A Review

Thuvia, Maid Of Mars

by

Edgar Rice Burroughs.

Part III-C

zzzzThuvia

Review by R.E. Prindle

Edgar Rice Burroughs

Edgar Rice Burroughs

Civilization And Its Malcontents

     Let us say that for the fifty years or so before the 1920s there was a growing sense of societal malaise.  This malaise was reflected most notably in the creation of  Edgar Rice Burroughs’ psychological projection, Tarzan Of The Apes.   One has to account for the immediate acceptation by society of such an absurdity.  Tarzan, in fact, completely rejected civilization for the life of the  romantic ‘unrestrained freedom’ of the jungle.  The noble savage in fact.

     Thus in a metaphor Burroughs reflected the malaise of his time so brilliantly that his creation was accepted as virtually a real person.  Writers like Grant and Stoddard put the same theme into more scholarly terms.  As noted, contrary to Richard Slotkin’s idea, Grant had little or no influence on Burroughs while the slightly later Lothrop Stoddard whose three relevant works appeared only from 1920 to 1922 could have had no influence on Burroughs’ formative years.   It seems probable that Burroughs did read Stoddard and was influenced by his work but only after his ideas were fully formed.  Even then  The Revolt Against Civilization appeared after Burroughs had examined some of the same problems in his rejected manuscript, Under The Red Flag of 1919.

     The problem of the malcontents and their war on civilization was examined by a number of writers during the twenties and thirties so why Slotkin singled out Burroughs, Grant and Stoddard isn’t as clear as it might be.  Postwar German cinema was intensely concerned with the matter as why should it not?  Germany was under asault by what Stoddard called the Underman.  Nor need Slotkin think Stoddard was alone.  I’m sure there were dozens of forgotten books prophesying the end of the world by one means or another including the Undermen of Communism.

zzzzThuvia2

     The Underman, or the Communist, was not even a term unique to Stoddard.  Gustave Le Bon, the French scholar on whose work Sigmund Freud based his study Group Psychology And The Analysis Of The Ego wrote prolifically on the psychological foundations of the Underman.  Freud based his book on Le Bon’s 1895 study  The Psychology Of Crowds.  Unless I’m mistaken he based his 1930 study Civilization And Its Discontents on Le Bon’s 1921 book The World In Revolt: A Psychological Study Of Our Times.

     On the cinematic side the problem was examined in the great silent films The Cabinet Of Dr. Caligari and Fritz Lang’s 1922 film Dr. Mabuse, The Gambler.  Lang would follow that ten years later with the sound film The Testament Of Dr. Mabuse.

     Even though Buroughs’ Under The Red Flag was rejected in 1919 he persisted, rewriting and extending the text into the 1926 story, The Moon Maid.   This story reflects a possible reading of The Revolt Against Civilization but such a reading was much more evident in 1934’s Tarzan And The Lion Man.

     The development of the problem was evident to all these writers which it seems to have escaped Slotkin who attributes the recognition of societal evolution to mere ‘racism’ in the writers.  One thinks that perhaps Slotkin is too involved in his own agenda.

     Rider Haggard enunciated the problem quite clearly in his 1888 novel Allan Quatermain  in which Quatermain grouses about the ‘strict limits’ of civilization compared to the ‘natural’ life of the African Zulus.  It might almost seem that the idea of Tarzan arose in Burroughs’ mind from that observation.  In fact science was undermining all the comforting beliefs that mankind had been settled in for a hundred thousand years.  During that long period characterized by the mental mode of what is called mythopoeic thinking man’s mind devoid of true knowledge projected a vision of reality that resulted in the notion of God.  Thus reasoning from insufficient knowledge man’s mind came up with an erroneous result.  You can’t get out of a mind what isn’t in it; all education is suggestion.

     As Freud was to say, man’s settled view of reality received its three great shocks when Galileo disproved the geocentric notion of the universe, Darwin disproved the uniqueness of man’s position in the animal kingdom and he, Freud, displaced the conscious mind with his vision of the unconscious mind.  Once again Le Bon was there ahead of him.

     Thus as the nineteenth century opened and progressed the bases of mankind’s notions of reality were shattered leaving him emotionally and intellectually bereft of foundations of belief.  Adrift without an anchor.

     As if that were not bad enough the great cataclysm that ushered in the modern era, The French Revolution, was based on the the absolute notion that not only were all men created equal but remained equal in all aspects of their existence.  The advance of civilization would toss this certainty into the trash can of history also.

     As civilization placed greater and greater demands on the intelligence and self-discipline of men and women the incontestable gap between those less intelligent and those more intelligent became more and more obvious.  Thus as the century progressed the notion of the Overman and the Underman began to become clear.

     At the same time the first tentative efforts at measuring the intellectual potential of the individual began to become possible.  Of course the basic inequality of men and women in its physical aspect had always been apparent.  Some men were naturally stronger and better muscled than others.  But, even that was changing. The science of physical culture was making it possible for the 98 lb. weakling to develop himself into a man mountain.  Thus artifically developed srongmen like the Great Sandow ushered in the golden age of the strong man topped off by Charles Atlas who guaranteed he could turn you into a man mountain if you followed his program.

     There was the promise that you could dethrone that bully and kick sand back in his face.  On the other side Francis Galton was originating the first primitive tests to measure intelligence potential.  Burroughs would have seen both proponents during his miraculous summer of 1893 at the Chicago Columbian Exposition.  I mean to say that both facts entered his mind where they could be digested and emerge later.  Nothing can come out of your mind that didn’t go in it.

     And then after the turn of the century Binet devised he first actual IQ test.  Thus, just as Sandow and Atlas could measure the size of muscles, the psychologists became able to measure the intelligence potential.  Those with high IQs were set up; those with low IQs were cooked.  The upshot was that all men were not created equal nor could they ever attain intellectual equality.

zzzzThuvia4

     To a very large extent what became the Communist Party recognized the inequality while demanding equality against reason.  Recognizing subconsciously, perhaps, that men could never be intellectual equals rather than try the futile task of raising the less fortunate they sought to destroy education which brings out the inequality but doesn’t create it.   No matter what happens there are always going to be the more intelligent just as there will always be the physically stronger.  As Le Bon points out, if you needed to hear it, nature don’t know from equality.

     Thus the Communist Party devised the well sounding slogan- From each according to his ability; to each according to his need.  Good plan for the needy, slavery for the able.  The needy were organized beginning their struggle to achieve superiority by collective action.  This was accomplished in Russia in 1917.  The battle was joined.

     Just as individuals are created with different capabilities so are peoples and races.  Some can achieve and some can’t.  Slotkin who must be a Communist thus takes offence at what he perceives to be, and is, an attitude of White Supremacy in Burroughs, Grant and Stoddard.  While I am aware there are those who will disagree with White superiority it is nevertheless not an attitude but an evolutionary fact.  That is the reason Communists have Darwin under attack.  While Darwin doesn’t say it, it is the inevitable result of his studies.  Just as it was necessary for the Undermen to destroy education in the hopes of creating intellectual equality so it became necessary to destroy White achievement of the last five hundred years.  The whites must be demonized and made to feel evil and inferior morally.  That is the import of Slotkin’s Gunfighter Nation.

     At that level all three writers are guilty.  As has been stated in Canadian courts- Truth is not a defense.  So there’s nothing to discuss.  Might is right and whoever has the might will prevail.

     It is a fact that all three writers were anti-Communists so it may be assumed that whatever Communists believe, they didn’t.  And why should they?  Might may be right but it can still be nonsense.  Communism is a flawed ideology based on a false premiss.  It always fails wherever it is introduced.  Failure is not evidence of a bad plan in Communist eyes.  One just continues to shovel sand against the tide and pray.  So succeed or fail they always think they can succeed by the same flawed ideology.  The fault for failure lies elsewhere.

     In that sense Burroughs was wasting his time assailing this religion of failure with his Under The Red Flag and its successor The Moon Maid.  The only people who would applaud his effort would be we non-Communists but he could never convince anyone with Communist leanings.  Of course that wasn’t well understood at the time.

zzzzThuvia3

     If Burroughs were accused of not believing in equality that would be true.  Not only are John Carter and Tarzan superior to any contemporaries on two worlds but Burroughs has a whole hierarchy of value.  John Carter is the Warlord of Mars ruling from the top city  of Mars, Helium.  The races of Mars pretty much reflect those of  Earth and their relative stations.  The main exception is the ruling Red race.  As Whites do and have existed on Mars in Burroughs stories  while at one time being the dominant race perhaps the Red race is some sort of amalgam of the various Eropean immigrants of the United States.  I believe the Green Men represent the American Indian.  Both roam the great plains while being essentially savages.

     Tarzan though always spoken of as being White is described as a bronze giant.  Bronze is a fairly dark metal so that Tarzan and the Red men of Mars may be more or less identical in color.

     Tarzan is the man-god so there are none superior or even equal to him.  Below him come the English who are the cream of mankind.  Perhaps slightly below the English are the French and then the rest of the Whites.  Tarzan himself is psychologically an animal having been raised by the Apes.  Not your ordinary gorilla or Chimp but a species intermediate between Gorilla and the Negro.  Slotkin hasn’t read enough Burroughs to make an intelligent comment but the undeniable attitude of Burroughs is enough for Slotkin to condemn him as an unregenerate bigot.  The reader may believe as he likes.  I have stated my opinion eslewhere and that is enough. Whether any of these opinions of Burroughs influenced American soldiers at My Lai is open to question.  The burden of proof is on Slotkin and he hasn’t provided  it.

     Along with the Undermen however, speaking through Tarzan, Burroughs is heartily discontented with civilization.

