On the Brink, and led by Irrational Ideologues!

City Journal - Bowling with our own

"Harvard political scientist Robert Putnam, author of "Bowling Alone", is very nervous about releasing his new research, and understandably so. His five-year study shows that immigration and ethnic diversity have a devastating short- and medium-term influence on the social capital, fabric of associations, trust, and neighborliness that create and sustain communities. He fears that his work on the surprisingly negative effects of diversity will become part of the immigration debate, even though he finds that in the long run, people do forge new communities and new ties. Though Putnam is wary of what right-wing politicians might do with his findings, the data might give pause to those on the left, and in the center as well."

Well, how about making a start by publishing these findings, so that instead of pushing ideology based on demonstrable Marxist lies, we might actually start dealing with hard, reality-based facts ...

... like ... how 'racist' Israel Quietly Takes in Thousands of Darfur Refugees ...


... and why the biased BBC sounds like the voice of Hamas. That's because it is Hamas. Melanie Phillips reveals that the story in the Jerusalem Post all but throws away explosive revelation!

And how the 'free world' pushed through - come hell or high water - the creation of an unprecedented diplomatic monstrosity, we all shall long regret it ever saw the light of day ... 'deal' apparently confirmed by the U.S. ambassador to Serbia: Kosovo Compromise Achieved!

And if that wasn't enough, here's some vintage stuff coming from the latest ideologue the world got itself lumbered with: the Darfur Genocide wasn't the result of humans exercising free will, but of ... Global Warming, its purpose becoming now apparent: control and extort!

At which point we are ready for just about anything rotten in the nation state, so let's top that up with the latest news from the front of Transnational Progressivism ...


... if anyone was still in any doubt about where that piece of ideology stems from, it should herewith be removed: Gaddafi Urges Pan African State!

Oh and, whatever changes, it's always the same thing anyway: Chavez shopping subs in Russia!

The Straight Red Line (7): Plotting against The West

~ Continued from the Part 6: the Collective ~

We have now established and asserted the Straight Red Line of the Counter-Enlightenment movement, as described by Stephen Hicks in "Explaining Postmodernism", running from the anti-Reason Collectivism of Rousseau, the Relativist Subjectivism [1] of the German philosophers of Romanticism (Kant, Fichte, Hegel, Schopenhauer, Nietzsche), the Totalitarian Socialism of the Nazis on the Right side (Heidegger, Spengler), and Communists on the Left (Marx, Engels), through to Islam inspired terrorism, and the irrational European terror groups as the Bader Meinhoff c.s., on to the contemporary animal rights anti-globals and their organized rioting, topped up by the Postmodern Relativist thinkers in the Marx tradition: Foucault, Lyotard, Derrida, Marcuse and Rorty. The Postmodern movement includes branches of Feminism, Multiculturalism and Environmentalism.

The implication of the1984 revelation of former KGB agent and Soviet defector Yuri Alexandrovich Bezmenov that the KGB had been subverting three generations of Western students from 1968 onwards (if not before) (see other posts in this series), combined with the above pedigree of Subjective and violence prone philosophy, lays bare the origins of radical political Islam and explains the - at first glance - inexplicable attraction of that movement and Postmodern Leftism. (See Chart I to follow the Straight Red Line.)

I suggest wrapping up the series with more revelations about the group's mutual attraction and admiration, detailing the joint plans for the destruction of the Liberal, modern West, and then move on to further detailed analysis of the Unholy Alliance's strategy of misinformation, demoralization and subversion.

Melanie Phillips, author of "Londonistan" in an article posted on 18th May, "Liberalism v. Islamism" (aggregated to American Diplomacy) confirms Theodore Dalrymple's analysis of Islam being hopelessly and fatally insecure. Faced with an intractable dilemma - to abandon the faith which was supposed to bring glory and salvation, but instead has condemned Muslims to the backwater of humanity - or embrace modernity, acquiring with it the power that results from free enquiry: progress, knowledge and science. He holds that like all people when faced with an intractable dilemma, they lash out. Hence their accusation that is barely understood in the West, that they are 'under siege' by the ever expanding Liberal culture.

Melanie Phillips: "The driving force behind the Islamic Jihad is the fight against Liberalism and modernity. All the iconic conflicts ... are secondary to the fundamental aim of the Jihad to prevent Liberalism and modernity from destroying Islam." But Liberalism just wants to be left in peace without Sharia Law being foist upon it, a plea that regretfully falls on deaf Jihadi ears.

Underscoring the thesis of the Straight Red Line, Phillips describes how - more or less coinciding with the KGB's activities of the perversion of Liberalism by subjecting it to unrelated, Narcissistic, pathological ideas and behavior - the Muslim Brotherhood proposed to destroy Liberalism before it would infect the Islamic world, and to replace it with Islam through the pincer movement of both terrorism and cultural takeover.


This plan allegedly was laid out in a program of subversion in 1978 when the Organisation of the Islamic Conference sponsored a seminar in London which said, Muslim communities in western countries must establish autonomous institutions with help from Muslim states, and lobby the host country to grant Muslims recognition as a separate religious community, a step towards eventual political domination.

The plot is confirmed by a book published in 1980 by Khuram Murad, titled "The Islamic Movement in the West", and affirmed by a Muslim Brotherhood document seized in Switzerland in 2001, known as ‘The Project’, outlining a twelve-point strategy to 'establish an Islamic government on earth'.

At the time I have derided Hoover Institution Fellow and Townhall columnist, Dinesh d'Souza for siding with Islam against our fellow Western ideology, Liberalism. I haven't read his book "The Enemy at Home", but a gist article "It's the Culture, Stupid" can be found on Townhall, making the point that Islam has a problem with the amoral side of permissive Liberalism specifically, not with the West as a whole.

Today's Liberalism of course is not what it originally set out to be when the philosophy first developed during the Enlightenment. In fact, it has become its very opposite. Indeed, it bears all the characteristics of the Counter-Enlightenment: anti Reason, Collectivism, Relativist Subjectivism, victimhood. I posit that this well known process of 'usurp, pervert and destroy' was carried out by the KGB subversives in an effort to rob the West of its morals, the process of de-moral-ization. Now that the move towards depravity and decadence is more or less complete, the Unholy Alliance by Phillips' pincer movement is ready for the cultural takeover.

