For Easter: Multicultural Cuckoo's Eggs (I)

I wasn't planning on wasting much more time on the German government sponsored culture site that was established as a counterweight to the American influence on American culture, but the latest contribution "Multiculturalism is not cultural relativism" - while simply breathtaking is its anti-logic - not an unfamiliar experience for regulars on the subject - it does provide an opportunity to provide a recap for the benefit of those that have joined us a bit later, or for readers who missed the basic principle: that multiculturalism cannot base itself on any philosophy, other than the pseudo-philosophy of relativism exclusively, and that the excruciating postmodern phenomenon of political correctness, is a mere symptom of the two.

Recapping the above: relativism is to multiculturalism, what scientific socialism is to communism. Political correctness is to multiculturalism, what Heil Hitler! was to National Socialism. You still with me ...?

Whereas the multicultural proponents in the discussion, Messrs Buruma, Garton Ash and Sim are viciously out to destroy Western culture even if they have to make dhimmis out of all occidentals, it would transpire that the latest contributor to the debate, author Jesco Delorme, is merely useful and is making some honest, if basic mistakes.

A caveat for the beginners around this subject, don't expect anything in the way of logic or reason: that's not the point at all. Relativists only call their ideology a philosophy, and multiculturalists pretend they have a serious policy, to make the impression it is well wrought and deeply thought through. The proponents aren't interested in logic, in true or false: the basic tenet of relativism is that objective truth does not exist, reason why at some point I personally stopped counting the paradoxes, the oxymora and the fallacies. Even I don't have so much time!

Multiculturalists are presently disowning relativism as their philosophy because they just found out that if you deny objective 'eternal truths', the emperor literally has no cloths. So they're on the lookout in whose nest they can drop their nasty cuckoo's egg. At the moment they favour Liberalism, a philosophy they not that long ago vilified for its free-market principles!

The sole purpose of the proponents however is to push their agenda, which is ultimately the destruction of Western civilization - Christianity for starters - which, for some reason only known to themselves, they deem inherently and uniquely bad. In this respect, think like communism: everybody knew it didn't work, but the aficionados kept on apologising and advocating it long after its crimes against humanity became known, simply because it offered the best opportunity to annihilate the West. Fortunately it collapsed under its own weight, but that was after only the fittest survived the atheist humanistic onslaught.

But for those not willing to suspend the laws of logic altogether, let's begin by establishing a few definitions. The relativist mind - bend on realising the main objective - tends to be not very precise in definitions and loans principles and tenets here and there, wherever the purpose takes him. So, back to basics:

1. What is the essence of relativism?
2. What is the definition of multiculturalism?
3. What is Liberalism in the original sense?
4. Ditto on Socialism.

~ In tomorrow's instalment a closer look at the definitions. ~

Easter wishes

The Lighthouse endeavours to shine a light over matters and thought that influence our world in this extraordinary time of major transition.

I wish all readers a blessed and happy Easter and the Orthodox readership, Kali Anastasi!

God bless,

Cassandra.

A fittingly Good Friday

Good Friday 2007, and it hasn't made me any more charitable towards postmodernity.

The institution that went - within one year, from the standard of journalistic excellence, to possibly the worst politically correct offender - weighs in on the Greek history book furore, and entirely along predictable, dualistic, P.C. ideological party line:

- church, obstructionist, uncompromising, conservative, irrational, reactionary, history, obscurantism, vilification of the other, narrow minded, dogmatic, nationalistic, monoculture, nation-state, petty pride: bad;

- 'science' (in casu, the authors, the supporters), reasonable, open minded, charitable, progressive, enlightened, European Empire (implicit), multiculture: good.

The basic part of the P.C. message also is, either "it must happen, it is essential" for some unidentified reason, or "it is already an accomplished fact, so you'd better make the best of it": case closed. So much for the open mind, revulsion towards dogma and the 'scientific' approach.

Another sample of the course BBC are on, can be found in a typical "BBC Breaking News Alert" of these days. Another 9/11? Government fallen? Moldova struck by major earth quake?You must be joking! Such a hot breaking news message can only concern the new animist religion! But perhaps there's still hope. They're getting new management. But if the Tory reaction is one to go by, things may not even have hit rock-bottom yet! Or it may be as per the E.U., simply beyond repair!

But back to the Greek history book story, which is revealing in more ways than one. Following the 4-1 loss in the Greece/Turkey soccer match last week, English language Turkish Daily News gloatingly spoke of "no absence of national malaise these days" and "The textbook takes a less victimized approach to the war of independence in 1821 from the Ottomans and downplays the role of the Orthodox Church during that period".

Dear Turks, by all means, eat your heart out while you still can! By the time the boys in Brussels are finished with your history books, you won't know what Greek and Armenian lobbies will have hit you! By the way, the French don't mind about the gas pipe line project being abused as a political object of blackmail over the Armenian Genocide Act, you know. Apart for your mutual interest in power politics, the French are also great stickers to principles. And after Russia's abuse of economics as a political crow bar like there never was a Soviet Union, the rest of the world by now is up to anything that might be thrown at it. You'll see ...

With hindsight it has by now become apparent that humanity's hay days were the 1990's of blessed memory, when the curtain had just fallen and to the optimist it seemed to be curtains! for the whole social engineered mess. But this is the new millennium and high time for yet another gigantic folly of global proportions.

So old Uncle Joe (Stalin) gets the blame (he's conveniently dead so has nothing to say) and the entire totalitarian circus is resurfacing in another guise, as champions of women, blacks, gays, indigenous peoples, the physically and mentally challenged, and any other downtrodden minority you can think of. Just in the nick of time rescued from white, male, Christian domination, only to be turned over to the other partner in the axis of evil in Operation Destroy the West - to reemerge on the other side of the 'debate' as dhimmis, or converts with bags over our heads. As if 1821 should never have been: empire is good, even if it is called a khalifate, it is multicultural!

This is going on while some useful others with impaired brain capacity, want us all to become bloody heathens and think, this is of no consequence at all, other than entirely beneficial, to the world we live in.


~ Some of the readers will be pleased to know that over the Easter weekend we'll be revisiting the Veritable Treasure Trove of Sheer Relativist Madness! ~

Quick, while it's still legal ...! Part 3.

- While we are on the subject, let me remind you of part 1.

- For those of real short memory, here's part 2.

