up with Randall Hoven's "It's Not Just Scott Beauchamp" in American Thinker, a brave effort in almost comprehensively listing all the "lying and fabricating, doctoring photos, plagiarism, conflicts of interest, falling for hoaxes, and overt bias" in the recent history of damaged journalism.

Hoven's figures break down as follows: of the total count of 62 cases in the United States alone, 7 are in relation to Iraq, and 4 to the Middle East. Case number 28 makes clear that the Leftist press has been at it since The New York Times' Walter Duranty hailed the accomplishments of Stalin era Soviet Union. I conclude with Randall Hoven that:

"If it is 'too good to be true', or just too politically correct to be true, take it with a grain of salt - several grains, apparently, if from The New York Times, The Boston Globe, The New Republic, CNN or Reuters ... If this is the visible part of the iceberg, just how big is the iceberg?"

To which I can add a query of my own: I'm just so curious what the figures for Europe would be!

In the meantime there's an update in which Hoven effortlessly lists another 21 cases, of which 4 relate to the combustible Islam, Middle East, AQ triangle.