I disagree however with Phillips' conclusion - which is in keeping with mainstream opinion - that rampant individualism is a logical consequence of the philosophy of Liberalism, the Classical version, that is. In the post "The Mill Paradigm" I explained that John Stuart Mill's tenet of personal autonomy has been gravely violated by Leftist Liberalism. What is usually criticised as amoral individualism, is most of the time caused by a pathological condition called Narcissism, and has absolutely nothing to do with Classical Liberalism.

It is however at home in Leftist Liberalism, born of the KGB ideological demoralization program, literally to rid the West of notions of right and wrong, good and bad, by injecting Counter-Enlightenment thought into the system that holds that Reality does not exist, rendering these moral principles null and void. The result is all around us.

I dare now safely say, that all conspired to atomise Western culture from within: demoralized and confused to the core by pathological ideologies, it is upto Jihadism to deliver the coup de grâce. In case anyone would object that this scenario will destroy Left Liberalism as well, I can tell you they are but usefuls in the hands of the Postmoderns, who would like nothing better than to obliterate the naked, irrational, grasping ape of a man from the face of the earth entirely.

Hicks: "Postmodern thinkers inherit an intellectual tradition that has seen the defeat of all of its major hopes ... For those opposed to the Enlightenment, the modern world has offered no comfort ... Science .... generated nuclear bombs and super-bacilli. And the confidence in the power of reason [has] been revealed to be a fraud ... [from the] postmodern perspective the universe has been ... shattered ... But there was always Socialism ... the order that would transcend everything and create the beautiful, collectivist society. The failure of Left politics to achieve that vision was merely the last straw".

If Hicks is right, Postmoderns are beyond caring.

I have prepared the beginnings of a inventory (Chart II), detailing the advance of the 'program' as pertaining to the various spheres of activity. I do invite and would greatly appreciate active commenting, critique or whatever the reader may think to contribute. Thanks!

The Slow Train to Brussels Redux

Breaking News - Stop Press - Scoop!

A new E.U. treaty is to be drawn up by lawyers and technocrats under the auspices of Intergovernmental Conference for Retired Collectivist Eurocrats Redux. For electoral considerations and as the measure of its unpopularity, this document may emphatically not be termed a 'Constitution', the first one having shipwrecked on French and Dutch No referenda; just how dumb and subsurface do these politicians think their citizens actually are?

This new piece of solidified suspicion must be completed at the end of 2007, as "the new treaty will enter into force ahead of elections to the European Parliament in summer 2009". So far the bad news (and please note the idiom) ... but,


... Not so fast, boys ... here's the good news: Dutch pressure group "We demand a referendum" has just let it be known by press release that parliament has secured a majority in favour of yet another referendum. It's my believe the Government will have to comply if they want to avoid a major popular revolt!

It would appear that the post-democratic, Transnational Empire train stops there for the time being. It will be fun though to see yet a fresh instalment in the series of Eurocrats slithering hither and dither to cunningly push the agenda through, no matter what, at whatever the cost!

Posting is a bit low, for which my apologies. We have a few more chapters of the Straight Red Line series in production, as we find liberty to be in serious existential trouble. Plain air at present measures some 43C/109F. Tomorrow will be a mere 38C/102F, so prognosis remains on the slow side of posting.

The Straight Red Line (6): the Collective

~ Continued from Part 5: Love of Islam, Loathing of Self ~

With the Hicks explanation of Postmodernism and the Bezmenov revelation that the KGB has been subverting three generations of Western students from 1968 onwards (if not before), we have a direct line from the tenets held by the Relativist, Subjective philosophies [1] of the Counter-Enlightenment movement, on to Marxism and National Socialism (Nazism); the Middle Eastern varieties: Arab Nationalism and Pan-Arabism, the Baath Parties in Iraq and Syria, and Jihadism; Western style Social Democracy and Left Liberalism, Environmentalism, Multiculturalism and for the future, the post-democratic Transnational Progressivism; all these vicious ideologies sharing the same characteristics (see Chart I).

The straight red line starting with the Counter-Enlightenment, set in motion by Rousseau and picked up by the German pre-Romanticists and Romanticists, eventually led on the one hand to the Collectivist Left as represented by Marx and Engels, and on the other to the Collectivist Right in the philosophies of Kant, Herder, Fichte (the Headmaster from Hell) and Hegel.

We must realise that post World War II the Left have lodged a broad based and very succesful public relations offensive to wipe their own historical slate clean, and drop all that is debased and ugly in Totalitarianism in the Nazi lap. It's a stretch to even see Nazism today as Socialist, but from the outset the discussion between them was, which of the two was more Socialist, the actual historical Right being the faction that kept true to pre-revolutionary feudalism. We have been induced to forget that Nazism literally stood for National Socialism.

Just as the Left, the Right wing Socialists were real statists, often also fiercely nationalistic (not to be confused with patriotism which is merely pride of country). In contemporary terms perhaps the late President Milosevic of former Yugoslavia was most true to this type of politician. Right and Left wing Socialists had more in common than not, the enemy being Classical Liberalism that was seen as decayed, capitalist and its limited government by the people frowned upon as weak and anti government.

Apart from the same enemy, they shared Collectivism (anti individualism), statism (sometimes to the point of worship (Hegel)), education not seen as transfer of knowledge, but as today, as conditioning (socialization), both were pro revolution (justification of violence in the pursuit of centralized power), anti capitalist, and anti-Reason which was viewed - true to the period of Romanticism -as a totally inadequate source of knowledge. As increasingly today, emotion was deemed an infallible guide to morality.

World War I by one interpretation, might be considered a war of Collectivism on Liberalism, the outcome of which should have brought Socialism to Germany, the war industry already being footed on a Socialist basis. The defeat was devastating for the Collectivist Right. Due to the Left's succesful propaganda this might look odd, but in fact it was entirely possible to be a Socialist and a Marxist enemy simultaneously. The difference between Left and Right Socialism boiled down to intensity and method: the Left favouring a transnational point of view (the USSR, and later also the Warsaw Pact) - as they still do, today apparently being the epoch of the 4th International (feast you eyes on this piece of Marxist irrationality by which the hero is fitted out with almost supernatural powers) - and the Right favouring a method along cultural or ethnic fault-lines: to each nation and culture, its own form of Socialism.