- And for those who, contrary to expectations, may have any illusions if the Pakistan and OIC initiative towards defamation of Islam were to become reality, here's part 3.

Good night.

Anything, but the Truth ... please!

It is with sincere regret that I had to prepare this sequel to the post of a few days ago, "Quick, while it's still legal".

This monument to hypocricy is no longer fit for polite society: meet The Daily Invective.

GalliaWatch: Police Resistance

Police resistance: it is simply unprecedented! Whatever next? A coup by the Foreign Legion?

So much for Pascal Bruckner's laicite, which he defends in the face of all the Anglo-Saxon multicultural misery, as the only alternative possible.

As per Socialism, perpetually on the look out for a third way that might actually Work! Increasingly it's too late.

In Defense of Democracy, the West, and Deeep Thoughts

Yesterday I reported on how the very institutions that are supposed to be the temples of our universal human rights, have become the incubators of quite the opposite. Well, I have found an organization that is tracking and exposing this phenomenon for us: the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies. I can heartily recommend subscribing to their excellent Newsletter.

L'Occidentale is back, with a brand new English language section and a link to Tocqueville.

I leave you to it for the day, as I am preparing a recap of the investigations so far. It would appear that the workings and goals of the axis of evil laid bare in these pages, hasn't yet reached those that need it most.

Here's a thought for you: could it be that - given time - any idea, driven to its extreme, turns into its own opposite? Let me know your thoughts.

Quick, while it's still legal ...!

Let me write this quickly while it's still legal. A new low watermark in humanity's march backwards has passed virtually unnoticed by the mainstream media, except perhaps significantly by a brave little Calvinist newspaper in the Netherlands, Reuters and the Jerusalem Post.

On Friday 30th March the United Nations Human Rights Council - yes, the one which was silently set up last year to replace the Human Rights Commission, which was simply too much disgraced to keep on - adopted a Resolution by 24-14, calling for combating defamation of religion. It was drafted and tabled by the OIC, the Organization of Islamic Conference [1].

Superficially this may seem beneficial for humanity as a whole - except perhaps for those radical enlighteners that like to bring trumped up charges to bear on Christianity, as if a giant autocratic theocracy headed by Benedict XVI or Bartholomew I is just a matter of days, not months. This Resolution however is almost exclusively drafted in defence of Islam at the expense of basic human rights.

The Resolution was an initiative of Pakistan's President Musharaf. Since he is not a democratically elected head of state and sits at the pleasure of radical elements in the army and elsewhere, it may be assumed his initiative primarily serves a domestic purpose. As a 'friend of the West' he is in a perpetual balancing act, playing two boards at once.

The telling lack of media interest perhaps stems from the fact that such politically motivated Resolutions are passed quite regularly and have no teeth to speak of. This new U.N. body for human rights is rapidly going the same way as its predecessor, as we shall see. Still, a trend has been already set, and bit by bit inroads are made towards exchanging Western inspired universal human rights for less enlightened ones, with the help and assistance of indigenous crypto-totalitarians who have declared war on occidental ethnocentricity in the name of multiculturalism.

The Resolution also sheds light on the Danish Mohammed cartoon hysterics of last year. It has been estabished that this was a carefully choreographed piece of agit-prop in the best Marxist-Leninist tradition, the Islamist's revolutionary model of choice. It was thought at the time that the ulterior motives of the riots of hate were, well ... the riots of hate. It is now becoming clear they may have been concerted to provide a context and excuse for tabling and pushing this U.N. sponsored ban on the freedom of expression where 'the good name of Islam' is concerned. Here's another suggestion.

It should however not be confused with blasphemy, the defamation of God. Rather, it is towards a ban on insulting the religion of Islam and its Prophet, a crime for which many people are rotting away in prison cells, at best: just recently an Egyptian blogger was jailed for four years.

This text on the contrary has nothing to do with anyone's God. It astonishingly speaks of "attempts to identify Islam with terrorism, violence and human rights violations, the ethnic and religious profiling of Muslim minorities in the aftermath of the tragic events of 11 September 2001" and "urges states to provide protection and take resolute action to prohibit the dissemination ... of racist and xenophobic ideas and material".

In Eurabian style it even goes on to urge supposedly democratic states "to ensure that all public officials, including members of law enforcement bodies, the military, civil servants and educators, in the course of their official duties, respect different religions and beliefs and do not discriminate against persons on the grounds of their religion or belief, and that any necessary and appropriate education or training is provided ... on all manifestations of defamation of religions and in particular on the serious implications of Islamophobia on the enjoyment of all rights". I'm sure there are some Purple [2] dominated governments to be found that are more than happy to oblige.

The full text can be read here: minutes of the entire session at the UN site. As it's a bit of a stretch and a puzzle, here's the digest on this particular Resolution.

As a genetically determined Roman Catholic I heartily thank the Organization of Islamic Conference for speaking on my behalf. But still I'd rather they didn't, for the following reasons:

As multiculturalists well know - reason why they want to abolish them as ethnocentric - the universal human rights as mentioned in the Resolution, are based on Christian teaching. As long as Christians are prevented from freely practicing their faith in Islamic countries, indeed are killed and prosecuted, this reads as hypocrisy.

The liberally used designation, especially in tuition text books, of Jews and Christians as pigs and monkeys, is not consistent with peaceful coexistence and are parts of Islam that for starters might hit the religious antiquities and curiosa cellar, just as a gesture of good will.

The text of the Resolution is specifically addressing the West, the source and vessel of universal human rights. There is not a country in the West however in which the rights are Muslims are not upheld, even to the point of positive action at the expense of the indigenous populations and at the detriment of social cohesion.

This Resolution should be addressed instead to the Governments of those Islamic countries that violate human rights on a daily basis - primarily because such rights are not rooted in their religion - as some Islamic radicals do not stop to point out.

Moreover, it is an attempt to curtail the freedom of expression that is also a basic right in Western societies. In fact, this is the reason the OIC is able to draft this Resolution and bring it to bear in an international forum, in the first place.

Furthermore it has the undesired effect, of confirming radical and assertive seculars in their belief that religion as a whole is against freedom, is dictatorial, undemocratic, backward, obscurantist, and a danger to those same human rights they portent not to believe in as occidental hegemonism. It thus provides these secular ignoramuses with a stick to beat Christianity in particular and religion as a whole: they see it as a matter of "freedom of speech versus religion". Islam is spared because of its socially constructed victimhood, while religion gets a bad name.