      The spectacle of Chicago of the 1890s as a dirty unpleasant place haunts Burroughs.  In contrast to the great White City of the Columbian Expo was what was afterwards known as the Black City of everyday Chicago.  The contrast was so strong and so offensive to the Undermen that within a year of the Expo’s closing the entire White City was burned to the ground with the exception of one building.  Hence perhaps the decayed crimson and gold ruins of Opar and the crimson and gold twin cities of Helium.  One wonders what effect the sight of the ruin of the White City had on Burroughs when he revisited the site sometime after his miraculous summer of ’93.  The mind creates nothing from nothing so there must have been models of the great cities of ERB’s imagination.

     There are points at which Burroughs and Communism have quite similar views.  It will be remembered that Burroughs only reluctantly married and throughout his life expressed discontent with the institution.  To some extent or other ERB must have been an advocate of free love.  Communists would have heartily approved of ERB’s women who went nude except for certain ‘adornments.’  Communists of course want women to be accesible to any man who wants them at any time while they have always advocated bare breasts.

     In many ways when the Communists appropriated Tarzan for the MGM movies it took but slight changes to make Tarzan conform to their ideals.   The MGM Tarzan and Jane were not married.  While Burroughs’ Tarzan was a highly educated on-again off-again sophisticate the MGM Tarzan was a stupid illiterate oaf and one who rejected the attributes of civilization high up there in the Cloud Cuckoo Land of the Mutia Plateau.

     On the essentials though Burroughs rejected the demands of the Underman as The Moon Maid clearly shows.  There was very little in Stoddard’s The Revolt Against Civilization that Burroughs would have disagreed with.  At the same time there was probably very little he didn’t already believe although he had never codified his information as Stoddard had.  Slotkin’s contention that Burroughs was influenced by either Grant or Stoddard is surely wrong.  ERB had already taken hs positions before either men had begun to write.

     Each writer was, in his own way, an advocate of White Supremacy.  It now become clear that White Supremacy has nothing to do with a fringe element in Liberal ideology.  All Whites are White Supremacists in that ideology unless they reject ‘White skin privilege’  whatever that is.   Ayers and Dorhn explain in their recent Race Course In White Supremacy.  Interestingly constructed title.  Nor as Slotkin would have it is the attitude based on mere racial pride and bigotry but on a solid record of achievement unattained by any other people.  The quesiton is not was it right for some people to rule or be supreme because in the nature of things some people will rule and be supreme but which of the peoples are most qualified to be supreme.

     All people have had equal opportunity so that one can only conclude that the race has gone to the most qualified participant.  In the contest the Whites  unified the other peoples against them as must inevitably be the consequence of being the top people.  As they say, getting there is the easy part; staying there is the hard part.

     Slotkin merely represents the envious losers, the Undermen.  who clutch at any firebrand to burn the White House down.  Who is most to be admired and emulated?  Builders or destroyers?

Finis of Thuvia, Maid Of Mars Review

 

Sigmund Freud And His Vision Of The Unconcious

Redefining A False Vision

by

R.E. Prindle

Texts:

Bakan, David, Sigmund Freud And The Jewish Mystical Tradition,  Orig. Issued 1965, Dover edition of 2004

Movie:  The Testament Of Dr. Mabuse, 1932, Fritz Lang, auteur.

https://idynamo.wordpress.com/2007/10/01/something-of-value-i-2/

freud-6

     Sometime after I wrote the first part of Something Of Value (see above for link) I read David Bakan’s Freud And The Jewish Mystical Tradition.  Bakan’s book confirmed my findings while developing Freud’s relationship to his culture’s mystical tradition based on Bakan’s understanding of the Zohar and the Jewish Kabbalah, which I haven’t read or studied; nor do I intend to unless I exhaust my other pursuits which doesn’t seem likely.  You never know though.

     However a point to consider is how Jewish is the Jewish mystical tradition, that is, what are its antecedents?  Are they rooted in Judaism or elsewhere?  Bakan seems to believe that the Jewish Kabbalah is derived entirely from Jewish sources independent of the general milieu.  I don’t believe this to be true.  The Jewish mystical tradition like all others is based on the very ancient Egyptian traditions as is a great deal of ancient Jewish culture.  Bakan believes that the Kabbalah arose in the first century AD.  This is probably true.

     The Hermetic tradition which is equivalent to a European Cabala took form as such in Alexandria during the Ptolemaic period when Greek and Egyptian ideas interreacted.  Hemeticism evolved from much earlier doctrines centered around the Egyptian god Thoth.  The Zohar and Cabbalah then is Hermetic material adapted for Jewish needs.  The whole can be traced back to Alexandria.  It will be remembered that there was a large colony of Jews in Alexandria from long before the first century AD.

     The Zohar is a mystical book, which is attributed to the first and second century Rabbi, Simeon Bar Yohai, and it was rewritten, edited and whatever in twelfth century Spain in the sixteenth century.  Its influence then was transmitted to the seventeenth century Jewish messiah, Sabbatai, Zevi.

     According to Mr. Bakan Freud was familiar with the Zohar and Kabbalah.  I couldn’t go so far as to claim so myself but Mr. Bakan can quote chapter and verse.  While Freud claimed to be scientific Mr. Bakan relates almost all of Freud’s psychology to the Kabbalah showing Freud’s dependence on Sabbatianism and Frankism as I indicated in Something Of Value Part I.

     Thus while seeming to be working from a scientific point of view Freud is actually blending a bit of scientific method acquired from European sources, as there is no science in Jewish culture, with his Jewish religious material to subvert the European moral order.  While Freud himself was at war with European civilization, the international Jewish organizations of which he was a member extended his field of influence to the United States and Canada.  Thus while Freud speaks specifically of Europe he can be taken to mean Euroamerica.

2.freud-3

     A further background for his psychology, Freud’s central childhood fixation, appears to be the incident in which a European knocked his father’s hat into the gutter which his father meekly, or wisely, depending on your point of view, accepted without a demur.  Because of this story Freud wished to avenge himself on all Europeans.

     Probably at this point Freud assumed the Moses complex that stayed with him to the end of his life.  He, Freud, would lead his people to triumph over the Europeans as Moses had led the People out of Egypt while Pharaoh and his army were drowned in the Red Sea.

     However, oddly enough, as he claimed to be wholly Jewish, Freud was conflicted in his attitude toward Europeans.  As a child he had a Roman Catholic nurse who introduced him to Christianity by taking him to church.  Most probably she also tried to wean him from Judaism.  This experience had a great effect on young Freud.  In the following anecdote, as with most fixations, he seemed to have lost the exact memory of the situation.  From Bakan:

     …that my ‘primary originator; (of neuroses) was an ugly, elderly, but clever woman who told me a great deal about God and hell, and gave me a high opinion of my own capacities.

     On October 15, 1897 he quotes his mother speaking about the old nurse who took care of him when he was very young:

     “Of  course,” she said, “an elderly woman, very shrewd indeed.  She was always taking you to church.  When you came home you used to preach and tell us about how God conducted his affairs.”

     His memory had become confused while it does not appear that he ever exorcised his fixation, for fixation it was.  He apparently loved this nurse at the time rather than hating her.  When she was later accused and convicted of stealing from the Freuds she was dishonored and actually sent to jail.  Freud was heartbroken while changing his opinion of her.  But, he had had contact with Christian Europeans which left a lasting impression on him that he could not consciously recognize or acknowledge.  If I am correct, this impression resurfaced when he came into contact with C.G. Jung who he adopted as a surrogate for this nurse transferring his love and hatred of her to Jung.

     Just as he loved this nurse there were apparently strong homosexual overtones in his relationship with Jung.  As Freud would have known, the compulsion toward repitition would have been a component in his relationship with Jung through his nurse although he apparently did not recognize this.  So much for his self-analysis.  He found reasons to break off with Jung or drive him away while bitterly claiming to be betrayed by Jung just as his nurse had been accused and convicted of theft thus betraying the love of the child Freud.  Thus once again his contact with a Christian European was brief ending in sorrow for himself.

     A third situation occured late in life when he wrote Moses And Monotheism.  Rather startlingly he claimed that Moses was not Jewish but was an ethnic Egyptian.  This means Freud, who had a Mosaic fixation, split his personality between his Christian longings and his professed Jewish identity.  Another result would be that monotheism was not a Jewish invention but actually a goyish invention so that all the evil arising from monotheism was not the fault of the Jews but the goys.  A neat job of transference.   Thus Freud’s notion of Moses may have been a sort of dream reversal of facts.

     Whatever the results of Freud’s self-analysis back before the turn of the century, it is quite clear that he was unable to resolve his fixations nor, one believes, was he aware of their influence on him.  He never integrated his personality remaining under the influence of his subconscious fixations.  No wonder he ignored the conscious mind.

3.

     Like most people Freud had to find his way from adolescence to adulthood and his true ambitions by a freud-5circuitous route.

     The editor’s note to 1927’s The Future Of An Illusion says this:

     In the ‘Postscript’ which Freud added in 1935 to his  Autobiographical Study he remarked that a ‘signficant change’ had come about in his writings during the previous decade.  “My interest,” he explained, “after making a long detour through the natural sciences, medicine, and psychotherapy, returned to the cultural problems which fascinated me long before, when I was a youth scarcely old enough for thinking.”

     He undoubtedly refers to his experiences in church with his Christian nurse contrasted with the ‘Christian’ who knocked his father’s hat into the gutter.  As Freud is very duplicitous in his use of language one should try to be very sensitive to the personal meanings behind the general meaning of his words.  Thus I believe his use of the term ‘cultural problems’ can usually be understood as his inner conflict between his Christianity and Judaism.