Left and Right Collectivism share the same basic dimensions, as by sheer chance does Radical Islamism. Chance, or perhaps not. In the post "Yes my Friends, I Will Call for War" we have seen that Syria/Lebanon and Iraq found themselves as French colonies at the time of World War II, on the side of Vichy and Nazism; only afterwards, with very little adaptations necessary, these countries and Pan-Arab Nationalism as foreseen by Egypt's President Nasser, moved to the Nationalistic Left (Baathism), aligning themselves with the Soviet Union and the East bloc. (More insight here.)

In a separate process in the Middle East radicals adopted Islam as a political project, which is similarly characterized by the familiar dimensions: anti rationalism, Collectivism, Totalitarianism, Subjectivism and an Oppressor versus Oppressed dichotomy. Hence the natural and smooth cooperation in the Unholy Alliance with the Western remnants of the KGB subverts: the Postmodern Left. It is perhaps therefore not entirely by chance that the indispensable scape goat - to off-load the blame on for all that doesn't reflect the respective Utopias - happens to coincide as well ... yes, it's the infernal twins, Big Satan and Little Satan, Libertarian America and Jewish Israel.

The history and development of (urban) terrorism - Rousseau's political justification for irrational violence - runs directly from the Reign of Terror during the French Revolution, to the nihilistic agit-props of imperial Russia of 1885 and the Revolution itself; Hitler's 1930's Freicorps and the Italian Fascist groups; the violence after the 'failed revolutions of 1967 and 1968 by the Baader Meinhoff Group and the Red Army Faction; to contemporary Hamas and Hizbollah, and the increasingly violent and always trivialized organized rioting of the Postmodern little fry: Autonomen, anarchists, anti-globalists and animal rights activists. All are battling the state, provoking revolution and war through violence, considering it a justified form of 'resistance' as legitimised by Rousseau, Marx and others (see Chart I).

Today's groups by the way are getting increasingly bolder and more violent as the Western police are tied by hands and feet by civil rights laws; the state of Lebanon is bravely trying to assert itself in the face of Syrian/Iranian pressure, and the Palestinian Authority has de facto ceased to exist.

The West in the meantime is moving towards a Postdemocratic era, its Collectivism becoming increasingly Totalitarian as a perverted form of Liberalism is elevated to the status of Transnational State Ideology (also euphemistically known as political correctness). Egged on by the Postmodern KGB remnants in government institutions, NGOism, education and the mainstream media, in the words of Theodor Dalrymple: "We are willingly adopting the mental habits of people under Totalitarianism". We ain't seen nothing yet.

~ To be continued in Part 7, Plotting against the West ~

The Straight Red Line (5): Love of Islam, Loathing of Self

~ Continued from Part 4: the Founders ~

The touching words quoted yesterday (here in entirety) were uttered by the Subjectivist [1] champion of the Collectivist Counter-Enlightenment movement: Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1712-1778). I regret to say we have no winner of Hicks' groundbreaking tome "Explaining Postmodernism".

Rousseau set the tone of the premise of mankind basically being good but corrupted by his environment, that we have come to know so well in Leftist thinking. In Rousseau's vision the world's trouble is caused by civilization, Reason and its fruits, knowledge and science. He's often quoted as a philosopher of the Enlightenment, but it is quite clear he rebelled against all the tenets of individual Liberalism, Reason, secularism and limited government.

In Rousseau we find the very source of our trouble with Postmodernism, but also the answer to many a vexed question:

- "why does the Left ally itself with Radical Islam against the permissive Liberal society that is of their own making and of which they are the prime beneficiary?", and

- "why should Western civilization be considered so uniquely bad?" and related:

- "what's with the self-hatred", in these pages often termed "Down With Us", or Operation Western Auto-Destruct, so often confessed to by our Postmodern Multiculturalists and directed against white, rich, hetero-sexual, Christian men in particular and Western society in general.

Earlier I suggested to have discovered the source of self-loathing in the Positivism of Auguste Comte. But in Rousseau we have yet an earlier Ground Zero.

Disappointed Marxists often return to the grandfather of Collectivist Anti-Reason, but when the Leftist press recently sabled the film '300', about the three hundred Spartans that defeated the Persian Army in 480 Before Christ - driven by Pacifism and love of anything that doesn't answer to the white, male litany, in casu the Greeks - they forgot to check back on their Classics, the pure, emotional Rousseau.

As opposed to the degradation of Athenian decadent Civilization generated by Reason, Rousseau glorified the militaristic Spartans as pure, unspoiled, noble tribesmen - their callous practice of exposing babies to nature may have even inspired him to expose his own five children to the hardships of the Paris orphanage.

Because to Rousseau, the more advanced a civilization, the more corrupted and corrupting it is. As a paradigm of Rousseauian thought we can envisage the Noble Savage, or man's fall from Paradise: the snake of old was often used as a symbol of wisdom; read 'reason' for 'wisdom' (not to be confused!) and you have Rousseau in a nut-shell.

More of his ideas inspired by the image of noble savagery is the divorce of Eros and Agapi, so highly prized by contemporary man and woman; and a distaste for compassion with others which would only generate more decadent civilization: this is reminiscent of the view that drove the Russian Revolution: one cannot create a workers' Paradise with sentimentality, at which point usually the village headmaster was made an example of.

Rousseau also inspired in Marx the use of the Leftist dichotomy of the Oppressor versus the Oppressed; and seems to have been the source of Postmodern Fallacy Number One: the world as a pie, the view of the zero-sum game, where it is inappropriate and fatal.

Rousseau as the source of Western self-loathing can be found in the vision of the noble, primordial world that is destroyed by man's civilizing force: Reason, knowledge, science, technology, art, aesthetics, property, and economy; man not only destroyed this pristine environment (!), he also became soft, fat and lazy, and created a social conflict: a few winners on top and a whole lot of losers at the base of the pyramid of power.