Implementation of laws against religious defamation will either lead us up the path of semi-Soviet or French style secularism (laïcité), the banning of all religious expressions to the fringes of society and seclusion within the home, the state and public space being thus religiously neutralized; or the Anglo-Saxon variety will breed a Hobbesian, sectarian, multicultural wasteland of perpetual tribal war, of all against all. We could call that also the Balkan, or Yugoslav model. Either way, it leads to a totalitarian dictatorship.

In Search of the Origins of Postmodern Self-Loathing (II)

Part (I)

Part (II)

Auguste Comte completed his vast work in re of Positivism in 1842. Comte believed in no other source of human knowledge than the empirical method exclusively, and built a fuzzy agnostic pseudo-religion around it. Positivism is the opposite of relativism, it is materialistic and science as an idea gone haywire.

It is not a very great surprise that every French intellectual appears to be practically raised on it. De Lubac: "Every undergraduate in France knows "the law of the three states ... every branch of knowledge has necessarily to pass through three successive theoretical states: 1. the theological or fictitious state, 2. the metaphysical or abstract state, 3. and the scientific or positive state".

So in the earliest stages of man's development he began by conceiving phenomena as a result of continuous influence of supernatural agents, which Comte terms fetishism: found in animism - to which we seem to be reverting today, as Comte would have it, as we shall see - and for example in the Greek and Roman pantheons.

In a later stage, the metaphysical, man came "to regard such phenomena as produced by various abstract forces inherent in bodies but distinct and heterogeneous". This stage is found in the monotheistic religions 'of the Book', Judaism, Christianity and Islam.

And finally man considers phenomena as subject to a "certain number of invariable natural laws that are nothing but the general expression of the relations observed in their developments", in other words science: the third, or positive state. For this stage Comte later used the term 'sociology'; Auguste Comte is considered by some to be the father of sociology.

Comte seems to have had a total contempt for the contemporary dominant, secondary stage and would prefer to skip the phase altogether, which he deemed possible under certain circumstances. It reminds me of the remarks of Stuart Sim in his contribution to the polemics on Signandsight re The Multicultural Issue: "Personally, I'd like to see religion wither away as a force in human affairs ...". Sim means, secondary stage religion. Compare Comte: "Catholicism is rotten to the core, all theology is 'outmoded', and everything that comes from it is now in a state of hopeless decrepitude, etc. ...".

De Lubac: "When the generation of transmission had come to an end, a ceremony would 'finally inaugurate the new religious regime ...". In anticipation Comte had started his own calender (as we have seen in Mussolini a sign of megalomania): on 23rd Archimedes in the year 63 (22nd April 1851) Comte wrote: "I shall be preaching positivism at Notre Dame as the only real and complete religion".

Comte described the third state "as positive as any other science based on observation". Comte even came to perceive a fourth state, in which the mind frees itself even from science: the truly positive state. Perhaps predictably enough Comte's ideal fourth state results paradoxically in ... relativism! Comte saw those that reached this ideal state as "resolutely freeing themselves from the prejudice that leads us 'to place ourselves on a different footing from things' and 'to claim a special place in the universe". Sounds familiar?

Compare that with today's multicultural complaint based on relativism's tenets about Western ethnocentricity and the Christian view of our central place in the Cosmos. Auguste Comte saw it thus: Monotheism or the metaphysical state is opposed to both the first and the third stage, "so much so that the positive state can be considered as the reestablishment of the "normal state, interrupted during the Western transition ...". If that isn't true self-loathing, I don't know what is: Down With Us! It was with us, 160 years ago.

A measure of how just like relativism today, 'positive thought' pervaded Comte's contemporary intellectuals, De Lubac writes: "Right at the end of his life, he noted with satisfaction that his 'thirty years of work' had already secured the admission of this law by all thinkers really abreast of the times", much like today's relativist prophets are congratulating themselves with the pervasiveness of their own particular postmodern fallacy.

While much can be said about Comte's mistakes and the willful suppression of later discovered facts, De Lubac sums the main problems with positivism up as follows: "... his (Comte's) offence lies in ... wishing to reduce man to no more than the subject matter of sociology". The extraordinary things happening as a result of the fallacy when the mind is reduced to its object can be found here in two articles by my philosopher-hero Greg Koukl, "All Mind, no Brain" and "All Words in your Brain".

To wrap this up in the words of Henri De Lubac: "Having reached its final state of rational positivity ... the human mind abandons its quest of the absolute ... Comtean thought immured itself in the relative as a last resource after having found itself powerless to decide the question of the absolute. Separating 'positive knowledge' from 'belief', it took the terrestrial horizon as its boundary, without prejudice to what might lie beyond it ... Comte is said to have declared the problem of God unsolvable".

Quotes of the Day, History calling, and Yes to an Islamic State in the Balkans

"These people are so hard-line I think it doesn't even merit the word 'hard-line'. They're way beyond that."
Simon Henderson of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, asked about Iran's Revolutionary Guard, currently having control over the 15 British hostages.
Question: Has anybody looked lately what else is going on, perhaps in the nuclear department?

is vying with another remarkable revelation:

"The Middle-East is going through a serious change, which has been sharpened since the Second Lebanon War. This process has brought about a change in the Arab frame of mind. Israel is no longer considered their biggest problem. This is a revolutionary thought."
Israel's Prime Minister Ehud Olmert
Question: Is it all Shia or just Iran's increasing power politics that's currently taking up all the attention? Or alternatively, could it be The Great Arab Unraveling? That would be good news towards the Eurabian Empire!

In more remarkable news:

- Bones of Missing Greek-Cypriots Unearthed
Bones believed to belong to more than 30 Greek-Cypriots, who have gone missing since the Turkish invasion in 1974, were found in Kyrenia, northern Cyprus, said a member of the Committee on Missing Persons, further claiming that more bones, possibly belonging to Greek-Cypriots, may also come to light.

- Euro-Parliament demands semi-autonomous Islamic state in its heartland
The European Parliament yesterday overwhelmingly backed U.N.'s Martti Ahtisaari plan for a 'supervised' autonomy for Kosovo. The E.U.’s foreign policy chief Xavier Solana called the bloc’s planned development project in the province "the most important E.U. mission in history." (!)