     As Bakan points out, that while Freud rejected Rabbinical religious Judaism he was deeply immersed in the Jewish mystical tradition of the Zohar and Kabbalah.  Thus one can discount his claim to be an ‘atheistic’ Jew.  Or else atheism has a more specific meaning for him.

     I would place the change of emphasis in his writing or, at least the beginning of the change, in 1915.  My guess would be that Freud was unaware of the coming Jewish Revolution  until he joined B’nai B’rith in 1895.  That knowledge would have shaped the direction of his researches.  Whatever science was involved would have been subordinated toward achieving the Revolution.  At the same time that he was working out the nature of psychoananlysis as Bakan indicates he must also have been studying the Zohar and Kabbalah.  I haven’t read or studied either so I have to rely on Bakan’s analysis of their influence.  Bakan traces strong mystical influences running side by side with what passed for science in Freud’s mind.  As Freud persistently says he’s going to ignore the facts if favor of projections one must assume that there is more mysticism than science in Freud’s construction of psychoanalysis- as he says ‘his creation.’

     Bakan points out that Freud transited from the role of physician to that of ‘healer.’  That is analogous to the hands on approach of Christian Fundamentalism.  Freud then for all practical purposes abandoned medicine for healing.  Then, sometime between 1913, the year of the beginning of the Jewish revolution, and 1915 he abandoned psychoanalytical research for his ‘cultural’ studies.’  In other words, he began to apply his psychological studies to the manipulation of cultures through his developing ideas on Group Psychology.

     Just as Freud learned that there were screen memories that transformed more painful memories into something more acceptable to salve those injured feelings so Freud learned that he could develop ‘screen’ language to serve up unpalatable meanings in palatable ways.  Thus what he says has a reasonable meaning to the uninitiated but has a totally different meaning to the initiated- those with the key.  In many ways it is the same as a criminal argot.  Those who understand the argot can discuss topics openly without the uninitiated understanding, while only those with the key can twig it.  Ya dig?

     The key incident that fixed his mind on ‘cultural interests’ was his father’s story of the guy who knocked his hat into the gutter.  Freud then, in attempting to diguise his hatred for ‘Christianity’  while secretly admiring it because of his nurse who gave him an inflated opinion of his importance, and his desire to avenge his father and hence all Jews through his Moses fixation, developed his program.  Thus he acted in his own mind altruistically and need feel no guilt.

     Freud was very seriusly conflicted, also suffering from depression according to Bakan.  Hence his purpose was to knock the whole of European Christianity into a cocked hat in the gutter, which is to say the actual persons of Europe.  Compare Freud to Rebbe Schneerson in America.

     Thus, the use of terms like ‘Culture’ and ‘Civilization’ should always be placed in the context of Jews and Europeans.  In this manner he avoids the appearance of bigotry and hatred while sounding ‘scientific.’

     Now, this obsession and extreme form of vengeance for something that, after all, didn’t happen to him nor did he witness it, might certainly be considered a neurosis, probably a psychosis and possibly a degree of insanity.  In reading Bakan there is a hint that he believes Freud had a disordered mind.  Indeed, Fritz Lang’s movie The Testament Of Dr. Mabuse should be held steadily in mind when reading of Freud’s later career.  Lang must have had Freud in mind when he filmed the movie.

     Lang also had a hand in the making of The Cabinet Of  Dr. Caligari from which film he was dismissed.  Lang’s departure from Caligari changed the ending of that movie to the conventional note of the victim, or whistle blower, being declared insane.  Lang reversed this by making the perpetrator Caligari/Mabuse insane as in real life with Freud.  Further the disciple of Mabuse, the head of the asylum, Dr. Baum was also declared insane.  Although the problem appeared to be solved the threat of the conspiracy continuing from Mubuse’s cell, now occupied by Dr. Baum who has assumed Dr. Mabuse’s identity, looms like a spectre over the denouement.

     While Freud was never incarcerated as he sould have been, he was imprisoned in his mind no less than Drs. Mabuse and Baum or the character in Gradiva which held such fascination for Freud.  It is interesting that Freud had a plaster cast of the relief of Gradiva’s heel on which the story of Gradiva was based that the displayed prominently in his office.  The story obviously had greater significance for him than his ‘objective’ analysis of the story would lead one to suspect.

     Thus from 1915 to 1935 like Dr. Mabuse he sat imprisoned in his projection of reality churning out page after page, volume after volume of criminal plans for the subversion of civilization which is to say of Euroamerican civilization but not Jewish culture.  He makes a definite point of that illusion of whose future he is discussing applies only to Europe and Christianity rather than religion in general which would include his own Judaism.  At this point he is not aware of the burgeoning Wahabi Moslemism so that his message is that Jewish beliefs  are real while Christian beliefs and Scientific reality are illusory.  One has to penetrate the screen language and convert it into the proper psychological intent.

     As David Bakan points out Freud lived his whole life in a sort of Jewish ghetto having very little contact with Europeans.

     His choice of Jung as the potential heir to his ‘creation’ may have had as much to do with a desperate attempt to reestablish a connection similar to that of his childhood Christian nurse.   Thus his overtures to Jung while under extreme stress were driven from his unconscious while he himself was unaware of his true motivations.  This would have been an expression of a repetition compulsion.  Thus as his nurse disappeared from his life under discreditable circumstances he replicated the situation with Jung.  His attempt to convert Moses (hence himself) into an Egyptian may have been a last attempt to replicate and resolve this early contact with Christianity.  His view of European civilization then was filtered wholly through a Jewish projection of possibilities.  He really had no intimate knowledge of European mores.

     From 1915 on, then, his writings were obsessed with hatred for Euroamerica and a desire to wreak vengeance on them by destroying the basis of their civilization.  His ideas for the subversion of European civilization were carried to America by the international B’nai B’rith organization to be adopted and employed there.  In addition Revolutionary plans executed in Europe in 1917 were financed and organized by the world Jewish government in the US.  While functioning according to local conditions the Revolution was conducted on an international scale.  Act locally, think globally.  Hence Jewish revolutionaries left the US for Russia after 1918 to aid in the consolidation going on there.  This is really an incredible repressed story in the Freudian cultural manner.  Very Freudian that such phenomenal criminal activity that were best left invisible was repressed into humanity’s unconscious.

     At this point I think it mght be well to examine Freud’s vision of the unconscious in more detail.  While there can be little doubt that there is a subconscious function to the human mind usually referrred to as the unconscious after Freud that had been an accepted fact amongst scientific researchers for a hundred years Freud has been given the credit for discovering it.  The exact nature had not been determined before Freud nor does Freud determine it.  His view is merely a projection of his own conscious and subconscious needs.

4.

      In David Bakan’s view Freud made a compact with ‘Satan.’

     Certainly not in the literal sense but in the figurative sense that Freud would do anything, abandon any freud-1moral precepts, to achieve fame.  Bakan points out the supercription to Freud’s Interpretation Of Dreams a quote from Virgil: Flectere si nesqueo, superos, Acheronta movebo.  Translated as: If the gods above are no use to me, than I’ll move all hell.  Freud further blurred the line between good and evil or amalgamated the two from the influence of Sabbatai Zevi and Jacob Frank who cast off all morality.  Since Freud has been successful in altering both Euroamerican and Jewish morality toward these immoral or amoral beliefs by false ‘Satanic’ criminal doctrines it is imperatvie to debunk his personal projection of the ‘unconscious.’

     As he ‘made a pact’ with powers below- the unconscious- against the powers above- the conscious- he invested his projection of the unconscious with the attributes of ‘Satan’ or evil.  This view of the subconscious is a self-serving fiction not based on any science.

     He sets up the unconscious as an autonomous entity with the main function of blighting the conscious.  He give the powers of hell supremacy over the powers of heaven.  The notion is mere fantasy; it cannot be.  There is no possibility that the function of the subconscious doesn’t have a positive function in and of itself and in relation to the conscious.  If you actually think abut it for a moment you wil realize this must be true; every part of the body works to the benefit of the whole; there can be no exception for the subconscious.

     Now, nature is not flawless.  The order that the religious seem to find is not there.  Nature functions in a much more imperfect or haphazard way.  It takes only one peek through the Hubble to see that.

     However the relationship between the conscious and subconscious is delicate and easily disrupted especially in the early years of the organism when it has no experience with which to evaluate the events occurring to it.  The Ego and Anima are not part of the subconscious and possibly not of the conscious but functions through the conscious and subconscious minds.

     The conscious mind perceives phenomena and acts on them but the terrific inflow of impressions is more than it can deal with so the day’s input is received into the subconscious for further reference.  Thus a major function of dreams in the sleeping state is to review and process, organize the information into a coherent whole for future reference.  The subconscious then is able to compare incoming information with experience for the appropriate response.  When the conscious and subconscious minds are attuned, that is to say, the personality is integrated, the system works properly, otherwise the response is distorted by one’s fixations.  This is very easy to see in Freud.

     However, especially in youth when experience is scant, the mind may be challenged with some devastating new experience for which there are no reference points.  If an appropriate response is made there is no problem.  If an inappropriate response is made against which future experience may be in variance, the earlier response which has become fixated will over rule the current response and substitute the fixated inappropriate response.  Thus the current response will constellate around these earlier fixations which gives one bizarre symbolic dreams and inappropriate responses.

     The inappropriate response will usually result from an insult to the Ego or, in other words, one’s sexual identity.  In turn the response to this insult will be expressed in a sexual affect.

     The purpose of psychoanalysis, which is real science, although Freud didn’t see that, is to locate and exorcize them allowing the conscious and subconscious aspects of the mind to function properly as a unit.  Dreams are actually important because they are an analysis of life’s experience providing responses.  None of this, of course takes in intelligence, discipline and other functions of mind and character that Freud dismisses as irrelevant.