It's this inequality that is so damning in Rousseau's erroneous total-sum game! Far from considering contemporary Western society an engine of equality and a creator of wealth, it is seen by the Rousseau followers as doomed, the epitome of social pathologies! Down With It ... à la Lanterne! Presently the problem is our destruction of the environment by technology: it doesn't save it, it despoils it.

The West prides itself for what it considers progress. But for anyone who has invested completely in a world view seen as evil, amoral and utterly failed, this gloating is unbearable. So the fight isn't over for the KGB's ideologically demoralised remnants. The capitalist world's moral values are attacked as utterly sexist, racist, dogmatic, authoritarian, cruel, uniquely civilized - uniquely bad!

If Reason makes no sense to what you're saying as Reality clearly shows otherwise, attack Reason as pernicious and superfluous, and persuade the world that Reality doesn't exist!

Rousseau as the source of the revulsion for civilization unmasks Fjordman's correspondent at the University of Helsinki for the Postmodern vile hypocrites that Multiculturalists at heart are: sending the message that retaining culture should be a human right, when in fact they mean to destroy anything that can remotely be considered a 'civilization', favouring instead the long-lost ideal: Marx' pseudo religious red paradise, or by default, Rousseau's wild tabula rasa of the tribal society, so pure and self-sacrificial, possibly Islamic (apparently not considered civil enough to be damned).

But then again, Postmoderns have a relation to language, that Muslims also have when lying to infidels: language, not as a means to transfer information, but as a means to a usually bloody end: it is about effectiveness. This is part of the confusion: to Postmoderns language is not about objective Truth, which to them doesn't exist any way. Therefore language isn't used as an instrument of precision, but as a propaganda tool. A word of advice: never, ever, take a Postmodern's words literally: what is being said habitually requires a good deal of deconstructing before its meaning can be discerned - which they will then go on to reject as non-existent.

To Rousseau religion was a imperative, as we have seen in yesterday's puzzle contest. He had the intention of cutting a few individual heads in the interest of society's stability as a whole. In Hicks' words: "... 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. Further: so fundamentally important is religion that the ultimate penalty is appropriate for disbelievers ..."

At which point we see the source of our Unholy Alliance of the Left and assertive Islam emerging on the horizon. As the cursed Western civilization was practically built by Christianity, this obviously rules it out. Now Islam on the other hand - due to the precise parallel characteristics of Collectivism, Anti-reason and Oppressor versus Oppressed - is the ideal candidate. The use of irrational terrorism is just an added attraction, as we shall see!

Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Ayatolla Extraordinair, far from being the Left's Mister Nice Guy, also has the honour of being the source of political justification to irrational violence, committed by Jacobin thugs during the French Revolution, the Reign of Terror; of the horrors that Marxist dictators inflicted upon their own peoples; and of various Leftist terrorist groups who - from the 1960's onwards, when it began to dawn on them that with the passing of the 100 million victim mark - the Totalitarian game was up.

Most people, myself included, with the fall of the wall in 1989, made the mistake in taking for granted that Communism had conceded defeat. But the KGB's ideologically de-moral-ized, brainwashed crowd never gave up: they weren't programmed to pack it in. On the contrary! After their contributions to the permissive society to corrupt it even further, the West is currently witness to their collusion with the forces of Radical Islam.

I think we need to carefully consider the ominous words of one of the Four Horsemen of the Communist Apocalypse, Herbert Marcuse of the Frankfort School in 1974, after the 'failed revolutions' of 1967 and 1968: "It will be resurrected in the universities".

~ To be continued in Part 6, the Collective: ... we have seen that Syria/Lebanon and Iraq found themselves - as French colonies during World War II - on the side of Vichy and Nazi Germany ... ~

Science as Liberal Ideology and a Puzzle Contest

Today a bit of a break from the Straight Red Line series: the line that runs from the Counter-Enlightenment movement of the eighteenth century on to Marx and (National) Socialism, to contemporary Postmodern thought patterns: all branches of Relativism as Multiculturalism, and presently in full development: post-democracy Transnational Progressivism, best described as a neo feudal form of Empire.

First another matter that requires our attention, and then I'll wrap it up with a puzzle contest pertaining to the above. On a first received basis the winner gets a copy of Stephen Hicks' ground breaking book, "Explaining Postmodernism".

America has been dealing with this problem for a some time, now it's Europe's turn: Liberal morality being thrust upon the nations, whether its people share the world view, or not. A clarification is required at this stage, the usual caveats with an added dimension: we are not talking Classical Liberalism or Libertarianism here, the Enlightenment version of laissez-faire, of the scientific variety that operates by empiric investigation and submission to falsification.

Instead the subject matter pertains to the atheist variety of the Counter-Enlightenment lot that has usurped the Liberal title and inserted into it a set of its own characteristics to further the ideological ends: collectivism, anti-reason and socialism, that runs counter to the rational, individual liberty of the original thing.

The usurpation doesn't end there: enlightened science is being used as a means to provide the subjectivist, liberal ideology with a rational coat of paint: it is actually a bit of a dirty trick ... like Kim Jong-il saying he's proclaiming North Korea hence a capitalist nation, while secretly maintaining a plan economy and defending the construct as the only respectable and lawful way to conduct a free market.

At stake: the all important existence of God ... God Must Be Averted and Stamped Out, at All Cost ...!

Subject matter is the Council of Europe's Parliamentary Assembly's draft resolution on the dangers of creationism in education. This institution is one of Europe's impermeable political entities, not to be confused with any of the European Union's agencies, but it bears all the hallmarks of the same pseudo democracy, claiming "pluralistic composition of democratically elected members of parliament" while there are very few citizens that have heard of it beyond the evening news, let alone having voted for any of its members.

Its proud President is Mr Van der Linden, in an earlier incarnation a nondescript backbencher of the Christian Democrat persuasion in the Dutch parliament, got respectability by moonlighting in Brussels corridors of power.