A brief check on EuOberserver's site learns that the E.P. also have adopted a related report demanding that the disputed province of Kosovo be granted "supervised sovereignty." Said report was drawn up by Dutch Green MEP Joost Lagendijk. He expressed satisfaction over the fact that the E.P. chose to send an unambiguous signal to E.U. capitals, while saying it is the "first step" to a "united Europe" over the Kosovo issue.

Meanwhile Greek newspaper Kathimerini reports that Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said yesterday that the U.N.'s plan will fail, if pursued.

Commentary: It may be noted that said Mr Lagendijk is a staunch federalist and supports the earliest possible membership of Turkey despite - or because of - its appalling human rights record. It goes without saying that all this has nothing to do with Mr Lagendijk's private life. He is married to a Turkish woman.
It is also not explained why we should be looking forward to a semi-autonomous Islamic state in the heart of Europe, in the Balkans no less. Those unfamiliar with the area could picture themselves a sort of Tora Bora, a former tribal no-go area like Pakistan's Waziristan, smaller but just as rugged, wild and with the same tendency towards anarchy and life in accordance with the prevailing code of honour.
It may also be noted that the U.N. does not have the authority to declare any country's independence. Reason why we see all the subterfuge and underhandedness.

In Search of the Origins of Postmodern Self-Loathing (I)

I'm sure Dr Pat of the Sanity Squad would have one or two astonishing things to say about the origins of self-loathing, so common today in the West. But I approach matters from another angle. I beg to disagree with those who attribute it to a lack of confidence - because if so - then, what triggered the lack of confidence: this isn't an answer, but posing the question in another way.

Those who have gone a little deeper into the illogics of the ideology of multiculturalism and the underlying 'philosophy' of relativism, will be familiar with its bizarre tenet that Western civilization in general and Christianity in particular, are uniquely and inherently bad. I adorn philosophy with inverted commas, because I fail to see that it is even deserving of the term sophistry (for relativists: this was not meant as a compliment)! I have written extensively about relativism in The Lighthouse Blog. It only makes sense if the laws of science are temporarily suspended, so that logic is no longer a measure of true or false.

For some imperial reason best known to our European leaders, this piece of ideological junk has been elevated to the status of official sociological policy within the E.U. member countries, that being a bit of mystery in itself unless Eurabia makes any sense to you.

Americans must slowly prepare themselves for being subjected to possibly the worst excesses of the phenomenon, once the Democrats get their hands on the U.S. administration. This is at present the only thing standing between myself and the acceptance of the Eurabia Theory. Yes, I have single handedly promoted its status from conspiracy theory, to real theory. I'll come back to all that in later posts.

Okay, when the ideology of multiculturalism forces its way into you life, you're having to deal with the extraordinary notion that white occidentals are inherently more bad than other humans: something vaguely reminiscent of original sin, but exclusively for the Western hemisphere and its satellites.

Once you realise that an important basis of the multiculti hogwash lives on the molecular level - genes being so remarkably similar of all people, that they do not even want to make race distinctions anymore (hence the term multicúltural, as opposed to multi-racial or multi-ethnic), the unique exclusion of the Caucasion race can't be but another one of the ideology's breathtaking amount of paradoxymora [2]. This phenomenon is common as muck in relativism. To date it has given the adherents no rise to re-examine its tenets or its truth-value (but then, they don't believe in truth, so this attitude only stands to reason ....pfffff!).

Well, having wrestled with the question why occidentals should be inherently worse than say, Huns or Turks, I may have located a possible source for this idea. Henri de Lubac in his book The Drama of Atheist Humanism has written extensively about an Enlightenment precursor thought up some time, half way through the nineteenth century in ... you've guessed it ... France, that wonderful source of heaps of pernicious intellectualism. I shall be short about it, as details can easily be found in (online) reference works (for some major ones, visit The Lighthouse Store Room.

To be continued in Part II: Auguste Comte completed his vast work in re of Positivism in 1842. Comte believed in empirical knowledge only, and built a vast atheist pseudo-religion around it.

Of the Return of The Bolk, Animal Sacrifices, and New Tricks of the Left

While I'm researching the next feature post in re of fun and goodies, and try to have a life on the side as well out of the bl...blegosphere, today a few newsworthy items - admittedly some more upbeat than others, depending on your point of view.

- Former E.U. Commissioner Frits Bolkestein c.s. is finally roaring again!

This is how I know my Frits. I think this commissar-ship was perhaps a prestigious way to top the career, it did keep the old goat from what he does best: exercise the brain cells and trample real hard on some politically correct toe nails. Hopefully this is the start of a suitably explosive post-career as is expected of someone of his caliber:
"Former European Mandarin Exposes Intrigue, Illusions and Dangers".
God knows the world needs every straight thinker we can get, in these relativist days. A Nova video maintains he single-handedly blew the French constitution referendum to smithereens by openly singing the free-market praises of Polish plumbers! So much for French multiculturalism: a welcome to Muslims only, not WASP libertarian neo-Atlanticists.


- Earth Mother demanding sacrificial evidence of true faith!

This is how the new pagan faith celebrates a culture of life. Every winter hundreds of deer and horses starve to death in a Dutch nature reserve (this year to date, seven hecatombs). The goddess would have it so.

- Earth Mother now demands even more proof from faithful.
German baby polar bear singled out as scape-goat.


- Mugabe has a few expected, and unexpected allies.

. Mugabe thugs out to cripple all opposition.
. The E.U. is moving over 18 million Euros this year to Zimbabwe 'to combat poverty'. This is the E.U.'s idea of supporting 'change from within'. The article doesn't say how the E.U. proposes to keep the money from going into Swiss Zanu-PF bank accounts. When you want to check it on EUObserver, you get this for transparency.
. While no troops were available for the A.U. force in Somalia, Angola is sending 2.500 troops (ninjas) to Mugabe to help him crush the opposition.

- The new Left modus operandi.

The Left has a new way of operating that is everywhere in evidence. It goes as follows:

1. Idenfy a minor point of right-wing policy (it doesn't need to have much significance or even be factual);

2. Get some exposure and be as outraged and scandalised about it as you possibly can;

3. The leftist voters are willing to believe anything, so you can be assured of a follow up, full of indignation, hysterics, and start to finish prime-time mainstream media coverage for days on end.