     Now, in the cultural war between Judaism and Euroamerica, or as the Jews express it, Christianity, Freud infused the Jewish subconscious with a disregard for morality al la Jacob Frank in relation to Sabbatai Zevi.  Any evil was excused so long as it seemed to advance the cultural war.  While this infusion may not have reached down through the ranks of Jewry- which is to say they behaved in a certain way but didn’t know why- the ideas were thoroughly planted in the minds of what Henry Ford would call the International Jew.

     The cold war between Jews and Europeans became a shooting war in the wake of the Great War.  Men, money and munitions flowed in a wide steady stream from the United States to Russia.  Coordinators established themselves in strategic locations.  If one reads restricted, censored literature the impression is made that horrible anti-Semites harassed and hated innocent unresisting Jews.  Jews may have been killed but they were not innocent or unresisting.  To the contrary freed from guilt, or supposedly so, by Freudian/Sabbatian/Frankist precepts, abattoirs were established throughout Russia where unsuspecting Russians were led in one door and flowed out the other in liquid form.  This is not the place to dwell on gruesome details.  The literature exists but the collective Jewish mind has repressed the deeds into the collective unconscious.  In other words, history has been denied and censored so that the crimes can’t be known.  Actually Whittaker Chambers, the Red spy, translated a number of these books concerning the Hungarian atrocities of Bela Kun and Tibor Szmuelly, but those are impossible to come by.  All this slaughter was made possible and justified by the doctrines of Freud.

     In relation to the 1919 atrocities of the Jews in Hungary and the response which expelled them from power it should be noted that Israeli troops were recently introduced into Hungary to reestablish the tyranny of Kun and Szmuelly.  Don’t ever think that historical memories are short.  Remember the Amalikites.

     Freud sat confortably in Vienna looking on as the carnage occurred.  If, as believed, the tenor of his writing changed in 1925 that was probably due to the death of Lenin in 1924.  By 1925 it was apparent that the Jewish Revolution in Russia was on shaky grounds as Stalin began his rise to power so that Freud may have renewed his cultural attack or, on the other hand, as 1928 was the terminal projected year of the Jewish Revolution Freud may have been celebrating the death of European Civlilation when he published The Future Of An Illusion.  By the illusion he meant European Christianity and he meant European civilization was finished.  The Rome of the Popes should have fallen.

     In Illusion and Civilization And Its Discontents Freud makes us believe that the malcontents of civilization are synonymous with civilization rather than being a minority that always exists during great revolutionary changes.  Freud whose Judaism was challenged by the Scientific Revolution as much as Christianity or Moslemism must have been aware of the reactionary ‘instinct’ as he himself was in reaction to both European Christianity and the Scientific Revolution.

     David Bakan closes his volume with these words:

     …under the ruse of “playing the devil” (Freud) served Sabbatian interests.  In this respect, however, just as Freud may be regarded as having infused Kabbalah into science, so may he be regarded as having incorporated science into Kabbalah.  Sabbatian-wise, by closing the gap between Jewish culture and Western Enlightenment he acts as the Messiah not only for Jewish culture but for Western culture as well.

     Note that Western Enlightenment is reduced to Western culture putting it on a par with Jewish culture which is a tacit admission that there is no science in Jewish culture and none is wanted in Western ‘culture’.  Language as a screen.

     Bakan’s is a hefty statement.  Under the guise of the Devil Freud becomes the Messiah not only for Jews but for Euroamericans.  Truly in this scenario good comes from evil in the Jewish mind, assuming that the Messiah is good.  In case you missed it, Freud according to Bakan was the Second Coming.  Narrowing the gap between the two cultures means the imposition of Jewish culture as the Chosen or Abelite people over Western or Cainite culture.  Thus the age old goal of reversing the Cain and Abel story so that Cain is obligated to give preference to Abel is accomplished.

     By infusing Kabbalah into science, science has been subjugated to the unscientific Jewish culture so that the Catholic/Jewish situation of Medieval Europe has been restored.  The Enlightenment that invalidated Judaism, Christianity and Moslemism has been obliterated, hence the revival of religion happening today.  Thus in Bakan’s eyes and according to Freud’s intent Judaism has deconstructed Euroamerican society so the reconstruction according to Jewish cultural mores can commence.

     The result has been accomplished by the destruction of the Scientific Consciousness as there is little of science in Freud’s cultural writings.  He just says what he believes and wants you to believe and asserts it as a fact.  As always there were some Westerners who resented the encroachment of the strict limits imposed by science.  Rider Haggard in his Allan Quatermain made that as clear as possible.  The topic is the dominant theme of Edgar Rice Burrough’s Tarzan novels.  Henry Ford and his mass production methods was a symbol of that rebellion against the strict limits set by the clock.  Some denounced it as Taylorism; but with each passing decade the West became more acclimated to the change as the reactionary mood became acclimated to the new reality.

     Freud invents ‘instincts’ and their ‘renunciation’ to give sense to his arguments; the renunciation of instincts’ almost sounds scientific but it isn’t.  there are no instincts nor does Freud even attempt to demonstrate their existence.  Like the rest or Freud’s psychology the notion is just something Freud made up.  As always he notes only the negative societal destructive effects.  He says nothing of the ‘instinct’ to be around people which would conflict with his instinct against civilization- the last is a vague enough term the way he uses it.  But as Fritz Lang points out the hypnotic spell cast by Mabuse negates criticism so that the head psychologist of the asylum, the objective scientist himself, Dr. Baum, suspends critical judgment falling under the spell of Mabuse to the point of becoming a disciple just as Lang himself did.  Indeed, as the West has.  Hitler was a blessing in disguise for the Jewish Revolution.  The guilt caused by Hitler completely disarmed the West allowing the reconstruction of Western mores to proceed at a faster pace than would have been possible otherwise.  Indeed, the Nazi Era drove the entire psychotic Jewish Revolution to the shores of the United States beginning in the early thirties.  Thus the deconstruction of Edgar Rice Burroughs’ America was assured.

     To return to 1919.

freud-4

The Deconstruction Of

Edgar Rice Burroughs’

America

by R.E. Prindle

Part IV

The Red Triumph

How long, how long,

Has that leetle old evenin’ train

Been gone?

How long, how long,

Oh baby,

How long?

Trad.

     A pall fell over the world when the Communists assumed power.  Joy left the planet in favor of the sour envy of that ilk.  There were no happy Communists.  They knew no contentment.  They were as disaffected, dissatisfied with life, civilization and themselves, especially themselves as psychologically possible.  Misfits, envious with no prospects in life they were.  They were incapable of generating wealth; they could only appropriate and waste what others had created.  The spirit of vengeance which had been their dominant characteristic in the French Revolution would remain their goal throughout their existence.  There has been no Red government from the France of 1793 to the present that hasn’t believed in wholesale massacres of ‘enemies’ at the the least, genocide at the worst.  Quite frankly they can only think in terms of crime no matter how they rationalize it and they can rationalize like nobody’s business.

     Murder is part of their psychotic nature.  I do not exclude Hitler  and the Nazis as Red organizations.  Placed in the context of Redism Hitler and the Nazis are perfectly understandable.  The Nazis were National Socialists.  One can’t be socialist without being Red; one can’t be Red without believing in mass exterminations.  History speaks the for the truth about Reds; I merely repeat history.

     No one Red faction can be held  less accountable than others.  All participated equally and as joyously as their sour temperaments allowed.  Mild mannered college professors and sanctimonious ministers of the social gospel wholeheartedly supported the murders and atrocities of Communist regimes just as today they raise no outcry against the genocide and crimes against Whites taking place in Africa because they think the ‘right side’ has the upper hand.  Reds never did and never will have a disinterested concept of morality.  The Red idea of law and morality is merely a projection of their subconscious desire.

page 1.

     In the giddiness of the Russian success the Revolutionaries believed that the world revolution had arrived so that it was a matter of a few months before they assumed control of the world.

     Post-war success in Hungary encouraged them on.  Revolutionaries flowed back into Germany from Russia intent on bringing to fruition the ‘German’ revolution.  Success in Germany eluded them.  There the world revolution stalled.  It was going to a tougher job than anticipated.  The United States especially was not as ripe for their plans as they had projected.

     Resistance was prompt if somewhat flaccid.  Wilson’s program, while Red was opposed to that of Bolshevism.  Some have said that Wilson was merely envious of Lenin as the leader.  His Attorney General, A. Mitchell Palmer, to whom we all owe a debt of gratitude, cracked down hard on the Red cadres deporting a very few while putting the rest in disarray as a law was passed that outlawed the Communist Party temporarily.

     But all the Parlor Pinks, Fellow Travelers and Liberals interested in their form of ‘social justice’ and the ‘true American Way’ had the ban repealed.  As usual they misrepresented their motives.  The task now became one of subverting the ideals the country held sacred.

2.

Heroes And Villains

     We must now delineate the sides in the American struggle for supremacy as it stood in the aftermath of the Bolshevik Revolution.

     The Liberal Coalition had gained the power of the Presidency in 1913 when Woodrow Wilson was inaugurated.  Although not appreciated as such this was an occurrance for the both the Jewish and World Revolution as significant for America as that of the 1917 Bolshevik Revolution in Russia.  The Wilson administration began the ‘partnership’ between America and the Jews as celebrated by Irving Berlin in his song, God Bless America, while this year of 1913 was the inaugurating year of the Jewish Revolution.  Off on the right foot.  At this point in 1913 for the first time the Jews became influential in the US government.  In 1916 Wilson created the ‘Jewish seat’ on the Supreme Court when he appointed the confirmed Zionist, Louis D. Brandeis, to the bench.