This body of crypto dictators have seen fit to draw up a rag of a Subjectivist Manifesto that is typical of the breed. It lives and breaths liberal morality activism: "The theory of evolution is being attacked ...!" it rants. Yes, this is what you do in science with theories: you attack them in order to see if they can stand up to scrutiny.

But it stands to reason: after 150 years the theory is still unproven and the chances of basic enzymes of life arising by random processes are 1 to 1 followed by forty thousand zeroes! So instead of attacking it, it had better be kept in a velvet coated vault for fear of it desintegrating into sub-atomic particles.

The Discovery Institute just the last few days published an article by David Berlinski that sums up the story of "The Origins of Life" rather nicely: some 17 pages of modern science history and not an end in sight. The author concluding that "We must wait end see".

This is the actual state of the scientific investigation, but the Council of Europe have elevated it to gospel truth and wants to root out all forms of alternative investigation and research: "The Parliamentary Assembly is worried about the possible ill-effects of the spread of creationist theories within our education systems and about the consequences for our democracies. If we are not careful, creationism could become a threat to human rights, which are a key concern of the Council of Europe."

There you have it in a nut-shell: consider the consequences for human rights and democracy if God cannot be averted. I don't propose to repeat the entire rag, but this is not the language of lawyers and it certainly isn't scientists talking: this is sheer activism in defense of the politically correct ideology! We are way, way out of line, at present!

I promised a riddle, a little contest ... okay ... but brace yourselves for this one: the full kit of protective totalitarian raid paraphernalia is required. I'll give you the answer who's quoted here tomorrow. Good luck, here goes:

"while the state can compel no one to believe it can banish not for impiety, but as an antisocial being, incapable of truly loving the laws and justice, and sacrificing, if needed, his life to his duty. If, after having publicly recognized these dogmas, a person acts as if he does not believe them, he should be put to death ... the individual particularly ... is surrendered to a new moral and collective body which has its own self, life, body and will. [In moral society, one] coalesces with all, [and] in this each of us puts in common his person and his whole power under the supreme direction of society's leaders."

The Straight Red Line (4): the Founders

~ Continued from Part III: the Really, Really Usefuls ~

Thanks to the 1984 interview with former KGB agent and Soviet defector Yuri Alexandrovich Bezmenov and the rather clever person who resurrected it and posted it on YouTube, we now know that this human time bomb was programmed to commit a massive act of treason. That was the whole point of the exercise of which the next stages were supposed to be destabilisation, crisis (revolution) and the consolidation of the Marxist/Leninist state in the West. We will come back to it in the next instalment of the series.

The Bezmenov interview is pertaining to the United States, but we can rest assured that the same program was worked in Western Europe with equal success, if not more so. The Soviet Union having collapsed for good reasons, the psychotic robots now seek to capitulate to the next best thing. Again, it may seem far fetched, but when one looks at the underlying characteristics and the forces at work, it makes perfect ideological sense.

Stephen Hicks in his book "Postmodernism Explained" outlines the philosophical development of subjectivist philosophy [1] since Rousseau, Kant and Hegel. As a reaction to the Enlightenment this school initially sought to accommodate faith, but soon went any other way in developing as a Counter-Enlightenment movement, in opposition to Reason at best, amazingly hostile towards it at worst. Rousseau is in a league of his own in this respect. With Kant we see a tacit approach: still Objective enough to hold that things do exist objectively outside of the mind, but from Hegel and the Irrationalists onwards, the development rapidly moves downhill, reason-ably speaking.

Subjectivist Postmodernism stands for the following characteristics:

- collectivism (as opposed to individualism, the Classical Liberal operative unit);
- reason is limited and constructed (reason being seen as an inferior and poor source of knowledge);
- reality does not exist outside of the mind (Kant's noumenon).

What follows is that Truth/Reality is relative, and that Reason must accept illogical contradictions (antinomies), of which Relativism is simply riddled, in these pages referred to as paradoxymora [2]! This is why we can argue against all the things that are logically wrong with Relativism (and Multiculturalism by extension) until we are blue in the face, the adherents know the antinomies to be part and parcel of the dogma, and a measure of their contempt of Realism and Reason!

Free Will is very much thrown into doubt, and Reality is created by contradictory (dialectic) forces, these being the cause of Growth and Change.

A number of social themes were formulated around the dialectic of the Oppressor versus the Oppressed (see Chart I). Multiculturalists today also speak in terms of a group's 'narrative'.

If Kant was just modestly placing a question mark in favour of Relativism, the later philosophies based on Kant are a hundred percent Subjective and Relativist. In the Counter-Enlightenment movement Hegel was followed by the theists Schleiermacher and Kierkegaard, and the atheists Schopenhauer and Nietzsche.

- Schleiermacher: Reason is artificial and limited; Reality is accessible only through faith, emotions and instinct.
- Kierkegaard: choices are made in ignorance.

Atheists Schopenhauer and Nietzsche already show much more signs of our own contemporary Postmoderns: after Reason was rejected they found the return to religion by Schleiermacher and Kierkegaard a cowardly, sad act. Here we truly enter the realm of Totalitarianism and brutality we have come to know so well.

- Schopenhauer: Reality is deeply irrational; it is conflictual Will towards nothing; beyond comprehension. Only by our own Will and Feelings can we grasp Reality. Music - he suggested - could play a role in triggering required instincts.

Nietzsche, a proto Nazi and a Schopenhauer disciple, was completely Reason averse and a great admirer of the stupor brought on by orgiastic Bacchanalia and the frenzy of the Dionysia: consciousness is a weakness; Reason is a tool of weaklings. Meet the madman's platitude: "The yeasayer - the man of the future - will not be tempted to play word-games, but will tap into his deepest drives, his Will to Power and channel all of his instinctual energies in a vital new direction", which the Counter-Enlightenment movement proceeded to do. The rest, is history, partly still in the making: I posit we are yet in for another instalment of Unreason.

Things get even worse with Karl Marx, and Nazi philosopher, Heidegger:

- Reason is a superficial phenomenon;
- getting to the core of Being through Conflict and Contradiction.

Heidegger's Postmodern disciples of our generation are Foucault, Derrida and Rorty (recently deceased), the latter also a fan of Wittgenstein and one of American multiculturalism's founding fathers, Dewey.