In the Netherlands the Leftist Red-Roman variety in a TV program with a history of constructed 'truths' - even to the point of freeze-drying human skulls in the studio fridge - have 'exposed' that the previous Government has failed to inform parliament (a major crime, carrying political death sentence) of earlier support of the U.S. government in the Iraq war than previously maintained. It involves the former Foreign Minister, presently Secretary-General of NATO, Jacob de Hoop Scheffer. The program acts as if they have uncovered proof of Nazi involvement, and even have issued a press release to lend more fire to their outrage. Also the old British canard is paraded in evidence: that the support was to uncover WMD, while the factual reason was that Saddam had been violating the terms for ending the 1st Gulf War for twelve long years, an offence the Security Council for economic reasons best known to themselves, failed to enforce. If you ask me, this scenario is a backwards carbon copy of the recent 'exposure' by Seymour Hersh of Pentagon Iran war planning.

4. If that approach won't fly, get on the record as follows: stand before a mike, flushed and slightly out of breath - think: you just came out of a meeting with a major opposition figure and you were an inch removed from having to call Security to fetch the men in white coats, brandishing straight jackets - then say very slowly and utterly composed: "The - opposition - must - calm - down and do their utmost to be reasonable about this. They must understand we are doing this for the good of the people", or words to that effect. Not only have you had your say, but the opposition will come across as if in a total panic, as hysterical beyond reason. I saw a prime example yesterday, but I regret YouTube doesn't have it on record.

Hey, nobody said it'd be one huge rose-garden!

The Totalitarian Pseudo-Religions (III)

Continued from Part II:

A much better job was made of it on the right hand side of the totalitarian divide. It is imprecise custom to describe all varieties, Germanic Nazism and its Italian and Spanish counterparts, as Fascism. There are however important and specific differences.

The Spanish branch endeavoured to put itself on a par with the Catholic Church and fitted itself out with a sacred mission, which gave it much more push than the pseudo-religion Soviet style.

In Italy - although the former journalist Benito Mussolini proved his megalomaniac tendencies by introducing his own calender, marking the Fascist March on Rome in 1922 - the Italian variety originally didn't do race and pseudo-religion. Mussolini even criticized Hitler's racism. It was not until in1938 the Italo-German Pact of Steel came into effect that the Italian race laws were passed.

By contrast German Nazism did race, cultural political correctness and religion, and how! The pagan variety. Getting back to our hapless commentator of part I "since the original Nazis were self declared Christians, perhaps we should refer to them as Christos-Nazis": the Nazis weren't self-confessed Christians, it was the other way around: the Nazis mimicked religion, but not the Christian one, which - as we have seen - "bound man's ferocious side that prevented him from usurping God's throne". That - on the contrary - would be the last thing the Nazis stood for as far as the supremacy of Aryan man - the Overman - the Ubermensch was concerned.

The essence of Nazism lies in the extent to which it played the religious card in manipulating the German people. Unlike its mirror ideology communism, it succeeded in touching heart and soul at once. This gave it dynamic, the energy from hell and the cruelty that far exceeded the Italian and Spanish totalitarian varieties.

The writers of The Messianic Legacy speak of "the first mystic theocracy since ancient Rome ... the Fuhrer - not a politician or even a demagogue, but a shaman". It provided the German people with a tribal cosmology, a philosophy and an ideology at once. By the nightly Nuremberg mass displays of uniforms, flags, lights, symbols and hypnotising rhythms that caused a form of trance, manipulating heart, soul and nerve centre (the so-called Cathedrals of Light: see photo).

Hitler's rhetorical gifts were non-existent as far as content was concerned: it was simplistic and infantile, renowned for its banality, but it had mantra quality. His intonation had a poisoned energy, like "a jungle war drum". Once combined with the contagiousness of the mass hysterics and the tension of the thousands of people closely packed in an enclosure, the result may well be called altered consciousness, practically: a mystical experience.

Hermann Rauschning, an early and intimate aide of Hitler's got cold feet in 1935 and fled to America where he wrote two books in warning the world for the impending menace. It soon became apparent that Hitler knew exactly what he was doing. He's quoted as saying: "During the mass event thought is suspended. As this is the consciousness I need as a sounding board for my speeches, I order people to attend ... intellectuals, the bourgeoisie and the workers. I mix people. I talk to them as a mass", a collective soul of Overmen.

This collective soul - the 'Volk', or Germanic tribal spirit, was said to lose power and energy through the presence on its soil of the Undermen. That prevented their greatness from rising to sheer cosmic levels, their rightful destiny as a people. In 'Mein Kampf' Hitler writes in detail how to play the will of people: "we need a hierachical Order of a secular priesthood."

Parts of the secular religion were provided by the composer Richard Wagner, who in the nineteenth century had "glorified the uniquely sacred quality of the Germanic blood, believing with all his heart in the theatre as a temple of the Germanic art, where mystical rites would set the German soul free".

Tom Reiss in The Orientalist describes how in a fact of extreme irony Theodor Herzl got the idea of a modern Jewish state (Zion, Israel) while listening to Wagner's opera Tannhaeuser. A story that is witness to the fact that the romantic, mystical way of thinking, linking race and culture (Blut, blood) to the ancestral soil (Boden) was not exclusively a German one, but was also typical of the time [1].

The philosopher Friedrich Nietsche we have already mentioned as provider of the required basic mind-set..

Occultism and secret societies were also rife in the Third Reich: new Templars, Germanic Orders, the Thule Society, and the Freicorps (proto SS), the latter inspired by the medieval Teutonic knights and essential to the National Socialist cause.

Christian calender occasions were replaced by pagan celebrations: Jule Tide, the semination of the flag (Blutfahne), harvest and fertility rites, solstices, and the Indo-Germanic celebration of the return of the sun god: the Sol Invictus cult (Hitler as Sol Invictus: see photo).

The Orientalist provides us with a hilarious anti climax to the carefully constructed pseudo-religious National Socialist building: a prankish claim by one Putzi Hanfstaengl - the ultimate American version of the public school tie. He was a member of the core group responsible for the early Nazi Party political campaign - Hitler's Flying Circus - and head of foreign press relations. Reiss: "Among his many creative contributions to the early Nazi movement was turning the Harvard football song - 'Fight Harvard! Fight! Fight! Fight!' - into the model for the chant 'Sieg Heil! Sieg Heil! Sieg Heil!' of the Nazi mass meetings".