     During the War the Jews played an ambiguous or perhaps duplicitous role.  So long as Czarist Russia was in the War they refused to support the Allies.  This refusal led the British to attempt to buy their cooperation with the Balfour Declaration involving Palestine.  This was unnecessary as  after the Spring Revolution the Mensheviks dethroned the Czar effectually taking Russia out of the War.  At the time of the October Revolution of the Bolsheviks the Jews threw their support to the Allies against Germany.  As they had no troops to offer one wonders what this support was worth.  Perhaps a cessation of sabotage?

     In the US the Socialistic Wilson administration used its window of opportunity to attempt to impose it version of ‘equality’ on the American people.  The key agency was the WIB- War Industries Board- headed by the Jewish financier- the bear of Wall Street- Bernard Baruch.

     I’m not sure that the ultimate or secret plans of Wilson have ever been revealed but Baruch in his autobiography drops a few helpful hints.  The plan depended on the continuance of the War so that when that ended prematurely in 1918 the plan was aborted.

     At that time Wilson, through the WIB had orders ready for execution that would have limited the styles of shoes and clothing to just three or four styles within a definite price so that everyone would be dressed alike without distinction.  Wilson deemed inequality to be based on differences in dress.  Obvious, hey.

     If you think the Liberals discarded the plan just because the war ended all you have to do to look around you today and observe everyone in jeans or sports outfits of one kind or another.  The plan is about seventy per cent or so implemented.  It was done through infiltration of the fashion industry.

     Most troublesome for the leaders of industry was that the WIB required all businesses to submit financial and other data to the WIB for their evaluation.  Most significantly a center of resistance came from the auto industry of Detroit.  Noting all the Jews on the board who essentially had the industrial base of the US in their hands the auto makers demurred.  Of course the Masters of Denial deny that Jews were that involved but if the matter was noted who are you going to believe the Jews or the auto makers?  One of the other must have it wrong.  I’m betting on the auto makers against the Masters of Denial.

     The resistance of Detroit would have consequences.  The Jews never forget.  Significantly Henry Ford was not in thrall to the Eastern bankers thus being independent.  Now, Henry Ford and the Dodge Brothers, accurately noting the number of Jews on the WIB correctly divined their purpose.  Remember, if the War had gone on for another year or two Wilson would have been able to complete the revolution in toto changing the American character in one stroke while Jews would have assumed the role of Commissars or the role they had enjoyed in pre-expulsion Spain, that of middlemen under the crown administering to the general populace.  This is the ultimate cultural dream.

page 2.

     Objecting vociferously to the Wilson plan some intemperate remarks concerning the nature of Jews were made by the Dodge Brothers allowing the administration to play the race card with AS for anti-Semite up there in the corners.  Both the Dodges subsequently died in mysterious circumstance in 1920 while a strenuous effort was made to destroy Ford by bringing his company under the control of the New York bankers, that is to say, the Jews.  Thus there was very little cranky about any of Ford’s supposedly eccentric beliefs.  Such a characterization is mere defamation by his enemies.  Failing to break Ford the anti-Semitic race card was played against him that resulted in his excommunication from society.  They haven’t been able to flush him out of history yet but that may be just a matter of time.  I wouldn’t be suprised to see the marque changed to something other than Ford.

     The Jewish culture shifted the onus from themselves to the ‘anti-Semites’ in a clever damage control move to exonerate themselves.  Internationally the damage controllers also shifted the onus from themselves to ‘anti-Semites.’

     The Liberals, continuing the Reconstruction policy, now set the Jews, Negroes and immigrants over what we may call the Conservatives precisely as they had set the Negroes over the Southern Whites during the Reconstruction after the Civil War.  This was extended to the international field where the Liberals self-righteously adopted an anti-colonial policy.  As European colonialism was equated with Southern slaveholding in Liberal minds they took the side of the colonials, that is to say the colored Third World peoples against the Europeans.  Thus as Charles De Gaulle despairingly noted that America while a White country behaved as though they were a colored or Third World country.  Europeans then were classed with the Southern Whites and Conservatives of the United States.

     The Jewish Culture continued the ultra self-righteousness based on their projection that they were an exceptional people chosen by god to administer the affairs of the people of the world.  Although patently absurd and scientifically impossible the Jews were able to impose this notion on both the Liberal and conservative religious cultures of the US.  Thus although the Anti-Defamation League of B’nai B’rith was organized in 1913 as a terrorist organization and the NAACP came into prominence as a terrorist organization as members of the Coalition these patently racist outfits were considered virtuous.

     On the other hand Nativist organizations in reaction such as the APA- American Protective Association- or the the KKK- Ku Klux Klan- were considered kranky or actually terrorist.  In reality there was no difference in intent between any of these organizations.  You may call them protective or terrorist as you wish but they all functioned with the same goal in mind but for different sides.  That intent was to intimidate all others into submission.

     These were cultural wars, in other words, Cold Wars, not shooting wars so the battles were for the control of the dissemination of information, opinion and institutions.  In this the Jews were particularly effective having a clear idea of their objectives effectively seizing control of the key publishing units, the film industry and the emerging radio-television industries.

     Thus the Jews in the US were uniquely positioned to implement Freud’s program of cultural domination.  Now, all of this was done in the light of day so that it was impossible for the program to pass unperceived.  A firestorm of indignation against the Jewish culture ensued after the Russian Revolution.  It might be noted here that culturalism is merely latter day nationalism.  Its defense is patriotism.  So let’s keep the meanings of the terms straight.  The damage controllmen went to work successfully silencing all opposition while censoring the entire media over the next few years except in Germany.

      I will here examine a few literary voices that saw the nature of things but in different ways.  One novel, three movies and one short story that was turned into a TV show.

page 3.

     The short story was by Charles Beaumont published in 1959 then made into a TV script for Rod Serling’s Twilight Zone.  In the TV script the time is set just after the Great War.  A traveler while staying at a monastery unintentionally releases Satan whom some monks were holding captive.  Among various possible interpretations one is that the Bolsheviks represented Satan.  An allegory was necessary as a more direct representation would never have been published as Edgar Rice Burroughs found to his chagrin in 1919.

     The horrors of Communism immediately presented themselves to that writer’s mind who quickly composed an anti-Communist polemic.  Politics was nothing new to Burroughs who sniped at various political affairs from the time he began writing.  About the time he took up his pen in 1912, the Socialist convention of that year took umbrage at the nascent IWW- Industrial Workers Of The World- booting them out of the congress.  The Socialists were led by Jews while the IWW, also known as Wobblies, were Americans of the true working class, the people the Socialists were supposed to represent.  Must have been a culture clash when American workers met European style Jewish intellectuals.

     Now, the Wobblies were the Real Thing compared to the Socialist ‘labor fakers.’  Under the leadership of Big Bill Haywood  the Wobblies took direct action in an attempt to shut down industry and bring the government to heel as the United States was entering the Great War.  These guys meant business.  Their role in this period as well as the whole period has been misrepresented and distorted by Liberal control of the media.

     Burroughs whose anti-Left attitude can be traced back to his boyhood cast the IWW as villains in several of his novels from 1915 to 1924.  Nothing was more natural than Burroughs pillorying the Bolsheviks.  As publishing was controlld by the Reds his effort came to nothing in 1919.  He rewrote the theme in his dystopian novel, The Moon Maid, that was published in 1926.

      The third and most interesting examination of the Red assault on civilization was made by the Jewish-German film maker, Fritz Lang.  While the notion of conspiracy is derided by the conspirators nothing can be more obvious than that events from 1913 through this period were not merely spontaneous.  I doubt if there ever has been a period of history that has not been directed by a cabal or any number of cabals and conspiracies.  Check out your own neighborhood.  You just don’t call them conspiracies, that’s all.  Even the Trojan war was a conspiracy headed by Agamemnon.  You don’t think Ulysses wasn’t coerced by the cabal do you?

     One can call anyone who disagrees with you, bigots or anti-Semites as Liberals do but that doesn’t change the facts.  There is no one group of people more sensitive to subterranean movements than artists.  Paranoia rightly channeled is a gift of the gods not a curse as Freud himself discovered.  He thought he succeeded where paranoiacs failed.  Does that say something?  Lang being himself a Jew from Austria might be expected to be a little more aware of what Freud was up to.  It might be interesting to check to see  if Lang was a member of B’nai B’rith.  Hitler himself was an Austrian who had lived in Vienna at the time Freudianism was being formulated while he was highly critical of  ‘Jewish psychology.’  Hitler was at least as intelligent and aware as either Freud or Lang.

     Lang first tried to land the directorship of the 1919 movie titled The Cabinet Of Dr. Caligari.  Although silent this is a great film and great art.  As great art the movie must be allegorical.  As with Lang’s films there is a war being directed against civilization from a mysterious source.  Civilization is represented here as a fair or carnival, a common device of the artist.

     Dr. Caligari is some sort of showman who doubles as an agent of the conspiracy or is the ‘unknown superior.’  He is obviously intended to be Jewish as he has a Golem, a sort of Frankenstein’s monster, to carry out his dirty work.

     When he would be exposed by the injured party it turns out that Dr. Caligari is also the director of an insane asylum, in other words a psychoanalist not unlike Herr Doktor Freud.  In the denouement rather than he being exposed his accuser is committed to the insane asylum.  Obviously an ‘anti-Semite.’  An unexplained crime wave directed at civilization continues.  One believes that Dr. Caligari is responsible.

page 4

    Lang didn’t get to direct this picture but having fought for it he was familiar with the story line which had on influence on him if he, indeed, wasn’t part of this particular cabal.  He converted Dr. Caligari into Dr. Mabuse.  Dr. Mabuse was based on a novel by Norbert Jacques.  I haven’t read the novel so I can’t compare how Lang adapted the character for his uses. 