I'll come back to these thinkers in some detail, but for now I would like to point out, the direction this irrational Counter-Enlightenment movement and its particular mindset, is taking us. From the Pantheism of the Greek and Roman classics, to the Metaphysics and altruism of Christianity in the Middle Ages, from Reason and Individual Liberty of the Enlightenment, to the Irrationalistic Collectivism - from thereon not backwards to medieval Christian thought where God lays out his Grand Plan for mankind - but to Man as God, to whom conflict is beneficial and the moving force of growth and change, and whose belief in life as a useless exercise in futility results in cynicism and nihilism: the belief that chaos is the natural state of Being and that feelings, emotions, and prime impulses are superior. Is this making any sense to anyone?

The result is a man who believes his ego to be the very centre of the universe, and goes so far as to state that if he isn't watching it, it isn't even there. Not a man who seeks to live according to an ideal that is larger than life, who is nor led by the force of Reason, but who takes primordial impulses and base instincts as his source of knowledge. It has so far led straight to three gigantic blood fests that have cost millions of lives and counting: the French Revolution, Nazism and Communism.

~ To be continued in Part 5, Love of Islam, Loathing of Self: a horror of a riddle: who wrote this? ~

The Straight Red Line (3): the Really, Really Usefuls

Continued from Part 2: A Carnival of Fallacies

This is the part of the series where I'm running the risk of sounding like my mother. It is however vital and essential for the full extent of the disaster, to become clear.

The KGB de-moral-ization program - as confessed to in the 1984 interview with former KGB agent and Soviet defector Yuri Alexandrovich Bezmenov, since released on YouTube - became so successful that the brainwashed generations of 'students' far outlived the existence of the Soviet Union.

This success was due to a number of factors: first there is the subversion of morality, making any kind of behavior, personal opinion, or lifestyle of choice, socially acceptable. The absence of objective reality [1] of either good or bad, true or false, has resulted in the moral confusion that lives on to this day. It is now known as Relativism - moral, cultural or otherwise.

The advance and intensity of the program was greatly helped along by three simultaneous, equally pernicious items of fashion, which may have been part and parcel of the program, maybe not: according to Bezmenov the transcendental meditation rage was not, though the KGB was certainly interested in the possibilities of spiritual and mental vacuity techniques.

The first was the propagation of the use of consciousness (perception of reality) altering drugs, the most 'innocent' of which was cannabis, the most toxic LSD - 'innocent' in inverted commas, as I can attest to a number of fatalities in my immediate circle of operation, directly attributable to the use of these substances.

The second was the spiritual leaning towards Eastern, narcissistic, ego-absorbing mysticism, which could at times reach surreal proportions, in itself also life threatening as meditation tended to induce psychosis in some people, as did the use of the drugs that accompanied it.

And finally there is the pseudo philosophical propaganda emanating from "The Institute of Marxism" at Columbia University, the Communist advanced Polit Bureau in the West, also known as the Frankfurt School. Here's an article by Charles Morse, "The Four Horsemen of the Frankfort School". It is well worth reading in its entirety: the amount of damage due to psi-ops, intellectual and ideological manipulation as effected by these fiends can hardly be underestimated.

With hindsight it is hard to believe this drivel was lapped up by the 'intelligentsia' like fluid space cake. At present we are sustaining a recurrence in the guise of political correctness and forms of Relativist thinking, not the least of which is Multiculturalism, also known as Cultural Marxism. Again laws of nature are being suspended in order to render the masses susceptible to the correct ideological messages.

With the fall of the wall in 1989 these dimwitted psychotics didn't miraculously cure themselves of the subversion at the hands of the scions of the revolution, nor did they disappear into thin air. I am a personal witness to the arrested development of these usefuls: almost none ever changed or moved one iota since they sacrificed their souls on the altar of Marxism.

What did happen, is that they kicked the drug habit (during working days at least), and fixed the do and other overt signs of ultra Leftist affiliation. In short, they became socially acceptable. Then they got themselves a respectable job, preferably in public institutions, local or national governments, (higher) education, social work, media: all the strategic places where they'd be able to propagate and disseminate the Relativist message, taking care always to masquerade it as something innocent for the well-being of humanity, like "immigration is enriching Western society".

These remarkable U-turned careers have advanced to the stages where they are at present: well entrenched, to claim pension in about 5-10 years' time when they'll go pick up the thread as full time ideologues. But for now the usefuls are at the height of public power, somehow managing to wreck three thousand years of civilization within the few decades of their sad existence. This is the extent of the success of the KGB ideological demoralization program.

~ To be continued in Part 4, The Founders: Thanks to Yuri Alexandrovich Bezmenov we now know that this human time bomb was programmed to commit a massive act of treason ... ~

The Straight Red Line (2): a Carnival of Fallacies

Continued from Part I: It's Communism After All

With the Stephen Hicks' explanation of Postmodernism and the Bezmenov revelation that the KGB has been subverting three generations of Western students from 1968 onwards, if not before then, we have a straight red line from the tenets held by the Relativist, Subjective philosophies of the Counter-Enlightenment movement (I'll come back in detail on that), on to Marxism and National Socialism (Nazism); the Middle Eastern varieties: Arab Nationalism and Panarabism, the Baath Parties in Iraq and Syria, and Jihadism; Western style Socialism, Social Democracy and Left Liberalism, Environmentalism, Multiculturalism and for the future, the post-democratic Transnational Progressivism.

All these vicious ideologies have a common philosophical source and have the same vital characteristics: they share collectivism as the operative unit (as opposed to the individual), they are subjective [1] and anti-reason, anti-capital or plain socialist, and the overall commonality: totalitarianism with a overlaying dichotomy of the Oppressor versus an Oppressed class, culture, religion, minority, gender, race, etc. No wonder there's a mutual attraction! Here's Chart I for The Straight Red Line, from Counter-Enlightenment onwards.