Reality may out-weird fiction many times over.

The Totalitarian Pseudo-Religions (II)

Continued from Part I

Enlightenment inspired, first communism and after it Nazism, sought to release man from the grip of Christianity that had kept the human spirit captive in the endeavour to save man from himself, to bind and tame human nature's creative, ferocious, chaotic, predatory side, to save his very soul. The Nietzschean ideal wanted it released, to lift man up and usurp the position of the Christian God that had kept it within bounds, denying man his own greatness, or so he thought.

The essence of this ideal is captured by Henri de Lubac in his great work "The Drama of Atheist Humanism", quoting the reflections of Rainer Maria Rilke, recorded after enthusiastically reading the work of the new prophet, Friedrich Nietzsche:

""He whom men worship as the Messiah turns the whole world into an infirmary. He calls the weak, the unfortunate, the disabled his children and his loved ones. What about the strong? How are we ourselves to climb if we lend our strength to the unfortunate and the oppressed, to idle rogues with no wits and no energy? Let them fall, let them die, alone and wretched. Be hard, be terrible, be pitiless! You must thrust yourselves forward, forward! A few men, but great ones, will build a world with their strong, muscular, masterful arms on the corpses of the weak, the sick and the infirm!"
Others have repeated the cry: "The gods are dead, long live the Overman (Ubermensch)!", celebrate the new Nietzschean ideal in terms that none can afford to ignore as a clue to some of the dominant facts of contemporary history: Nietzsche predicts an early return to the ideal, but to an entirely different and new ideal. To understand this ideal there will be a category of free minds, fortified by war, solitude and danger. They will know the wind, the glaciers, the Alpine snows; they will be able to plumb the deepest gulfs without wavering. Endowed with a kind of sublime perversity, they will deliver us from loving our neighbours and from the desire of nothingness, that the earth may recover its purpose and men their hopes".

And so, instead of the ever transcending greatness in humility, as man measures himself against the demanding directions issued by God through Revelation, man became the measure of himself, of which we oversee the result today.

Over the years a few books have been written that sought to posit something quite different, but that in passing provide us with some wonderful insights into the origins and workings of the two totalitarian pseudo-religions: communism and Nazism. One of the works, we have already introduced elsewhere: Tom Reiss' The Orientalist, gives us pages of minute details of the times and the people involved, and who - in some cases - lived through both versions of the man induced hell.

Another work - perhaps remarkably so - is The Messianic Legacy, the second 1982 tome of the Holy Blood and Holy Grail trilogy, written by former BBC journalists, Michael Baigent, Richard Leigh and Henry Lincoln. They set out to make the case of the original story that was later plagiarised, vulgarised, simplified and commercialised by Dan Brown in The Da Vinci Code. Of course much later, the whole hoax of the Priory of Sion and the goings-on in Rennes-Le-Château were exposed as an elaborate fabrication by Pierre Plantard c.s. But that was after a whole industry of gullible esoterics had set up shop.

But that aside, the BBC authors must be recommended for making an excellent job of their homework. This fortunately leaves us, in the second tome of the trilogy, with an erudite description how religion and myth subconsciously influence heart and mind, and how the other New Prophets of the Enlightenment, Bakunin and Adolf Hitler for communism and Nazism respectively, willfully used religious trappings and paraphernalia to get the masses on their side. The authors term these constructs surrogate secular religions.

Bakunin for over twenty years, belonged to the rank and file of Free Masonry and - as we have seen - Joseph Stalin (alias the pockmarked one: see foto) for some obscure reason best known to himself, finished his education in a Tiblisi seminary. Not only did he rub shoulders with The Orientalist protagonist's revolutionary mother, he was also a regular house guest of the well known esoterist G.I. Gurdjieff. From both these sources he got to know humanity's religious impulse up close, and learned how to harness and manipulate it.

The Messianic Legacy describes the pseudo-religious oath sworn on the occasion of Lenin's death and how the body was preserved, displayed and adored in later years, reminiscent of Christian saints.

The value attached to the membership of the Communist Party - particularly during the thirties of the last century, was specifically religious in nature.

Membership of the Pioneers from the age of nine had all the hallmarks of a rite of passage and was on par with the Catholic's first communion. The red handkerchief - symbolizing the blood of the revolutionary martyrs - was perceived as a relic, crucifix or charm. Nobody was allowed to touch it.

The book posits however, that ultimately the Marxist-Leninist ideology was never very much more than just that. It flopped because a religion must appeal to the heart as well as the soul at the same time, give succor in times of distress and provide answers to life's cosmic questions. Communism as a pseudo-religion always remained materialist, abstract and ultimately emotionally sterile.

To be continued, Part III: A much better job was made of it on the right side of the totalitarian divide. It is customary to describe all varieties, Germanic Nazism and its Italian and Spanish counterparts, as ...

The Totalitarian Pseudo-Religions (I)

I'm firmly resisting the urge to list a number of particularly noteworthy headlines, but this little gem I cannot possibly pass up:

Glowball warming hysterics reaching new heights - the end of the universe as we know it:
"We are facing a planetary emergency".

Having got that out of my system we can get down to the business of analysing a few other pseudo-religions.

Last night I happened to enjoy an instalment of one of my favourite British police series. Set in the south in England in World War II this particular piece centered on a nest of Fifth Columnists, grouping together in a rural hotel for a private function: instructions how to demoralise the local population, primarily by cutting telephone wires and psi-opsing the natives with defeatist messages, like "why bother, next week when the German army will be here it'll be all over any way".

These fiends were portrayed in the usual manner in which the Nazi spirit is conveyed: women faintly hysterical over-painted trollops, jackbooted men in leathery coats, looking sly and muttering words like "bloody Jids" while brandishing a copy of the Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion. This may be doing well on stage, it is in fact far from capturing the Nazi essence.

A further, but far more nasty misrepresentation was recently provided by a hapless commentator - with a pseudonym that was in itself telling - on the Townhall version of my article "Post postmodernism: what are the options?. Her achievement is nothing short of the miraculous, committing one fallacy, one mistake in grammar, plus two outright lies in the short declaration: "since the original Nazis were self declared Christians, perhaps we should refer to them as Christos-Nazis".