     While depicting a gambler, which in a way I suppose Freud was, Mabuse is nevertheless a psychologist and master hypnotizer not unlike Freud.  Like Caligari and Freud he is at war with civilization doing everything he can to undermine it.  In this case that favorite dodge of counterfeiting money is used.  He is able under cover of a gambler (one of many guises) to direct several people to destruction by his use of hypnotism.  It will be remembered that Freud was a master hypnotist.  In a stunning scene Mabuse, presenting his act on stage, mass hypnotizes the audience into believing they are seeing a parade not unlike the episode of the Lotharians in Burroughs’ Thuvia, Maid Of Mars.  In the end Mabuse is captured, but his ravings are such that unlike Caligari he himself is committed to an insane asylum.

     He, one imagines, pined there until 1932 when Lang chose to make his masterpiece and the first Mabuse sequel, The Testament Of Dr. Mabuse.  During the intervening several years Mabuse has been catatonic sitting up in his pajamas in bed saying and doing nothing.  And then one day he takes up his imaginary pen simulating writing on an imaginary pad.  The astute head of the asylum, one Dr. Baum, realizes what he is doing giving him a real pen and paper.

     The master criminal Mabuse/Freud then writes out his manifesto or testament for the destruction of civilization non-stop.  As a master hypnotist he is able through his writing to hypnotize and take control of Dr. Baum’s mind who then sets in motion an incredible series of crimes including the counterfeiting of money meant, naturally, to undermine civilization.

     Mabuse having delivered his testament dies.  His ghost then merges with Dr. Baum who becomes in effect Dr. Mabuse executing his Testament.  In the end Baum certifiably insane is incarcerated in Mabuse’s room with all his papers taking his place as head of the conspiracy.  One assumes that another will eventually replace Baum and once set in motion the plot will continue of its own accord, so to speak.

     So, we have a neat allegory of Freud’s goal of destroying civilization.   That Lang chose 1932 to revive the character would correspond neatly with the direction of Freud’s writing at the time which included his attack on Christianity ‘The Future Of An Illusion’ and Civilization And Its Discontents.  While Lang would later say that Mabuse was an attack on the National Socialists when the same character with the same goals was introduced in 1922 there was no National Socialist Movement of consequence to pin the crimes on.

     No.  Both films of Dr. Mabuse were about someone and something else.  The use of psychology points more directly to Freud than it does to Hitler.  How involved Lang was in the conspiracy I leave to your conjecture.  That he made a copy in French and that that French copy was smuggled into the US in 1943 when the Nazi defeat became not only apparent but certain would imply that he too was one so discontented with civilization that he wanted his blueprint for destruction brought to the attention of the American Communist cadres.  By 1943 Lang had been in the United States for about ten years.

     As a footnote Dr. Mabuse became a franchise with many sequels including one by Lang, The 1000 Faces Of Dr. Mabuse.  There is a Mabuse/Tarzan  connection.  The former Tarzan, Lex Barker, who spent the rest of his career making movies in Europe was involved in Mabuse sequels himself.  So, in that way Mabuse and Tarzan are connected.

     Freud’s intent then was divined by many people including Fritz Lang.

     The question then was how to go about undermining European Civilization.  Ostensibly the most ‘pacifistic’ culture in the world while having neither numbers, territory or means for a frontal attack, just in case the disaster of the Great War didn’t present an object lesson, Freud and his culture would have to use surreptitious or clandestine means, in other words, an international conspiracy.

page 5.

     Even on a cultural level Freud was shrewd enough to understand that a mere frontal attack on the cultural traditions would be met with stern resistance so that first the effort must be made to deconstruct the culture according to the desires and needs of the minority culture.  Freud was a master of reduction.

     One doesn’t know whether the signal failure of the Anglians in the South when they merely tried to impose their will on the Southern Whites influenced Freud or his culture but the failure was certainly an object lesson before them of what not to do.

     As I say the Coalition was already in possession of the publishing and news apparatus of the United States.  Through the Jews it controlled the movies and would control Radio.  Thus they controlled access to the media.  Only those writers who met their apporval stood a chance of being published.  As the Red slogan had it:  All things are permissible to Revolutionaries, all others are to be denied.  This while they availed themselves of the freedoms of the Constitution which they claimed to respect.

     While the older authors posed a problem the editorial function can be wielded in such a way that content can be substantially altered while publication of a novel might no longer be able to be taken for granted.

     Overnight, almost miraculously, the nature of the authorial community changed.  While the percentage of Jews and homosexuals was relatively small prewar, after the War non-Jews and heterosexuals seem to have lost the talent to write while Jews and homosexuals miraculously acquired it.  As the editors explained it:  All the best new writers seem to be of the Left.  Thus what people were allowed to read tended to shift their opinions from Right to Left.

     The Social Gospel was preached from the pulpit while college professors subtly rewarded Left thinking students while punishing those of the Right.  Of course it would take time to turn the universities into the Red seminaries they are today but from 1917 to the present is only ninety years.  Once can judge the indredients from the pudding so there is no reason for the Left to deny the results as they did the process for at least seventy of those ninety years.

     Make no mistake the Cold War began with the October Revolution of 1917.   It broke out into a shooting war only because the National Socialists refused to accept the Judaeo-Communist yoke.  It matters not what anyone else says, the reason for WWII was the German volkist refusal to accept Jewish volkism under the religious guise of Communism.  That the leaders of the resistance turned out to be Hitler and the National Socialists may be only coincidental.  They understood the problem and had the will to resist.  It was inevitable that there should be casualties but the extent of destruction was truly phenomenal.

     Only after WWII when the American Right had regrouped under cover of the War essentially exercizing a hegemony over Western Europe did the West acknowledge the Cold War.  The American resistance only solidified after the death of FDR when his less ideological successor Harry Truman took the helm.  What took place before FDR’s death was maneuvering in the Culture Wars.

     The maneuvering took many forms, all of which tended to undermine or destroy the existing culture.  While Jews and Liberals were the key elements in the Coalition each was in competition with the others to impose its culture as supreme.  You can read culture as nationalism by another name.  The contest was both temporal and spiritual.  While I am primarily concerned with the spiritual or culture aspect one may look at the temporal event of the Crash of ’29 and its resultant Depression as the work of the Liberal Coalition.

     While I’m sure there were many reasons for the Crash there were also many ways to make it worse than it need have been.  The restraints that were thrown off the Stock Market are worth investigating.  For instance it was at this time the Jews invented the Holding Company.  Now, I will not tolerate charges of anti-Semitism.  I attempt a scientific analysis of a religious culture, one of only a great many in the US, and refuse to kowtow to any cultural projection.  If Christianity which is a Semitic religion is thought to be ridiculous then how much more ridiculous must the other two Semitic religions, Judaism and Moslemism, be?  One must have at least a modicum of consistency.  So, as I say, the Jews, as an instrument of their particular cultural revolution invented the Holding Company.  A holding company owns a number of producing companies.  Therefore the value of the stock of a holding company is dependent on the dividends it receives from the producing companies.  If there are no dividends  the holding company has no source of income.  then the Jews invented Holding Companies of Holding Companies whose stock was based on value at all.  But these stocks were traded and purchased with bonafide capital.

     Now, when the market crashed if you owned your stock outright you may have taken big paper losses but you weren’t wiped out.  Your stocks still had considerable value.  If you bought on margin that is to say if you put a small amount down when your margin call came you couldn’t meet it and you were wiped out.  The Holding and Holding Holding companies were a total loss as it was all phony money.  And the bankers called Henry Ford a fool!

     I don’t know if a study has ever been done on winners and losers but a survey of those left standing might provide some interesting insights.

     But to return to culture.  The Freudian attack was primarily centered on sex, that is, the destruction of Euroamerican morality.  It is important to bear in mind that Freud was a despicable person, a master hypocrite.  He was a homosexual, Libertine and dope addict.  It should hardly come as a surprise that the ‘morality’ he wished to impose on civilization was precisely the morality of homosexuals, Libertines and drug addicts.

     The key to such morality is sex.  Western morality from the time of Homer was based on the control of sexual apetites or, at the very least, channeling sexual energy into productive habits.  The sexual story of Homer’s Odyssey is Odysseus’ conquest of his sexual nature.  First he resisted the wantonness of Circe, then the allure of the Sirens.  He stayed for some time with Calypso who was the most complaisant of females but who demanded his full attention and finally a vision of the peacful home before his return to Penelope.  Even then he immediately left his wife after taking twenty years to get back to continue his wanderings or his search for salvation, meaning or whatever.  The Roman Catholic Church reinforced these sexual attitudes.

     The ruling attitude then was what Freud wanted to overturn.  In the destruction of the goyim’s culture to be reconstructed on the Semitic cultural model was the most important step.  First the ‘prudish’ ‘Puritan’ attitude toward sex had to be dismantled.  Censorship of explicit sexual material had to be removed.  Hence a campaign ensued to impugn anyone who ‘didn’t appreciate the beauty of the nude human body.’  Sounds reasonable doesn’t it?  But what does it mean?  It means the legitimization of pornography.  ‘There shouldn’t be any shame connected with sex.’  The Freudians said.  Well, that’s an opinion not a fact.

     The first effort was to legitimize literary works of questionable morality or, at least, which contradicted the prevailing morality.  So, books such as Madame Bovary, Lady Chatterly’s Lover and James Joyce’s Ulysses were promoted as the highest form of literary attainment, whatever exactly that might be, rather than as salacious novels.  Literary,  well there’s a thought to be considered.  Eventually they were all legalized.  ‘They started out on Burgundy but soon hit the harder stuff.’  The standards of society had been breached.   Then came the Marquis de Sade whose ‘literary’ value was said to override his sadistic psychosexual content.  Literary, hmm?  From thence we passed through Esquire Magazine to Hugh Heffner’s Playboy.  The latter magazine opened the floodgates of pornography which of course legitimized homosexuality; but, Playboy published stories of the highest literary quality.  Literature, yup, but everyone looked at the dirty pictures.