The resurrected Bezmenov interview is already being dismissed as an exaggeration, outdated and irrelevant. Part of the viciousness of the KGB subversion is, that the denial is an aspect of it: the general attitude at the time towards caveats issued by people who were on to it, was no different. It eerily underscores Bezmenov's commentary that the brain-washed generations have been rendered incapable of coming to conclusions on the basis of genuine information: the refusal to face reality, the desensitization for factual information, their incapability to pursue a path of logic: the perception of reality having been perverted by the KGB ideological de-moral-ization program.

You need to adopt the Relativist thought pattern to achieve just that, the suspension of natural law: truth does not exist, there's neither good nor bad. In other words: the KGB subversion program and Relativist thought are one and the same!

Regular readers may recognize the above: not only does it conform to what Dr Sanity describes as the psychological pathology that confuses mature adaptation to a changing reality, with myth and self-delusion - these form also the basics of the Relativist, Counter-Enlightenment thought of which Marxism is a subspecies: the absence of truth outside the consciousness (Kant's noumenon), the senses being considered unreliable sources of information, resulting in the absence of morality: right or wrong, good or bad, mentioned by Bezmenov as the prime cause of the success.

- What follows is that any personal act or opinion (in the absence of truth) is as good as any other;
- Then there is the confusion of ideas and concepts: fact with opinion, equal with identical, new with improvement, the person with his ideas;
- What to think of the perplexing problems with the Law of Cause and Effect;
- The polarizing tendency to adopt a manicheistic thought pattern and the inability to see shades and nuances;
- To say nothing of the historical and cultural barbarism of not differentiating one historical or cultural paradigm from another.

One fallacy after another form of twisted thought, topped up by the intellectual and psychological immaturity caused by an overprotective nanny state that is always available to pick up the pieces, should the personal relativist lifestyle of choice have given cause to unhoped trauma.

As the objective reality outside the brain is rejected, this idea results in perceiving oneself literally as the centre of the universe, giving rise to the idea that everybody is entitled to "do their own thing" along the high moral standard that all involved must consent and no one must get hurt: the Mill Paradigm, borrowed from Classical Liberal Enlightenment for once. Of course stripped of what might have led the idea to work: responsibility, caution and the acceptance of consequences.

I have made up a list of some fourteen fallacies in Postmodern thought, the so-called PMF (PostModernFallacies). The relevant posts in which the fallacies, inconsistencies or plain stupidities were discussed, are:

- Post-modernism's Fallacies I - numbers 1-5;
- Post-modernism's Fallacies II - nrs 6, 7, and 8;
- Post-modernism's Fallacies III - numbers 9, and 10;
- The PMF, an Update on the Culture War - number 11;
- Relativism on the Couch with Dr Pat II - number 12;
- Fallacy number 13 is in: The Master of the Universe - number13;
- Postmodern Fallacy #14: Relativism Leads to Historical Barbarism -14.

~ Continued at Part III: The Really, Really Usefuls ~

The Straight Red Line (1): It's the Communists After All

No sooner had I taken mental note of the 'Simon-Peter Says' post on the trepidations of education, the thought occurred to me that the current state of the world is reminiscent of a situation in which a global Communist coup has taken place, and by a wild flux in the time-space-continuum, the press and the public were not informed of the fact: as a consequence we'd all be living a totalitarian nightmare of which nobody'd be aware. The majority wouldn't even notice.

It may be a far fetched thought and a awkward dystopia, yet events are occurring on the grander scale of things that are so bizarre, they could normally only have taken place during the seventies, when due to free reign experimentalism, the abnormal had become the standard.

Hardly had I digested above intellectual exercise, or in a serendipitous occurrence 'Atlas Shrugs' released a nuclear time bomb, strategically set to explode in the early stages of the 3rd millennium A.D. and made in the USSR anno 1975. My mother was either a secret clairvoyant or a very smart woman: in any case she is now proved right after all that the Soviet KGB was doing their damnedest in rendering an entire generation of students susceptible to their ideological subversion, also called ideological demoralization, active measures, psi-ops: stage one in the Cold War of Communism on the free world.

The bomb on 'Atlas Shrugs' is a link to a 1984 interview - Cold War still raging with no foreseeable end in sight - that Edward Griffin had with former KGB agent and Soviet defector Yuri Alexandrovich Bezmenov and since released on YouTube, spilling the beans on the unheralded success of it all. (I apologize and regret I lack the technical skills to insert it here, so please hit the above provided link.)

Bezmenov explains the psychological warfare practiced by the Soviets and how a generation of baby-boomers is now "totally and irreversibly ideologically demoralized", having an altered perception of reality. Sounds familiar, doesn't it? "Cerebly relativized", I would have said in an earlier stage of the investigation, or "Having had a lobotomy, not remembering the lobotomy", sometimes also disguised as Bush Derangement Syndrome, Projection, Displacement, Delusion or Denial, but always with one chief characteristic: altered state of reality.

That particular generation Bezmanov is speaking of, currently happens to be at the height of their power, being some 55-60 years of age, not yet ready to be pensioned off and alas omnipresent in all echelons of crucial areas in society. The Bezmenov list of fields of occupation sounds uncannily like my own postmodern repertory: government, civil service, media, education and business.

~ To be continued Part 2 A Carnival of Fallacies: It also eerily underscores Bezmenov's commentary that the brain-washed generation has become incapable of coming to conclusions and calculations on the basis of facts, refuse to face reality, are desensitized for factual information, logic, their perception of reality having been subverted by the KGB ideological demoralization program ... ~

Transnational Progressivism: an Inexplicable Presumption

The Transnational Progressivism Alerts for today are for the Central European areas and the Balkan peninsula, as well as for the whole of Northern America and parts of Meso-America, and - oh .... what thee eck ... make that for the whole of planet Earth and the surrounding areas!

Foehammer's Anvil, in "Bush dismembers Serbia" is on to the consequences of the impending Kosovo precedent. In instalment number 5 on the transnational state in the series "Neo-Totalitarianism" we have already seen that " ... it is certain that diplomatically and politically something is afoot. The U.N. does not have the legal power to declare countries independent; nevertheless, if Security Council member and Serb ally Russia doesn't veto ... the U.N. will have done exactly that. It will provide for any other area in the world with separatist aspirations or with an axe to grind, to go the same route".