This remark is exemplary of the invective, the toxic, and under and mis-informed character of the discourse today. In the first place there's the excruciating irrationality of the postmoderns: maintaining every opinion to be equally valid, equating with a strait face totally incommensurable entities with one another. Feast your eyes on this example which is taking place on professorial level: X writes polemics, Y throws bombs, X is equal toY, they are both 'warriors'. Correspondingly above hapless commentator - presumably writing from the American context - makes following cerebral acrobatics:

Evangelicals are right-wing Christian fundamentalists;
Nazis were right-wing and fundamentalist (by the same token: fundamentalist = fanatical);
Nazis are Christians = Christos-Nazis.

The first lie is the self-serving repetition of what is now well-known to be Soviet disinformation about the war time Pope being in cahoots with the Germans - the so-called "black legend". It has continued all the way down to the present day and originated at Radio Moscow, accusing Pope Pius XII of coming forward too late with his opposition to Nazism "because he had been silent when the German death machines were running, when the chimneys of the cremating ovens were smoking". But it went unnoticed that five months after that broadcast on 29 November 1945, he had the opportunity to feel the full horror of the Nazi atrocities when he received a delegation of Jewish refugees, thanking him for the work the Catholic Church had done for them. It is also all but forgotten by outsiders that (Polish) priests were an easy and early target of Nazi suppression.

The Nazis, far from adhering to the Christian beatitudes - as in "Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the land" - were rather persuaded by Nietzsche's pagan lust for power. John Allen's recent article "Papal preacher exalts non-violence, connect Nietzsche to Holocaust" describes how it has been fashionable in the last half century to divorce Nietzsche from anti-theist ideas. "Wrong", says the Pope Benedict's Preacher to the Household. Nietzsche "scorned the vision of humility and non-violence" ... styling Christianity "a morality of slavery". He juxtapositioned Christ against Dionysus, his pagan deity of choice, associated with the Bacchanalia that at some point in time became so extreme, that the celebrations were prohibited by the Roman Senate in 186 B.C. It involved the pleasantry of ripping to threads smallish animals whilst under deep intoxication.

To be continued with part II ... Enlightenment inspired, first Communism and after it Nazism, sought to release man from the grip of Christianity that had kept the human spirit captive ...

Treason (IV): a Vast Left-Wing Conspiracy?

Earlier instalments: Part I, Part II, and Part III

Criticism of the E.U. isn't encouraged by liberal politicians: such would only place the organization in an unfavourable light and create an atmosphere against it. If we do, we mustn't be surprised about the return of a majority of No votes against the adoption of the E.U. Constitution - as was the case in The Netherlands and France. The German chairman is at present looking for Clintonian options around this problem, to get it ratified nevertheless - such is the worth of E.U. legality. Invasive, E.U.-wide policies can hence become a reality by a simple majority vote: no more Maggies about "I want my money back!".

Gradually it becomes apparent how the clever saboteur operates. A clue is provided by Pim Fortuyn's green animal rights assassin. This activist (no doubt government sponsored on the grounds of something or other beneficial to society) made an entire region of Holland a living hell for poultry farmers: law book in the one hand - note book in the other, checking every single piece of fine print against the reality on the ground, and prosecuting any discrepancy, however minor, upto the European Court of Law, if necessary.
It is therefore very important to keep a close eye on the legislators. The more they produce, the more there is to prosecute. Big, bureaucracy producing government is the enemy!

A further example of judicial terrorism is found in the following quote from an American commentator on The Brussels Journal: "It seems we share this trend of the breakdown in trust, especially as some of our own institutions are cleverly used against us; for example, six imams are suing an airline after they started praying and acting like they were going to hijack the plane, and so were thrown off the flight. Not only is the airline being sued, but so are the passengers that reported the suspicious behavior. The meaning of this couldn't be more clear: if you report a Muslim who's acting suspiciously on an airplane, you face a lawsuit. This is leading to an increasing feeling of powerlessness (but, at least we can still own guns)."

The Swedes cloaked their multicultural aspirations in an official Act of Parliament: a horror story of culture assassination of the first order. See here how the state has turned into an enemy of the very population it is supposed to protect. One wonders how we ever got ourselves into such a mess? On the other hand, it's not as if nobody was ever forewarned. It's what you get when you cut yourself off, by the root.

Then why do we accept this treason of the people, by our own elected governments? I think, because we are still prosperous nations. Also we are comparatively free within the constraints of the law: after all, I can still write this, whereas bloggers in Egypt go to jail for insulting Islam, and the head of state. Others have suggested it is, because we are at heart such law abiding citizens? In that case we'd be advised to refer ourselves back to Karl's early work on the revolution, in re of victory, sentimentality, the bourgeoisie, and all that.

And, strange as it may seem: anything becomes normality at some point. Just as Londoners during World War II got used to being bombarded night after night, and Iraqis adjust to IEDs and exploding chlorine trucks, so our minds are set to accept big government, their intrusion into our lives and the 'normality' of political correctness: to express ourselves and act in accordance with the prevailing ideology that is fed by the Unholy Alliance of urban jihadies and the Left, their shared glorification of victim-hood and constructed social identities, their shared love of the collective and 'irrational logic'.

All of the above may make us liable to accept the treason cloaked as political correctness, but circumstances change. Something dramatic may happen. Tensions are rising, so much is apparent. And it looks like the Left is doing some fundamentalism of their own, harking back to the early works of socialism, as it was supposed to be before it was hijacked by Uncle Joe c.s., who are blamed for the Soviet mess - not the ideology, not the inspirators, nor the earlier apostles. Heaven knows what that may produce!

Or can we just not imagine there's a Vast Left-Wing Conspiracy happening in this place and time - against us and by our own representatives? The generations born in the free world after World War II have known only democracy and steadily increasing prosperity. It's next to impossible to imagine other circumstances. That mind-set, combined with the lack of proper history education, and the postmodern arrogance with regard to all that came before us, makes it hard to see the signs and patterns that Wladimir Bukovsky does recognize, and that sometimes emerge when we read books like The Orientalist, about which I hope to write more soon.

Let me deny the reverse of Hildebeast's product of sleepless, paranoid night sweats: no, I don't think there's a Vast Left-Wing Conspiracy, no Protocols of KGB Elders, but I do believe there is a Vast Totalitarian Pattern becoming apparent!