     So that, as of today we have this peculiar, need I say disgusting, homosexual and Libertine sexual morality.  One judges the tree by its fruits.  What the Satan Freud cut loose which has come to fruition today must have been his intent.

     The driving wheel for this transformation was the film industry of Hollwood.  The very essence of the film is hypnotic suggestion.  While it is true that poetry and novels also serve as suggestion there is a great quantitative and qualitative difference.  One’s intellectual distance and guard are always present while reading while with movies the opposite is always true.  Since one could maintain distance in the silent era being always able to discuss the movies with others while viewing them without disturbing people the suggestive power of any film required the same degree of consent as ‘literature.’

page 7.

     This was not true with sound movies.  Talking was not tolerated as it disturbed concentration.  Thus the mind was left open in a hypnoid state to visual and audio stimulation.  What goes in the mind stays in the mind.  Nothing is forgotten.  During the thirties and forties suggestion was employed but without the effectiveness of the technical changes that began in the fifties.  Huge wrap around screens began to fill the entire visual field enveloping the viewer in the suggestion.  Huge, powerful surround sound speakers filled any void left by the screen.  The volume was overpowering, virtually blocking out critical attention, actually placing the viewer very deep into the hypnoid state, almost the same as the feeling of terror wherein the suggestion becomes implanted in the subconscious somewhat on the order of a fixation.  Then the movie going audience was being hypnotized without being aware of it.

     Realizing that young minds were somewhat more malleable than older ones movies were directed at the ‘critical audience of from twelve to twenty-five.’  this age group also has the most leisure for movies.  Yeah, I know there were good reasons to direct movies at the age group but I’m interested in the real reasons.

     As the Jewish culture had a near hammerlock on the making of movies it could control the content.  Thus while having to ‘pander’ to the dominant culture, especially in the thirties and forties, the Jewish culture could subtly condition the viewers to their own cultural goals.

     Naturally this had to be done openly if not obviously  so that there was always a sizable minority who understood what was being attempted; voices were raised in objection.  Once again the Jews and the Coalition denied this was so deriding any objections as anti-Semitism or in violation of the Constitutional guarantee of freedom of speech and conscience.  The dissidents allowed themselves to be silenced too easily although the charge of anti-Semite was and is indefensible.  Unless you just dismiss it as a joke like I do.

     Thus by the process of gradualism control was established so that no movie not passing a very strict Jewish censorship could be shown.  Christian movies depicting Jesus were absolutely forbidden hence the huge flap over the Mel Gibson movie led by the Jewish culture who, that’s right, denounced Gibson as an anti-Semite.   The key word here is culture, not individual Jews but the entire culture denounced Gibson.  That’s why they call them culture wars.    

     In the thirties and forties the studio heads abjured movies with Jewish themes even in some cases refusing to employ actors because they looked too Jewish.  That’s the legend anyway.  Gentlemen’s Agreement broke that taboo although the lead characters were all goys playing goys but posing as Jews.  Interesting ploy.  Elia Kazan directed.  During the fifties movies that Jews considered purely reflected Jewish culture although the goy audiences were too oblivious of the fact were successful.  Two big films of this genre were A Funny Thing Happened On The Way To The Forum and Cabaret.

     Gradually what Jews called ‘Christians’ were made the butt of the jokes while Jewish characters became heroes.  Then as in the Adam Sandler movies he as a Jew although it was never made clear he was acting as a Jew put down ‘Crhistian’ characters, treating them as buffoons and fools while abusing goy women who were portrayed as sex crazed sluts and bimbos.

     Of course criminal behavior and sleazy approaches were used to condition the viewers mind in the direction of Freudian criminal and sex crazed morality.  The ‘Christian’ family was always attacked, fidelity, honor and uprightness demeaned.

     This attack was paralleled by a similar attack made on TV and also significantly in recorded popular entertainment.  First Vinyl records and then more openly on CDs.  Thus the public mind was constantly bombarded by propaganda reflecting the desires and needs of the Jewish culture. 

     So that, if in 1918 you had stood up and said that it was the intent of Freud and the Jewish culture to hypnotize the entire American population they wouldn’t even have had to call you an anti-Semite to discredit you, you would have been laughed to scorn.  Yet here it is.  You are all hypnotized. Except for a small disregarded and vilified minority, a small body not unlike the excommunicated heretics of the Middle Ages, everyone has been conditioned to accept the value system of the Jewish culture.  Of course when you abandon control of your culture to another you can’t expect anything else.

     As a side excursion let us consider the field of pornography.

page 8.

3.

     Let me say that while I deplore the Jewish culture’s methods I vastly admire their chutzpah.  it is the same as the admiration I have for the great Midwestern bandits like Jesse James, the Youngers, the Daltons or Pretty Boy Floyd The Outlaw.  Well, let’s exclude Pretty Boy, he has a special place in my affections.  While their careers were based on a false premise yet there was a dauntless courage and actual justification for the Outlaws’ choice of means to redress their grievances.  While I am aware that it was necessary for society to terminate their careers in one way or another, still I have that secret admiration for their attempt.  So it is with the Jewish culture.  While I can’t endorse their ideals and feel their methods will always doom them to failure, much as those of the Outlaws did,  like the Western train and bank robbers there is something thrilling in the attempt.

     But the return to the question.  Freud in his essay ‘The Aitiology Of Hysteria’ which is certainly approriate here, said:  Collected Papers Vol. I, p. 194:

     Quote:

     (I) am prepared to let my belief outrun the evidential force of my discoveries for the present time.  Besides, I am influenced by another motive, which for the moment is merely subjective value.

     Unquote.

     I am not quite so ready to allow my beliefs to outrun my evidence nor am I willing to abandon objectivity as was the good Herr Doktor Professor Sigmund Freud.  No. No.  We must adhere more closely to our science than that.  While Freud doesn’t tell us what his subjective motives were I think I can guess.

     As a Libertine and homosexual Freud would have been a proponent of the distribution of pornography.  We have seen that Freud made advanced studies into the nature of emasculation.  Well, pornography is what emasculation is all about.  It seems certain that Freud misinterpreted the nature of the Anima following rather the lead of his friend Fliess, of nose fame, that there was an inherent bisexuality.  In other words in keeping with his homosexuality he believed that a man desired sexual relations with either men or women.  Any port in a storm, or even fair weather.

     In fact an affect of emasculation is the estrangement of the Animus from the Anima.  In the process of emasculation the Animus apparently has the understanding that the Anima failed in its duty therefore wishing to punish it.  Indulging his or her hatred then the homosexual is attracted to pornography with is attendant sadomasochism.  Indeed the mainstay of the pornography business is the homosexual by which I include Lesbians.

     In use then terms from individual psychology to group psychology the same Freudian rules apply.  Freud realized his own emasculation, probably that of the Jewish culture, and therefore sought to emasculate the Euroamerican culture in return.  We have seen through the media of movies, TV, radio and recordings how successful he was.    There is a French film entitled Dr. Petiot.  Dr. Petiot was a real person who realized his full potential under the Nazi occupation of France.  A bonafide psychotic as well as a physician Petiot lured those seeking to escape France to his home under the pretense that he would smuggle them out of France.  Instead he murdered them but before he did he mocked and ridiculed them deriving full enjoyment from their humiliation.

     Now, in the Winter 2004 edition of the European magazine The Jewish Quarterly an essay was published by a lecturer of American History at the University of Aberdeen, Scotland by the name of Nathan Abrams.  His bit is entitled Jews In The American Porn Industry.  What this essay shows is the divorcement of the cultural or group Animus from the Anima of the Jews.  This should come as no surprise because Semites in general suppress the role of women, or the Anima in favor of the Male Animus which is an expression of the Culture’s unhealthy Anima-Animus relationship.  Here Mr. Abrams mocks and ridicules Euroamerican civilization.

page 9.

     Mr. Abrams begins his essay thus:

     Quote:

     A story little told is that of Jews in Hollywood’s seedier cousin, the adult film  industry.  Perhaps we’d prefer to pretend that the ‘triple exthnics’ didn’t exist, but there’s no getting away from the fact that secular Jews have played (and still continue to play) a disproportiate role throughout the adult film industry in America.

     Jewish involvement in pornography has a long history in the United States as Jews have helped transform a fringe subculture into what has become a primary constituent of Americana.  These are the ‘true blue Jews.’

     Unquote.

     The most virulent anti-Semite couldn’t have expressed it more succinctly.  At the same time we have a cultural confession of emasculation.  I haven’t been able to discover the exact meaning of ‘triple-exthnic’ but the term is probably just another obfuscation  in terminology.

     While everyone has known of the Jewish role in the ‘sex industry’, where they are as over represented as they are in Hollywood itself, for a hundred years, only Jews have been permitted to write about it.  The goys have been so thoroughly emasculated in their turn that they would rather leave it alone than be denounced as anti-Semites thereby being excommunicated or thrust out of society so Mr. Abrams has the field to himself.  However one is free to criticize the content of the essay.

     When Mr. Abrams identifies pornography as the seedier cousin of the Hollywood film industry he tacitly admits that Hollywood itself is seedy to which conclusion I heartily assent.  All, or nearly all films, are pornographic in intent.  The only area in the world in which the production of pornography is legal is right here in these United States Of America and that place is within a twenty mile radius of Hollywood where you know who is over heavily represented.  Not American but Israeli, Jewish.  Hollywood is an Israeli colony in the United States.