But, if the whole exercise isn't an adexterous attempt at appeasing Radical Islamism, betting heavily on Russia indeed voting the hazardous plan to Neverland, "perhaps this is the very thing the Transnational Progressive community have in mind ... the gradual end to the mono-cultural remnants of the era of "sectarian war after war, and wave after wave of ethic cleansing", as the latest postmodern propaganda slogan goes."

Foehammer is quoting from a 'Accuracy in Media' (AIM) article by Cliff Kincaid dated June 8, 2007 as follows: "What Bush is doing is laying the groundwork for more conflict and upheaval in the world ... Never before in history has the U.N. presided over the deliberate destruction of a sovereign state. Kosovo represents the religious heritage of Serbia's Christians and many Christian churches have already been destroyed by Muslim extremists there. Taking Kosovo from Serbia is comparable to taking Jerusalem from Israel." Amen!

There is that last aspect too, yes. But in today's 'post-Christian' world who cares for a few antiquated churches and monasteries: old bricks and mortar, and a reminder of the terrible world we inhabited before the advent of postmodernity! We are all interdependent now ...!

Yet the relentless diplomatic push towards an independent Muslim state in Kosovo is indeed "ominous ... If ethnic Albanians can take Kosovo from Serbia, then Mexico can take the Southwest from the U.S., making it part of Mexico or making it into a state or region of its own, separate from the U.S. Indeed, there is a plan to do just that. Bush apparently doesn't fear this possibility because he sees Mexico joining Canada and the U.S. in some kind of ultimate trilateral entity. In this kind of world, there would be a common identity card and people would be free to travel anywhere." Hey, let's rock with this transnational progressivism! Burn your passport, delete the border!

That multicultural and multi-ethnic world of empires people lived in before the doctrine of self-determination, autonomy and the national identity was fully developed, and which since has gone out of diplomatic fashion, is described in the book "Not even my name" by Thea Halo whose mother was a Pontian Greek, father an Assyrian, Christian minorities in the Ottoman Empire that - along with Armenians - felt the brunt of the Young Turk and Ataturk's policies of 'Turkey for the Turks'. Armenian Aztag Daily had an interview with the American author; it can be read in "Companians in Suffering".

Which begs the question: can Turkey ever become a worthy E.U. member while in denial over its own history of conquest, submission (dhimmitude) and suppression? Germany and South Africa were brave enough, having completed their psychological processes to come to terms with the past and are the better for it; due to their cultures of shame Japan and Turkey are still struggling with the events, the latter being in a state of denial altogether.

The tone for example in which Turkish Daily News recently reported on the matter of a Greek history text book didn't exactly betray awareness of any sensitivities on the Greek side towards past events that happened on their imperial watch, to say the least.
And neither did Turkish P.M. Erdogan betray any empathy when he told Greek P.M. Karamanlis during a meeting in Vienna last Friday, that "there is a lot of sensitivity (on the part of Turkey) to this sort of issue"; this sort of issue being the unveiling of a monument in Thessaloniki, commemorating the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Pontic Greeks during World War I and in the Asia Minor catastrophe of 1922 at the hands of Turkish forces: it "cast a shadow over friendly relations between the two countries", rang the ultimate chutzpah.

The American author has a good point where she stresses that "... by recognizing the genocides they (Turkey) would resolve some of the other important issues as well. For instance ... you don't have to keep jailing your teachers, publishers, and journalists on this issue ... It's a shame that they can't speak freely and learn what happened in their own country without fear."

"The sad thing is that they lost so much, because the Greeks, Armenians, and Assyrians had so much culture there ... vibrancy ... wonderful artisans, intellectuals, teachers, musicians. At the time, there were Europeans who were saying "What in the world will Turkey do without the Christians?" After all, it was the Christians who were the intellectuals and business people, who had the education to help Turkey progress into the 20th century."

"When Turkey got rid of the Christian populations, they set themselves back, way-way back. The general Turkish population was not well educated at that time, because the Turkish government didn't bother to educate them the way the Christian missionaries educated the Christian populations. For the most part, the government wouldn't allow Muslims to attend the Christian schools, for fear of conversion, so most Turks of the time remained peasants and farmers" ... whose grandchildren are currently finding their way to permissive, postmodern, liberal societies and don't seem to be able to get over the culture shock.


As history lessons are gradually erased from school curricula, it is not unusual to find Westerners going through their lives with the false idea that Greek temples, Armenian monasteries and Assyrian churches were built by Turks, unaware as they are of the fact that pre-Islamic Turkish tribes only came on the Indo-European scene out of the Mongolian planes, from the thirteenth century onwards, conquering the indigenous Christianized peoples in the process. It is an illusion the Turks do nothing to dispel, claiming the cultural loot as their own.

A similar development occurred from the eighth century onwards with the Islamic conquests of countries in the Middle East and Northern Africa: it may come as a shock to some victims of the postmodern interpretation of history education, but (Islamic) Turks and Arabs don't build churches, or Greek ruins, or Roman aquaducts - never have, never will! Nor are they indigenous to Turkey (Asia Minor, or the Near East) or the Middle East, the Arabs hailing from the Arabian peninsula, roughly present day Saudi Arabia.

The postmodern elite is so much in a hurry towards the progression of the transnational, borderless, multicultural and multi-ethnic empire building, that they rather opt for silence and suppression of unwelcome historical events rather than deal with them, non-offensive policies being the number one on the politically correct order of the day.

U-turning politicians are never a pleasant sight, but nothing is more repulsive and nauseating than the European party big wigs slithering hither and thither in their exculpation of the Turkish atrocities in the face of that country's impending E.U. membership (Belgium's Messrs Johan Vande Lanotte and Yves Leterme and, on behalf of The Netherlands, Wouter Bos).

The most perplexing of the transnational progressive wisdom is, that - apart from the fact that the old empires were neither easy manageable entities from a governmental point of view, nor democratic champions of civil rights - the idea also counters, what not a century ago, was seen as the solution to "sectarian war after war, and wave after wave of ethic cleansing", namely borders, passports, sovereignty, the nation-state.