Note: Just had the afterthought that since treason as a crime seems to have been abolished, or suspended, or whatever it is they've done to it, these heathens currently in charge of our parliaments and governments in all likelyhood haven't the foggiest idea they're committing it, or what the concept is in the first place. Conversely, they'll also have no inkling of the meaning of loyalty.

Update: In this post I answered the question - if we're experiencing today a renewed onslaught of Marxism, or Neo Communism, or whatever you want to call it, negatively. I've changed my mind ... I've discovered the trick ... Eurika! How do I know? Because it's logical but above all, it's dead Boring! The peoples of the West are today living in a crypto, semi totalitarian situation in which taxation, and >>>

Treason (III): Cultural versus National Borders

Earlier instalments: Part I, and Part II

Although thought up in Canada, multiculturalism makes the perfect ideology for the E.U., as it already deals with the various (nation) states and ethnicities. If the ideology hadn't already existed, Brussels would have invented it. The artificial witch' brew that is produced in the melting pot makes the E.U. highly allergic to patriotic expressions; it breaks out in a rash each time something occurs that so much as smells like nationalism. But not to worry: such outbreaks are usually swiftly dealt with - preferably by blackmail, nebulous promises, bribes (commonly called financial aid) or a combination of all of the above.

It may not be said overtly, but it is the nature of all, corporations or bureaucracies alike: grow or die. The continent of Europe has few geographical boundaries. Technically it can expand up to the eastern and western shores of both America and Canada. The number one export product of the E.U., is the E.U.: its formation is a trick worthy of repetition elsewhere: after all, what is comes down to, is not just a simple free trade zone like any other, but one huge social contract: the voluntary abolishion of the state in lieu for 'peaceful coexistence' (another anachronistic Soviet remnant) within the Pax Europea.

The E.U. ideally cast the net wide for potential new membership: all Balkan countries, if not already a member - starting with an independent Kosovo (which is a scandal of major proportions and worth a post in itself, currently under production); Turkey; parts of Northern Africa: certainly Morocco and Tunisia; all of Eastern Europe, including Ukraine and at some point in time Belarus ("the last European dictatorship"), and dare I say the Caucasus nations: Georgia, Armenia and oil-rich Azerbaijan and who knows Russia, duly 'reformed' and no longer an economical pauper: we now know the E.U. after all was fine-tuned to converge with the Soviet Union; Israel has obviously been dropped to facilitate dealings with Muslim states, also a story in itself.

There is a breed of E.U. supporter who - like communism before it (and also a formidable success) - seeks to obliterate the existing nation-states and create an artificial, new, historic, and borderless entity with an artificial ethnicity, the Europeans, just as politically and socially engineered as that other non-existing race, the Macedonians. All ingredients for a phony European statehood are in place: flag, anthem, capitol, passport, driving licence, currency, mint, manufacturer's labels: "Made in the E.U.", administration, raising taxes and the redistribution of funds.

On a micro level populations have been made state-dependent, if at least they want to enjoy the benefits and pension plans they have paid for. On a macro level we see a similar mechanism in place: the member states are dependent on Brussels to reap the benefits of what the respective citizens already paid for: commonly in the form of farm subsidies (CAP), export grants, subsidies for underdeveloped regions (cohesion funds), etc. If you'd like to enjoy the freedom of falling off the European administrative radar screen, you'll have to forfeit pensions, medical cover, etc. But as long as people have a reasonable amount of freedom within such limits, and prosperity is high, this isn't experienced as a problem (the social contract).

On the longer term the present isn't a practical state of affairs. Most borders being artificially and rather arbitrarily drawn in the first place - the last great re-arrangements having taken place after World Wars I and II - aberrations came into existence like ethnic and linguistic entities ending up on two sides of the artificial boundery.
So instead we'll strive for a Europe of the regions, for now limited to cultural, civic and economic cooperation between border areas.

But in time, new administrative units will be formed, possibly called Provinces or Departments, that are more culturally and linguistically driven: for example the Department of Limburg will comprise Dutch speaking parts of what is presently Belgium and The Netherlands. The Treaty of Schengen already foresees in free roaming, free trade, etc. This is why asylum seekers entering one Schengen signatory country have in principle free access to all other Schengen member countries. So much for general amnesties of illegal immigrants.

What fills me with suspicion is that the French Gaullists, while their staggering national chauvinism often surpasses that the Sun King - yet are staunch E.U. supporters: former French President Giscard d’Estaing plays a prominent role in the draughting of the infamous Constitution. As we have seen in Bukovsky's speech he was also the one who tipped off former Soviet president Gorbachov of the impending European Federal State.

This gives weight to the argument that Europe - far from being a United States partner - will rather become a U.S. counter-weight, the creation of yet a new bi or tri polar world of super powers. While I'm sure there are at present lots of misguided Europeans that would celebrate such a development, it would nevertheless be a historical drama and a grave mistake: a super-power cannot afford Utopian world views, reflected in almost non-existent defence spending, if surrounded by old-fashioned political power brokers.

In the meantime we forget that flexible international treaties concerning asylum and migration came into existence to facilitate those former Eastern Europeans who were lucky enough to make it over the Iron Curtain: the concrete, barbed wired wall that separated the Communist from the free world. These lenient conditions survive till this day, presently facilitating Europe tragically being overrun by immigrants, some of whom have no intention of integrating themselves, but on the contrary demand that Europeans conform to their specific cultural and religious persuasions, turning would-be member status into one of a unwelcome occupier.

In this they are aided and abetted by Europe's left-leaning multiculturalists who cannot bear the thought of having to live in a homogeneous culture and thus advocate we all follow their arrogant examples in enjoying the barbarian melting pot. In this way an entire continent changes its ethnic, cultural, and religious character, a phenomenon the likes of which not seen since Attila the Hun, Genghis Khan and Tamerlane.

It is a historical gamble for no good reason other than to realise their ideology of multiculturalism, which - as we have demonstrated in these pages - is based on irrationalities and lies. Considering what's at stake it isn't an exaggeration to state it constitutes treason against Europe's indigenous peoples, who feel left in the lurch by their own governing elites. What to think of the inner cities where the state isn't performing the very first duty: the protection of its citizens. It was to be expected: there are now people seriously calling for private militias, which brings Western Europe at least in entirely new territory, and one step closer to civil war.

To be continued: Part IV