     Mr. Abrams says that Jews have helped transform a ‘fringe subculture’- read criminal- into what has become a primary constituent of Americana.  Further he says that this legitmization of crime has been the work of the Jewish culture.  Mr. Abrams is projecting badly when he believes that pornography has anything to do with Americana, rather by his own admission he should say Judaica.  He further states that these pornographers are ‘true blue Jews.’  In other words, the best that Judaism has to offer.  If so, then the Jewish culture must be analyzed with this notion in mind.

     Pornography is essentially an extension of prostitution.  That is to say, the degradation and exploitation of the Anima, let alone women.  To keep the business running there must therefore be procurers and procuresses.  Men may volunteer but women by and large have to be dragooned.

     As an expression of emasculation one finds a disproportionate number of homosexual also involved which means sadomasochism and drugs.  Sadomasochism is an affect of emasculation.

Thus the seedier cousins of seedy Hollywood itself are governed by a psychotic state of mind.  In fact Hollywood movies are psychotic visions of a psychotic sadomasochistic projection on the world as examples of American culture or as Mr. Abrams would have it, Americana; quite falsely so.

     How far they represent other cultures than the Jewish is open to question.

page 10.

     Pornography was taken mainstream by the goy, Hugh Heffner, who developed this affect of a mental disease in the guise of Hedonism rather than Libertinism which is its true guise.  He was joined by the major ‘players’ Larry Flynt of Hustler Magazine and Bob Guccione of Penthouse Magazine.

     Although Jews had been instrumental in kicking down the doors of sexual censorship, most notably with the legitimization of Joyce’s Ulysses, it was Heffner beginning in 1953 who paved the way for the porn film industry which arose in the sixties.  In competition with Heffner, Flynt and Guccione constantly stretched the limits from Heffner’s Hedonism to outright pornography.  The three magazines above were sold openly across the counter which meant high grosses.  It should be noted that while tremendous effort was made in lifting censorship of obscene material at the same time the same effort was made to censor political and social thought by the same parties.

    The smut industry of peep shows and whatnot Mr. Abrams quite correctly identifies as being primarily Jewish.  Mr. Abrams then gets involved with the motivations of the smut peddlers.  As is consistent throughout Jewish writing he distinguishes between ‘secular’ Jews and ‘religious’ Jews as though they were two separate entities.  The distinction will undoubtedly confuse those who haven’t scientifically studied the culture.  In point of fact crime and prostitution had a significant hand in financing Jewish political activities from the beginning of the Revolution from 1913 and before to the present.

     The Revolution didn’t come free and it didn’t come cheap; there’s a price tag on everything and a very high price tag on this one.  On the financial and banking level it was fairly easy, the bankers just used other people’s money.  Loans are loans and expenditures are expenditures; loans have to be repaid while expenditures are cash out of hand.  So for expenditures the money came largely from vice.  One usually thinks of organized crime as Italian or Sicilian while in actuality the organizers were Jewish.  Enormous sums were raised by crime especially under the kingpins Arnold Rothstein and Lepke Buchalter.  But, lo and behold, when these men died the vast sums that passed through their hands which they could not possibly have spent were nowhere to be found.  To all intents and purposes these men died penniless.

     On the other hand men like Julius Rosenwald who became a principal of Sears, Roebuck contributed millions upon millions of dollars to Jewish ‘charities’, read- political organizations.  While there is no reason Rosenwald couldn’t have become rich from his position at Sears still the amounts of money he contributed seem well in excess of any possible earnings.  While Jewish criminals were donors to Jewish causes, and very welcome ones too, it seems probable that the money pouring into their coffers which, after all was a joint Jewish effort, may well have been funneled thrugh intermediaries like Rosenwald as a money laundering scheme.

     After all men like Rosenwald maintained magnificent establishments while making these contributions.

     The Liberal position from 1815 or so when Liberalism per se came into existence had always been that crime and prostitution were the result of the inequitable distribution of wealth.  Always on the qui vive for another utopia it was assumed that when the working class had its share crime and prostitution would disappear.

     For all practical purposes that particular utopia was realized in the United States.  Lo and behold, instead of crime and prostitution having disappeared they have prospered mightily.  Indeed, rather than being repulsed by this particular form of prostitution women have apparently embraced it.  Yes, as Mr. Abrams so quaintly puts it:  Once (women) had laid down, they could stand on their own two feet, particularly as female performers typically earn twice as much as their male counterparts.  Once they had laid down that is.  Good paying prostitution is still prostitution, but at least the girls were paid better than the boys.  I’d still rather be a boy in those circumstances.

     So, if not driven into prostitution by poverty it seems that women are lured into it by the pursuit of wealth or as Mr. Abrams insultingly puts it, in pursuit of the ‘American Dream.’

      Nor are these entrepreneurs of porn from poverty backgrounds.  Mr. Abrams proudly claims that these porn pros come from ‘upper class’ and prosperous Jewish families.  What motivations does Mr. Abrams attribute  to these Libertine criminals other than the pursuit of the buck.

     Mr. Abrams:  Porn is just one expression of [the] rebellion against standards, against the disciplined life of obedience to the Torah that marks a Jew living in Judaism.

     So, their rebellion is really culturally internal and has nothing to do with the mainstream culture.  They find Judaism too restricting.  Indeed, ‘America provided the freest society Jews had ever known.’ Adds Mr. Abrams.  Including his own Judaic culture one assumes.  One might think the Promised Land had been realized.  But, read the sentence carefully and it is made evident that the Jews still consider themselves strangers in a strange land but now they have the freedom to rage at all, even themselves.

     Quote:

     Extending the subversion thesis, Jewish involvement in the X-rated industry can be seen as a proverbial two fingers to the entire WASP establishment in America.  Some porn stars viewed themselves as front-line fighters in the spiritual battle between Christian America and secular humanism.  (read- the Jews)  According to Ford (Luke Ford) Jewish X-rated actors brag about their ‘joy in being anarchic sexual gadflies to the puritanical beast.’  Jewish involvement in porn by this argument is the result of an atavistic hatred of Christian authority:  They are trying to weaken the dominant culture in America by moral subversion.

     Unquote.

     Quite right.  While the revolution or 1913-28 has been extended that War still rages on.  Furthermore it is being waged on the terms laid down by Freud.  The Jewish culture permits even encourages these pornographers toward that goal.  One doesn’t really believe that a bunch of scum criminal pornographers were able to get a law passed legalizing their criminal behavior does one?  Of course one doesn’t.  Such a law could only be passed by very influential ostensibly respectable people of porn’s less seedy cousin.

     This area of legal pornography is Hollywood.  Whether fronted by goys or not Jewish moguls passed this law.  Are they taking a rake-off as a reward for providing the pornographers a legal sanctuary of are they sleeping partners of the pornographers or has it made it possible to release such racist pornographic filth as Shadow Boxing as legitimate entertainment in mainstream theatres.  Gosh, let me think long and hard on that one.

     So , we have the results so far of Freud’s psychological program for the conquest of Euroamerica.  Of course along the way his program would be reinforced.  Here’s Mr. Abrams again:\

     Quote:

     Those at the forefront of the movement which forced America to adopt a more liberal view of sex were Jewish.  Jews were also at the vanguard of the sexual revolution of the 1960s.  Wilhelm Reich, Herbert Marcuse, and Paul Goodman replaced Marx, Trotsky and Lenin as required reading.  Reich’s central preoccupations were work, love and sex, while Marcuse prophesied that a socialist utopia would free individuals to achieve sexual satisfaction.  Goodman wrote of the ‘beautiful cultural consequence’ that would follow on legalizing pornography.  It would ‘ennoble all our art’; ‘humanize sexuality.’

     Unquote.

     I’d put those statements in quotation marks too.  These writers might be considered the second wave after Freud to refreshen the program and keep it moving forward.  There is a particular reason why these writers should have been published and lauded over others and it isn’t literary value.  As we will see in the next section, when a book was to be promoted a cadre of boomers ran through the universities and cities touting this stuff.

     Thus this very powerful organization was very effective.  The effectiveness was made total when any who objected could be isolated and harassed by teams of damage controlmen.  Not only could an individual be silenced and marginalized by a whispered imputation of ‘anti-Semitism’ but the entire population could be emasculated by the same charge.

     Freud then had devised the means to emasculate the hundreds of millions of Euroamericans and that purely by their own acquiescence.  Rather than be known as anti-Semites they willingly abandoned their sexuality.  This abandonment was conditioned and reinforced by the entire media of the land.  Most especially Hollywood.

page 12.

     Do not think I condemn the Jewish culture, or nationality in fact, for this fait accompli.  On the contrary I applaud it.  Imagine this atavistic religious consciousness projecting a state of ignorance over the most enlightened population on the planet.  Think about it.  It stuns one to silence.  This achievement is so amazing it leaves one standing with mouth gaping.  If the entire Euroamerican population is willing to voluntarily surrender not only their intelligence but their manly and womanly sexuality to another culture why should the receiving culture be blamed?  No force was used.  Only psychological manipulation that any fool could have seen and easily rejected.

     Further, just like Dr. Petiot with his victims, the Jewish culture humiliates its slaves via the media.  I have pointed out Adam Sandler movies where he plays a vacuous nerd who triumphs over athletic men and humiliates nubile women.  If the past is any guide to the future one can look forward to a gulag system where opponents are mass executed.

     I can say no more on the topic here.  Suffice it to say that on the sexual level Edgar Rice Burroughs’ America hs been deconstructed per Sigmund Freud’s plan and reconstructed to the complete advantage of the Jewish culture and to the complete disadvantage of the Euroamerican culture.  All it took, and this the most astonishing fact of all, was a little chutzpah.

     All credit belongs to the Jewish culture and I say that to the shame of my own.